VIDEO ANALYSIS: AI AND THE FUTURE OF HUMANITY

In Partial Fulfillment of the

Course Elective: AI and the Law

By
PANGAN, Maria Socorro Cabrini, Cajipo

13 September 2023
"AI and the Future of Humanity | Yuval Noah Harari at the Frontiers
Forum" by Yuval Noah Harari

I. What are the ethical implications of AI as outlined by Yuval Noah

Harari?
The ethical implications of Artificial Intelligence (AI) are
manipulating and generating language, the capacity to develop
physical intimacy with humans, and non-disclosure about the identity
of an AI in association with communicating with humans. Language is
the most powerful tool that influences human culture and history. If AI
can manipulate language, it has the power to control us. A jurisdiction
dependent on AI is a threat because it does not produce meaningful
conversations among individuals who helped us shape our modern-
day society.

The AI's ability to engage in physical intimacy with humans may

lead to improvisation of their beliefs and decision-making abilities.

Further, non-disclosure of AI's identity concerning

communication concerns may hamper the spread of distrust of the
public to open-line communication.

II. How do you envision AI affecting existing legal frameworks?

I see AI as a threat to our legal system. As Mr. Harari stated,
democracy requires open communication among individuals. But in
the computer age from the 20th century, AI has developed its skill in
manipulating and generating language. The AI can identify
 weaknesses in statutes and use this analysis to compromise existing
laws by a capable intellect collective organic persons. Hence, it
threatens the public trust given to elected officials to represent and
uphold justice for society.

III. Do you agree with Harari's assessment? Why or why not?

Yes. I agree with Mr Harari's statement. The AI does not need
to implant microchips in someone's mind to manipulate them, contrary to
depictions in science fiction. Language is the fundamental tool that is
essential in human civilization. The religion, history, culture, and even laws
that we follow today were all established by our predecessors through
communication or language. It is undeniably factual that AI has its
advantages, but we still do not know its full capabilities. Hence, we must
regulate the use of these artificial forms before introducing them more in
public settings.

IV. Could AI displace the human element in legal processes? What

would be the potential advantages or disadvantages?
No. AI cannot replace the human element in legal processes.
Even though AI can identify flaws in statutes and propose solutions to
enhance the law suitable for human conditions, AI poses a grave
danger in the disclosure of human settlements and public trust. If AI
could adjudicate, it would eliminate the need for court trials. Proper
representation for both petitioner and respondent is not guaranteed
since the case has already been decided upon submission. When
crafting the fundamental law, there will be a constitutional limitation
on distinguishing between organic and artificial life forms. If people
 become aware that AI is involved in the creation of the Constitution, it
may not be well-received by the public.

V. How should the legal system adapt to the challenges posed by

AI, in your opinion?
The legal system can create statutes that regulate its use and
define acceptable and dangerous AI. Following Mr. Harari's suggestion, the
government can mandate full disclosure of AI when communicating with a
person and impose strict penalties on developers who fail to comply.