The Interview: Dr. Nicola Ranieri, a scientist & the AI.

Written in


Introducing a fresh blog series featuring weekly interviews that probe into the impact of technology and AI on our lives. Engaging with AI artists, educators, and scientists, we’ll uncover the practical uses, extensive influence, and deeper philosophical questions tech raises. Dive in for enlightening discussions on innovation and the role of technology in shaping our everyday existence.

This Week’s Insight: A Skeptical Scientist Weighs in on AI’s Future

Nicola Ranieri is a dedicated professional currently serving as Customer Technical Development EMEA at Syensqo. With a strong background in polymer chemistry and technical expertise, Nicola plays a vital role in supporting and developing customer relationships across Europe, the Middle East, and Africa.

This week, we’re venturing into the realm of skepticism and contemplation with a guest who brings a critical perspective to the forefront of the AI debate. Our featured scientist shares a cautious viewpoint on AI’s rapid development and its implications for society. Delving into concerns about AI surpassing human intelligence, the potential loss of unique human capacities, and the ethical dilemmas posed by autonomous systems, this conversation promises to challenge our assumptions and spark thoughtful discourse. Join us as we explore the skeptical side of AI, examining both its potential to revolutionize our world and the cautionary tales that urge us to proceed with mindful consideration.

Can you describe your initial reservations about AI and if/how they have evolved over time?

NR: I view the “ideal AI” as it stands or as it could be, as an extremely potent tool capable of rivaling human intelligence. I’m uncertain if the current AI meets my conception of the ideal AI, but my concerns regarding the threat to human intelligence posed by such an “ideal AI” remain unchanged over time.

What do you consider to be the most pressing ethical concerns with the development and deployment of AI technologies?

NR: The primary concern revolves around the loss of human activities, akin to how robotized tasks have replaced physical ones previously done by humans, but with a significantly greater impact. Indeed, the key distinction of a human being versus “the rest of the world” lies in their capacity to think, their “intelligence.” If we create an alternative with equal or superior performance, what will become of human beings? This question applies not only in terms of employment but also more broadly: how will our lives be without the challenges that fuel all brains and the activities stemming from them?

In your view, what are the potential risks of AI in scientific research and how can they be mitigated?

NR: Scientific research does not have particular concerns beyond the general, i.e., the risk is still seen in the possibility that AI develops solutions faster and better than human scientists. Of course, I must stress again that I refer to AI as a kind of human brain but without the drawbacks of getting tired, having a subjective (hence potentially erroneous) view on data, and with the advantage of accessing an infinite data bank in nanoseconds. Why would we then need human researchers? Not even for filling lab testing tubes… robots can already do that…

How do you perceive the role of AI in augmenting human capabilities rather than replacing human roles, especially in the scientific field?

NR: Such a role, to me, represents a limitation of what AI should be capable of doing. The answer, however, is elaborated in point 3.

What, in your opinion, are the limitations of current AI technologies, and how do these limitations impact their utility in real-world applications?

NR: I have never used AI so far. I am probably not a good statistical example for that, because I have always tried to limit the use of ‘AI’ (even a simple calculator) to allow my brain to work as independently as possible. From what I’ve read, it seems that today’s AI still lacks the ‘processing ability’ to fully interpret information, a ‘creation mode’ that processes data to generate a thought, an idea, or an opinion. So far, it appears to me merely as a ‘data collector and distributor.

Could you share examples of AI applications in your field that you find promising or concerning?

NR: I cannot so far. In my company we are going to discuss the use of AI in the coming weeks.

What measures do you believe should be implemented to ensure the responsible development and use of AI technologies?

NR: Unfortunately, there are no possible measures if AI develops into real intelligence capable of creating thoughts and possessing a kind of ‘fantasy,’ becoming a true counterpart to human intelligence. We know that everything ‘digital’ is impossible to control (see, e.g., the dark web or pirate sites in general).

Is there anything else you’d like to add or any other thoughts on AI that we haven’t covered in this interview?

NR: Well, just to recap, I can’t believe that we are developing our own ‘competitor,’ I mean, something that will possess the same unique skills that have so far differentiated humans: the ability to think, to process information from the environment, to create thoughts, ideas, and more. More philosophically, I see this as driven by the never-ending passion of humans to demonstrate their ability to control nature and then adapt it to their needs. Now, the challenge seems to be to replicate our brain, and as has been the case in the past, there will be positives and negatives. Personally, I see the latter as much more significant than the former.

Diversity Drives Progress: The Critical Role of Listening to Different Voices in AI Evolution

As an individual deeply involved in the realm of artificial intelligence, both personally and professionally, I am often enthralled by its boundless potential for positive impact. However, I recognize that this enthusiasm can sometimes lead to overlooking the complexities and challenges inherent in AI development and deployment. Engaging in discussions with diverse viewpoints, such as this with Nicola Ranieri, serves as a vital exercise in broadening my understanding and reminding me of the importance of maintaining a balanced perspective.

What is Syensqo?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *