Markus Buehler, MIT Professor, discusses knowledge graphs for scientific discovery, hypothesis generation, and graph reasoning. Topics include AI systems to create ontological knowledge graphs, isomorphic mappings for novel insights, and human-AI collaboration for faster breakthroughs.

Nichol Bradford, an expert in AI + human potential, discusses the role of AI in enhancing mental and emotional health, redefining work in the AI age, and the importance of unique perspectives. She highlights successful AI implementation, investing in mental health tech, and addressing global challenges with advanced AI.

“To use AI for omni-beneficial output, we need to bring to it our best qualities, which are beyond intelligence; it is wisdom.” – George Pór About George Pór George Pór has been researching, teaching, and consulting in the arts and sciences of emergent collective intelligence since 1987, when he was introduced to the ideas by his mentor Doug Engelbart. He is the founder of numerous organizations, including Future HOW, Enlivening Edge, and Campus Evolve. His academic posts have included London School of Economics, INSEAD, UC Berkeley, Université de Paris, while his clients include European Commission, European Investment Bank, Ford, Greenpeace, Intel, Shell, Unilever, World Wildlife Foundation and many others. Websites: futurehow.site ResearchGate Profile www.riverflows.life LinkedIn: George Pór Medium: George Pór What you will learn Exploring wisdom-focused collaborative hybrid intelligence Enhancing decision-making with high-quality AI prompts The role of AI whisperers and AI shamans Iterative interaction between humans and AI Balancing ethical considerations in AI use AI’s potential for community healing Promoting personal and collective growth through AI Episode Resources Artificial intelligence (AI) ChatGPT Gregory Bateson Medium Generative Action Research AI Whisperer AI Shaman Prompt engineering AI-augmented human development Collective intelligence Vertical development Horizontal development Artificial General Intelligence Artificial superintelligence Transcript Ross Dawson: George, it is wonderful to have you on the show. So, I’ve known of your work for a very long time. I think, you know, probably 20 years or so. And I think similarly, you for mine, but there’s been a lot of parallels. And recently you’ve been working on this idea of wisdom-focused, collaborative hybrid intelligence. That’s a very intriguing phrase. I think it goes to a lot of these ideas of amplifying cognition. So please, can you explain to us what this means wisdom-focused, collaborative hybrid intelligence? George: Okay, let me just step back to give you a little context. For those last two years since I’ve been diving into AI, my driving question was, and still is, how can AI augment collective intelligence to serve better the flourishing of people, organizations, and the human species? So that’s the context from which wisdom guided and wisdom fostering collaborative hybrid intelligence comes. And so to get a sense of what I mean by wisdom-guided, collaborative hybrid intelligence, just think of that there are all of these zillions of organizations that prompt an AI agent to help with this or that aspect of decision making. The quality of that prompt has a huge impact on the AI’s output. Imagine if the articulation of the issue in the prompts would come from the deepest wisdom available to a decision-making individual or team.  So what we are doing with AI in a meeting is analogous to what is happening in any good meeting. Even without AI, we are putting something out in the conversations, and individuals speaking, are contributing. And that becomes a prompt to the others to the other participants and brings back something from the others. So the quality of a team’s collective wisdom depends on the mindfulness and heartfulness of our utterances, plus the depth of our listening to each other in the field. So what I’m saying is that when the mind, heart, and action of speaking come into alignment, then that collective wisdom can guide our interaction with our AI mates. So that’s what I mean by wisdom-guided AI. So it’s not just putting out any prompts for hoping that AI will come back with something that makes our processes more efficient, yes, AI can do that, but the higher state, the uncatchable advantage comes from people bringing their best into the definition, the articulation of the prompt that goes to the AI agent. Now, the other aspect of this wisdom-focused AI is that it can be not only wisdom guided, but also wisdom fostering, and what I mean by that is that too, to catch up to the capacities that the benefits that AI can provide. We humans need to bring our best wave and if we do that, then what the AI’s output enables us is to tune in With the collective intelligence of the whole accumulated output of human knowledge.  So, to catch up with that, we need to become more like AI whisperers, that is developing an intimate relationship with AI’s thinking. And that whole becoming wiser, for example, give you a specific example, like in one of our workshops, where we introduced this in our action research into the Collaborative Hybrid Intelligence, where we were not only talking about AI but actually used ChatGPT as one of the participants and Co-facilitator of the workshop. So how does it work? It’s like, I already use ChatGPT, in the design of the workshop by asking some questions that may come up with a better design. And then in the workshop itself, I asked all the participants to bring with them their favorite AI agent, because they will need to consult with them during the workshop to further the process of what we are doing. So they did, and the question was, one of the overarching questions of the whole workshop was, Can AI help us become wiser? When a participant asked that question from her ChatGPT, she got a pretty detailed answer. It responded with “Yes, I can,” then outlined in 5 or 6 points, the different ways in which it can contribute to making her a wiser person. When she asked the AI can I help you become wiser, the AI responded, yes, you can. And again, it outlined what kind of behavior, what qualities of prompts it expects that would help it give wiser responses. That was pretty cool. I found that just one example of “wisdom-focused,” of what it means why it it important. As I said earlier, we can just go for intelligence, but intelligence is neutral in that it has no values intelligence can be used for nefarious purposes, as well as for  benevolant, beneficial purposes. And to use AI for omni-beneficial output, we need to bring to it our best qualities which are beyond intelligence, it is wisdom. Does it make any sense to you what I’m talking about? Ross: Absolutely. No, that’s fantastic. It was really, really inspiring. The mission, which you outlined at the very beginning of our conversation is extremely aligned with mine as well, I think, very strong alignment there. So there’s a lot to unpack there. And perhaps the starting point is to get very specific, you mentioned a number of times, specific prompts, and also the qualities of prompts. Would love to just get liked and pulled back a little bit to the, I suppose, ways in which we can be wiser through AI. But can you talk about some of the specific prompts or types of prompts or qualities or prompts that enable us to get to these kinds of wisdom? Supporting interactions? George: Yes, like, if you take a situation, give me a situation in which you would use a prompt in a group setting. Then, I will share what its “wisdom-focused Collaborative Hybrid Intelligence” version would look like. Ross: So, I mean, one example is in, you know, boards and executive teams, what I will do is to say, you know, this is the current conversation, this is what we have been discussing, what has not been discussed, what else important has not been discussed, that we can add to the conversation. So, that’s something that I might use in a facilitation context. George: Beautiful, yes. These prompts already point in the direction of something wisdom related, because this domain is about looking at any situation, from a broader perspective. So, when you ask, what else is out there that was not discussed in this meeting? It points to the possibility that something is missing, that is broader. Ross: There’s no, one of my favorite quotes ever is from Gregory Bateson, who said that wisdom comes from multiple perspectives. And that certainly informed my own thinking and outlook. George: Exactly. Right, right. So, you can ask that question from everybody, and using a shared document like a Google Doc or whatever else you are using, people will enter it like a brainstorming question. So, people will enter whatever comes to their mind, and if you would preface your question with a brain-stilling, stealing as in S-T-I-L-L, brain-stilling before brainstorming like something like why don’t you take a couple of deep breaths and feel into what is really important to you that we have not yet touched on. Then. So, if you preface it with this, people are more likely to come not from the top of their mind, which is their intellect, but from a deeper space closer to wisdom, human wisdom, and what is important to them. And then when you connect the answers, the output of the brainstorming, then you can ask an AI to tell us what is a common pattern in these human responses. What is a pattern that connects with them? So then it gives something that you feed back to the participants, so it’s an interaction, a back-and-forth conversation, and with each turn of the conversation, the quality goes higher when it’s facilitated by the symbiosis of your intelligence that defines the process and the prompt and the AI support that is capable to summarize, integrate, and essentialize large volumes, even extremely large volumes of input from humans. Ross: I can see that the iterative approach, I think is very powerful. And this this way you get the sequencing humans getting a response from the AI appropriately guided to give broader context or additional things and feeding back to the humans and then in turn, so I think that’s what you’re describing is this iteration between humans and AI and to be able to enhance and enrich the thinking, is that right? George: Yes, absolutely. That was one example. But that’s kind of typical. Yeah, iconic example. Ross: So, just thinking about this frame of wisdom to how it is we can get the wisdom fostering. So wisdom guided is when humans guide the AI to hopefully be a wiser perspective and wisdom fostering is when the AI is supporting humans and their wisdom that is that correct? George: Yes, yes. And you know, I designed action research for addressing the main question that my driving question, which is, how can AI augment collective intelligence to better serve the flourishing of people, organizations, and the human species, and that the action research, when I introduced it in the workshop, in the workshop, what I learned from those workshops is that to make it this high level, driving questions, to make it more engaging, the process has to be fun. So I turned the action research into a game, into a discovery game. In that game, players will climb a mountain range called the ‘three mountains’. The three mountains are the Presence Peak, the Sovereignty Summit, and the planetary Plateau. When the players are climbing the Presence Peak they are engaged in AI-augmented human development, because the challenges that they encounter during the climb happen in the Integral Matrix of the AI whisperer.  So the more integral my thinking and behavior, the wiser, I become, by definition of what I mean by wisdom. So the Integral matrix of AI whisperers includes… Sol I don’t want to go into all the details just to tell you that the challenges that people need to meet during the game are what increase not only their horizontal skills, and horizontal development, but vertical development, which has to do with the higher consciousness and higher wisdom. So it’s through those specific challenges that AI can increase people’s capacity to address and look at everything and anything from the largest whole that they can put their arms around, the largest whole they can have an intimate relationship with. So AI is not only answering questions but also gifting the participants with challenges that can help them evolve. Ross: So in this idea of the AI whisperer. So part of, of course, is your prompting techniques. But tell me a little bit more about what that looks like, if you are an AI whisperer to evoke or to draw out the wisdom of the AI or to be able to help it foster your wisdom. So, what are the behaviors or characteristics or you know, of an effective AI whisperer? George: First of all, prompt engineering deals with only the right quadrants of the integral matrix, which are the objective things that you can learn in a prompt engineering course. But an AI whisperer is also paying attention to the left quadrants, which are the invisible, subjective things like his or her inner state when they are prompting the AI. They question who am I in this process of interacting with AI. So, it’s an enhanced subjectivity that characterizes AI whisperers, but not only that, AI Whisperers are also knowledgeable and vibing (or maybe not by vibing with the lore, the culture of the community that they are serving. So this paying attention to the inner, the interior of themselves and the interior of the community that gives the capability of AI whisperers to have a more meaningful relationship with the AI agent. Ross Dawson: Just about to say, I mean, there’s an I think it was last year, I can’t remember what it was, I was talking quite a bit about your relationship with AI, I’m trying to define it. And so I’d say, Well, what is your relationship with AI? You know, do you see it as a tool? Do you see it as a peer? Do you see it as a companion and that those very high level but to your point, part of a relationship is about who you are and how you are feeling if you are in a relationship with a person, you know, this is not just a description of it, it is you and that other and how they relate and just that consciousness of how it is we’re relating to AI, and shifting the nature of, you know, how we conceive of our relationship with AI can potentially create quite different outcomes. George: Yeah, just one level. Clarification that I do not think that AI is a person. But I do believe that we get the most productive, the most creative, the most enlightening conversations with an AI if we believe but if we take it as if it was a person. Not because it matters to AI, but it matters to our aptitude to relate. Ross Dawson: You have to think that that’s very important. It is a balance and Ethan Malek has written about this, in this idea that no, we shouldn’t anthropomorphize AI. It is a machine. It is a tool that we have built, but it can be useful. But I suppose we also need to be careful as well in treating it as the equivalent of any conscious person. George: The whole discourse about artificial general intelligence artificial super intelligence maybe I will never say never. However, I am more interested in AI augmenting human intelligence and AI-augmented collective. Ross Dawson: So, to round out you just shared an article with me which we’ll put in the show notes, which raised the idea of an AI shaman. And so, a long time ago, for a very long time, you’ve been calling yourself a techno shaman and now we have AI and you’ve introduced this idea of an AI shaman. So what is the role of an AI shaman and how does one become one? George: Before somebody can become an AI shaman, the person needs to become an AI whisperer. So to develop that intimate relationship with an AI, but not all AI whisperers become AI shamans so the difference is that I would say that an AI shaman is not unlike the shamans, of the Ancient old times, that the task of the shaman as healer not only to heal individuals but heal the community, when it is all out of balance with the forces of life and an AI shaman does very much the same I mean, AI shamans, put their competence as a whisperer, they put it in service of healing the human collective at any scale. Healing the common human collective and it is out of balance with life forces when whatever narrow interests prevent life energy flow and enliven people and organizations then the AI shaman comes in to engage the power of AI to be part of a process of healing the community. So, there are not a lot of AI shamans. However one of my aspirations is to grow educational opportunities for AI whisperers who aspire to become AI shamans. Ross: I think that’s very powerful. I may, I may, I may come back to this. In another way, the potential threat is pretty amazing. The other goes to the point of this we are at a point that is absolutely transformative as humans have now something with which we can understand ourselves better through the nature of the way in which we interact with it. It changes who we are and it is a tool for positive transformation if we treat it the right way. So George, I love what you’re doing, fascinating conversation and I hope you are able to have a far bigger impact. So where can people go to find out more about your work? George: I published a couple of dozen mini-essays on Medium. There, my username is Technoshaman. There is also our website, the Future How, which is our action research, R&D organization.  I was am a member and advisor to River, the website of which is riverflows.life that is not a direct expression of my work; it’s a teamwork that I’m advising. I am contributing with my wisdom-focused collaborative hybrid intelligence perspective. Ross: We’ll have links to all of that in the show notes. So thank you so much for your work and your energy and all you’ve done over the years. George, it’s been fantastic to have you on the show. George: Thank you for us, looking forward to continuing our conversation another time. The post George Pór on wisdom-focused collaborative hybrid intelligence, AI whisperers, and AI shamans (AC Ep52) appeared first on amplifyingcognition.

“The promises are tremendous and the peril is climate, not AI. “ – Daniel Erasmus About Daniel Erasmus Daniel is the Founder and Managing Director of futures consulting firm Digital Thinking Network (DTN), CEO of AI sense-making platform Erasmus.AI, and creator of ClimateGPT. He has been applying innovative approaches to scenario planning since 1996 for many leading organizations around the world. Daniel is a visiting professor at Ashridge Business School and a fellow at The Rotterdam School of Management. Websites: www.danielerasmus.com Digital Thinking Network (DTN) www.erasmus.ai www.climategpt.ai LinkedIn: Daniel Erasmus What you will learn Discussing the real existential threat of climate change Exploring AI’s role in addressing climate challenges Daniel Erasmus’s background in foresight and scenario planning The development and impact of ClimateGPT The importance of Human-AI collaboration Equitable access to AI technologies for climate solutions Innovative climate resilience strategies and examples Episode Resources Artificial intelligence (AI) The Promise and the Perils of AI Rotterdam climate initiative BloombergGPT ChatGPT World Economic Forum ClimateGPT Singapore Sea Lion European Central Bank Systemic Risk Board FSB (Financial Stability Board) NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) Sea Ban (European legislation for a carbon border tax) SDGs (Sustainable Development Goals) TCFD (Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures) TNFD (Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures) chess.com (freestyle chess competition) Transcript Ross Dawson: Daniel, it is awesome to have you on the show. Daniel Erasmus: It’s great to see you again, mate. It’s been far too long. And it was wonderful seeing you in San Francisco last year. I mean, it was a fascinating event, the title of the event was The “Promise and the Perils of AI”. In the audience, we had Rusty, they’re working on meteorites and a whole set of sort of existential issues facing humanity. And, and the point that I made there is, that people tend to place AI as an existential threat within these, and instead of sort of challenges for human supremacy, but the real threat, the peril is somewhere else. And the peril is not AI, it’s climate change. Climate change is a structural threat that will face humanity, at the scale of the UN estimates 200 million climate refugees by 2050, maybe half a billion, that’s 26 years from now, half a billion a decade later.  Now, the European project barely survived one and a half million Syrian refugees. So the kind of things that we are talking about here, we’re going to have to get really, really good at not just anticipating what’s happening but acting on that early preparing for that with the least amount of human and of course, planetary suffering.  And so that’s the promise of AI. And I think it’s far more interesting to look at AI with those terms. How can it help us? And how can we, together with AI come to very, very different solutions than we have in the past for the real existential threat, which is climate change? Ross: Yep, absolutely. The challenges we face are unprecedented in complexity and scale. So we hopefully have some tools which can assist us in that. But I think that goes a little bit to your background and where we’ve crossed over in the past is understanding complex systems. So it’d be great just to hear a little bit about your background and how you’ve come to this point from your work in foresight over the years Daniel: I’m South African, my origin, and I witnessed the transition of South Africa from an oppressive racist regime to a democracy, which was perhaps one of the most exciting things to happen in my youthful life, but it was a youthful life. But within that one gets the bones of looking ahead, scenarios transformation, and that the same people in the room, looking at the thing very differently, can come with very, very different conclusions. And then spent almost an hour actually, but over a quarter of a century, running scenarios and foresight processes, largely for multinational companies. So the Fortune 50 type of things, countries, cities, and doing a set of transformation projects around this, of which, there’s certainly some clerk climate work that came out of that Rotterdam climate initiative to half CO2 levels from their 9090 level, which was launched before. Al Gore’s film even came out in 2005, anticipating the global financial crisis for a bank, which led to them having their most profitable year in 150-year history in 2008. Running the first central bank digital currencies for central banks, anticipating the oil price collapse for an oilfield, so several multibillion-dollar exercises for clients, but at one point, one takes a step back and says these are legacy and foresight, which talks to the practice of foresight and bringing people together. But the challenges that we find look ahead and take foresight seriously, the challenges are going to require far more than changing single organizations. It’s going to require changing entire ecosystems of organizations’ industrial ecosystems, the way that cities are coupled with each other, the way the country’s bill is coupled with each other, and the policy issues around that. And, so the focus then became, how does one build the tooling to facilitate that type of decision-making on this? And I will say it’s not an AI solution that we built by the social intelligence solution. Ross: So, what have you built when we spoke last year, you said what are you doing, focusing entirely on AI and climate change. So what does that look like? What have you done? What are you and your colleagues doing?  Daniel: We’re in a very fortunate situation but over 15 years ago, we started collecting large amounts of money and we built a professional search engine that complemented the scenario practice. So one could get a better assessment of that. And it looks a lot like some of the diagrams behind you at this point. And one can get an interactive view. But we were in a very fortunate position because we were doing web-scale crawls and processing, just over a quarter of a billion URLs every day. We had the kind of collections with which one could build tasks and specific domain-specific models. And, then decided to build something akin to chatGPT is about, you know, half the size of tokens. So similar, say to Bloomberg GPT, has about the same amount of tokens. So it’s a task-specific model. And we built a family of models, so a foundational model. So that’s trained completely from scratch and fine-tuned models. 7 billion 70 billion. So there’s a family of models, 13 billion parameter models, and it was a unique and exciting challenge, you know, it required us to look for green power — one of the things we put a, you know, stake in the ground and said we wanted to build a model on green power. And experts far smarter than ourselves said, ‘No, this is not possible in this day and age.’ And now it’s there. And it’s the first to the best of my knowledge, an AI paper with a foundational model that indicates its sustainability, balanced scorecard, and says exactly how much CO2 went in it. And even today, we run it with green inference. So the whole model runs on green inference. And these things are eminently possible to be done. The model, again, benchmarks there was, you know, deciding lack of benchmarks, so we had to add to the benchmarks so that one can test the model on its performance on general reasoning tasks, so we had about seven of those. And then climate-specific benchmarks which we were very happy to partner with Exeter that had a collection of climate myths and disinformation. So when contested because they looked upstream and actually found that missing disinformation came from four places. So four very discreet institutes create a lot of climate myths and disinformation, which makes it rather easy to track. And we wanted the model to help. And not hindering doesn’t mean models don’t hallucinate, they don’t make mistakes, etc, etc, I think we’re all pretty much aware of the limitations of models and that it should be the best effort possible. It was a consortium of equity Labs, which focused on responsible AI and model provenance. So you can see where the models are an uptake, which is the focus development house with deep skills in translation and NLP. So the three of us together, and we were supported by a grant from the UAE sovereign fund so that we could launch at coop, and then model one point X was launched at the World Economic Forum earlier this year.  Ross: Fantastic. So well, perhaps, let’s come back to some of the model foundations, but how is this used? So we’ve got climateGPT? So what is the value of having this model? How is this used, who will use it, and what will be the outcomes of it existing?  Daniel: So, technologies, other than a very, very few exceptions tend to diverge going forward. So the car became the motorbike, the SUV, the sports car, the city car, the little smart electric cars, so they tend to diverge for specific use cases, as they are. There are very, very few exceptions, where that doesn’t happen. And we expect the same to be happening in terms of large language models that we’re going to get a lot more domain-specific models. Some things like someone like Bloomberg GPT, or even company models, suddenly starting to get country models, the Singapore Sea Lion has an incredible effort of addressing Singapore and its environs languages and having that represented. And so we wanted to carve out something for climate because this is the most interesting and exciting task of our generation. The scope of the problem is we’re going to have to reallocate about $100 trillion of assets, which is more or less equal to all of the stock. It depends on stock or bonds. But for all of the property on Earth, it’s more or less, we’re going to have to reallocate that, which also indicates, this is a spend of one to $5 trillion. And every time we do these numbers, this is from nature. Every time we do these numbers, we end up with a very different calculation. So, earlier action matters, and better action matters here. And so how could we make the decision-making threshold as low as possible for climate information, and really build a feedback loop there that enables this? So you can go to climategpt.ai Just apply for access, and normally within 24 hours, when is provisioned for that? It’s tied to this as model 1.3. Now, we’re well on our way to model 2. And so which we launched a couple of weeks ago, 1.3. So the next steps in this, and it gives a multi-perspective answer.  So what we see people using it for is everything from ‘I’m the climate policy, I’m in charge of climate policy for Madagascar, and I work to prepare our island for this, or ‘we’re 120 climate scientists in the Caribbean. And we want to look at strategies for climate resilience for the Caribbean, or from the head of NOAA, too. We’re looking at climate resilience within Turkey with an Argentina within this, we’re Levi Strauss company, and we’d like to develop a net-zero plan. So, it encompasses the broad south swath of public policy changes that are to be done and help support them. And I’ll touch base on how that is done. Organizational changes, which is a set of regulatory challenges, but also decision-making support that are really needed, and then city level down to individual level. And at this point, what we see from the utility is it kind of encompasses the gambit of those things.  Ross: So well, well, you mentioned a lot of policy applications there. You also mentioned 100 trillion in reallocation of assets. So there are some, obviously some institutional investment or other essentially those who are holders of capital who are making some decisions there as is it other ways, how might they use these tools as well? Daniel: The European Central Bank, as well as the Systemic Risk Board, as well as the FSB, various institutions, most central banks on Earth, have said, you know, we have a massive carbon asset bubble. And so that carbon assets are structurally priced in a way that doesn’t measure the long-term liabilities, nor whether that carbon will be taken out of the ground. So it’s a structural, structural, I mean, financial system, encompassing structural risks that are sort of at the scale of the GFC, those kinds of risks, all the way down to two other sets of risks.  So, from an institutional perspective, most organizations are now doing ESG reports. There are about 3000 organizations doing ESG reports. And we just make it one to make it a little bit easier and a little bit more disciplined in making those reports. So as an organization, you can upload your documents, it can reference your documents, it can tie that to the newest research that is there. And we’ve tied it to just under 2 million climate facts. And we will tie that to more climate facts. And in the near future, we’ll add a couple of 100 million general knowledge facts to that as well. So, using retrieval augmented generation, it gives the references there, but then it can complement it with your institution’s references as well. And you can start to see whitespaces, the delta between the general discussion say about climate change when your organization’s discussion about that, or the SDGs, or whichever lens one picks on so the first is sort of ESG there’s a set of regulatory things. So TCFD, the Task Force for Climate-related Financial Disclosure, TNFD nature-related disclosure, as well as the Sea Ban, which is the European legislation for a carbon border tax, you know, that’s 500 million consumers that starts next year, and companies need to start to answer for their carbon budget and so on report on that.  So what we’re doing is just facilitating that process, and just making it a little bit easier, and a little bit more systematic, using these AI tools, because it’s a tremendous amount of work done. That’s simply the regulatory side. In the models, we’ve had clients who say, ‘write a climate change scenario for a 1.5 degree as for Sub-Saharan Africa, giving specific emphasis on unseen risks and cascade events of how these things can interconnect from you know, 2025 to 2045 and draw specific systemic conclusions for that and you can say, given that, what should a bank do about this, what should a bank prepare right a plan of action..’ So the normal way when it interacts in the model, um, seems to perform rather well at those tasks. And one can cascade that from different regions and different issues and different scenarios on that. So basically decision support and regulatory requirements are coming in to facilitate that. Of course, linking parties to each other you might not be aware of, but those people are also working on a similar problem, perhaps you should be talking to each other and learning from each other.  Ross: So I understand that the model is being provided for free? Daniel: Yes, yes. I’m here discussing with various partners to continue to enable this, we’ve paid for it. So access is free. We don’t think particularly given the deep political nature of the climate, that somebody in Ghana, you know, that’s contributed almost nothing to global warming, is left with a great deal of liability. So to charge that person $10 a month, or that team or to charge that simply just begs reason. So we will continue to fund public access, but we do fund a smaller model. And we will grow that to larger models, as we get more funds available, but access is free, you simply need to log in. And we’ve got these three layers to that. So the one layer is free public access to the model. Two is to work together with sets of universities, of which we’re in discussion with most of the Ivy League and an example process there is with Georgetown, they measured the model in a taxonomy of 20 climate issues. And then measured model performance. And in 80% of them it gave correct, factual answers, but also sufficiently explained in certain detail, et cetera, et cetera. And I can come back to hydrogen is kind of an interesting example there. It performed best in sort of the geopolitics and the ethical issues around geoengineering and albedo management. So 95 and above, and the worst in climate change, impact in Rwanda. So there’s clearly where our work is cut out to be done. But that’s the second tranche working together with universities, and profiling university research within that, but also creating climate mentors and partners to that. And the last one is all institutions, of which they’ll pay a fee for that. And hopefully, that can fund the general public access to this. Ross: Which takes me to this point around the humans in the loop. So since it’s not 100%, and I suppose no model ever will be, we still need the humans in the loop, which we always do anyway. So what does this look like as in human experts or human policymakers, assisted by these tools? So, what are some of the ways this can work? Is it to ask the question, and then get it verified by an expert? Or how is the best support for human experts and policymakers?  Daniel: So one has a few layers to that and some of those things we’ve done and some of those things we’re heading into. So I’m happy to talk about this. I’m an old-school engineer. Although the background here is in foresight, I prefer to talk about work we’ve done rather than you know, vaporware, so I tend to favor the prior rather than the latter. But back in 1997, I argued, when Kasparov made the argument that he was defending the dignity of humanity. I was writing a column at the time, and I thought it was a very limited view. And I’ve lost many, many chess games against computers, and I’m certain I will continue to do so. And I hope my dignity is more or less intact here.  And so the more interesting thing is, how do we, together with computers, play chess, and the early lessons came from a competition which was held by chess.com. It’s called freestyle chess, in which they had various chess players play, either with machines or teams of chess players or some versions thereof. And they had Grandmaster-level machines play and then Grandmaster-level chess players playing but the competition was won by Zack and Steve. And Zack and Steve, are they prodigies? No, not really. Do they have a mother or something that works and has a supercomputer in the basement? No, no, not really. It was three PCs Dell and two Pentium machines and Zack Steve and three PCs could win against Grandmaster level. Chess computers or chess players, and had figured out this augmentation relationship better. So the human brain does about one move a second. And that’s what makes your podcast so fascinating. If you’re talking about this, I think the most interesting issue of our day in age is how to create this augmentation piece between humans and computers. And this is an early indication that despite the sort of press of the day about the fantastic aspects of AI, and how to replace it, I think that’s, again, a very limited vision and I hate to criticize Kasparov. But it is a limited vision. The more interesting vision is how we do this together. Ross: So Kasparov did realize that soon after.  Daniel: Yeah, he did. He absolutely did any profiled freestyle test. And I think without his championship there, you know, what had been theoretical and that really bordered on an angle bar arguments earlier on, I’m in no way unique for mentioning that, there’s a long history of making these arguments there. But they certainly carried some aspects of consciousness at the time.  And so the first thing is basic feedback systems. So climateGPT, the public interface, you can select something and you can immediately give feedback and within the next round of that, of the model, and of course, we update all the time. So that’s there. Secondly, as you provide tooling for people so they can turn retrieval or intergeneration. So rag with climate references on or that can tie to the general press. But certainly, for scenario tasks, where you want the models to create something that doesn’t yet exist, you don’t want to tie it to a rag, you actually want to have it be a bit more creative. And, we’re getting better at this. So you provide to people, you know, not all of the buttons, but some of the buttons so that there’s some level of utility because we can develop some level of understanding of how to use these systems, rather than simple black boxes and keeping it by keeping it to a limited set of critical choices on that.  Lastly is there’s behind the, there’s a number of actions on this, but there’s sort of behind the scenes. There are model competitions, which one runs with model arenas where we test various versions of the models against each other. You test larger models, and you incorporate some of the insights from larger models into the smaller models. And then when complimenting that constantly, we added that one of the training sets of this model was breakthroughs, Global game-changing breakthroughs, and extreme weather through the last decade. So 10 years of extreme weather events at the scale of the planet, there’s a public open interface where we can look at this. And again, one can give feedback on any of those things, this is millions of articles, that one can give feedback on any of those things, I’m misassigned on that. Ross: So I want to take it into the foresight space now. So this is an extraordinary time. Last year was the hottest year on record every month since then, and has been the hottest month on record. So we now have more tools to be able to think as you just talked about resilience is an important part of being able to adjust. So there are many, many factors here. One is ways of mitigating carbon emissions and others, potentials for geoengineering or another sort of climb, you know, planetary level impacts, and other it’s at national level in terms of resilient, others institutional level organizational level.  So how do you see the response, assisted by AI now…What is the role of AI and being able to address these incredibly complex, incredibly difficult, incredibly impactful challenges?  Daniel: So let me answer that in two parts. The first part is looking at the extreme weather data set. There’s a lot of work being done on metrology. There’s Earth 2, there are various things that posit extreme weather, and they model that in the global climate system, but it kind of negates the human activity system. So for many people, it doesn’t matter that much, that it rains a little bit more in the Sahara, which is very important from a methodological point of view, but not from a human activity system. So by using news articles, as well as scientific articles, as well as the body of research around that, one can get better insight into climate cascade events. And one can get better insight into what leads to what in a very unexpected way.  So I’ll give an example. Last year was not reported, barely reported in early November, there was significant flooding in Kenya, and in East Africa. And so you’ll see in the news articles from this, the flooding happens, significantly. And then very close to that the Kenyan government is looking for 15 million mosquito nets, which in hindsight seems really obvious. And everything and foresight seem really obvious in hindsight, but planning for that is a very different thing. And so planning for mosquito nets in the wake of flooding, etc, etc, at the scale of the planet, and being able to move those resources in ways that mitigate the unclean water, etc, etc.  So the first thing that we noticed is that there start to be the beginnings of utility. Have some predictions in those articles, and the human activities level, obviously, you now have articles at the level of that city. So you can zoom in, and you can see that city and those places, so the loss and damage discussion can go down to that city, that newspaper in Somalia that talked about that, which may not be around in 10 years time, but is a cryptographically signed event. And we expect the loss and damage discussion to be around a trillion dollars. So how do we know where those losses actually occurred? So building a collection like that matters. So the first thing is, you’re building standard collections. We’ve had the first climate litigators start to approach us and say, Can they have access to this, the donor community saying they can target it very differently because they can now target at this level of a city, not necessarily the sovereign, which enables much more targeted donations. So from prediction from just knowing what happened, so archiving, and then lastly, from anticipation, those collections itself, and AI underpins those things to build those collections. So we tend to think of AI as chunks now, but it’s not, it’s underpinning those delivering the lift planetary scale collections.  The second level in terms of the chat is a given example. So somebody asked which livestock are best suited for climate change in the Sahel. And it’s not the first thing on my mind, but it is an important question, somebody that was very large and then comes an answer, saying camels and goats are far more suited than cattle. Because they’re more resilient against drought, they eat a broader variety of plants, and they’re capable of dealing with a broader variety, and some other utilities, in terms of the sort of tertiary products, the hair, etc, etc. And so, there’s a set of reference articles on measuring climate resilience in the Sahel. And one can go through hundreds of those types of questions. So it helps reveal hidden connections, which would otherwise not have been seen, it’s those little hidden things of you don’t know. But putting mangroves around ocean Islands has a massive difference in terms of their climate resilience. Now, it’s not going to help against a three, four-meter ocean level rise, but in the meantime, it can have a significant utility, and again, climateGPT comes with an answer saying this is expected by 2050 to have saved $150 billion. And this is the cost-benefit ratio of those various things. So it helps to reveal hidden connections that one would otherwise not have known.  Ross: Sorry, just want to make a point. I mean, the broader point here is that even if we go to…Well, we’ve already had significant climate change. And even if we got to net-zero this year, which we’re not, then we will continue to have climate change. So we’re moving to a different planet. So I suggest that a lot of the applications that you’re talking about for climateGPT are in terms of understanding that the world is changing in terms of its climate, which includes agriculture in terms of land use, in terms of impact on humans, and we will need to transition from the world we were to the world we will be. And so what you’re really giving the world now is this tool to assist us in managing the trends necessary to transition to a world that is already different and will become more different whatever we are able to do in terms of mitigating carbon emissions.  Daniel: It is exactly right. And there is a set of decisions here in which better decisions matter and earlier decisions matter and so by 5x. And so, one wants to create an interface that gives multiple perspectives, it gives an economic perspective, it can give a risk perspective, it gives a scientific perspective, a general perspective gives a biological perspective and one can add perspectives.  So often one can see those different viewpoints on things on that, and they are from a policy perspective, but also from an individual organization. Multiple choices for example, right here, Old Faithful, there’s an Excel file found in an old faithful, that converts nutrient-rich waters to proteins. And so rather than cutting down swaths of forests to grow soybeans on them as done in many parts of the world, one can grow these proteins within this mineral-rich and use that as feedstock for pigs, which a lot of the soybeans in the world are being used, that radically alters our water calculation that radically alters of things that radically alters the requirements for specific system level changes. And one can go through example, after example, example after that, of things that aren’t yet known. Sometimes they’re not at the system-scale, or they’re early stages or they’re proven technologies. South Australia is growing tomatoes in seawater, and doing it exceedingly well supplying millions of tons of tomatoes, growing just seawater and sun. So most people when one mentions this, it seems science fiction, but these things are running at scale. And they’re and so you’re starting to create those and weaving those connections to accelerate change, because one of the primary ways in which one does this and say, Look, over there, they’ve done it, it’s not that risky, we can change and talk to them, learn from them, and then scale that up. Ross: Fantastic. So the climategpt.ai, I believe. So is there anything else that anyone asks or any pointers for people who want to find out more? Daniel: The organization behind it is erasmus.ai, you can see some of the extreme weather examples on there. And then obviously linked through to climategpt.ai. If there are parties that would like to support us, either through datasets or through grants, to enable open equitable access to these technologies or want to work together with us on solving particular narrow problems, there’s a whole set of this kind of narrow problems that we’re dealing with on this, or from a university point of view, and then use it and organizations to use it and facilitate because it’ll be both private and public monies going into this changes and businesses, and often are in much more progressive in their viewpoints of understanding the challenges that they have for system wide change. Many, many businesses have signed Net-Zero targets for 2030, 203,5 2040. And simply, you know, when you speak with the CEO, they have no idea how to reach that. And this is the task of our age. And we should be using AI in this regard because the promises are tremendous and the peril is climate, not AI. Ross: Fantastic. Thank you so much for your insights and all of your work on such an important problem, Daniel. Daniel: Great seeing you again, mate. And thank you for your work. It’s wonderful, addressing this challenge of how to get people and computers and intelligence to work together in fundamentally different ways and lending some critical thinking to that and profiling work in this regard, I think is a tremendous benefit to us all.   The post Daniel Erasmus on ClimateGPT, AI for climate decisions, social intelligence solutions, and surfacing hidden connections (AC Ep51) appeared first on amplifyingcognition.

Pedro Uria-Recio, an AI executive, discusses the evolution of AI, human-AI interlacing, brain-computer interfaces, future education systems, and the importance of adaptability. He predicts AI's long-term impacts on humanity and emphasizes the need for an entrepreneurial mindset in an AI-driven world.

Anita Williams Woolley discusses collective intelligence, AI's role in enhancing collaboration, and using AI to care for the elderly. They explore gender impact on group intelligence, integrating AI as a teammate, and future human-AI collaboration possibilities.

Jeremy Somers, Founder of NotContent.ai, discusses merging AI with human creativity, addressing misconceptions about AI replacing creative jobs, strategies for integrating AI in traditional agency workflows, and the future of creative agencies in an AI-driven world.

Futurist Ross Dawson discusses the positive future of work with AI, emphasizing collaboration between humans and machines. They explore AI's role in content creation, enhancing creativity, and ethical considerations. The podcast highlights the potential of AI in amplifying creative potential and shaping a dynamic work environment.

Prominent Finnish screenwriter, Katri Manninen, discusses AI in screenwriting, maintaining human creativity with AI, automating content workflows efficiently, ethical considerations, and future possibilities of AI in amplifying creativity. She emphasizes the importance of human storytelling amidst AI advancements, exploring the dynamic between AI and human creativity in the field.

Tim Burrowes, Founder of Unmade, discusses AI's impact on media, challenges for journalists, evolution of creative agencies, and disruptions caused by Generative AI. He explores the balance between human creativity and AI automation, future training for creatives, and the role of AI in investigative journalism. The podcast delves into business model transformations, the symbiotic relationship between AI and journalism, and the potential consequences for marketing agency models.