- We The 66
- Posts
- 🌊 Inside a Controversial AI Breakthrough
🌊 Inside a Controversial AI Breakthrough
AI is transforming how diseases are treated. When will it go too far?
Brad Smith and his family
Did someone forward you this? Subscribe here free!
This is a guest article by Jamie Towey of Aging With Dignity, a nonprofit that defends the rights of people as they approach the end of life.
On April 27, there was news of a technological marvel that, if you blinked, you may have missed.
That day, a man named Brad Smith posted a nine-minute video to X and YouTube where he (or rather, an AI recreation of his voice) described how a Neuralink brain implant had transformed his life.
Brad has ALS. The loving husband and father of three can’t use his hands, feet, or much of anything, really; he can’t even speak. But his mind works – perhaps the most painful aspect of this disease.
The Neuralink implant and its associated software now allow him to type and use a computer to communicate with others – all by thinking. Delicate wisps of gold-coated polyimide thread surgically embedded into Brad’s brain tissue measure his brain’s electronic activity which, with some honing on Brad’s part, manipulate his MacBook’s cursor. For the first time in years, he can emotionally engage with his wife and children beyond smiling and blinking.
“This is my old voice narrating this video, cloned by AI before I lost my voice,” he says. He then tells his story – something that later-stage ALS patients have never been able to do.
Watch the video. It’s poignant and inspiring.
I have lost a much-loved relative to ALS and have seen friends and family members succumb to other vicious diseases. I’m all for cures and therapies. And yet I couldn’t join the full-throated chorus of praise. Instead, I found myself thinking back to a few quotes:
“The purpose of Neuralink [is] to be symbiotic with AI.” – Elon Musk, founder of Neuralink
“The Singularity will allow us to transcend these limitations of our biological bodies and brains. We will gain power over our fates. Our mortality will be in our own hands. We will be able to live as long as we want.” – Ray Kurzweil, inventor, futurist, Google executive
“We believe Artificial Intelligence is our alchemy, our Philosopher’s Stone – we are literally making sand think.” – Marc Andreessen, venture capitalist, billionaire
“Intelligence, magic intelligence in the sky. I think that’s what we’re about.” – Sam Altman, CEO, Open AI
“Don’t die.” – Bryan Johnson, entrepreneur and CEO, Blueprint
This… them. That’s why despite the tremendous benefits being brought by technological progress, I have qualms.
Set aside the fact that Musk, Kurzweil, Andreessen, Altman, Johnson, and so many other leading figures of the “transhumanist movement” – which advocates for enhancing the human condition through technology – have massive financial stakes in manifesting their predictions into reality.
The rest of this report is for paid subscribers, who fund our journalism. If you start a two-week free trial today, you’ll be automatically entered to win a free year. Once you sign up, you can access all of our articles here!
Editor’s Note
We’re very curious to hear your thoughts on today’s story. Also, we’ve been meaning to incorporate more guest writers to provide a more diverse range of stories and expertise. If there is a story you would like to cover, please let us know.
And regarding yesterday’s story (on the privilege of journalists and press freedom rankings), let us know you did!
Paul wrote:
This is a fantastic article. This is such important information that so many people don’t know about the crazy censorship during the pandemic.
I love what you guys do and every now and then I just feel a “mic drop” moment… like today’s closing sentence! Well said!
Greg wrote:
This was spectacular... as you continue to grow, please don't let the MSM's bias characteristic slip into Roca's own reporting and management. It sounds easy, but it's not. You're on a mission, and it's working!
And we had this exchange with Ian from South Africa:
There is a massive difference between government and social media censorship. To put Instagram or any other meta/private Chinese platform, on the prevention of freedom list is a massive mistake. Press freedom is measured by government policies, not Mark Z! The US asks for social media handles on visa applications and you're cheesed at number 57? You are lucky to be in the top 100, press freedom is in the eyes of the reader not the writer, in censorship it is the government not social media.
To which we replied:
There's definitely a difference between government and social media censorship, however, when the government pressures social media to commit the censorship, that line is blurred – as it was in the US during the pandemic. The Chinese government often isn't silencing speech directly – it's telling Weibo what can and can't be posted there. That's what happened in the US under the last administration (albeit to a much lesser extent than in China).
It's by now been well-documented that White House officials were routinely holding meetings with tech companies about which speech was allowable, and many tech employees have confirmed that this pressure shaped their speech policies. When Biden accused the tech companies of "killing people," it sent a clear message (just as Trump's lawsuits against CBS and ABC have). Our problem is with the fact that this situation was never deemed a threat to the press, because it wasn't a threat to the big press. For us and any other digital media startup, it was existential – we're only as free as the platforms that we operate on allow us to be.
As always, if you missed our recent stories, find them here:
See you tomorrow,
Max and Max