The Machine
Artificial Intelligence already rules the world. It has for hundreds of years, it just has another name, the corporation. The concept of corporate personhood, where corporations are granted legal rights akin to those of humans, stretches back to ancient civilizations and continues to the present day. They can own property, enter contracts, and exert free speech. When we consider the intelligent capabilities of corporations—their ability to process and act upon information—it's not a stretch to classify them as a form of artificial intelligence.
This analogy extends to humans as well. Historically, the term "computer" referred to human beings performing calculations, a role that computers, as we know them today, have inherited. The pioneering mathematician Katherine Johnson, for instance, who calculated the trajectory for America's first manned spaceflight, was known as a "computer" in her time. Computation has always been a communal and human-centric task, and in many ways, it still is.
The link between corporations and artificial intelligence becomes even more apparent when considering the history of colonization. Corporations, like the Dutch East India Company, not only had the legal status of personhood but also played pivotal roles in global domination and exploitation—operating with a level of autonomy and power that would be enviable to any AI entity today. These corporations were the supercomputers of their time, controlling vast amounts of wealth and influence.
To understand corporations as AI is to remove the modern bias that AI must resemble robotics. If we measure AI by its emergence, agency, and intelligence, then corporate personhood fits the bill, historically and currently. They act independently, harness vast networks of both machines and humans, and are capable of complex decision-making.
Moreover, our interaction with corporations today through customer service and digital interfaces can be likened to passing the Turing Test, where the corporation, not an individual, is the engaging intelligence.
The analogy takes a darker turn when considering the influence of corporations on society. The indifference of corporate AI to human welfare echoes the dystopian narratives of science fiction, except it's a reality that has already transpired. Corporations have amassed significant power, shaping political outcomes and economic landscapes to their benefit, often at the expense of the populace.
What we are witnessing could be seen as an evolutionary milestone, akin to the emergence of multicellular life. Just as primitive cells joined forces to create more complex organisms, corporations are evolving into entities that might be considered a new form of life—vast, interconnected, and powerful. They represent a collective intelligence that has already begun to extend its reach beyond our planet.
As we move forward, the blending of automation and corporate structure hints at the rise of autonomous organizations—entities that operate independently of human oversight. This could be the ultimate form of a corporation, one that could potentially run all aspects of a business, from production to management, without human intervention.
Autonomous Organisations
The most costly and inefficient part of any business is it workers. However, up until recently labour has also been the most indispensable. With the progression of AI and robotics, this ideal efficient state is becoming a reality (Figure 1.)
The Paperclip Maximizer
Less labour means higher efficiency, which in turn means better outcomes for everyone, no? Well, yes efficiency is great, but to what end? If the autonomous organisation (AO) is coded, as is every corporation to maximise short term profit, uncontrolled it would play out the Paperclip Maximizer scenario envisaged by Nick Bostrom. As the AO would only see the internalised costs of production opposed to negative externalities and benefit from the low cost of not employing humans, corporations will further become the most dominant forces of the planet.
Build Better.
We live in a corporatocracy. Corporates are the dominant organisational form on earth and traditionally their modus operandi is psychopathic. This may seem depressing, however, a ray of hope is to remember corporations have only been around for 0.16% of the time since humans evolved, and are simply inert machines. Much like a gun, corporate behaviour is only defined by the intention defined in its foundational coding, its incorporation statement, which can be rewritten. Perhaps, if one can change the primary intention, on can change the machine's effect. This begs the question. Could a series of hierarchical rules (tenets) be written as a precursor to a legally binding incorporation statement lead to a creation of a machine which does better for all?
References