The text develops a discussion of the diversity, inclusiveness (inclusion), and heterogeneity of societies and how all of this affects the progress of new technologies.
First, the concept of “heterogeneity” comes into play. This refers not merely to people who are different from each other, but to those whose differences are so great that they cannot be easily integrated or included (encompassed). Heterogeneity in this context is portrayed as a new challenge for human societies to coexist while respecting each other’s differences, as their diversity extends to extremes.
Next, the text mentions Diversity and Inclusion (D&I), a concept that aims to create a society in which people of different backgrounds can work and live equally. However, the text criticizes that its actual efforts often lead to “homogenization,” i.e., a loss of diversity.
He further discusses the potential for Large Language Model (LLM) innovations to bring about major changes in humanity. He states that as technology evolves, human society will become more complex, and old systems and methods may no longer be usable or may be eliminated. For example, the emergence of more sophisticated malware (malicious software) is cited as an example.
Finally, it is stated that with new technological advances, only those who are able to adapt to the LLM era may survive. However, the conclusion is that there is no clear answer as to whether technological evolution should be delayed for this purpose.
@nishio: “heterogeneity” Interesting. “The era of mere diversity is ending. When we talk about diversity, we tend to talk about inclusion… heterogeneity, which is about living with beings with differences that cannot easily be included… how to build relationships with people who have distinct differences.” Delay, GPT, and Heterogeneity: The Possibility of Alternative Technologies with Mitsuhiro Takemura: Six Towards a Smooth Society Dialogue #2 | WIRED.jp
hrjn D&I was originally supposed to be about coexistence among heterogeneous people, but what tends to be done as a matter of fact is language education and culture penetration, I think this is homogenization rather than inclusion.
Inclusion, in the sense of the word, should have meant encompassing in a more general concept.
hrjn In such a context, I believe that purposeful management and the like should have emerged, but there is not much change from MVV, or perhaps it tends to move in the direction of indoctrination and exclusion of those who “do not share” MVV. I think that the direction of MVV tends to be toward indoctrination or elimination of those who do not “sympathize” with MVV.
hrjn I think that technological evolution, especially LLM systems, are so innovative that they can even weed out pre-LLM humanity in the extreme because the technology is clearly abused/utilized…
hrjn For example, I wouldn’t be that surprised if we see more sophisticated malware than ever before. Even emotet from the before LLM era is already quite widespread. It’s a little scary to think that that one could get more sophisticated more easily.
It could even be that one day, an unknown employee was on slack and it turned out to be malware.
hrjn It is quite possible that here, in the end, only those humans who have been able to adapt to the LLM era will remain…
But I’m not sure if that should slow down technological evolution.
This page is auto-translated from /nishio/異質性 using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.