By Michael Pearson, Executive Director of the Mathematical Association of America

On the train to work this morning, I read an extended essay in The Atlantic by Yuval Noah Harari, a historian, and philosopher who is on the faculty at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, drawn from his new book, 21 Lessons for the 21 Century. 

In his essay (and in the book), Harari discusses the massive disruption already in process as a result of technological innovation, and in particular the risk that artificial intelligence (machine learning) poses to democratic institutions and individual freedoms/rights.

He suggests that the following approaches are needed:

For starters, we need to place a much higher priority on understanding how the human mind works—particularly how our own wisdom and compassion can be cultivated. If we invest too much in AI and too little in developing the human mind, the very sophisticated artificial intelligence of computers might serve only to empower the natural stupidity of humans, and to nurture our worst (but also, perhaps, most powerful) impulses, among them greed and hatred. To avoid such an outcome, for every dollar and every minute we invest in improving AI, we would be wise to invest a dollar and a minute in exploring and developing human consciousness.

More practically, and more immediately, if we want to prevent the concentration of all wealth and power in the hands of a small elite, we must regulate the ownership of data. In ancient times, land was the most important asset, so politics was a struggle to control land. In the modern era, machines and factories became more important than land, so political struggles focused on controlling these vital means of production. In the 21st century, data will eclipse both land and machinery as the most important asset, so politics will be a struggle to control data’s flow.

Recent reports from meetings of business leaders at Davos suggest that the race towards automation using AI is likely to not only radically alter the manufacturing landscape, but displace workers across almost all employment sectors.

At the same time, the trends across the user-facing portions of the tech industry are further consolidating, presenting challenges for anyone concerned about the control of citizens’ personal data. This NY Times article on plans at Facebook is one of many appearing in the popular (reality-based) news media that are troubling.

These observations resonate with me and are consistent with the discussions that I participated in at the recent session Motivating Data Science Education through Social Good. This session was part of an ongoing series organized at the National Academies under the auspices of the Roundtable on Data Science Undergraduate Education, of which MAA is a partner.

These issues are relevant to MAA's mission precisely because mathematics is central both to the development of the technologies and to understand the ways in which these technologies function in the real world. In fact, this was also a theme in Cathy O'Neil's Porter Lecture at JMM, "Big Data, Inequality, and Democracy," which is based on her prior writing and her current work at O'Neil Risk Consulting & Algorithmic Auditing (while Cathy's lecture was not recorded, you can find many of her writings through her website).

These are complex issues, and I believe it is useful for all of us to learn more about how our data is being collected and used, to inform our personal decisions about what technologies to use, and how to engage these issues as citizens. Personally, I believe that a robust regulatory framework is a necessary but not sufficient ingredient to collectively address the challenges we face as a society. It will also take a concerned, quantitatively-literate citizenry who are capable of understanding the underlying issues and making informed decisions.

For our work at MAA, I hope you'll share my enthusiasm for how important our mission, "to advance the understanding of mathematics and its impact on our world," is in the context of these massive shifts in society.