Unpredictable: A Response to Daniel Miessler’s “AI’s Predictable Path”

In his compelling article, Daniel Miessler asserts that while technological progress is unpredictable, the human desires driving it are not. While I acknowledge the appeal of this argument, I respectfully disagree. Human beings, along with their desires and motivations, are far too complex to fit neatly into predictable frameworks. History is replete with examples of how unexpected developments have shaped our world in ways no one could have foreseen, often defying even the most rigorous attempts at prediction. Take fire, for instance. When early humans first discovered how to create and control fire nearly a million years ago, they had no way of predicting the cascading effects of this breakthrough. Fire wasn’t just a means of cooking food or staying warm—it became a foundational technology that reshaped human life in ways still evident today. It fueled innovations that enabled transportation across continents and even journeys into space. It also became a tool of destruction, used in warfare to devastating effect.

Beyond its immediate utility, fire catalyzed fundamental changes in human evolution. Cooking food allowed our ancestors to extract more nutrients, which in turn supported the development of larger brains. This newfound cognitive capacity led to innovations in medicine, agriculture, and social organization—advancements that could never have been anticipated by the early humans who first harnessed fire.

These examples illustrate the inherent unpredictability of human desires and their outcomes. Even with advanced mathematical tools like calculus, which excels at modeling rates of change and interdependent variables, predicting the future remains an elusive goal. Human society is not a system of neatly quantifiable variables; it is a dynamic, nonlinear, and often chaotic environment where countless factors interact in unpredictable ways.

The Complexity of Human Motivations

If technology is unpredictable, human beings are exponentially more so. While it’s true that basic motivations such as safety, success, and social belonging are universal, the ways in which these motivations manifest vary widely across cultures, religions, and individual circumstances. This variability makes it nearly impossible to predict how collective human desires will shape technological progress.

History offers vivid examples of this complexity. Consider the differing approaches to safety in medieval China and among the Mongols. Chinese emperors sought to protect their people by building the Great Wall—a monumental feat of engineering designed to keep invaders at bay. The Mongols, in contrast, pursued safety through expansion, investing in a powerful military to eliminate threats rather than erecting defensive barriers. Both strategies were driven by the same fundamental desire for safety, yet they led to vastly different outcomes. The Great Wall became a symbol of isolation and defense, while the Mongol Empire’s military campaigns reshaped entire regions through conquest and cultural exchange. These contrasting approaches underscore the unpredictability of human decision-making, even when driven by shared motivations.

The Evolution of Digital Assistants

When it comes to digital assistants, Miessler envisions a future where they become deeply integrated into our lives, serving as omniscient companions and indispensable tools. While this vision is intriguing, I would argue that it is already a reality. Today’s smartphones—arguably the most advanced digital assistants—know more about us than we often realize. Consider the uncanny accuracy of targeted advertising. Have you ever mentioned a niche product in conversation, only to be bombarded with ads for it moments later? This phenomenon highlights the extent to which our devices collect and analyze data about our preferences, habits, and interactions. Platforms like YouTube serve content tailored to our demographics with remarkable precision, demonstrating that digital assistants are already deeply embedded in our lives. However, the idea of digital assistants evolving into fully independent, user-controlled entities seems unlikely. Instead, they are more likely to remain tethered to centralized systems managed by tech giants such as Google, Apple, and Amazon. This trend mirrors developments in cloud computing, where data is increasingly stored and managed in centralized server farms rather than on individual devices.

Even in industries like automotive technology, we see this pattern of centralization. Cars that once operated as isolated systems are now part of interconnected networks, integrating features like self-driving capabilities and real-time traffic updates. Given these trends, it is improbable that digital assistants will evolve into standalone, independent agents.

Misconceptions About AI Predictions

Everything and Everyone Gets an API (Daemon/Aura):

Miessler suggests a future where every entity has its own API, enabling seamless interactions between systems. While this idea is compelling, it seems unlikely given the current trajectory of AI development. Traditional APIs allow multiple endpoints to interact with centralized systems, but the high barriers to entry in AI mean that only a few companies will dominate the market. This centralization reduces the need for sprawling, decentralized API architectures, as data will likely be concentrated in a few large pools managed by companies like Google or Amazon.

Our DAs Will Mediate Everything:

This claim is less of a prediction and more of an observation about the present. Digital assistants like Apple Maps already demonstrate this capability, learning user behavior and offering proactive suggestions. For instance, if you routinely visit a specific location at the same time each week, Apple Maps may automatically suggest a route to that destination. This is not a glimpse into the future—it is a logical extension of existing technology.

Our DAs Will Become Advocates and Defenders:

The notion of digital assistants as protectors echoes the ideals behind the Second Amendment, which grants Americans the right to bear arms for self-defense. However, just as gun ownership doesn’t guarantee safety, there is no assurance that digital assistants will effectively protect their users. Governments or corporations may intervene if they perceive a digital assistant’s owner as a threat, limiting the assistant’s ability to advocate for or defend its user.

The Limits of Predictability

One of the central themes of Miessler’s article is the idea that human desires provide a predictable foundation for technological progress. While this argument has some merit, it oversimplifies the complexity of human motivations. Desires are not fixed or uniform; they are shaped by a multitude of factors, including culture, religion, and individual experiences. Even when we identify universal motivations like safety or success, the ways in which these desires are pursued can vary dramatically. This variability makes it impossible to predict with certainty how collective human desires will shape the future.

For example, consider the development of fire as a technology. While early humans sought to harness fire for basic needs like cooking and warmth, the long-term consequences of this discovery were far more profound. Fire enabled the development of metallurgy, which in turn led to the creation of tools, weapons, and infrastructure. These advancements laid the groundwork for entire civilizations, yet they also introduced new challenges, such as environmental degradation and the destructive power of warfare.

Conclusion

While Daniel Miessler’s optimism about the predictability of human desires is commendable, it is essential to approach such claims with caution. Human beings and their motivations are inherently complex, shaped by countless variables that defy easy categorization or prediction. The future of technology, much like humanity itself, is a dynamic and unpredictable tapestry. While we can identify certain trends and patterns, the specific outcomes of our collective desires and innovations remain elusive. And perhaps, this unpredictability is not a flaw but a feature—a testament to the boundless creativity and complexity of the human spirit.