I don dey tink say as AI go dey grow, e go change our society and how we go dey live life.
As AI go dey do all di sense work, e fit be like say person no go need to tink again. But me, I believe say human beings go need to dey tink different kain tinking wey no be di one we don dey call sense work before.
Dis one just like as machine don free human beings from plenti hard labour, but dem still need to dey do different kain body work.
Di different kain body work na di ones wey involve careful hand and finger work. E fit be like skilled work wey artisan dey do, or using computer and smartphone.
Na so too, even if dem free us from sense work, we no fit run from di sense work of tinking.
So, wetin kain sense activities we go need?
Inside dis article, I go explain my tinking about di big change for software development for dis AI time, and we go find out our destiny as human beings wey must dey tink.
Software Wey Dem Arrange By How E Dey Work
I dey suggest say make "process-orientation" be di next big way to arrange software, pass di "object-orientation" wey we sabi.
Dis na one way wey di main part of programming go be wetin dem call "process." A process go start when something happen or when certain things set, different parts go work on am according to how dem arrange am for inside di process, and e go finish at di end.
To tink of dis whole flow, from when e start till when e finish, as one single tin, e just make sense to human beings.
Because of dis, we fit understand software and systems well well by following di processes, from when we dey analyze wetin we need, to when we dey build am, even to when we dey test and use am.
After we don build di main processes for one system, we fit just plug in other small small processes or processes to add new features.
Some of di extra processes fit start with events or conditions wey no concern di main process, while others fit start when di main process don meet certain conditions.
But even if na so, you no need to go change di main process. E just make sense to define di added process to start when di main process don meet di conditions wey go make am start.
Apart from dat, because dem dey treat a process as one single module, di definition of di process go include all di work wey e go do.
No be only dat, a process go still hold di starting conditions wey I mention before, plus variables and data areas to write information wey e go need while e dey work.
Since dem dey treat processes as single modules and dem get all di necessary work and data areas inside, e fit be say plenti times di same work and data structure go dey for many processes.
One way na to make dem common modules, but e no bad if we just let di repetition dey.
Especially as AI go dey help with programming, e make sense say if plenti modules get similar but different ways of doing things, e no go cause problem.
Di reason why dem dey make work and data types common na mainly to reduce di amount of program code for di software wey dem develop, so e go easy to manage and understand.
But if AI don significantly reduce di cost of managing di code wey dem build, then di need for commonality go reduce.
So, di idea to avoid making software structure complicated because of commonality, and instead define all work and data structures individually for each process, even if e get plenti repetition, na very good idea.
Dis one show say we dey shift from tinking about overall best solution to tinking about individual best solution. Dis na because if you no make dem common, you fit adjust similar processes individually for different modules.
Society Wey Dem Arrange For Everybody One By One
Just like software wey dey use di "process-oriented" way of thinking, for one society where AI go dey do work automatically and make everything fast and produce plenti, di way wey people dey think go change from finding di best solution for everybody to finding di best solution for each person.
Dis na one thing wey we fit call "individually optimized society."
Our society get plenti common values and standards, like rules, common sense, good manners, and things wey everybody suppose sabi.
But if dem apply all dis things strictly for every situation and condition, e go cause wahala for many cases wey be exception.
So, even as we dey hold on to common values and standards, we still allow for flexible judgments depending on wetin dey happen to each person or for each situation.
Dis ones fit be clear exceptions wey dem write for inside rules, or rules wey say make dem judge cases one by one. And even if dem no write am down clearly, e fit be things wey everybody just understand.
For example, dem write plenti exception clauses clearly for inside laws. Apart from dat, even if dem no fit write am clearly for law, di judicial system still dey allow individual cases to influence how dem go sentence person. "Extenuating circumstances" na exactly di idea of considering individual situations.
If we look at am dis way, e go clear say di idea of individual optimization, which originally mean say you go carefully check di unique nature of all situations and conditions and make judgments based on dat uniqueness, don already siddon well well for inside society.
On di other hand, e sure say e no efficient to judge every single thing individually and carefully. So, for one time where high efficiency dey very important, people go dey look for "global optimization" (best solution for everybody).
However, as society go dey become very efficient through AI, di value of chasing "global optimization" go reduce. And an "individually optimized society," where dem go dey make careful judgments for each person's situation and condition, suppose come to pass.
My Own Philosophy
To make di best judgment for individual person based on di situation, e mean say instead of just doing wetin everybody dey do, you must really think about am.
I dey call dis kain way of seeing ethics, where di act of thinking deep by itself get value, "subjective philosophy."
Every tin wey happen always get its own special character "now" and "here," different from other tins. Na "my" responsibility to take dis special character seriously when I dey make a judgment.
To make a standard judgment wey no care about how unique something be and just follow one pattern, or to just throw away deep thinking and make a anyhow judgment, no good morally, no matter how good di result turn out to be.
But on di other hand, even if di result of di judgment lead to wetin we no plan and something bad happen, if dat judgment come from deep thinking from different angles and you don account for your actions, then di judgment itself good morally.
So, as we go fit pass di ideas of just being fast and making everything standard, we go enter one time where dem go need personal best judgment, or "subjective philosophy."
How To Arrange Something
Whether for philosophy, society, or software, di way wey you arrange something—like di ideas and how dem connect—wey dem call "framework," dey very important if you wan make things work best.
Dis na because di way you go make things work best go change depending on how you see each thing and how you rate am.
If you dey look at making everything work best for everybody (global optimization), then di framework must gather different things and make dem as simple as possible. When you do am dis way, you go lose di special character of each thing.
But on di other hand, if na to make things work best for individual person (individual optimization), e better make you understand and rate events or things from different angles, wey dem arrange specially for dat particular event or thing.
For di global optimization matter, small number of people dey enough to think about wetin kind framework dem go use to understand different things.
Most people fit just understand, rate, and judge things according to di framework wey dat small number of people don create.
However, for di individual optimization matter, plenti people go need to create their own framework for each individual thing so dem fit understand its special character well well.
Because of dis, plenti people go need di power and skill to design frameworks.
Wetin We Go Dey Think For Life
When we arrange things dis way, e show us one future where even if AI take over di sense work wey humans don dey do before, we no fit stop to dey think.
Dem go free us from sense work wey be for making things and getting money. But di society wey dey optimized for individual person and di subjective philosophy go still ask us to design personal frameworks for each matter and think deep about am.
Dis one go put us for one position where we must continue to dey think, maybe even pass how we dey think for dis present society.
AI fit do sense work and make judgments wey anybody fit make. But for matters wey "I" must take responsibility for, AI fit only give information, show wetin dem go use judge, or give advice.
Di final judgment must come from "me." Dis one just like say, even now, person fit consult with people wey get power, parents, or friends about different personal decisions, but you no fit give dem di power to judge for you.
And for one time where everything dey very efficient, no dey think deep for individual judgments go become something wey dem no go accept. Dis na because di excuse say you too busy to think because of life demands no go hold water again.
For dis kain time of advanced efficiency, we no go fit escape di destiny of thought.