I dey think about how society and di way we dey live go change as AI dey improve.
As AI dey take over brain-work, e fit be like say humans no go get much to think about again. But me, I believe say one different kyn of thinking, wey no be like di brain-work of before, go dey required from humans.
Dis one be like how mechanization free humans from hard labor small-small, but at de same time, e ask for other kyn of physical work.
Dis other kyn of physical work involve delicate tasks wey dem dey do with hands and fingertips, like di skilled work of artisans or using computers and smartphones.
Na so too, even if dem free us from brain-work, we no fit escape de brain-work of thinking.
So, wetin kyn of brain-activity dem go ask from us?
For dis article, I go show my thoughts on di change for software development styles for di AI age, and I go explore our "fate of thinking."
Process-Oriented Software
I dey propose process-oriented as de next way of doing things, moving past de object-oriented ways.
Dis idea see de main part of programming as a process. An event or condition dey start a process, different roles dey handle am based on wetin dem don arrange, and e go eventually stop.
Dis way of seeing a series of steps, from when e start to when e finish, as one single unit, dey fit human intuition well.
So, dem fit understand software and systems with processes as de main thing, from analyzing wetin dem need to implementation, and through to testing and operation.
After dem don do de main processes for a system, dem fit plug in extra processes or processes for adding new functions.
Some extra processes fit start by demsef based on events or conditions wey different from de main process, while others fit start when de main process meet certain conditions.
However, even for such cases, no need to change de main process. E just make sense to define de extra process to start when de main process meet its starting condition.
Also, because dem dey treat a process as a single module, its definition include all de processing wey e dey do.
Apart from dat, a process also get variables and data areas to store information wey dem need during its execution, as well as de starting conditions wey I mention before.
Since a process be one unit module wey get all de necessary processing and data areas, e high say dem go get duplicate implementations of processing and structured data across plenty processes.
While one way be to use common modules, e no wrong to instead decide to tolerate duplication.
Specifically, as AI dey help with programming, e fit be say having many similar but different implementations across multiple modules no go cause any problem.
De main aim of making processing and data types standard na to reduce de amount of code for developed software, wey go make am easier to manage and understand.
However, if de costs of managing implementation code go reduce well-well because of AI, den de need for standardization go reduce.
Therefore, de policy of avoiding complex software structure wey standardization fit cause, and instead defining all processing and data structures individually for each process, even with plenty duplication, dey entirely reasonable.
Dis one mean say we dey move away from de idea of overall optimization and dey aim for individual optimization. Because no standardization, e go make am possible to fine-tune similar processes individually.
Individual Optimization Society
Just like how software dey use process-oriented thinking, for one society where AI dey drive automation and efficiency to achieve advanced productivity, di way we dey think go shift from overall optimization to individual optimization.
Dis na one phenomenon wey dem fit call an individual optimization society.
Our society get different standardized values and criteria, like rules, common sense, manners, and general knowledge.
But, if dem dey strictly apply dis to all situations, plenty problems go come up for many special cases.
Because of dis, even as we dey value standardized values and criteria, we still allow flexible judgment based on individual circumstances and situations.
Dis fit be clear exceptions wey dem write inside rules, or rules wey talk say dem suppose make judgment case-by-case. Also, even if dem no write am down clearly, pipo fit just understand am.
For example, laws also clearly state different exceptions. And, even if dem no state am clearly in law, individual cases dey influence sentencing through de judicial system. Extenuating circumstances na exactly de idea of reflecting individual situations.
When we look at am dis way, we fit see say de concept of individual optimization, wey originally involve carefully checking di uniqueness of all situations and making judgments based on dat uniqueness, don already enta deep inside society.
On di other hand, e sure say e no dey efficient to carefully judge every single matter individually. So, for one time where high efficiency dey very important, dem dey look for overall optimization.
However, as society dey become highly efficient because of AI, de value of pursuing overall optimization go reduce. Instead, an individual optimization society go surely be realized, where careful judgments dey made for each individual situation.
Subjective Philosophy
To make individually optimized decisions based on the situation, e mean say instead of just quickly applying one common judgment, person must think well well.
I dey call dis ethical way of thinking, where de act of thinking well well by itself get value, subjective philosophy.
Every event, "here and now," naturally get im own unique way wey dey different from all other events. De "me" wey dey make judgment, after considering dis unique way, get im own responsibility.
If person ignore individuality and just make standardized, fixed judgments, or if person give up on thinking well well and just make anyhow decisions, e no dey ethical, no matter if de outcome good or bad.
On de other hand, even if a judgment lead to negative consequences wey person no plan for, de judgment itself still ethical if dem don think about am well well from different angles and dem accept responsibility.
So, as we go dey fit move past de ideas of efficiency and standardization, we go likely enta one time where subjective philosophy, as a kyn of on-demand individual optimization, go become necessary.
Framework Design
Whether na for philosophy, society, or software, a framework—wey be like a structure for thinking—dey very important for making things work best.
Dis na because de way wey things go optimize go change depending on how dem view each subject and how dem evaluate am.
From de angle of overall optimization, frameworks need to simplify different things as much as possible by making them very abstract. For dis process of abstraction, de unique nature of each thing dey lost.
But, for individual optimization, e better to understand and evaluate events or subjects from many different angles, wey fit their specific nature.
For overall optimization, just a few people fit think about wetin kind of framework dem go use to understand different things.
Most people just need to understand, evaluate, and judge things according to de frameworks wey those few individuals create.
However, for individual optimization, plenty people go need to create frameworks for each specific matter, so dem go fit properly understand its unique nature.
Because of dis, many people go need de ability and skill to design frameworks.
De Fate of Thinking
As we arrange our thoughts like dis, we go see one future where, even as artificial intelligence dey take over de brain-work wey humans dey do before, we no fit stop to think.
Dem go free us from brain-work wey dey focused on productivity and plenty money. But, on de other hand, de individual optimization society and subjective philosophy go demand say we design individual frameworks for each matter and think deep about am.
Dis one go put us for a situation where we must continue thinking, even pass how we dey think for society now.
AI fit do brain-work and make judgments wey anybody fit make. But for matters wey "I" dey responsible for, AI only fit give information, show wetin dem use judge, or give advice.
"Me" must make de final decision. Dis one be like how, even now, pipo fit ask authorities, parents, or friends for advice on different decisions, but dem no fit give dem de judgment itself to make.
And for a time of advanced efficiency, not thinking deep and individual for judgment no go dey allowed again. Dis na because de excuse of being "too busy to think" no go hold water again.
For such a time of advanced efficiency, we no go fit escape de fate of thinking.