AI-Assisted Human Development: Is it a Good or a Bad Thing?

In the 90’s World Best Chess player Garry Kasparov lost to Deep Blue—an AI developed to self-reinforce itself to play the game almost to perfection. Today it is accepted that AI is better at chess than humans. But in what other areas does this conclusion apply? Accounting? Engineering? Or even more human endeavors like poetry and music? There’s no saying, and many people, my good friends, are concerned. That’s the thing about AI, not even its developers know what turn it could take—too many black-boxes for what is very well a critical element of today’s civilization.

Roving in the dusts of the moment, let us talk about Nobel Prizes—or do we say… the consensus badge of a life well-utilized for the common weal.

The Rise of AI in Fringe Research: Robots Eyeing Nobel Prizes?

Once upon a time, science was all about long hours in the lab, endless number crunching, and staring at chalkboards filled with equations only a select few could decipher. Those were times apples fell on Newton’s head and Marie Curie suffered lethal radium exposure before winning a Nobel Prize. Fast forward to today, Demis Hassabis and John M. Jumper of Google’s DeepMind just won the 2024 Nobel Prize for Chemistry! Yeah, read that again, lol. Let me restate that, Tech employees just won a Nobel Prize in Chemistry.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become the ultimate lab partner—minus the need for coffee breaks or those awkward moments of small talk. Even its “pioneers”, Hopfield and Hinton, won the 2024 Nobel Prize in Physics for their work, which, when you consider that Stephen Hawking never won the award, is just like whoa! Even though we are yet to develop the ultimate AI machines, AI is already at the frontiers of knowledge—from medical diagnostics to movie recommendations for newly-weds, to next-gen hands-free driving Tesla cars... heck, Musk just unveiled his fleet of robo-assistants (for those that can spare $25K).

AI's meteoric rise in frontier research isn't just some futuristic fantasy. It’s real, and it’s happening faster than you can say "machine learning." From physics to chemistry, biology to cosmology, AI is crunching numbers, analyzing data, and even suggesting new research pathways that would take mere mortals years to conceive. So, what’s the big deal about AI stepping into the spotlight of scientific discovery, and—wait for it—what happens when “it” wins a Nobel Prize?

AI: Your New Lab Buddy

For starters, AI is transforming how we conduct research. It’s like having a genius-level research assistant who works 24/7, doesn’t need sleep, and never complains about overtime. AI algorithms can sift through massive datasets, recognize patterns humans might miss, and run simulations that would take traditional methods decades to complete. In the realm of medicine, AI has already contributed to drug discovery and personalized treatments, while in astrophysics, it helps parse through the ocean of data from telescopes.

And let’s not forget the gene-editing realm, where AI is turbocharging CRISPR technology by predicting the most effective cuts in DNA strands. Sure, we humans are still directing the ship, but AI is doing some serious heavy lifting—and it’s only getting stronger.

But, Can AI Win a Nobel Prize?

Here’s where things get interesting. The Nobel Prize is still considered the most prestigious accolade in science, awarded to individuals who push the boundaries of human knowledge. But what happens when a machine assists or even leads the breakthrough? Are we on the cusp of the first AI-assisted Nobel Prize?

Imagine this: a group of researchers submits their groundbreaking paper to the Nobel committee, only to reveal later that half the work was done by an algorithm. Does the AI get a share of the prize? Does it get a gold medal? More importantly, can it give an acceptance speech, and perhaps, in tears?

While the thought of a robot giving a Nobel lecture is amusing, it also raises serious ethical and philosophical questions. Can a machine, devoid of consciousness, creativity, or ambition, truly deserve such recognition? Or is the Nobel Prize still a distinctly human accolade, reserved for those flesh-and-blood beings who can savor the glory—and the champagne?

The Human Element: Still Important, For Now

Here’s the kicker: while AI can crunch the data and suggest new hypotheses, it’s still humans who interpret the results, make the decisions, and find meaning in the discoveries. AI lacks intuition, curiosity, and that sudden flash of insight that makes science so wonderfully unpredictable. It’s a tool—an incredibly powerful one—but it’s not replacing the human element in research anytime soon.

And let’s be honest, we all know that half the fun of Nobel Prizes is watching the eccentricity of the winners. Whether it’s a scientist in mismatched socks or someone giving a heartfelt tribute to their childhood chemistry atoms set, the personality and passion behind the discoveries is what makes the ceremony special. AI, however brilliant, would just make it... a little awkward. "I would like to thank my developers. Without their lines of code, I would not be here today."

Consequences for the Future of Science

With AI taking over cutting-edge research, it won’t be long before the 'cutting' part is handled by algorithms and the 'edge' gets a little... dull. Novel discoveries might soon come standard with a software update! If AI continues on its current trajectory, it could revolutionize the pace of discovery. Frontier research would accelerate in ways previously unimaginable. But it also means scientists will need to adapt—no more leisurely publishing a paper after a decade of work. The pressure to deliver results will increase as AI narrows the gap between hypothesis and discovery.

There’s also the question of accessibility. AI tools, especially the cutting-edge ones, aren’t cheap or easy to come by. Wealthier institutions with access to advanced AI could dominate scientific research, leaving smaller or less-funded entities in the dust. And, let’s face it, no one wants to see a world where brilliant ideas get left behind because they couldn’t afford the latest version of "Lab Bot 3000."

Finally, we’ll need to rethink the way we give credit. It’s one thing to acknowledge a grad student for their contribution to a research project, but what about when your co-author is an algorithm? It could reshape the way we perceive collaboration in science—and maybe even redefine what it means to be a “scientist” in the AI era.

The Final Analysis

The 2024 Nobel Prize in Physics is connected to neural networks, AI. The prize in Chemistry is connected to AlphaFold, AI. Some protesters have even claimed that OpenAI, or whatever LLM-owning unit shaking the literary space, should have taken the prize for Literature.

On another extreme end, people fear the eventual take-over of AI of all the things that make us us--but let’s put that can of worms back on the shelf for now.

It’s clear that AI will continue to shape the future of science in profound ways. This is both exciting and mind-boggling. Whether AI will claim a Nobel Prize or remain behind the scenes as the ultimate lab assistant, is anyone’s guess.

The question then is: is this good or bad? While this is up for a debate I am willing to moderate, one thing’s for sure: if AI does snag a Nobel Prize, it better learn to wear a tux and make a killer speech over a nice glass of Scavi & Ray Al Cioccolato. Apologies, that wine had to go in somewhere. Bye, and thanks to AI for the many help in putting these 2018 words together 😊