Tom Cruise’s latest Mission Impossible film has jumped on the artificial intelligence (AI) bandwagon, breaking the pattern of the evil antagonist being either an ambitious human or a malevolent alien species. The new antagonist is none other than an all-powerful AI known as the “Entity.”
Mission: Impossible — Dead Reckoning Part One depicts how the world’s superpowers race to find a cruciform key that unlocks answers to an incredibly powerful, omniscient and cognitive AI entity. Only Ethan Hunt, played by Cruise, and his crew want to destroy it, knowing such a powerful weapon would bring unimaginable disaster upon humanity if it falls into the wrong hands.
The film highlights “four fears” that a “perfect” AI would bring to the human world.
First is the fear that information has become less secure. In the age of the Internet and social media, most people have given up on ensuring the privacy of their personal information. In the age of AI, even if you are not an active information technology (IT) user, your personal information is still at risk of being breached.
Humans have always dreamed of inventing a robot that is capable of self-growth, possesses cognitive skills like humans and has the ability to process abstract problems, so as to help people make judgements, forecasts and solve problems. Recent AI developments have brought humanity a step closer to this dream.
For example, AI technologies have increased the accuracy of diagnosis and treatment of neuronal tumors, thereby improving predictions of recurrence and survival rates. Studies have shown that their diagnoses were at times more accurate than those made by doctors.
Additionally, AI is capable of finding other treatments and healthcare solutions, offering a better price-performance ratio. AI software such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Midjourney are designed for easy use by ordinary users to enhance their accessibility.
The AI antagonist in the Mission Impossible film is able to hack into systems connected to the Internet, acquire all the information it needs, and use the information and technologies to put everything under its control.
We are now living in the time of AI, but we have no way to prevent such malicious attacks. What we can do is to back up critical information in case of breaches, take everything with a pinch of salt and be mentally prepared for the damage caused by the loss of information.
Second is the fear of surveillance. In the film, IT agents, government officials and the Entity rely on facial recognition technology and dead reckoning to find and track targets. Surveillance that could occur anytime, anywhere could undermine people’s privacy and exacerbate people’s fear of AI.
Third is the fear of simulacra. To alleviate consumer unease, companies use anthropomorphism to humanize their products or services. For example, Pepper the robot is equipped with eyes, a mouth and limbs. Many ChatBots have human-like appearances, voices, gender and names. These humanoid characteristics and measures are adopted to reduce people’s fear of the unknown.
In the film, the director uses swooshing graphics and eye-like optics to personify the Entity, so that it would not appear too human-like to invoke the uncanny valley effect. However, people should still remember that this is a trick to alleviate their fear and, therefore, aversion to AI. The Entity still has great computing power up its sleeve, and could be more cunning and calculating than imaginable.
Finally, AI could replace humans. The movie vaguely tells the audience that a powerful, omniscient and cognitive AI can replace humans and possibly annihilate them one day. The AI can make efficient decisions autonomously just like any human being, and with the help of followers, complete its task, and even replace and destroy humans eventually.
This is not the first Hollywood movie to touch upon the subject of the dark side of AI, and media reports have lately focused on how many jobs AI would be replacing. The film has not only portrayed AI in a negative light, but also demonstrated that AI has no sense of morality and does not bear any responsibility for its actions.
Such concerns are why the EU and the international community have proposed a legal framework to govern AI, aiming to address the risks generated by specific uses of the technology. But is this possible? Once the rules are set in place, they would run counter to the ideal of developing an AI that can think, act and interact with humans.
We will have to wait for the conclusion to the story arc to know if Cruise’s character can save the day and whether humans can keep AI under control.
Lee Ya-ching is a professor at National Sun Yat-sen University’s Institute of Marketing Communication.
Translated by Rita Wang
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
The Hong Kong government on Monday gazetted sweeping amendments to the implementation rules of Article 43 of its National Security Law. There was no legislative debate, no public consultation and no transition period. By the time the ink dried on the gazette, the new powers were already in force. This move effectively bypassed Hong Kong’s Legislative Council. The rules were enacted by the Hong Kong chief executive, in conjunction with the Committee for Safeguarding National Security — a body shielded from judicial review and accountable only to Beijing. What is presented as “procedural refinement” is, in substance, a shift away from
The shifting geopolitical tectonic plates of this year have placed Beijing in a profound strategic dilemma. As Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) prepares for a high-stakes summit with US President Donald Trump, the traditional power dynamics of the China-Japan-US triangle have been destabilized by the diplomatic success of Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi in Washington. For the Chinese leadership, the anxiety is two-fold: There is a visceral fear of being encircled by a hardened security alliance, and a secondary risk of being left in a vulnerable position by a transactional deal between Washington and Tokyo that might inadvertently empower Japan
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
RSS