霍金演講:人工智慧也可能是人類文明的終結者

原標題：霍金演講：人工智慧也可能是人類文明的終結者

4月27日，著名物理學家史蒂芬·霍金在北京舉辦的全球移動網際網路大會上做了視頻演講。在演講中，霍金重申人工智慧崛起要麼是人類最好的事情，要麼就是最糟糕的事情。他認為，人類需警惕人工智慧發展威脅。因為人工智慧一旦脫離束縛，以不斷加速的狀態重新設計自身，人類由於受到漫長的生物進化的限制，將無法與之競爭，從而被取代。

霍金演講稿雙語全文&採訪對話稿

一、人工智慧，要麼是最好的，要麼是最糟的

在我的一生中，我見證了很多社會深刻的變化。其中最深刻，同時也是對人類影響與日俱增的變化就是人工智慧的崛起。

簡單來說，我認為強大的人工智慧的崛起，要麼是人類歷史上最好的事，要麼是最糟的。

是好是壞，我不得不說我們依然不能確定。但我們應該竭盡所能，確保其未來發展對我們的後代和環境有利。

我們別無選擇。我認為人工智慧的發展，本身是一種存在著問題的趨勢，而這些問題必須在現在和將來得到解決。

人工智慧的研究與開發正在迅速推進。也許科學研究應該暫停片刻，從而使研究重點從提升人工智慧能力轉移到最大化人工智慧的社會效益上面。

基於這樣的考慮，美國人工智慧協會（AAAI）於2008至2009年，成立了人工智慧長期未來總籌論壇。他們近期在目的導向的中性技術上投入了大量的關注。但人工智慧系統的原則依然必須要按照我們的意志工作。

跨學科研究可能是一條可能的前進道路：從經濟、法律、哲學延伸至計算機安全、形式化方法，當然還有人工智慧本身的各個分支。

文明所提產生的一切都是人類智能的產物，我相信生物大腦總有一天會達到計算機可以達到的程度，沒有本質區別。因此，它遵循了「計算機在理論上可以模仿人類智能，然後超越」這一原則。

但我們並不確定，所以我們無法知道我們將無限地得到人工智慧的幫助，還是被藐視並被邊緣化，或者很可能被它毀滅。的確，我們擔心聰明的機器將能夠代替人類正在從事的工作，並迅速地消滅數以百萬計的工作崗位。

在人工智慧從原始形態不斷發展，並被證明非常有用的同時，我也在擔憂這樣這個結果，即創造一個可以等同或超越人類的智能的人工智慧：人工智慧一旦脫離束縛，以不斷加速的狀態重新設計自身。

人類由於受到漫長的生物進化的限制，無法與之競爭，將被取代。這將給我們的經濟帶來極大的破壞。未來，人工智慧可以發展出自我意志，一個與我們衝突的意志。

很多人認為人類可以在相當長的時間裡控制技術的發展，這樣我們就能看到人工智慧可以解決世界上大部分問題的潛力。但我並不確定，儘管我對人類一貫持有樂觀的態度。

二、人工智慧對社會所造成的影響，需要認真調研

2015年1月份，我和科技企業家埃隆·馬斯克，以及許多其他的人工智慧專家籤署了一份關於人工智慧的公開信。目的是提倡就人工智慧對社會所造成的影響，做認真的調研。

在這之前，埃隆·馬斯克就警告過人們：超人類人工智慧可能帶來不可估量的利益。但如果部署不當，則可能給人類帶來相反的效果。我和他同在「生命未來研究所」擔任科學顧問委員會的職務，這是一個旨在緩解人類所面臨的存在風險的組織。

之前提到的公開信也是由這個組織起草的。這個公開信號召展開可以阻止潛在問題的直接研究，同時也收穫人工智慧帶給我們的潛在利益，同時致力於讓人工智慧的研發人員更關注人工智慧安全。

對於決策者和普通大眾來說，這封公開信內容翔實，並非危言聳聽。人人都知道人工智慧，我們認為這一點非常重要。比如，人工智慧具有根除疾患和貧困的潛力，但是研究人員必須能夠保證創造出可控的人工智慧。

那封只有四段文字，題目為《應優先研究強大而有益的人工智慧》的公開信，在其附帶的十二頁文件中對研究的優先次序作了詳細的安排。

在過去的20年或更長時間裡，人工智慧一直專注於建設智能代理所產生的問題，即：在特定環境下可以感知並行動的各種系統。

智能是一個與統計學和經濟學相關的理性概念。通俗地講，這是一種能做出好的決定、計劃和推論的能力。基於這些工作，大量的整合和交叉孕育被應用在人工智慧、機器學習、統計學、控制論、神經科學以及其它領域。

共享理論框架的建立，結合數據的供應和處理能力，在各種細分的領域取得了顯著的成功。

例如語音識別、圖像分類、自動駕駛、機器翻譯、步態運動和問答系統。

隨著這些領域的發展，從實驗室研究到有經濟價值的技術形成了良性循環。哪怕很小的性能改進，都會帶來巨大的經濟效益，進而鼓勵更長期、更偉大的投入和研究。目前人們廣泛認同，人工智慧的研究正在穩步發展，而它對社會的影響很可能還在擴大。

潛在的好處是巨大的，甚至文明所產生的一切，都可能是人類智能的產物。但我們無法預測我們會取得什麼成果，這種成果可能是被人工智慧工具放大過的。

正如我說的，根除疾病和貧窮並不是完全不可能，由於人工智慧的巨大潛力，研究如何（從人工智慧）獲益並規避風險是非常重要的。

三、從短期和長期看人工智慧

現在，關於人工智慧的研究正在迅速發展，這一研究可以從短期和長期來分別討論。

短期擔憂:

1.無人駕駛。

從民用無人機到自主駕駛汽車。在緊急情況下，一輛無人駕駛汽車不得不在小風險的大事故和大概率的小事故之間進行選擇。

2.致命性智能自主武器。

它們是否該被禁止？如果是，那麼「自主」該如何精確定義。如果不是，任何使用不當和故障的過失應該如何被問責。

3.隱私的擔憂。
 

由於人工智慧逐漸開始解讀大量監控數據，會造成隱私上的擔憂，以及如何管理因人工智慧取代工作崗位帶來的經濟影響。

長期擔憂主要是人工智慧系統失控的潛在風險。

隨著不遵循人類意願行事的超級智能的崛起，強大的系統可能會威脅到人類發展。這種錯位是否會發生？如果會，那些情況是如何出現的？我們應該投入什麼樣的研究，以便更好的理解和解決危險的超級智能崛起的可能性，或智能爆發的出現？

當前控制人工智慧技術的工具，例如強化學習，簡單實用的功能，還不足以解決這系統失控的問題。因此，我們需要進一步研究來找到和確認一個可靠的解決辦法來掌控這一問題。

近來的裡程碑，比如之前提到的自主駕駛汽車，以及人工智慧贏得圍棋比賽，都是未來趨勢的跡象，巨大的投入傾注到這項科技。我們目前所取得的成就，和未來幾十年後可能取得的成就相比必然相形見絀。

而且我們遠不能預測我們能取得什麼成就。當我們的頭腦被人工智慧放大以後，也許在這種新技術革命的輔助下，我們可以解決一些工業化對自然界造成的損害。關乎到我們生活的各個方面都即將被改變。

簡而言之，人工智慧的成功有可能是人類文明史上最大的事件。

但人工智慧也有可能是人類文明史的終結，除非我們學會如何避免危險。我曾經說過，人工智慧的全方位發展可能招致人類的滅亡。比如最大化使用智能性自主武器。今年早些時候，我和一些來自世界各國的科學家共同在聯合國會議上支持其對於核武器的禁令。我們正在焦急的等待協商結果。

目前，九個核大國可以控制大約一萬四千個核武器，它們中的任何一個國家都可以將城市夷為平地，放射性廢物會大面積汙染農田，最可怕的危害是誘發核冬天，火和煙霧會導致全球的小冰河期。

這一結果使全球糧食體系崩塌，末日般動蕩，很可能導致大部分人死亡。我們作為科學家，對核武器承擔著特殊的責任。正是科學家發明了核武器，並發現它們的影響比最初預想的更加可怕。

我對人工智慧的災難探討可能驚嚇到了各位。很抱歉。但是作為今天的與會者，重要的是，在影響當前技術的未來研發中，你們要清楚自己所處的位置。

我相信我們團結在一起，來呼籲國際條約的支持或者籤署呈交給各國政府的公開信，科技領袖和科學家正極盡所能避免不可控的人工智慧的崛起。

去年10月，我在英國劍橋建立了一個新的機構，試圖解決一些在人工智慧研究快速發展中出現的尚無定論的問題。「利弗休姆智能未來中心」是一個跨學科研究所，致力於研究智能的未來，這對我們文明和物種的未來至關重要。

過去我們花費大量時間學習歷史，雖然深入去看，可能大多數是關於愚蠢的歷史。所以現在人們轉而研究智能的未來，是令人欣喜的變化。

我們對潛在危險有所意識，我內心仍秉持樂觀態度，我相信創造智能的潛在收益是巨大的。也許藉助這項新技術革命的工具，我們將可以削減工業化對自然界造成的傷害。

我們生活的每一個方面都會被改變。我在研究所的同事休·普林斯承認，「利弗休姆中心」能建立，部分是因為大學成立了「存量風險中心」。後者更加廣泛地審視人類潛在問題，而「利弗休姆中心」的重點研究範圍則相對狹窄。

四、人工智慧的最新進展

人工智慧的最新進展，包括歐洲議會呼籲起草一系列法規，以管理機器人和人工智慧的創新。令人些許驚訝的是，這裡涉及到了一種形式的電子人格。以確保最有能力和最先進的人工智慧盡到其應盡的權利和責任。

歐洲議會發言人評論說，隨著日常生活中越來越多的領域日益受到機器人的影響，我們需要確保機器人無論現在還是將來，都為人類而服務。

向歐洲議會議員提交的報告，明確認為世界正處於新的工業機器人革命的前沿。報告中分析了是否應該給機器人提供作為電子人的權利。這等同於法人（的身份），也許有可能。

報告強調，在任何時候，研究和設計人員都應確保每一個機器人設計都包含有終止開關。在庫布裡克的電影《2001太空漫遊》中，出故障的超級電腦哈爾沒有讓科學家們進入太空艙，但那是科幻。我們要面對的則是事實。

奧斯本·克拉克跨國律師事務所的合伙人，洛納·布拉澤爾在報告中說，我們不承認鯨魚和大猩猩有人格，所以也沒有必要急於接受一個機器人人格。但是擔憂一直存在。

報告承認在幾十年的時間內，人工智慧可能會超越人類智力範圍，人工智慧可能會超越人類智力範圍，進而挑戰人機關係。

報告最後呼籲成立歐洲機器人和人工智慧機構，以提供技術、倫理和監管方面的專業知識。如果歐洲議會議員投票贊成立法，該報告將提交給歐盟委員會。它將在三個月的時間內決定要採取哪些立法步驟。

在人工智慧發展進程中，我們還應該扮演一個角色，確保下一代不僅僅有機會還要有決心。在早期階段充分參與科學研究，以便他們繼續發揮潛力，幫助人類創造一個更加美好的的世界。這就是我剛談到學習和教育的重要性時，所要表達的意思。我們需要跳出「事情應該如何」這樣的理論探討，並且採取行動，以確保他們有機會參與進來。

我們站在一個美麗新世界的入口。這是一個令人興奮的、同時充滿了不確定性的世界，而你們是先行者。我祝福你們。

問答環節

中國科技大咖、科學家、投資家和網友發問霍金（在百萬網友的關注中篩選出的七個問題）

Q1：創新工場的CEO李開復：

網際網路巨頭擁有巨量的數據，而這些數據會給他們各種以用戶隱私和利益換取暴利的機會。在巨大的利益誘惑下，他們是無法自律的。而且，這種行為也會導致小公司和創業者更難創新。您常談到如何約束人工智慧，但更難的是如何約束人本身。您認為我們應該如何約束這些巨頭？

A1：

據我了解,許多公司僅將這些數據用於統計分析,但任何涉及到私人信息的使用都應該被禁止。會有助於隱私保護的是，如果網際網路上所有的信息，均通過基於量子技術加密，這樣網際網路公司在一定時間內便無法破解。但安全服務會反對這個做法。

Q2：獵豹移動CEO傅盛：

「靈魂會不會是量子的一種存在形態？或者是高維空間裡的另一個表現？

A2：

近來人工智慧的發展，比如電腦在西洋棋和圍棋的比賽中戰勝人腦，都顯示出人腦和電腦並沒有本質差別。這點上我和我的同事羅傑·彭羅斯正好相反。會有人認為電腦有靈魂嗎？對我而言，靈魂這個說法是一個基督教的概念，它和來世聯繫在一起。我認為這是一個童話故事。

Q3：百度總裁張亞勤：

「人類觀察和抽象世界的方式不斷演進，從早期的觀察和估算，到牛頓定律和愛因斯坦方程式， 到今天數據驅動的計算和人工智慧，下一個是什麼？」

A3：

我們需要一個新的量子理論，將重力和其他自然界的其它力量整合在一起。許多人聲稱這是弦理論，但我對此表示懷疑，目前唯一的推測是，時空有十個維度。

Q4：史丹福大學物理學教授張首晟：

「如果讓你告訴外星人我們人類取得的最高成就，寫在一張明信片的背面，您會寫什麼？」

A4：

告訴外星人關於美，或者任何可能代表最高藝術成就的藝術形式都是無益的。因為這是人類特有的。我會告訴他們哥德爾不完備定理和費馬大定理。這才是外星人能夠理解的事情。

Q5：

「我們希望提倡科學精神，貫穿GMIC全球九站，清您推薦三本書，讓科技屆的朋友們更好的理解科學及科學的未來。」

A5：

他們應該去寫書而不是讀書。只有當一個人關於某件事能寫出一本書，才代表他完全理解了這件事。

Q6：微博用戶：

「您認為一個人一生中最應當做的一件事和最不應當做的一件事是什麼？」

A6：

我們絕不應當放棄，我們都應當儘可能多地去理解這個世界。

Q7：微博用戶：

「人類在漫漫的歷史長河中，重複著一次又一次的革命與運動。從石器、蒸汽、電氣……您認為下一次的革命會是由什麼驅動的？」

A7:

（我認為是）計算機科學的發展，包括人工智慧和量子計算。科技已經成為我們生活中重要的一部分，但未來幾十年裡，它會逐漸滲透到社會的每一個方面，為我們提供智能地支持和建議，在醫療、工作、教育和科技等眾多領域。但是我們必須要確保是我們來掌控人工智慧，而非它（掌控）我們。

Q8：音樂人、投資者胡海泉：

「如果星際移民技術的成熟窗口期遲到，有沒有完全解決不了的內發災難導致人類滅絕？拋開隕星撞地球這樣的外來災難。」

A8：

是會有這個內發災難的。人口過剩、疾病、戰爭、饑荒、氣候變化和水資源匱乏, 人類有能力解決這些危機。但很可惜，這些危機還嚴重威脅著我們在地球上的生存，這些危機都是可以解決的，但目前還沒有。

英文演講全文：

Over my lifetime, I have seen very significant societal changes. Probably one of the most significant, and one that is increasingly concerning people today, is the rise of artificial intelligence.

In short, I believe that the rise of powerful AI, will be either the best thing, or the worst, ever to happen to humanity.  

I have to say now, that we do not yet know which. But we should do all we can, to ensure that its future development benefits us, and our environment. We have no other option. I see the development of AI, as a trend with its own problems that we know must be dealt with, now and into the future.

The progress in AI research and development is swift. And perhaps we should all stop for a moment, and focus our research, not only on making AI more capable, but on maximizing its societal benefit.

Such considerations motivated the American Association for Artificial Intelligence's, two thousand and eight to two thousand and nine, Presidential Panel on Long-Term AI Futures, which up to recently had focused largely on techniques, that are neutral with respect to purpose. 

But our AI systems must do what we want them to do. Inter-disciplinary research can be a way forward: ranging from economics, law, and philosophy, to computer security, formal methods, and of course various branches of AI itself.

Everything that civilization has to offer, is a product of human intelligence, and I believe there is no real difference between what can be achieved by a biological brain, and what can be achieved by a computer. 

It therefore follows that computers can, in theory, emulate human intelligence, and exceed it. But we don’t know. So we cannot know if we will be infinitely helped by AI, or ignored by it and side-lined, or conceivably destroyed by it. 

Indeed, we have concerns that clever machines will be capable of undertaking work currently done by humans, and swiftly destroy millions of jobs.

While primitive forms of artificial intelligence developed so far, have proved very useful, I fear the consequences of creating something that can match or surpass humans. AI would take off on its own, and re-design itself at an ever increasing rate. Humans, who are limited by slow biological evolution, couldn't compete, and would be superseded. It will bring great disruption to our economy.

And in the future, AI could develop a will of its own, a will that is in conflict with ours. Although I am well-known as an optimist regarding the human race, others believe that humans can command the rate of technology for a decently long time, and that the potential of AI to solve many of the world's problems will be realised. I am not so sure.

In January 2015, I, along with the technological entrepreneur, Elon Musk, and many other AI experts, signed an open letter on artificial intelligence, calling for serious research on its impact on society. 

In the past, Elon Musk has warned that super human artificial intelligence, is possible of providing incalculable benefits, but if deployed incautiously, will have an adverse effect on the human race. 

He and I, sit on the scientific advisory board for the Future of Life Institute, an organization working to mitigate existential risks facing humanity, and which drafted the open letter. This called for concrete research on how we could prevent potential problems, while also reaping the potential benefits AI offers us, and is designed to get AI researchers and developers to pay more attention to AI safety.

In addition, for policymakers and the general public, the letter is meant to be informative, but not alarmist. We think it is very important, that everybody knows that AI researchers are seriously thinking about these concerns and ethical issues. 

For example, AI has the potential to eradicate disease and poverty, but researchers must work to create AI that can be controlled. The four-paragraph letter, titled Research Priorities for Robust and Beneficial Artificial Intelligence, an Open Letter, lays out detailed research priorities in the accompanying twelve-page document.

For the last 20 years or so, AI has been focused on the problems surrounding the construction of intelligent agents, systems that perceive and act in some environment. In this context, intelligence is related to statistical and economic notions of rationality. Colloquially, the ability to make good decisions, plans, or inferences.

As a result of this recent work, there has been a large degree of integration and cross-fertilisation among AI, machine learning, statistics, control theory, neuroscience, and other fields. The establishment of shared theoretical frameworks, combined with the availability of data and processing power, has yielded remarkable successes in various component tasks, such as speech recognition, image classification, autonomous vehicles, machine translation, legged locomotion, and question-answering systems.

As development in these areas and others, moves from laboratory research to economically valuable technologies, a virtuous cycle evolves, whereby even small improvements in performance, are worth large sums of money, prompting further and greater investments in research. 

There is now a broad consensus that AI research is progressing steadily, and that its impact on society is likely to increase. The potential benefits are huge, since everything that civilization has to offer, is a product of human intelligence; we cannot predict what we might achieve, when this intelligence is magnified by the tools AI may provide. 

But, and as I have said, the eradication of disease and poverty is not unfathomable. Because of the great potential of AI, it is important to research how to reap its benefits, while avoiding potential pitfalls.

Artificial intelligence research is now progressing rapidly. And this research can be discussed as short-term and long-term. Some short-term concerns relate to autonomous vehicles, from civilian drones and self-driving cars. For example, a self-driving car may, in an emergency, have to decide between a small risk of a major accident, and a large probability of a small accident. 

Other concerns relate to lethal intelligent autonomous weapons. Should they be banned. If so, how should autonomy be precisely defined. If not, how should culpability for any misuse or malfunction be apportioned. Other issues include privacy concerns, as AI becomes increasingly able to interpret large surveillance datasets, and how to best manage the economic impact of jobs displaced by AI.

Long-term concerns, comprise primarily of the potential loss of control of AI systems, via the rise of super-intelligences that do not act in accordance with human wishes, and that such powerful systems would threaten humanity. Are such dystopic outcomes possible. 

If so, how might these situations arise. What kind of investments in research should be made, to better understand and to address the possibility of the rise of a dangerous super-intelligence, or the occurrence of an intelligence explosion.

Existing tools for harnessing AI, such as reinforcement learning, and simple utility functions, are inadequate to solve this. Therefore more research is necessary to find and validate a robust solution to the control problem.

Recent landmarks, such as the self-driving cars already mentioned, or a computer winning at the game of Go, are signs of what is to come.  Enormous levels of investment are pouring into this technology. 

The achievements we have seen so far, will surely pale against what the coming decades will bring, and we cannot predict what we might achieve, when our own minds are amplified by AI.  

Perhaps with the tools of this new technological revolution, we will be able to undo some of the damage done to the natural world by the last one, industrialisation. Every aspect of our lyves will be transformed. In short, success in creating AI, could be the biggest event in the history of our civilisation.

But it could also be the last, unless we learn how to avoid the risks.  I have said in the past that the development of full AI, could spell the end of the human race, such as the ultimate use of powerful autonomous weapons. Earlier this year, I, along with other international scientists, supported the United Nations convention to negotiate a ban on nuclear weapons. 

We await the outcome with nervous anticipation. Currently, nine nuclear powers have access to roughly 14,000 nuclear weapons, any one of which can obliterate cities, contaminate wide swathes of land with radioactive fall-out, and the most horrible hazard of all, cause a nuclear-induced winter, in which the fires and smoke might trigger a global mini-ice age. 

The result is a complete collapse of the global food system, and apocalyptic unrest, potentially killing most people on earth. We scientists bear a special responsibility for nuclear weapons, since it was scientists who invented them, and discovered that their effects are even more horrific than first thought.

At this stage, I may have possibly frightened you all here today, with talk of doom. I apologise. But it is important that you, as attendees to today's conference, recognise the position you hold in influencing future research and development of today's technology. 

I believe that we join together, to call for support of international treaties, or signing letters presented to individual governmental powers. Technology leaders and scientists are doing what they can, to obviate the rise of uncontrollable AI.

In October last year, I opened a new center in Cambridge, England, which will attempt to tackle some of the open-ended questions raised by the rapid pace of development in AI research. The Leverhulme Centre for the Future of Intelligence, is a multi-disciplinary institute, dedicated to researching the future of intelligence, as crucial to the future of our civilisation and our species. We spend a great deal of time studying history, which let's face it, is mostly the history of stupidity. 

So it's a welcome change, that people are studying instead the future of intelligence. We are aware of the potential dangers, but I am at heart an optimist, and believe that the potential benefits of creating intelligence are huge. Perhaps with the tools of this new technological revolution, we will be able to undo some of the damage done to the natural world, by industrialisation.

Every aspect of our lives will be transformed. My colleague at the institute, Huw Price, has acknowledged that the center came about partially as a result of the university’s Centre for Existential Risk. That institute examines a wider range of potential problems for humanity, while the Leverhulme Centre has a more narrow focus.

Recent developments in the advancement of AI, include a call by the European Parliament for drafting a set of regulations, to govern the yooss and creation of robots and AI. Somewhat surprisingly, this includes a form of electronic personhood, to ensure the rights and responsibilities for the most capable and advanced AI. 

A European Parliament spokesman has commented, that as a growing number of areas in our daily lyves are increasingly affected by robots, we need to ensure that robots are, and will remain, in the service of humans.

The report as presented to MEPs, makes it clear that it believes the world is on the cusp of a new industrial robot revolution. It examines whether or not providing legal rights for robots as electronic persons, on a par with the legal definition of corporate personhood, would be permissible. 

But stresses that at all times, researchers and designers should ensure all robotic design incorporates a kill switch. This didn't help the scientists on board the spaceship with Hal, the malfunctioning robotic computer in Kubrick’s two thousand and one, a Space Odyssey, but that was fiction. We deal with fact. Lorna Brazell, a partner at the multinational law firm Osborne Clarke, says in the report, that we don’t give whales and gorillas personhood, so there is no need to jump at robotic personhood. 

But the wariness is there. The report acknowledges the possibility that within the space of a few decades, AI could surpass human intellectual capacity, and challenge the human robot relationship. Finally, the report calls for the creation of a European agency for robotics and AI, that can provide technical, ethical, and regulatory expertise. If MEPs vote in favor of legislation, the report will go to the European Commission, which has three months to decide what legislative steps it will take. 

We too, have a role to play in making sure the next generation has not just the opportunity, but the determination, to engage fully with the study of science at an early level, so that they can go on to fulfil their potential, and create a better world for the whole human race. 

This is what I meant, when I was talking to you just now about the importance of learning and education. We need to take this beyond a theoretical discussion of how things should be, and take action, to make sure they have the opportunity to get on board. We stand on the threshold of a brave new world. It is an exciting, if precarious place to be, and you are the pioneers. I wish you well.

Professor Hawking, we have learned so much from your insight.

Next I’m going to ask some questions. These are from Chinese scientists and entrepreneurs.

Kai-Fu Lee, CEO of Sinovation Ventures:

"The large internet companies have access to massive databases, which allows them to make huge strides in AI by violating user's privacy. These companies can’t truly discipline themselves as they are lured by huge economic interests. This vastly disproportionate access to data could cause small companies and startups to fail to innovate. You have mentioned numerous times that we should restrain artificial intelligence, but it’s much harder to restrain humans. What do you think we can do to restrain the large internet companies?"

As I understand it，the companies are using the data only for statistical purposes，but use of any personal information should be banned. It would help privacy, if all material on the internet, were encrypted by quantum cryptography with a code, that the internet companies could not break in a reasonable time. But the security services would object.

Professor, the second question is from Fu Sheng, CEO, Cheetah Mobile:

「Does the human soul exist as a form of quantum or another form of higher dimensional space?"

I believe that recent advances in AI, such as computers winning at chess and Go, show that there is no essential difference between the human brain and a computer. Contrary to the opinion of my colleague Roger Penrose. Would one say a computer has a soul. In my opinion, the notion of an individual human soul is a Christian concept, linked to the afterlife which I consider to be a fairy story.

Professor，the third question is from Ya-Qin Zhang, President, Baidu:  

「The way human beings observe and abstract the universe is constantly evolving, from observation and estimation to Newton's law and Einstein’s equation , and now data-driven computation and AI . What is next」

We need a new quantum theory, which unifies gravity with the other forces of nature. Many people claim that it is string theory, but I have my doubts. So far about the only prediction is that space-time has ten dimensions.

Professor, the forth question is from Zhang Shoucheng , Professor of Physics, Stanford University:

「If you were to tell aliens about the highest achievements of our human civilization on the back of one envelope, what would you write ?」

It is no good telling aliens about beauty or any other possible art form that we might consider to be the highest artistic achievement，because these are very human specific. Instead I would write about Godel’s Incompleteness Theorems and Fermat’s Last Theorem. These are things aliens would understand

The next question is from myself：

「We wish to promote the scientific spirit at all 9 GMIC conferences globally. What three books do you recommend technology leaders read to better understand the coming future and the science that is driving it?」

They should be writing books not reading them. One fully understands something only when one has written a book about it.

The next question is from Weibo user：

What is the one thing we should never do in life, and the one thing we should all do?

We should never give up, and we should all strive to understand as much as we can.

The next question is also from Weibo user：

「Human beings have experienced many evolutions ，for example, the Stone Age, the age of steam to the age of electricity. What do you think will drive the next evolution?」

Advances in computer science, including artificial intelligence and quantum computing. Technology already forms a major part of our lives but in the coming decades, it will permeate every aspect of our society .intelligently supporting and advising us in many areas , including healthcare work education and science. But we must make sure we control AI not it us.

Professor Hawking，the last question is from Hai Quan , Musician and VC:

「If the technology is not mature yet for interstellar immigrants, do human beings have unsolvable challenges that could lead to human extinction apart from external catastrophes like asteroid hitting earth?」

Yes. over-population, disease, war, famine, climate change and lack of water. It is within the power of man to solve these crises, but unfortunately these remain serious threats to our continued present on earth. These are all solvable, but so far have not been.

·END·