Opinion | As nations battle for AI supremacy, what about the cost of creative destruction?
- Most governments seem more interested in global AI dominance than managing the cost of disruptive innovation for society
- Wise states would make AI’s potential creative destruction a strategic issue, with funding and continuous attention from the highest levels of government
Unsurprisingly, investment in AI research and development is skyrocketing across the globe – not only from companies but also from governments and public entities.
We are also seeing more doomsday thinkers who argue that AI could be (even will be) the end of humanity. Apocalyptic visions of a future dominated by AI – one might recall scenes from The Matrix or Terminator films – are seemingly pushed upon society, instilling fear.
While creative destruction has a long history in economic theory, it is most often linked to the Austrian economist Joseph Schumpeter. Briefly, creative destruction implies that disruptive innovations are drivers of sustained economic growth, even if they destroy existing economic actors like specific industries, companies and jobs.
Think about how Apple’s iPhone conquered the world, at the cost of traditional mobile phone producers like Nokia, or how cars replaced horses and carriages.
