Interviewer: Okay, so let’s discuss the issue at hand, then.
Morgan: All right.
Interviewer: It’s your position that the United States should use its power within the new Democratic Union to push for a ban on artificial intelligence worldwide, correct?
Morgan: Let’s be crystal clear, because this is a crucial point.
Interviewer: Okay.
Morgan: It’s not my position that we should use our power to push for a ban—it’s my position that we should use our power to insist on a ban. And I am not personally against the development of artificial intelligence. A.I. is all around us—
Interviewer: Yes, I was going to ask you about your own personal use—
Morgan: I’m not against artificial intelligence. What I’m against is strong A.I. I am against artificial intelligence that is capable of passing the Turing test and that has the potential to become infinitely more intelligent than human beings.
Interviewer: But, Senator, A.I. is already stronger than us at most types of thinking—
Morgan: Most types of thinking? I don’t know where you’re getting your information, Anderson, but that’s simply not true.
Interviewer: Okay—many types of thinking—is that a fair statement?
Morgan: It’s faster, sure.
Interviewer: So, if computers have already surpassed us in many respects, isn’t the Turing test an anthropocentric and, therefore, irrelevant way of evaluating—
Morgan: No, it’s not. The Turing test determines whether or not a computer is conscious. That’s the whole point of it.
Interviewer: Don’t you think that might be debatable?
Morgan: We don’t have time for that type of academic debate.
Interviewer: No time for debate, Senator?
Morgan: The Turing test is the only agreed-upon—
Interviewer: No time for debate in a democracy?
Morgan: Let me finish. The Turing test is the only agreed-upon test in which all parties agree that, when a computer passes it, that computer will have reached human levels in all respects. We won’t have any cognitive advantages over a machine like that—we’ll be demoted to the second-smartest species on the planet. Like the dolphins. Ask them how that worked out for them.
Interviewer: So your position is that the United States will unilaterally decide to ban artificial intelligence if you’re elected president?
Morgan: I never said that.
Interviewer: You said the United States should insist on a ban.
Morgan: We should.
Interviewer: The rest of the Democratic Union doesn’t agree with that position.
Morgan: That’s not true.
Interviewer: It is true, Senator—
Morgan: No, it’s not. Sure, there are countries within the D.U. that disagree, and we’ll negotiate with those countries—
Interviewer: You said “insist.”
Morgan: The United States has the most influence of any D.U. nation. If we take a moral stand, I have full confidence that the D.U. will follow our lead.
Interviewer: Even if that’s true, China will never agree to abandon—
Morgan: I don’t know about that.
Interviewer: They have openly stated their position that they will continue developing strong A.I., regardless of the D.U. position on the matter.
Morgan: As President, I will not let China threaten us—
Interviewer: They’ve issued no threat, Senator.
Morgan: Yes they have. If they develop strong A.I., not only will that threaten international security, but it will also threaten our species.
Interviewer: How have they threatened international security?
Morgan: A strong A.I. would quickly be able to find a way around our defenses. That’s why they want to develop it in the first place—to threaten us.
Interviewer: With all due respect, Senator, aren’t you the one who’s issuing threats?
Morgan: Absolutely not, Anderson. I’m simply doing what the American people expect me to do—defending humanity from an existential threat.
Interviewer: Isn’t this—
Morgan: I’m glad you find this amusing.
Interviewer: I’m sorry, but aren’t you being a little dramatic?
Morgan: I don’t find the security of the American people and the security of the people of the Democratic Union funny, Anderson. I take it very seriously. If your friend, the President, were to take it seriously, he’d back me up and insist on a comprehensive, strong A.I. ban.
Interviewer: Let’s talk about that proposed ban. The election is almost eight months away, Senator, and even if you win, you won’t take office until January of next year. Meanwhile, IBM already has a working simulation of the human brain. Some experts are saying now that this simulated brain might be able to pass the Turing test before the end of the next President’s first term. How do you intend to implement measures draconian enough to stop multinational companies from following through on the development of these technologies?
Morgan: By any means necessary.
Interviewer: Excuse me, Senator, but I am a bit taken aback. Isn’t that the kind of talk that has caused some people to label you as an extremist?
Morgan: Your network has labeled me as an extremist. The American people haven’t.
Interviewer: Senator, I resent that. We’ve always been fair—
Morgan: Fair? The man who owns your network has donated to the President’s campaign already, has he not?
Interviewer: He has. Full disclosure for our viewers. That’s true.
Morgan: He’s got his toes dipped in every major technology company there is.
Interviewer: That’s an unfair generalization—
Morgan: It’s worse than selling his soul. If he just sold his soul, so be it. He’d burn in Hell. Serves him right. But this is worse than that. He’s selling out his species. He’d end humanity. He’d see a world that is post-human, as long as he lived to see it inside a computer—
Interviewer: Senator Morgan—
Morgan: He’s not just a traitor to America—
Interviewer: This is really—
Morgan: He’s a traitor to the species—to his own species!
Interviewer: Senator Morgan? Please—okay. Senator Morgan has walked out on the interview. He’s certainly started the general election campaign with a bang, that’s for sure. We’ll see how voters respond. A fiery outburst of a self-proclaimed Purist, or the extremism of a fanatic? The American voters will decide in November.
