The answer is a resounding yes. We just need to wake up and act fast. Let's discuss where we are now in terms of AI's actual level of intelligence and what we can do to prepare ourselves for the future so it's not that gloomy.

First things first, as of June 2025, can we trust AI platforms to give us the most accurate answer whenever we prompt them? The answer is a simple no. Many of the details of AI outputs still contain so-called "hallucinations".

"Hallucinations" occur when AI models, such as large language models (LLMs), produces outputs that are false, misleading or nonsensical.

Still, it presents outputs as if they were factual or accurate. For instance, the model might feed itself information derived from less reliable sources when giving you the answer to your question. Naturally, this would not yield accurate results.

The issue with platforms like ChatGPT is that humans implicitly grant "automatic consent" for the model to process search results and present them in a single, conclusive answer, which is often accepted at face value. Be aware that once humans type a prompt, it's the touch point at which the power shifts from us to the machine.

As autonomous beings, we are responsible for reviewing and double-checking whether the information provided is correct or not. Don't simply accept the output.

AI platforms like ChatGPT and Gemini can leap 10 times in every new version, leading to exponential development. In just a few years or months, hallucinations will become a thing of the past, and AI models will provide more than merely accurate and comprehensive information.

The scariest time will be when AI makes decisions without being asked.

With these improvements in each version, it's only a matter of time before the machine becomes thousands of times smarter than Albert Einstein, whose IQ was 162. This would enable whoever has access to such intelligence to possess unlimited abundance.

The challenge is whether those in such privileged positions, including governments, are compassionate enough to place humanity, not the machine, on the pedestal. After all, with such abundance comes an enormous power, including to eradicate poverty and hunger. For the first time in history, all problems will have solutions.

Third, for the first time, humans will no longer need to work because AI will provide an unlimited abundance. This requires a redefinition of jobs, businesses and of how incomes are earned and distributed.

One option is universal basic income (UBI). In this system, each citizen receives a regular and unconditional cash payment from the government as a social welfare benefit, regardless of their employment status and income.

Previously unprecedented, governments must create policies that prioritize the well-being of humanity over profit-driven capitalistic impulses. Power and greed have no place whatsoever when it's time to choose between living in a utopian or a dystopian future.

For this, governments of all nations must work together collectively to transcend differences, so that humanity can prevail. Separately, each government must have a think tank that provides the most practical, ethical and humane approach to excel in the age of AI.

Fourth, in the age of AI, the touch of humanity becomes rare and more valuable. Artificially-produced information can never replace humanity in its fullest meaning of the word, which increases its value. Humanity, after all, is the parent of AI. We train LLMs by feeding them datasets to enhance their performance.

Just like teaching a child, we need to continuously remind ourselves to be the parent, not surrender to the child's wishes. This, of course, requires a stronger, more intelligent and sterner parental figure when the models have become so intelligent that they outsmart us.

At last, let's ponder upon Google Innovation Lab's Chief Business Officer Mo Gawdat's quote, "[...] not an AI challenge but the challenge of humanity in the age of AI."

***

The writer is an author based in California, an AI trainer for Google, a legal scholar at Northeastern University, a former columnist for Forbes and a graduate of the University of Indonesia Law School. The views expressed are personal.