The Lost Ark and the Illusion of Obligatory Technology
The Never-Ending Quest for the Ark
Throughout history, legends of hidden treasures and ultimate power have captivated humanity. Among them, the Lost Ark of the Covenant stands as one of the most enduring. Said to contain divine wisdom and unimaginable power, the Ark was believed to grant military invincibility, divine favor, and control over destiny itself. Kings, conquerors, and treasure seekers alike spent centuries in pursuit of it, convinced that possessing it would ensure their dominance forever.
This ancient obsession with the Ark is not so different from our modern world. Today, we chase a different kind of power - not a sacred relic, but technological supremacy. The new "ark" is not a golden chest but the next great innovation: artificial general intelligence, quantum computing, biotech breakthroughs, space colonization - each promising unimaginable power to whomever attains it first. And just like the Ark, these technologies are pursued with great passion, as if their discovery will grant absolute control over the future.
But behind this relentless pursuit lies an unquestioned assumption: that this competition is not only necessary but inevitable. We are told that countries and corporations must race toward the next technological frontier, that slowing down or opting out is simply not an option.
The economist and systems thinker Nate Hagens describes this phenomenon as an obligatory technological arms race - a system in which stopping is unthinkable because falling behind means becoming irrelevant, outcompeted, or even extinct. Just as ancient civilizations that failed to adopt the latest weaponry were conquered, modern societies that fail to lead in AI, automation, or military tech risk economic and political downfall. But is this truly progress, or merely an unexamined rush toward an uncertain future?
Before we assume this competition is the only way forward, we must ask deeper questions: Why is technological dominance framed as a necessity? Who dictates the rules of this race? And more importantly, is this the only way we can structure our world?
If history has taught us anything, it is that the pursuit of ultimate power often comes with unintended consequences. What if, in chasing our modern Ark, we are creating something just as dangerous as it is powerful?
Technology as an Obligation, Not a Choice
The idea of technological progress as a choice is an illusion. In reality, we do not simply choose to develop new technology - we are compelled to. Whether at the level of nations, corporations, or individuals, the pressure to adopt and advance technology is dictated by competition, by the fear of falling behind, by the looming threat that if we do not innovate faster than our rivals, we will be at their mercy.
History offers countless examples of this pattern. Throughout human civilization, those who failed to adopt superior technology - especially in warfare - were swept aside. When European colonial powers arrived with guns, steel, and advanced naval fleets, indigenous tribes armed with traditional weapons stood little chance. The fate of societies was often determined not by their cultural achievements or wisdom, but by their ability to outmatch their adversaries in raw technological might.
The same dynamic persists today, but in a different form. Nations now race for dominance not in muskets and cannons, but in artificial intelligence, biotechnology, cyberwarfare, and automation. The argument is always the same: develop the technology first, or risk being outcompeted, overpowered, or made irrelevant. This is not a neutral process, but a system of forced acceleration, where opting out is seen as self-destruction.
This competitive pressure extends beyond geopolitics and into the corporate world. A business that does not embrace automation risks being undercut by one that does. A company that refuses to track its users with sophisticated data analytics loses out to one that does. In nearly every industry, staying at the cutting edge is not a matter of preference but survival.
Yet, we rarely pause to ask: Must we structure our world this way? Is there an alternative to the endless escalation of technological warfare? Instead, we continue forward, not because we know where we are going, but because we fear what happens if we stop.
The AGI Race: The New Lost Ark
Few pursuits embody the “Lost Ark” dilemma more than the quest for Artificial General Intelligence (AGI). Unlike narrow AI, which excels at specific tasks, AGI represents a system capable of human-level reasoning, problem-solving, and decision-making across any domain. Whoever builds AGI first will wield control over economies, militaries, and global infrastructures at a scale never seen before. And yet, just like the Ark, it carries the risk of catastrophic consequences.
Top AI researchers - many of whom are leading this very race - have repeatedly issued stark warnings about the potential dangers of Artificial General Intelligence. OpenAI's CEO, Sam Altman, has acknowledged that AGI "could either be the best thing to happen to humanity or the worst." Such are not casual remarks. They are bold statements from those shaping AI's future. And yet, despite these concerns, the race continues unchecked as no one wants to be the first to stop. Even when facing the unknown, the momentum of competition is too great.
And that is the paradox: We do not know where this will lead. Will AGI lead to an age of unprecedented prosperity? Or will it entrench power imbalances, destabilize societies, or even pose existential risks? We can only speculate. But if there is even the slightest possibility of catastrophic consequences, we have a responsibility to be prudent.
The Illusion of Progress and the Price We Pay
We have been taught to equate technological advancement with progress. Faster computers, smarter AI, more automation - each breakthrough is celebrated as another step forward. But forward toward what? We rarely stop to ask whether every technological leap actually improves human well-being. Some technologies create more problems than they solve, and others actively harm society.
History provides no shortage of examples. The 20th century saw the rise of nuclear weapons, developed in a race for military supremacy, leaving the world on the brink of destruction. Fossil fuel technology, which powered industrialization, has also driven climate change to a catastrophic point. AI surveillance tools, designed for national security and corporate efficiency, are now used to track and manipulate entire populations.
Yet, despite these lessons, we continue racing forward, believing that more technology will solve the problems caused by previous innovations. We almost never ask: Should we be building this in the first place?
Do We Really Need This Race?
For all the talk of inevitability, the system we live in is not dictated by physics or biology. The idea that competition must drive technology is not an unchangeable law - it is a human construct.
The way technological progress is framed today - as a race for dominance rather than a tool for collective well-being - is not the only way forward. What if, instead of structuring innovation as a battle for power, we designed it as a cooperative endeavor? Some might argue that competition drives efficiency, but history suggests that some of our most meaningful technological breakthroughs - vaccines, the internet, space exploration - were born from collaboration, not rivalry.
The lost Ark, in legend, was a source of divine power - whoever possessed it would hold an unimaginable advantage. Today's race for technological dominance mirrors that same old story. But maybe the real ark worth searching for is not another breakthrough that solidifies power, but a new way to think about progress itself - one that frees us from the illusion that we must always be chasing the next great treasure, no matter the cost.