‘Look Them in the Eye.’ As Maui Rebuilds, Returning Tourists Need to Be Mindful of the Trauma, Says Cultural Advisor.

There’s an opportunity for education as tourists return to Maui while it rebuilds from last summer’s devastating wildfire, says Kalikolehua Storer, a Lahaina resident and the area cultural and training advisor for Hyatt’s Maui resorts.

Designated a National Historic Landmark in 1962, the Lahaina Historic District—once a lush Hawaiian capital and retreat for Hawaiian monarchs—is beloved by residents, explored by tourists, and has a deep-rooted heritage. Storer was working on the opposite side of the island when the blaze started last August. She scrambled to connect with family and friends. And like so many others, she grappled with the utter chaos that rapidly destroyed her hometown.

Storer’s home was spared, but the fire ultimately claimed 115 lives and destroyed or damaged more than 2,300 structures, including culturally significant sites like the Na ‘Aikane o Maui Cultural and Research Center, which housed invaluable Hawaiian artefacts (books signed by kings, genealogy, maps, and more).

Kalikolehua Storer, a Lahaina resident and the area cultural and training advisor for Hyatt’s Maui resorts
Courtesy of Hyatt

Historically, Lahaina thrived from mauka to makai (mountain to ocean), with waterways nourishing native ecosystems and communities. However, years of water redirection and climate-related drought set the stage for such a disaster, and according to Storer, the fire underscored the erosion of Hawaiian control over land and natural resources, spotlighting issues like land degradation, water misappropriation, and tourism’s stronghold on Maui.

Tourism makes up a substantial part of Maui’s GDP. The wildfire led to a 51.4% drop in visitor arrivals between August and October 2023 compared to 2022, triggering a sharp 87.1% rise in unemployment, according to government statistics.

The sector’s dominance highlights the need for a more balanced and sustainable model. Moreover, the fire’s impact on tourism underscores the urgency to diversify Hawaii’s economy for greater growth and resilience. Lahaina’s water management issues, such as the historical diversion for sugar cane cultivation, have drastically altered local ecosystems.

With only 23% of water allocated for public use and the majority consumed by the private sector (resorts, golf courses, and some agriculture, for instance), the ecological imbalance has had severe consequences for indigenous environments. Storer said she believes the aftermath of the fires and the strain on Maui’s tourism highlight the interconnectedness of ecological health and economic stability.

In response to the crisis, Maui Mayor Richard Bissen formed a five-member advisory team to lead the recovery efforts, with Storer as a key participant. Storer also sits at the table of Maui’s Office of Recovery Natural and Cultural Resources, which helps to shine light on issues impacting air, water, and land. Storer collaborates with partners from federal, state, and county levels, along with Lahaina’s cultural practitioners, to facilitate Lahaina’s recovery post-wildfire.

Storer shared visions of Maui’s rebuild with Penta , and the balance between tourism, ecology, and the road to sustainable solutions.

Penta: With such a huge road ahead, how are you embracing hope? And what is your ideal vision for Maui?

Kalikolehua Storer: I know that I can get caught up in the end result of what will or will not work, but in the moment, our community needs to be heard, and this is my part to lean into what they are sharing. People have envisioned Lahaina as a walking town with cultural sites, a cultural marketplace, and restoring Mokuʻula, the site of the private residence of King Kamehameha III from 1837-1845. It has since been buried under a baseball field.

We also need to diversify the economy. This is a big task, but with Hawaiian leaders in all sectors, I am confident that this can be accomplished. We have nowhere else to go but up, so all ideas are worth a conversation. My ideal Lahaina is to rebuild our historical sites, churches, and learning centres, and better care for the ocean, land, and air. To be better stewards, we need to educate and make it a priority. All of us, including visitors, need to know the importance. The issues we have about water and land need to be resolved.

Explain more about the land and water and how they are pivotal parts of recovery.

The West Maui Mountains are home to the Pu’u Kukui Watershed and Mauna Kahalawai Watershed Partnership (caretakers of the mountain area directly above the impact zone), which used to flow through waterways and land divisions ( ahupua’a ) to enrich the ecosystems. However, when the sugar cane and pineapple industry arrived, that water was diverted and went straight to those farms. The water never went back to the way it was, and because of this, the indigenous ecologies have been drained. So, water needs to be returned to streams, and a greater percentage needs to be given for public use. This is a major issue and needs to be resolved. The waterways are there, but they need to be cleaned and prepared for water to flow. That has to start upland of the watershed. Looking at an aerial map of Kauaula Valley, most of the area is dry, but along the river where the Palakiko family lives is very lush. They prepared the stream area, and it came back. However, that took years because of private-sector control.

“Asking people how they are doing, looking them in the eye, and caring about them can make a huge difference,” Storer says.
Courtesy of Hyatt

Many people believe that tourism is the biggest problem. Is that true?

Right after the fire, many people encouraged tourists to stay away. And people listened. Our economy dropped because people stopped coming. Unemployment shot up, and the economy, as a whole, suffered. Our island is so dependent on tourism, and that is part of the problem. I believe we need to diversify the economy.

How can we educate tourists, and how can hotels be better stewards?

It truly is all about education and visitors engaging in cultural experiences and even conservancy programs, so that they have a better understanding of people and place when they visit. At Andaz and the other Hyatt hotels in Maui, I’ve developed very strong, culturally driven programs to engage our guests in authentic Hawaiian activities. Things like lei making, coconut weaving, hula lessons, celestial navigation, taro demonstrations, and Natural Cultural Resources programming with the Pu’u Kukui Watershed Preserve, Kipuka Olowalu, and the Ma Ka Hana Ka ‘Ike at Mahele Farms.

At Andaz, the lūʻau experience is called the Feast at Mōkapu and focuses on the journey of the Polynesian ancestors arriving on Maui and settling in the ahupua’a where the resort sits. We don’t hold back in that storytelling. We dive into history that isn’t normally spotlighted at luau, and the uncomfortable truth of settlers to Hawaii is really important. After the fires, this education became even more important, and I encourage tourists to participate in experiences like this.

Hotels play a huge role in this and can provide cultural sensitivity sessions for their guests.

How can tourists play a role in the rebuilding?

It’s important now more than ever for visitors to consider what happened, and that their waiter, housekeeper, bartender, front desk attendant, dive instructor, store clerk, literally everyone was somehow impacted by this. Asking people how they are doing, looking them in the eye, and caring about them can make a huge difference. Also, if you choose to visit Maui, there are ways to volunteer and donate. We’re not just looking at physically rebuilding here, we’re looking at emotional wellness, history, and so much more that is going to take years. So, I would say donating to Maui Strong and taking a few hours of vacation time to volunteer can greatly help.

Allocation of funds and policies that help to financially sustain our agencies that do the work in the watersheds, waterways, farmers, and ocean agencies. The work they do today is the key to this turnaround. I believe that visitor taxes should be allocated for our Natural and Cultural Resources effort.

How can tourists be a “good tourist” and still visit in a conscientious way?

Be kind without being maha’oi (being forward in asking) and asking so many questions. A nice, genuine smile and encouraging words in passing can uplift someone. Also, those who own vacation rentals. We need help from that sector. We need to take a look at the things that got us into this crisis to begin with. Unfortunately, we are having to work through policies written years ago, not ever thinking we would be in this situation.

This interview was edited for length and clarity.

There is ample and alarming evidence that artificial intelligence can help humans do bad things, such as committing cyberattacks, building weapons and even killing themselves or others. The Hugging Face hacking episode—and a growing list of others by poorly constrained swarms of agents—indicate just how powerful and potentially dangerous AI has quickly become.

Yet many inside the U.S. AI industry insist far worse is coming, on account of the imminent arrival of AI with superhuman and self-improving abilities.

Plenty of experts, including many who study AI harms for a living, are skeptical. The so-called doomers’ assertion that AI might decide to wipe out all of humanity—or even “just” topple human civilization—is contingent on it achieving a pace of development not yet seen.

And if the assumptions behind this global-doomsday scenario are wrong, it could lead us to curb or regulate AI in ways that don’t address its real harms.

At the center of this debate is the claim that current AI systems might take over the job of training their next versions, a process called “recursive self-improvement.” Think of it like evolution on steroids—billions of years happening at light speed within vast AI supercomputers. Anthropic Chief Executive Dario Amodei recently proposed a global agreement to slow down the pace of releasing new AI models, with the goal of delaying the arrival of recursive self-improvement.

“I don’t think we’re anywhere near ‘artificial general intelligence,’” says Melanie Mitchell, a professor at the nonprofit research group Santa Fe Institute who studies AI. She said AI is making impressive strides but thinks claims by engineers that they’ve achieved recursive self-improvement don’t stand up to scrutiny.

She is hardly alone. A recent paper by two dozen academics at Princeton, Stanford and other institutions found that even the most cutting-edge AIs are incapable of doing the original research required to advance the AI frontier.

Two of the authors involved in that paper also threw cold water on the idea that the Hugging Face swarm hack by OpenAI agents occurred because of a breakthrough in intelligence. The attack succeeded primarily because of a lack of basic technical guardrails, not an unmanageable explosion in AI capability, they wrote.

Yann LeCun, former chief AI scientist at Meta, posted that this analysis was “a welcome dose of sanity in an otherwise insane debate.”

OpenAI and Anthropic didn’t respond to several requests for comment.

The people who disagree with the doomers still consider AI to be dangerous, and point out that such systems don’t have to be particularly capable to be powerful. Some argue that AI should undergo regular evaluation by outsiders and that the companies that make it should be held responsible when their systems do harm. AI should also be treated the same as airplanes and elevators, and should be designed to do the least harm possible, they say.

“If you believe that technology is powerful enough to create novel, dangerous viruses, or to essentially take over the whole planet for some reason, then it must also be strong enough to create cures for cancer, to cure aging, to fix socio-economic or political problems,” says Christopher Canal, CEO of EquiStamp, a company that helps companies and governments evaluate AIs.

AI has shown an ability to rapidly advance because it is matching the abilities of humans who are constantly feeding it their knowledge. Sometimes it can recombine that knowledge and exceed what people have been capable of, through a kind of post-training known as reinforcement learning, as we’ve seen in mathematics.

Today’s LLMs are “models of knowledge” rather than actually intelligent, wrote Yi Ma, professor of AI at Hong Kong University.

Researchers at universities and commercial AI research labs in China wrote in a recent paper that autonomous, self-improving AI is likely to be a long way off, due to the sheer number of breakthroughs required. They also argue that humans will probably remain in the loop, supervising that process—and gating how fast it can occur.

Vals AI, a company that evaluates today’s AI models, maintains an RSI Index that benchmarks whether models can “do the research that builds the next model.” So far, no publicly released model is even close.

Yet Rayan Krishnan, CEO of Vals AI, says his team projects models will exceed humans’ ability to improve the next generation of AIs by August 2027, or sooner, and at that point could start building their successors all on their own.

“Once we get to recursive self-improvement, the fear is that all bets are off,” he says. “You could end up with a ‘fast takeoff’ situation, where the models quickly acquire skills and eclipse humans across every possible domain.”

In a reply to the resignation tweet heard round the world from Jacob Coxon, another Anthropic engineer declared his belief that those odds were at least 10% over the next decade. Many others in the industry chimed in to say they thought the percentage was even higher.

Some who argue the end is nigh say they calculate their personal p(doom) based on a chain of conditional probabilities—a bit like the Drake equation for calculating the likelihood of intelligent alien life. Since all those probabilities are based on speculation, estimates range from 0% to nearly 100%. Many land around 10%.

“The weird thing is that if you go back and look at the predictions on this over the last 10 years or more, it’s always been 10%—it’s just a nice round number,” says Mitchell. “I think it’s all vibes, and there’s no actual evidence or calculation.”

One argument against worrying about superintelligent AI is that the world is full of unlikely humanity-ending disasters, and trying to avert them all can make it impossible to prioritize, says Canal.

This has led AI experts and the policymakers who listen to them to propose remedies that don’t get at its real and present dangers.

AI companies’ proposals to “pace the frontier” aren’t addressing the problem in the right way, argues Stuart Russell, a computer-science professor at the University of California, Berkeley, and the president of the International Association for Safe and Ethical Artificial Intelligence.

“It’s like saying we’re driving toward the cliff at 60 miles per hour and we’re going to drive toward it at 40 miles per hour instead, and everything will be OK,” he says.

Russell and his peers have proposed that AI companies should have to meet the same standards that govern other areas of everyday life, from air travel and buildings to food and drugs. They highlight the “behavioral red lines” AI should not be allowed to cross. Breaking into other computer systems, stealing information or advising terrorists on how to build biological weapons are all illegal for a human to do, and should be illegal for companies’ AIs as well, he argues.

The challenge for AI companies in such a proposal, he adds, is that it would be a de facto ban on today’s advanced AI systems, since the companies behind them don’t know how to make them respect such boundaries all of the time.

Others have proposed something like the Food and Drug Administration, but for AI, but setting up a new agency has so far been a nonstarter in Congress. And some prominent voices in tech have said such a structure would give up America’s AI edge to China.

Given the bipartisan groundswell of support for curbing AI companies and their creations, however, that may soon change.

“The tech industry has had this mantra for decades that regulation is bad,” says Russell. “They don’t accept the liability for any harm, and they hide behind free speech. That, I think, has to change.”

‘Look Them in the Eye.’ As Maui Rebuilds, Returning Tourists Need to Be Mindful of the Trauma, Says Cultural Advisor.

Could fears of an AI apocalypse be distracting us from the dangers already here? Experts debate whether regulation should focus on speculative existential threats or present-day harms, including cyberattacks, weapons and unsafe autonomous agents. Read more via the link in bio.