Gold Rush

Jim Groom wrote a great short post about his dread of the “gold rush” of AI, and he compares it with the web in the 90s.

I am surprised how much sense this parallel makes to me. Working in the field, I was initially very enthusiastic because I was able to understand the possible affordances of the new technology, and accordingly big was my disappointment about what capitalism then actually made of the great potential: instead of a tool for augmentation, it became a vehicle for stultification of the users and abuse of the ‘stupid’. In case of AI, the severe danger is real that less able cognitive workers are badly hit by automata outperforming them.

And I wonder which role the ignorants played in that process. If they did not care and slept away the developments, they cannot reap the benefits and bear some joint guilt that we all will be swamped by the rubbish. By contrast, opposing to the black sheep among those exploiting a technology, may even benefit that technology and its affordances. So I think it is not enough to resist the hype but to object its noxious trends.

This also includes trivializing propaganda. Recently, somebody tried to reframe the idea of authenticity, by argumenting that natural conversation were ‘artificial’ too — as if inauthenticity was already normal. But I don’t want to give in and have to label my stuff as human; I still expect legislation to require mandatory labeling of the artificial stuff.