Artificial Intelligence is clearly being adopted worldwide as the next earth shattering innovation. But at what cost?
I started this piece with the intention of eviscerating artificial intelligence and anyone who celebrates it, and then I typed some things into ChatGPT and now I think AI should be running the government. I had all these zingers loaded neatly into magazines ready to clip into an assault rifle, I had hand grenades of explosive, passionate words promoting human creativity. My armaments rendered useless upon actually trying artificial intelligence for myself.
I’ve left my thoughts roughly in order below.
As I identify professionally as a creative, AI is difficult to fully embrace as it is now our turn to face the automation of our trade. This has happened in the creative industry before with Adobe Photoshop, Xerox, and myriad other examples. Capitalism dictates we must embrace technology that increases efficiency, and that anyone who doesn’t will be trampled to death by those who do.
Humanity’s drive to create is in our society, themes of creation are everywhere. From the foundation of any religious movement offering a creation myth story to our society’s emphasis on our dicks and balls (foundational tools of creation), it is undeniable that humans have a fascination with creativity.
It comes as no surprise that technology whose potential is seemingly paralleled with our own is so successful. But when we engage with AI, we run the risk of supplanting our own creative thinking for analytical thinking instead. We trade, “what if?” for, “if this, then that.”
There are throngs of corporate climbers megaphoning from their ivory pedestals that, “AI won’t take your job, someone who knows how to use AI will.” I’m sorry, no one is impressed by learning how to use a website. This is not a marketable trait. A lot of us made the shift from AOL Instant Messenger to Slack and Teams. But employers should punish the slow adopters.
(This is the part where I actually tried ChatGPT)
A part of me wants to ask, ‘if we love it so much, why don’t we elect it for president?’ and then, I thought this might actually be better than the current federal governance. A friend of mine, who works for the state government said, “you don’t want politicians who really want to be politicians.”
If we ordain an artificially intelligent government, we can ensure the government will at least have some form of intelligence. Entire governmental agencies and offices could be rendered as artificial, and a nonpartisan oversight group could …maintain oversight.
If AI results are derived from previously existing data, then The Intelligence can scan our internet and emails to automatically legislate how we want. The Supreme Court Justices can all be replaced. SC-GPT will handle our judicial branch, Grssi will take over our legislative and PREZ will assume the executive functions of our government.
Democrats will like this because this embraces ‘science’. Republicans would like this because it sounds like it would lower taxes. But the companies that own the software will understand the necessity of maintaining higher tax rates to keep the machines from fully taking over…
This may be the only way we achieve large-scale, human-generated energy. Maybe we would even pay our taxes through energy. Should the sentient humans that remain flood the internet with “pro fart rebates” propaganda so we can later cash in on that sweet methane money? This all assumes humans would be compensated for the energy they produce, this may not be guaranteed in our artificial future.
Comments