Excellent article, will share it on my AI post - I am no expert in this area, and the places of concern to me are mostly invisible and deal with the etheric/energy/creative abilities of humans. I am going to repost an article I wrote a while back in a week or so on the electromagnetic effects of using mobile devices. It does effect those who use our hands for certain types of energy work.
It is an excellent article and provides a comprehensive view. There are many different angles with which we can view tech, but holistically is just as important as intellectually. As a student of chi your article is unique as it applies a more grounded approach.
David -- A first-time lurker here. I recently wrote about AI (big deal, it seems everyone is doing it). I wish I had read this first. It was cogent and balanced. I will be back. One bit of perspective I like to share with folks. The autopilot for flying (very early AI) has been with us since 1914. What makes humans so special is our abiilty to adapt. I genuinely believe that all of the AI that has entered our lives over the last century was either set aside as irrelevant or simply accepted and join a comfortable stable in our heads as "not really AI". I believe making tools and understanding our world is one of our destinies.
Thanks David, enjoyed the clarity of your thinking and writing. You may have already heard these but i thought it worth flagging them two recent podcasts that I found enormously helpful in getting to grips with the whole AI thing
1. The Ezra Klein show ' Why AI might not take your job or supercharge the economy'. NYT's Klein in conversation with senior editor Roge Karma mostly around the social and economic implications.
One of the most intriguing arguments Klein makes is that if you were told 20 years ago about the power of the web we have now: Google, smartphones, Zoom etc you might have imagined such a huge increase in access to knowledge and comms would have generated huge increases in scientific advances and productivity etc - whereas productivity has fallen and scientific progress slowed. his point is that the internet has been a massive distraction - reducing our ability to concentrate and get shit done. He suggests that AI like GPT4 etc may turn out to be another huge distraction. There is much more besides this - really worth a listen. https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-ezra-klein-show/id1548604447?i=1000607834685
2. Lex Fridman podcost, Lex in conversation with Sam Altman CEO Open AI - Sam talks about the issue of ownership and not allowing profit driven corporations to shape AI (Altman. tells that Open AI's board structure gives non-profit side the final say on what goes on). I won't attempt to summarise the convo but it huge in scope and I found impressive. https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/lex-fridman-podcast/id1434243584?i=1000605876923
Thank you Nick, for both your feedback and resources.
I listed to Lex Fridman with Sam Altman - fascinating stuff, and i will certainly check out the Ezra Klein Show - such a wide ranging and explosive topic is AI - so many variables and implications.
Klein also makes the point that the reason why driverless cars haven't taken off is because AI isn't up to the 99.99% reliability needed to take life and death decisions.
Personally I've been unimpressed by GPT3.5 it mostly gives me anodyne answers that read as if written by a middle grade second year undergraduate. And creatively it's all over the place doesn't get it at all. See below for my request and its response
Write me a two sentence story in the style of Lydia Davis about an older woman opening a door to a cupboard in her house.
She opened the door to the cupboard in her house, revealing a collection of carefully arranged cups and saucers. Each one seemed to hold a memory, a moment frozen in time, waiting to be savored again.
Yes I do think self driving is inevitable just needs the data and we are at BETA stage. It needs to be safer than human error on the road and i think then it will be adopted. But yes, all of this is still very raw, especially creativity (thankfully) but it is catching up extremely quickly - scary speed!
I think the commentary is perhaps scarier...It's like a wonderful new distraction already - let's be scared of the bogeything AI...
I don't agree with you on driverless cars "it just needs the data" - how can data help AI judge what to do when there a combination of events like a child running out in one direction and bicyclist has fallen off so if you swerve to avoid the child you'd hit her her?
Food for thought Nick -- Airplane autopilot was first introduced in 1914. Some of the most trained among us (commercial airline pilots) only manage the takeoff and landing. Driverless technology will be THE SAME. Fleets of trucks, limited to the very simplified case of interstate driving will become prevalent first and are obtaining licenses to do just that now. Edge cases as you describe are certainly more difficult like the child and bicycle. I would imagine the first sensible and scalable driving solution will be one human driver blazing the path for a group of trucks in a pack. This, all by itself means a massive reduction in cost and improvement in reliable goods delivery. Just my opinion I guess.
The world turns, and will continue to, but a fear is AI doing laps on human beings in terms of reaction and control. I often wonder too Joanne, what is we want out of our earth we don't already have.
I really appreciated this piece as I've not stopped thinking about how AI will change the world, well, how it already has. My biggest concern is the time period when AI doesn't know empathy to when it does (I think in time that's a great possibility). How much damage will be done? Or will the damage never allow empathy to find its way into this new world?
Thank you Renee, lack of or too much empathy is a fear. But also is it something that potential bad actors can use to give AI some sort of empathetic understanding, and if so, where does that lead? And how does empathy affect humans, change what we consider empathy to be or understand in ourselves. AI could be super good, but also caution needs to be considered
I've never considered too much empathy before, but I see it's a great pointing out. Scary to think of bad actors using empathy as a weapon. You've given me a lot to ponder. AI has both great and evil potential and truthfully, I feel powerless to affect it one way or the other.
I am sure, as a poet, that I will never forget the chilling moment when I overheard in the pub that you can "get a poem" from ChatGPT. "We got one for our Dad's 60th! It was amazing and he loved it!" I froze with my beer glass only halfway to my lips.
As commissioned poetry is one of my revenue streams, I went home and wrote about everything I offer that AI cannot. This now needs to be spelled out in my marketing description. I am horrified, but also hopeful that people will start to know that they want "life, heart and soul" over "efficiency" in their gift-giving at least and hopefully in their lives. Thx for this article which anwers a lot more than I had dared to ask.
Wow, such a thoughtful response, and the idea of trying to justify why poetry - a form that comes from within needs USPs is scary. Thank you so much for sharing your journey and time on this one :)
So true - in 100 years they will think of us current humans to live in such 'ancient' times - wild to think how quickly technology has advanced society.
I have been avoiding this, but you might have encouraged me to try it too. Reluctantly. And now, reading through that link, I am left wondering: Is there "Divine inspiration" behind the art that AI can produce? Had I looked at Ai-Da's pieces without knowing, I would have imbued them with such. So Is "God" only where we choose to perceive it?! Oh my goodness! I have much to ponder this 'Good' Friday lol. Thank you for sharing here Thomas.
Really like how you included a section on the importance and lack of mental space with all this technology, that is something that should be more emphasised / strived for on more than an individual scale, so that we can slow down and not overload our mental health.
I think the main issue with this technology, as with everything, has a lot to do with how it will be / is implemented. As I talked about in my recent piece on ChatGPT , Bill Gates (Microsoft owns OpenAI) actually thinks that AI can solve world problems like hunger and poverty, and it does not take a supercomputer to figure out that these issues will be approached from a corporate / profit-oriented standpoint. OpenAI, if it were actually open, could have the same potential as a free and open internet once had, but ultimately it is the society that determined how a technology is used, just like private interests largely determine what is and is not researched by science.
When it comes to redundancy, especially looking at jobs, the same dynamic plays out. It does not have to be a huge problem for job security or peoples' ability to make a living/survive, as long as proper measures are taken to adapt to the changed world. Looking at past technological changes seems to confirm this.
All in all, it is more of a matter of how the technology is used, what the societal circumstances are in which it is developed, and what the main motivations are of those using/developing this technology, none of which currently are to the betterment of humankind, although that could still be a beneficial side-effect.
Robert, such a thoughtful response, thank you. I am so very much aligned with you on all of these points, I think the main thing I notice on a human level in myself is the focus aspect of technology. I really used to devour books and write with a much higher capacity. I still do these things, but the finite amount of decision making is impacted by tech. However, in other ways I have more room in my mind, as GPT gives answers I don't have to search too long for. Implementation, so true and so important, also allowing workers to adapt into new roles and new ways of working with the technology of AI not against it. If only Open AI was open, makes one wonder what went wrong at inception in regards to figures stepping away from their roles in the once research based company. The research of science consideration, so important, what is profitable often drives this also. Super valued response, thanks again :)
I recognise that, I have been getting back some of that attention and time, though, by limiting and boxing in the technology I use. No notifications, my phone disappears somewhere out of sight when I get home, whatsapp does not even work unless I specifically turn it on. Then slowly weaning myself off that 'ease' of digital entertainment, picking up a book, then the consequent time I remind myself of how satisfying that felt which makes it a little bit easier to choose the book over the tv show, then just keep doing that. For some reason I am now also reminded of how I cut down on sugar, probably not a coincidence ;)
Thank you Thomas, will checkout your suggestion. I think more and more models of GPT will arrive this year and become like a software update eventually, but then again I am like so many, learning as I go. The halt period is a good suggestion, but makes me think, where did these AI experts go at inception? they were involved in Open AI or at least many of them were.
Excellent article, will share it on my AI post - I am no expert in this area, and the places of concern to me are mostly invisible and deal with the etheric/energy/creative abilities of humans. I am going to repost an article I wrote a while back in a week or so on the electromagnetic effects of using mobile devices. It does effect those who use our hands for certain types of energy work.
Thank you for the kind words and support String :)
It is an excellent article and provides a comprehensive view. There are many different angles with which we can view tech, but holistically is just as important as intellectually. As a student of chi your article is unique as it applies a more grounded approach.
David -- A first-time lurker here. I recently wrote about AI (big deal, it seems everyone is doing it). I wish I had read this first. It was cogent and balanced. I will be back. One bit of perspective I like to share with folks. The autopilot for flying (very early AI) has been with us since 1914. What makes humans so special is our abiilty to adapt. I genuinely believe that all of the AI that has entered our lives over the last century was either set aside as irrelevant or simply accepted and join a comfortable stable in our heads as "not really AI". I believe making tools and understanding our world is one of our destinies.
Such a thorough and kind response - thank you Mark! :)
Thanks David, enjoyed the clarity of your thinking and writing. You may have already heard these but i thought it worth flagging them two recent podcasts that I found enormously helpful in getting to grips with the whole AI thing
1. The Ezra Klein show ' Why AI might not take your job or supercharge the economy'. NYT's Klein in conversation with senior editor Roge Karma mostly around the social and economic implications.
One of the most intriguing arguments Klein makes is that if you were told 20 years ago about the power of the web we have now: Google, smartphones, Zoom etc you might have imagined such a huge increase in access to knowledge and comms would have generated huge increases in scientific advances and productivity etc - whereas productivity has fallen and scientific progress slowed. his point is that the internet has been a massive distraction - reducing our ability to concentrate and get shit done. He suggests that AI like GPT4 etc may turn out to be another huge distraction. There is much more besides this - really worth a listen. https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-ezra-klein-show/id1548604447?i=1000607834685
2. Lex Fridman podcost, Lex in conversation with Sam Altman CEO Open AI - Sam talks about the issue of ownership and not allowing profit driven corporations to shape AI (Altman. tells that Open AI's board structure gives non-profit side the final say on what goes on). I won't attempt to summarise the convo but it huge in scope and I found impressive. https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/lex-fridman-podcast/id1434243584?i=1000605876923
Thank you Nick, for both your feedback and resources.
I listed to Lex Fridman with Sam Altman - fascinating stuff, and i will certainly check out the Ezra Klein Show - such a wide ranging and explosive topic is AI - so many variables and implications.
Klein also makes the point that the reason why driverless cars haven't taken off is because AI isn't up to the 99.99% reliability needed to take life and death decisions.
Personally I've been unimpressed by GPT3.5 it mostly gives me anodyne answers that read as if written by a middle grade second year undergraduate. And creatively it's all over the place doesn't get it at all. See below for my request and its response
Write me a two sentence story in the style of Lydia Davis about an older woman opening a door to a cupboard in her house.
She opened the door to the cupboard in her house, revealing a collection of carefully arranged cups and saucers. Each one seemed to hold a memory, a moment frozen in time, waiting to be savored again.
Yes I do think self driving is inevitable just needs the data and we are at BETA stage. It needs to be safer than human error on the road and i think then it will be adopted. But yes, all of this is still very raw, especially creativity (thankfully) but it is catching up extremely quickly - scary speed!
I think the commentary is perhaps scarier...It's like a wonderful new distraction already - let's be scared of the bogeything AI...
I don't agree with you on driverless cars "it just needs the data" - how can data help AI judge what to do when there a combination of events like a child running out in one direction and bicyclist has fallen off so if you swerve to avoid the child you'd hit her her?
Food for thought Nick -- Airplane autopilot was first introduced in 1914. Some of the most trained among us (commercial airline pilots) only manage the takeoff and landing. Driverless technology will be THE SAME. Fleets of trucks, limited to the very simplified case of interstate driving will become prevalent first and are obtaining licenses to do just that now. Edge cases as you describe are certainly more difficult like the child and bicycle. I would imagine the first sensible and scalable driving solution will be one human driver blazing the path for a group of trucks in a pack. This, all by itself means a massive reduction in cost and improvement in reliable goods delivery. Just my opinion I guess.
I agree driving AI has issues I just think that it will progress to being safer than humans. The FSD already lets you know when objects fall etc.
As AI enters it's angelic and demonic roles in the utopian dystopian ideals of man. What is the Earth doing?
The world turns, and will continue to, but a fear is AI doing laps on human beings in terms of reaction and control. I often wonder too Joanne, what is we want out of our earth we don't already have.
I really appreciated this piece as I've not stopped thinking about how AI will change the world, well, how it already has. My biggest concern is the time period when AI doesn't know empathy to when it does (I think in time that's a great possibility). How much damage will be done? Or will the damage never allow empathy to find its way into this new world?
Thank you Renee, lack of or too much empathy is a fear. But also is it something that potential bad actors can use to give AI some sort of empathetic understanding, and if so, where does that lead? And how does empathy affect humans, change what we consider empathy to be or understand in ourselves. AI could be super good, but also caution needs to be considered
I've never considered too much empathy before, but I see it's a great pointing out. Scary to think of bad actors using empathy as a weapon. You've given me a lot to ponder. AI has both great and evil potential and truthfully, I feel powerless to affect it one way or the other.
Me also Renee, more about hopefully making it work for us and not against us I think. Who knows where it goes, but I think AI will develop super fast.
I agree. We really have the capability to get it right and I hope we can navigate the boat of compassion in these new waters.
I am sure, as a poet, that I will never forget the chilling moment when I overheard in the pub that you can "get a poem" from ChatGPT. "We got one for our Dad's 60th! It was amazing and he loved it!" I froze with my beer glass only halfway to my lips.
As commissioned poetry is one of my revenue streams, I went home and wrote about everything I offer that AI cannot. This now needs to be spelled out in my marketing description. I am horrified, but also hopeful that people will start to know that they want "life, heart and soul" over "efficiency" in their gift-giving at least and hopefully in their lives. Thx for this article which anwers a lot more than I had dared to ask.
Wow, such a thoughtful response, and the idea of trying to justify why poetry - a form that comes from within needs USPs is scary. Thank you so much for sharing your journey and time on this one :)
This AI-Da is striking and terrifying in equal measure, wow, thank you for this Thomas.
So true - in 100 years they will think of us current humans to live in such 'ancient' times - wild to think how quickly technology has advanced society.
I have been avoiding this, but you might have encouraged me to try it too. Reluctantly. And now, reading through that link, I am left wondering: Is there "Divine inspiration" behind the art that AI can produce? Had I looked at Ai-Da's pieces without knowing, I would have imbued them with such. So Is "God" only where we choose to perceive it?! Oh my goodness! I have much to ponder this 'Good' Friday lol. Thank you for sharing here Thomas.
Really like how you included a section on the importance and lack of mental space with all this technology, that is something that should be more emphasised / strived for on more than an individual scale, so that we can slow down and not overload our mental health.
I think the main issue with this technology, as with everything, has a lot to do with how it will be / is implemented. As I talked about in my recent piece on ChatGPT , Bill Gates (Microsoft owns OpenAI) actually thinks that AI can solve world problems like hunger and poverty, and it does not take a supercomputer to figure out that these issues will be approached from a corporate / profit-oriented standpoint. OpenAI, if it were actually open, could have the same potential as a free and open internet once had, but ultimately it is the society that determined how a technology is used, just like private interests largely determine what is and is not researched by science.
When it comes to redundancy, especially looking at jobs, the same dynamic plays out. It does not have to be a huge problem for job security or peoples' ability to make a living/survive, as long as proper measures are taken to adapt to the changed world. Looking at past technological changes seems to confirm this.
All in all, it is more of a matter of how the technology is used, what the societal circumstances are in which it is developed, and what the main motivations are of those using/developing this technology, none of which currently are to the betterment of humankind, although that could still be a beneficial side-effect.
Robert, such a thoughtful response, thank you. I am so very much aligned with you on all of these points, I think the main thing I notice on a human level in myself is the focus aspect of technology. I really used to devour books and write with a much higher capacity. I still do these things, but the finite amount of decision making is impacted by tech. However, in other ways I have more room in my mind, as GPT gives answers I don't have to search too long for. Implementation, so true and so important, also allowing workers to adapt into new roles and new ways of working with the technology of AI not against it. If only Open AI was open, makes one wonder what went wrong at inception in regards to figures stepping away from their roles in the once research based company. The research of science consideration, so important, what is profitable often drives this also. Super valued response, thanks again :)
I recognise that, I have been getting back some of that attention and time, though, by limiting and boxing in the technology I use. No notifications, my phone disappears somewhere out of sight when I get home, whatsapp does not even work unless I specifically turn it on. Then slowly weaning myself off that 'ease' of digital entertainment, picking up a book, then the consequent time I remind myself of how satisfying that felt which makes it a little bit easier to choose the book over the tv show, then just keep doing that. For some reason I am now also reminded of how I cut down on sugar, probably not a coincidence ;)
Such a nice analogy with sugar, and an encouraging use of time. It's all about reduction and optimizing tech. Hope AI allows us to do this
Thank you Thomas, will checkout your suggestion. I think more and more models of GPT will arrive this year and become like a software update eventually, but then again I am like so many, learning as I go. The halt period is a good suggestion, but makes me think, where did these AI experts go at inception? they were involved in Open AI or at least many of them were.