Great post. Thanks for the mention. My weird little page needs all the eyes it can get.
Your post reflects a lot of my feelings about AI. I’m upset that “creative work” and “the arts” is one of the first things the engineers trained the AI to do. But as you say in your post, they never valued us anyway. Because society doesn’t value us. You spend ten years of your life perfecting writing a”sentences, making them sing, and everyone looks at you like you are an idiot because you didn’t learn how to code, or you get an MBA. But people naturally make art! We naturally tell stories and write poetry and dance and sing! The economy doesn’t have to force us to do these things; we just do them. And to somewhat echo your post (I think we are on the same page) to take a human completely out of the artistic equation, indicates a profound misunderstanding of humanity.
Our entire construct of Capitalism is fundamentally predatory where the few benefit from the labor of the many, LLMs are a prime example. AI as a productivity boost is just a narrative used for adoption especially on the Enterprise side. So there's a FOMO movement among companies trying to augment their products with LLMs that have no real rule of law - with no clause for actual regulation because our "adversaries" are doing it too.
The Machine Economy and age of automation hasn't even really begun yet. But the profit motive is what drives the speed of A.I. But is this even real innovation? It's definately a ploy for bigger companies to get even more powerful.
Very late comment, I have been trying to get to the subject of AI for months. Frankly, aside from the fact its creation is in much part from stolen intellectual property, its potential for abuse in further obscuring truth and reality is frightening. Humans are already doing that quite effectively without this tool. It also feels like the last frontier of job loss. It's no longer just manual labor, bad enough, it's now intellectual and creative labor.
I spent a few hours with ChatGPT over the summer, asking it questions on topics I have some expertise. One area I queried was lithium mining and Thacker Pass, NV, where a Canadian company has started mining over the protests of Native Americans and environmentalist Max Wilbert. I wrote a long article on the issue a bit over a year ago. ChatGPT had scraped information from corporate sites, including the Canadian firm Lithium Americas, but there was no nuance of the downsides of this project. An average user stopping there would have an incomplete picture. Given that we're beholden to speed in our work, there is a real danger in finding less information rather than more using this tech. And of course, there is an art to digging for information that I believe only a good human mind can achieve.
ChatGPT had not scraped my article. I wasn't surprised, I am a tiny fish. I don't care to be scraped, it's a violation. Yet, all the negative consequences of this mine I brought up were missing. That's problematic.
Speed in and of itself is destroying an inhabitable planet. Our goal should be to slow down, not speed up, to savor life. AI is scary. It could generate millions of articles in the time I write one. With disinformation prevailing and so many vulnerable to it, I am deeply skeptical of what this tech is bringing. Our history of the use of technology, plunging forward without thinking things through, seems instructive. This is a whole new level of tech enabling deep fakes at a speed we can't keep up with. A digger for truth, I fear one day it will be unobtainable.
Thanks for another enjoyable article Birgitte! It is always a pleasure to talk to you or read your articles!
I have “paid my dues” to “AI” during its second wave. In 1990, I gave it my days, nights, weekends, and holidays while crafting the memory of one “AI” (it will always be “AI” to me until I see intelligence). I read about full-custom silicon memories. Chose one, designed it, implemented it, tested it and released it. The whole chip did not do what it was intended to do (act human), but the memory and it’s surrounding circuitry worked flawlessly after it was manufactured in 2 micron technology. I had learned something and I could make a living off it. Then the second “AI” winter hit.
For many years I only read about “AI” as something that happened in the past.
Now “AI” is in fashion again and it is the same helper or threat already talked about twice in history.
Every time, “AI” appears to be a threat to human existence. But now, you nailed it, it is the people that are the ones not only making the tools but also trying to use them to get rid of having to pay other people.
But be aware that there are technologists like me who are working on tools to empower humans. I believe in humans and will continue to make tools so that we can figure out our universe and have fun doing it.
Thanks for this intriguing post. As always you respond with enthusiasm, optimism and passion. AI overwhelms me with its possibilities but I’m glad to see you still believe in the positives of the human spirit.
This is a really interesting analogy and one that deserves thought. The dynamics informing our relationship with technology are pressing, looking within ourselves vital if we are to retain any ability to shape those dynamics ourselves.
I write about a curious intersection between technology and being human. I'm an (almost) self-sufficient subsistence farmer and have found deep meaning in a life lived through my hands. I have also gained intimate knowledge of the deficit left when we divest ourselves of tech. I've begun to develop rheumatoid arthritis now, so there's much for me to mull over in your metaphor.
I'll link back to this piece.
Here's one of mine, on the subject of cognitive liberty, if you're curious:
I'm humbled and gratified to know I've been thinking about "AI" the right way. When you see my piece this week know I only copied "some" of your work. :-)
Every piece of technology is a tool. It is neither good nor evil. Technology is subject to GIGO, and that is programmed by humanity.
I partially agree with you, but I don't consider myself a virus or autoimmune disease. I don't depend upon technology to do anything. Heck, I even use pen and paper to write, and I would rather talk to people face to face.
I personally think that big cities are the disease and that we need to return to the way we were meant to live, in small communities...
interesting piece, but I'm not sure it's fair to say "humans" had an equal hand in creating the automation issue when (as always) almost no one outside the investment class will profit long-term...we do agree on your conclusion that cost less labor was always the goal and AI might be the scoring strike.
I admire and love just how vocally powerful you can be. In your face, authentic engagement with the reader. You just get out there and say your beliefs. without holding back. In no way. shape or form, are you a hypocrite. And that's what gives this peace pause. Its emotion, However, we can hold both opinions in tandem. when I say the substance does not follow through. I question. why such, anger towards the tools of the creatives? yes I totally understand. that there will be layoffs. That is part of whats ahead. Deep suffering. But the humanities have always advanced, in incremental steps, Followed by leaps, Historically known as paradigm shifts.
A paradigm shift is characteristic in the way that there's a strong dichotomy and willingness in people to embrace what they believe -and that things are no longer. The article itself is a strong reverberance of this flaw, Almost purposely satirical, in the way that if you do believe in humans. You should thank your boss. Don't fear the earthquake. The tidal wave. Learn how to surf it.
To close on a different note. the loss of good literature, Even though it's decaying. was already underway. Will always hurt to the bone to have spent midnight oil in pure passion for the art. How different? and how is it possible? that we can name? two artefacts, such as the Gulag archipelago from Solzhenitsyn. They changed the very nature and course of the world. To a hacked-up self-generated. optimized transformation model covered in our book. Cover.
As to the gentleman below. the reality of. the matter was. we always expect that the creatives the arts. The sciences in truth, were going to be the last ones. In the spirit of solace. consider that, is it a trickle-down? from that which is beautiful and creative into that which is mundane. or even trivial. that the rebirth will also come from the creatives. They never stole the creativity. just a form in which it's delivered. and as it becomes. fluent in other forms, this will become more apparent. Until then: Garlic it is. 🧄
Great post. Thanks for the mention. My weird little page needs all the eyes it can get.
Your post reflects a lot of my feelings about AI. I’m upset that “creative work” and “the arts” is one of the first things the engineers trained the AI to do. But as you say in your post, they never valued us anyway. Because society doesn’t value us. You spend ten years of your life perfecting writing a”sentences, making them sing, and everyone looks at you like you are an idiot because you didn’t learn how to code, or you get an MBA. But people naturally make art! We naturally tell stories and write poetry and dance and sing! The economy doesn’t have to force us to do these things; we just do them. And to somewhat echo your post (I think we are on the same page) to take a human completely out of the artistic equation, indicates a profound misunderstanding of humanity.
I had to get that out of me.
Our entire construct of Capitalism is fundamentally predatory where the few benefit from the labor of the many, LLMs are a prime example. AI as a productivity boost is just a narrative used for adoption especially on the Enterprise side. So there's a FOMO movement among companies trying to augment their products with LLMs that have no real rule of law - with no clause for actual regulation because our "adversaries" are doing it too.
The Machine Economy and age of automation hasn't even really begun yet. But the profit motive is what drives the speed of A.I. But is this even real innovation? It's definately a ploy for bigger companies to get even more powerful.
Very late comment, I have been trying to get to the subject of AI for months. Frankly, aside from the fact its creation is in much part from stolen intellectual property, its potential for abuse in further obscuring truth and reality is frightening. Humans are already doing that quite effectively without this tool. It also feels like the last frontier of job loss. It's no longer just manual labor, bad enough, it's now intellectual and creative labor.
I spent a few hours with ChatGPT over the summer, asking it questions on topics I have some expertise. One area I queried was lithium mining and Thacker Pass, NV, where a Canadian company has started mining over the protests of Native Americans and environmentalist Max Wilbert. I wrote a long article on the issue a bit over a year ago. ChatGPT had scraped information from corporate sites, including the Canadian firm Lithium Americas, but there was no nuance of the downsides of this project. An average user stopping there would have an incomplete picture. Given that we're beholden to speed in our work, there is a real danger in finding less information rather than more using this tech. And of course, there is an art to digging for information that I believe only a good human mind can achieve.
ChatGPT had not scraped my article. I wasn't surprised, I am a tiny fish. I don't care to be scraped, it's a violation. Yet, all the negative consequences of this mine I brought up were missing. That's problematic.
Speed in and of itself is destroying an inhabitable planet. Our goal should be to slow down, not speed up, to savor life. AI is scary. It could generate millions of articles in the time I write one. With disinformation prevailing and so many vulnerable to it, I am deeply skeptical of what this tech is bringing. Our history of the use of technology, plunging forward without thinking things through, seems instructive. This is a whole new level of tech enabling deep fakes at a speed we can't keep up with. A digger for truth, I fear one day it will be unobtainable.
Right on to this one!
Thanks for another enjoyable article Birgitte! It is always a pleasure to talk to you or read your articles!
I have “paid my dues” to “AI” during its second wave. In 1990, I gave it my days, nights, weekends, and holidays while crafting the memory of one “AI” (it will always be “AI” to me until I see intelligence). I read about full-custom silicon memories. Chose one, designed it, implemented it, tested it and released it. The whole chip did not do what it was intended to do (act human), but the memory and it’s surrounding circuitry worked flawlessly after it was manufactured in 2 micron technology. I had learned something and I could make a living off it. Then the second “AI” winter hit.
For many years I only read about “AI” as something that happened in the past.
Now “AI” is in fashion again and it is the same helper or threat already talked about twice in history.
Every time, “AI” appears to be a threat to human existence. But now, you nailed it, it is the people that are the ones not only making the tools but also trying to use them to get rid of having to pay other people.
But be aware that there are technologists like me who are working on tools to empower humans. I believe in humans and will continue to make tools so that we can figure out our universe and have fun doing it.
Thanks for this intriguing post. As always you respond with enthusiasm, optimism and passion. AI overwhelms me with its possibilities but I’m glad to see you still believe in the positives of the human spirit.
This is a really interesting analogy and one that deserves thought. The dynamics informing our relationship with technology are pressing, looking within ourselves vital if we are to retain any ability to shape those dynamics ourselves.
I write about a curious intersection between technology and being human. I'm an (almost) self-sufficient subsistence farmer and have found deep meaning in a life lived through my hands. I have also gained intimate knowledge of the deficit left when we divest ourselves of tech. I've begun to develop rheumatoid arthritis now, so there's much for me to mull over in your metaphor.
I'll link back to this piece.
Here's one of mine, on the subject of cognitive liberty, if you're curious:
The Softly Closing Gate:
https://walkingwithgoats.substack.com/p/the-softly-closing-gate
I'm humbled and gratified to know I've been thinking about "AI" the right way. When you see my piece this week know I only copied "some" of your work. :-)
Every piece of technology is a tool. It is neither good nor evil. Technology is subject to GIGO, and that is programmed by humanity.
I partially agree with you, but I don't consider myself a virus or autoimmune disease. I don't depend upon technology to do anything. Heck, I even use pen and paper to write, and I would rather talk to people face to face.
I personally think that big cities are the disease and that we need to return to the way we were meant to live, in small communities...
Interesting way of putting it. I myself have no concerns over intelligent machines. In fact, I welcome them, for the reasons I gave in We Must Stop Muting Like This: https://soaringtwenties.substack.com/p/we-must-stop-muting-like-this
interesting piece, but I'm not sure it's fair to say "humans" had an equal hand in creating the automation issue when (as always) almost no one outside the investment class will profit long-term...we do agree on your conclusion that cost less labor was always the goal and AI might be the scoring strike.
overall, I dig your perspective.
A masterpiece of thinking and wordcraft, Birgitte! Thank you. Lots to ponder.
I admire and love just how vocally powerful you can be. In your face, authentic engagement with the reader. You just get out there and say your beliefs. without holding back. In no way. shape or form, are you a hypocrite. And that's what gives this peace pause. Its emotion, However, we can hold both opinions in tandem. when I say the substance does not follow through. I question. why such, anger towards the tools of the creatives? yes I totally understand. that there will be layoffs. That is part of whats ahead. Deep suffering. But the humanities have always advanced, in incremental steps, Followed by leaps, Historically known as paradigm shifts.
A paradigm shift is characteristic in the way that there's a strong dichotomy and willingness in people to embrace what they believe -and that things are no longer. The article itself is a strong reverberance of this flaw, Almost purposely satirical, in the way that if you do believe in humans. You should thank your boss. Don't fear the earthquake. The tidal wave. Learn how to surf it.
To close on a different note. the loss of good literature, Even though it's decaying. was already underway. Will always hurt to the bone to have spent midnight oil in pure passion for the art. How different? and how is it possible? that we can name? two artefacts, such as the Gulag archipelago from Solzhenitsyn. They changed the very nature and course of the world. To a hacked-up self-generated. optimized transformation model covered in our book. Cover.
As to the gentleman below. the reality of. the matter was. we always expect that the creatives the arts. The sciences in truth, were going to be the last ones. In the spirit of solace. consider that, is it a trickle-down? from that which is beautiful and creative into that which is mundane. or even trivial. that the rebirth will also come from the creatives. They never stole the creativity. just a form in which it's delivered. and as it becomes. fluent in other forms, this will become more apparent. Until then: Garlic it is. 🧄