Is AI some kind of monster?

 Is AI some kind of monster? 

AI is a monster if we allow it to be. The world is full of monsters. And all new things are always classified as monsters. When we face some new things, the first thing that we see is resistance. Everybody finds negative things about the new thing. And that thing makes it possible to create a negative image around new things. The arguments are always that people must sit down and wait for society to adapt to the new thing. 

That's a sad thing because things like remote work slow climate change. But people resist that thing, and the argument is that they want to go to the office the traditional way, or maybe it's that their car becomes useless. When we think about discussions about robots and AI, that thing causes one question. Do we resist robots because that thing fights against our way of thinking?

 Or do we resist robotics for the next reason:  it's not cool to be a foreman for 5000 robots? Real leaders work as foremen to humans. Some people think that the person who works in the interface between humans and machines is the lowest man in the system. 

But if the new thing does not exist, how can society make that adaptation? How people can learn a thing if they cannot use it? The only argument against AI is that there is more free and social time in workplaces. Another thing is that new tools are meant to make human life easier than it is now. 

When we see AI as a competitor, we can say that some language model makes better answers than an experienced journalist. So what that tells to you? That means we must start to advance our way to make answers. The competition guarantees the quality. And if the journalist does not know some topic that makes the text bad. In those cases, we must ask one question: do we want qualified answers, or do we want to offer journalists a sheltered workshop? 

The AI will make better answers than experienced journalists. 

Especially, if journalists are not familiar with the topics. That makes the article very hard to read and benefit. When we read something, like stock marketing articles. 

We want to use that information. And in those cases the maker of those articles means nothing. Only their involvement means something. The information that those articles share should be confirmed and trusted. The AI is always neutral. It doesn't have emotions for things that it puts in the article. 

The thing is that we should be more worried about many other things than AI. We know that AI is a tool that can map genomes in seconds and control drone swarms. But the decision of how those things are used makes human, even if the system is automatic. In the automatic system, the human gives the order to start the action. 

https://www.freethink.com/futurology/alex-kantrowitz-ai

https://www.freethink.com/robots-ai/chatgpt-advice