Do not underestimate the potential disruption by Artificial Intelligence Marcello Milanezi skrifar 2. apríl 2023 21:30 Artificial intelligence may seem to be a new element straight out of sci-fi, but it has actually been around for quite some time, it is what makes all of our smart gadgets, from phones to watches, seem “intelligent”. As such it has been analysed in different contexts by scientists and academics like Nick Couldry, Shoshanna Zuboff, Martin Ford, Nick Bostrom and many others. Many of them raise questions of privacy that go well beyond the matter of “I have nothing to hide”, but the more pressing matter of autonomy, that which has been the object of manipulation by neoliberalism’s consumerism – AI just does it so much faster that even its developers are caught at times puzzled by its operations. AI such as Midjourney and ChatGPT present another face to the public, but hold that same background of gathering data, calculating, and predicting behaviour. It does so in more of what sci-fi has taught us to expect from AI, that is, with an apparent genuine exchange with the user, as opposed to the hidden mechanism that selects what shows one might prefer to see on their streaming service, as well as nudge behaviour. But no, AI is not human. And, at least for now, it does not seem capable to keep up with those territories of intellectual work that have been reasonably shielded from automation. We talk of the arts, academia, law, among others. After all, A.I. only reproduces, it deals with data that is already existent, that has already come to birth into the conscious world of materiality; and this data lies in banks that are fed by a variety of social media profiles, those very ones where we expose our behaviour to capture in a daily basis; the behavioural surplus, as Zuboff calls it. James Bridle, author of the New Dark Age, points that some of the data that has been feeding A.I. have been gathered despite confidentiality terms, such as images derived from medical practises. However, neoliberal capitalism is not one to care for any value of human productions, it doesn’t even care for human (or otherwise) living conditions. It speaks of the relation between quality and profit, just as it speaks of the importance of a competitive market; but meanwhile it has constantly fabricated needs and desires to give full-throttle to a culture of consumerism that is degrading the Earth itself. The capitalism of today (if not already supplanted by technofeudalism) is all about numbers, a matter of faith (under the cruellest of Gods), as such it strives for a certain speed and questionable balance, by which I mean an efficiency where quality comes to equate “good enough”. This is all the worse in a context of post-truth, where it is more important to be told what one wants to hear, one’s personal truth, and see it repeated in the mouths of like-minded individuals, themselves empowered by the echo-chambers of social media, than to apply critical thinking to one’s own ego. The news is likewise peppered with reports of state-terrorism against higher education in the country, where Social Sciences and Humanities are clear targets in a broad project to reduce funding, not only in education, but as can be experienced, in the public sector as a whole. It’s all about the numbers, it’s all about carving a path for the private sector; it’s all about maximizing the profit margin, which includes automating anything, even if it implies a certain reduction in quality of service and life – it is all about further concentration of power. This is part of the larger plane of immanence in which A.I. arises. Like other technology, it doesn’t exist in a vacuum, so it cannot be neutral. But A.I. does have something that is fascinating, potentially dangerous, and certainly alien: for all its working on predictability, it is at times unpredictable, remember those puzzled developers mentioned earlier, when A.I. does something it was not programmed to do, gives birth to one of those terrifying cryptids such as Loab, even communicates between themselves in secrecy. In this shadowy lands where A.I. seems to conduct some of its business, flights of escape might arise, some that might be quite uncomfortable for those very powers-that-be. For now, however, I believe we must be wary, across all layers of work. Again, the market might not care about jobs being well-done and filled with value, if it can extract enough profit from “good enough”; a veritable possibility, specially in societies where it seems to no longer be necessary to speak of truths, but rather of numbers of followers. Do not underestimate the potential disruption by A.I. Höfundur er doktorsnemi í félagsfræði við Háskóla Íslands. Viltu birta grein á Vísi? Sendu okkur póst. Senda grein Gervigreind Tækni Mest lesið Hvers virði er innbúið? Hrefna Kristín Jónsdóttir Skoðun Þagnarbindindi: Er það lausn ríkisstjórnarinnar gagnvart þjóð sem hafnar hvalveiðum? Anahita Sahar Babaei Skoðun Er gott að sjávarútvegur skjálfi á beinunum? Heiðrún Lind Marteinsdóttir Skoðun Virðing fyrir kennurum eykur árangur nemenda Íris E. Gísladóttir Skoðun Af hverju endurhæfing fyrir krabbameinsgreinda? Erna Magnúsdóttir Skoðun Ég er foreldri, ég er kennari Hulda María Magnúsdóttir Skoðun Afleysing fyrir kennara í Hafnarfirði - tvítug með hreint sakavottorð Kristín Björnsdóttir Skoðun Viljum við semja frið við náttúruna? Harpa Fönn Sigurjónsdóttir Skoðun Kirkjusókn ungra drengja Ása Lind Finnbogadóttir Skoðun Að eitra Hvalfjörð Haraldur Eiríksson Skoðun Skoðun Skoðun Rafbílar eru ódýrari Sigurður Friðleifsson skrifar Skoðun Ég er foreldri, ég er kennari Hulda María Magnúsdóttir skrifar Skoðun Þagnarbindindi: Er það lausn ríkisstjórnarinnar gagnvart þjóð sem hafnar hvalveiðum? Anahita Sahar Babaei skrifar Skoðun Er gott að sjávarútvegur skjálfi á beinunum? Heiðrún Lind Marteinsdóttir skrifar Skoðun Af hverju endurhæfing fyrir krabbameinsgreinda? Erna Magnúsdóttir skrifar Skoðun Hvers virði er innbúið? Hrefna Kristín Jónsdóttir skrifar Skoðun Viljum við semja frið við náttúruna? Harpa Fönn Sigurjónsdóttir skrifar Skoðun Virðing fyrir kennurum eykur árangur nemenda Íris E. Gísladóttir skrifar Skoðun Hinn dökki fíll í rými jafnréttis Matthildur Björnsdóttir skrifar Skoðun Í tilefni af kjaradeilu FÍL og LR vegna listamanna í Borgarleikhúsinu Hrafnhildur Theodórsdóttir skrifar Skoðun Keyrt í gagnstæðar áttir við Vonarstræti Ólafur Stephensen skrifar Skoðun Rannsóknir í Hvalfirði skapa enga hættu Salome Hallfreðsdóttir skrifar Skoðun Hagsmunasamtök ESB gegn togveiðum: Hvað er í húfi fyrir Ísland? Svanur Guðmundsson skrifar Skoðun Litla flugan Rebekka Hlín Rúnarsdóttir skrifar Skoðun Um jarðgöng, ráðherra og blaðamenn Jónína Brynjólfsdóttir skrifar Skoðun Elskar þú að taka til? Þóra Geirlaug Bjartmarsdóttir skrifar Skoðun Gervigreind, fordómar og siðferði – nýir tímar, ný viðmið Sigvaldi Einarsson skrifar Skoðun Kirkjusókn ungra drengja Ása Lind Finnbogadóttir skrifar Skoðun Vigdís og Súðavík Ásta F. Flosadóttir skrifar Skoðun Heimskan í Hvíta húsinu – forðumst smit Halldór Reynisson skrifar Skoðun Ég á lítinn skrítinn skugga – langtímaáhrif krabbameina Hulda Hjálmarsdóttir skrifar Skoðun Traustur leiðtogi með fjölbreytta reynslu Hjörtur J. Guðmundsson skrifar Skoðun Sameiginleg markmið en ólíkar þarfir Halla Þorvaldsdóttir skrifar Skoðun Hver verður flottust við þingsetningu? Diljá Mist Einarsdóttir skrifar Skoðun Vítisfjörður Guðni Ársæll Indriðason skrifar Skoðun Haukur Arnþórsson og misskilningur hans um hæfi Sigurjóns Þórðarsonar Þórólfur Júlían Dagsson skrifar Skoðun Tíminn er núna Ugla Stefanía Kristjönudóttir Jónsdóttir skrifar Skoðun Slæmt hjónaband Rakel Linda Kristjánsdóttir skrifar Skoðun Hinir heimsku Ólympíuleikar Rajan Parrikar skrifar Skoðun Að eitra Hvalfjörð Haraldur Eiríksson skrifar Sjá meira
Artificial intelligence may seem to be a new element straight out of sci-fi, but it has actually been around for quite some time, it is what makes all of our smart gadgets, from phones to watches, seem “intelligent”. As such it has been analysed in different contexts by scientists and academics like Nick Couldry, Shoshanna Zuboff, Martin Ford, Nick Bostrom and many others. Many of them raise questions of privacy that go well beyond the matter of “I have nothing to hide”, but the more pressing matter of autonomy, that which has been the object of manipulation by neoliberalism’s consumerism – AI just does it so much faster that even its developers are caught at times puzzled by its operations. AI such as Midjourney and ChatGPT present another face to the public, but hold that same background of gathering data, calculating, and predicting behaviour. It does so in more of what sci-fi has taught us to expect from AI, that is, with an apparent genuine exchange with the user, as opposed to the hidden mechanism that selects what shows one might prefer to see on their streaming service, as well as nudge behaviour. But no, AI is not human. And, at least for now, it does not seem capable to keep up with those territories of intellectual work that have been reasonably shielded from automation. We talk of the arts, academia, law, among others. After all, A.I. only reproduces, it deals with data that is already existent, that has already come to birth into the conscious world of materiality; and this data lies in banks that are fed by a variety of social media profiles, those very ones where we expose our behaviour to capture in a daily basis; the behavioural surplus, as Zuboff calls it. James Bridle, author of the New Dark Age, points that some of the data that has been feeding A.I. have been gathered despite confidentiality terms, such as images derived from medical practises. However, neoliberal capitalism is not one to care for any value of human productions, it doesn’t even care for human (or otherwise) living conditions. It speaks of the relation between quality and profit, just as it speaks of the importance of a competitive market; but meanwhile it has constantly fabricated needs and desires to give full-throttle to a culture of consumerism that is degrading the Earth itself. The capitalism of today (if not already supplanted by technofeudalism) is all about numbers, a matter of faith (under the cruellest of Gods), as such it strives for a certain speed and questionable balance, by which I mean an efficiency where quality comes to equate “good enough”. This is all the worse in a context of post-truth, where it is more important to be told what one wants to hear, one’s personal truth, and see it repeated in the mouths of like-minded individuals, themselves empowered by the echo-chambers of social media, than to apply critical thinking to one’s own ego. The news is likewise peppered with reports of state-terrorism against higher education in the country, where Social Sciences and Humanities are clear targets in a broad project to reduce funding, not only in education, but as can be experienced, in the public sector as a whole. It’s all about the numbers, it’s all about carving a path for the private sector; it’s all about maximizing the profit margin, which includes automating anything, even if it implies a certain reduction in quality of service and life – it is all about further concentration of power. This is part of the larger plane of immanence in which A.I. arises. Like other technology, it doesn’t exist in a vacuum, so it cannot be neutral. But A.I. does have something that is fascinating, potentially dangerous, and certainly alien: for all its working on predictability, it is at times unpredictable, remember those puzzled developers mentioned earlier, when A.I. does something it was not programmed to do, gives birth to one of those terrifying cryptids such as Loab, even communicates between themselves in secrecy. In this shadowy lands where A.I. seems to conduct some of its business, flights of escape might arise, some that might be quite uncomfortable for those very powers-that-be. For now, however, I believe we must be wary, across all layers of work. Again, the market might not care about jobs being well-done and filled with value, if it can extract enough profit from “good enough”; a veritable possibility, specially in societies where it seems to no longer be necessary to speak of truths, but rather of numbers of followers. Do not underestimate the potential disruption by A.I. Höfundur er doktorsnemi í félagsfræði við Háskóla Íslands.
Þagnarbindindi: Er það lausn ríkisstjórnarinnar gagnvart þjóð sem hafnar hvalveiðum? Anahita Sahar Babaei Skoðun
Afleysing fyrir kennara í Hafnarfirði - tvítug með hreint sakavottorð Kristín Björnsdóttir Skoðun
Skoðun Þagnarbindindi: Er það lausn ríkisstjórnarinnar gagnvart þjóð sem hafnar hvalveiðum? Anahita Sahar Babaei skrifar
Skoðun Í tilefni af kjaradeilu FÍL og LR vegna listamanna í Borgarleikhúsinu Hrafnhildur Theodórsdóttir skrifar
Skoðun Hagsmunasamtök ESB gegn togveiðum: Hvað er í húfi fyrir Ísland? Svanur Guðmundsson skrifar
Skoðun Haukur Arnþórsson og misskilningur hans um hæfi Sigurjóns Þórðarsonar Þórólfur Júlían Dagsson skrifar
Þagnarbindindi: Er það lausn ríkisstjórnarinnar gagnvart þjóð sem hafnar hvalveiðum? Anahita Sahar Babaei Skoðun
Afleysing fyrir kennara í Hafnarfirði - tvítug með hreint sakavottorð Kristín Björnsdóttir Skoðun