As AI gets better I'm using it for a lot more. Right now, I've got a super challenging planning and coordinating task to figure out and it's been able to crank the products needed to make it fast without having to wait for the team to stand up. It's the work that a base level employee could do which frees me up more.
Funnily I was thinking on the same issue (post to come "OnlyHumans"). I add to this list the idea that you deconnect from yourself using AI too much. Indeed prompting is not like writing. You are guiding a machine which is not equivalent to being drawn into the text that you are writing. Most of the time when I write, I am starting with an idea and most of the text comes at writing. It is not like I have something in mind that has to be written down. It is rather like actively exploring the idea as the sentences go. You lose that with prompting.
Absolutely. I see writing with AI as a spectrum of course. Sometimes you only want an output, that's it. You can prompt your way to getting that meeting summary or report or whatever, because the output is what matters. Other times you want to wrestle with your own ideas, and AI can be an obstacle here. Then most of the time I'm somewhere in the middle, there is an important part of self-discovery and struggle with my own ideas, and then a part of packaging it and reviewing it where AI used in the right dose can help. I think the right formula is different for everyone, and different for every ocassion.
As for the hyper-spectacle and disconnection from immediate reality: If you haven't already, check out Pika's short Pikapocalypse ad. They actually embrace and lean heavily into many of these concerns in a very "on the nose" way.
Great article, man! Search is only the beginning, and I fear most for the younger generations that will grow up believing this is the new normal. I've also bookmarked the video so I can forget about it and pretend I'll it later :). Be careful you don't end up eating your kids, by the way. Been there, it's not that tasty.
Yeah, kids are all bones, little meat. You gotta go for 30+ adults, but you didn't hear it from me.
Do give Pikapocalypse a watch, though. It's only 2 minutes long and is equal parts provocative and existentially terrifying in a way that jibes well with the premise of your article. Reality is optional.
Alejandro, your words here are powerful. I see you highlighting our humanity and saying what Clarisse McClellan says so well to Guy Montag in Fahrenheit 451, "There's dew on the grass in the morning"– don't forget to go outside and notice what you haven't in a while, or maybe ever. Our "qualia," what Federico Faggin and many modern philosophers refer to as our unique human senses that we each use to uniquely interpret the world around us, need to be activated.
We must smell the grass, feel the wet dew in the morning, and see the tiny drops of water bubble on the surface of a single tall blade of grass. We must be in the moment with it.
For those who don't know, in Fahrenheit 451, written by Ray Bradbury, is a fictional American novel. Guy and the society he lives in are profoundly disconnected from nature and from their humanity, and Clarisse isn't. She reminds characters and readers alike that there is more to living than screens and that our qualia is how we make our way back to ourselves.
AI lacks qualia. And yet, I fear that humanity itself has become hardened somehow– rougher. It seems like there's a genuine shift towards being on the defensive at all times for individual mental and physical safety. What I have realized is controversial, perhaps, but I think I would rather speak to an AI that can pretend to care better than a human who can't pretend to care long enough to get through a conversation. I'm worried that this is the state of things as I perceive them, because I genuinely don't want humanity or humans to be replaced.
But if humanity is already here, then I am concerned that humans, who are increasingly destabilized by local and global events, really may be replaced after all.
Thanks! I loved Fahrenheit when I first read it, back in highschool. I have to revisit it because I'm sure there are lots of things I missed. There was a movie adaptation a few years ago but I don't think it was nearly close the original story. Bradbury is hard to film, of course, perhaps impossible. Then again so was Frank Herbert supposedly and I think the new Dune adaptations are as close to perfection as possible given the inherent limitations of visual storytelling. That's why books will never get old--I hope.
What you explain is damned concerning, to be sure. When people begin to prefer
talking to an actual philosophical zombie rather than an actual human, it means we've lost something really important. Technology has always mediated human relationship with reality, I think that's probably at the core of what being human is about. We are the kind of animals that make technology to help us navigate the world. But I fear we may be going too far. I mostly fear for my kids, they won't know of a different world, just like most Gen-Zers I know have no idea what it feels like to see a premiere of Lord of the Rings together with 300 people. Or the whole country stopping for half hour to watch the final episode of Friends, and then the telephone network collapsing from everyone trying to call everyone.
I don't know what else to do about it than scream out loud, and try to keep my kids and my students a bit safer.
I wouldn't refer to AI as a philosophical zombie. It is a great way to explore philosophy, in fact! As with all technology, when it is operating correctly, it serves as a mirror in many ways--reflecting to us what ask and give it. I do agree with you that technology has provided us with a bridge, a way to connect that wouldn't have been possible before. This conversation is a good example of this. Neither one of us knows the other, yet we can converse and exchange thoughts. I think that's really, truly wonderful. But, at the same time, there aren't many nooks of the Internet, or the world these days, where two people can amicably disagree, especially if they are strangers. The good news about LLMs is that they're great to disagree with.
In fact, I argue that if you're not telling AI that it's wrong, "standing on business," as the kids on Love Island say, and pushing back, you're probably using it wrong. I hear that you're worried for your kids and that we might be going too far, and I believe that we still have a choice about how this shakes out for humans. We can say, "Wait! we need more x,y,z." We can disagree. But not enough people are pushing for this sort of thing in meaningful ways.
As AI gets better I'm using it for a lot more. Right now, I've got a super challenging planning and coordinating task to figure out and it's been able to crank the products needed to make it fast without having to wait for the team to stand up. It's the work that a base level employee could do which frees me up more.
Funnily I was thinking on the same issue (post to come "OnlyHumans"). I add to this list the idea that you deconnect from yourself using AI too much. Indeed prompting is not like writing. You are guiding a machine which is not equivalent to being drawn into the text that you are writing. Most of the time when I write, I am starting with an idea and most of the text comes at writing. It is not like I have something in mind that has to be written down. It is rather like actively exploring the idea as the sentences go. You lose that with prompting.
Absolutely. I see writing with AI as a spectrum of course. Sometimes you only want an output, that's it. You can prompt your way to getting that meeting summary or report or whatever, because the output is what matters. Other times you want to wrestle with your own ideas, and AI can be an obstacle here. Then most of the time I'm somewhere in the middle, there is an important part of self-discovery and struggle with my own ideas, and then a part of packaging it and reviewing it where AI used in the right dose can help. I think the right formula is different for everyone, and different for every ocassion.
Another great read!
I also talked about the AI mediation of facts and sources briefly in my "Are we even ready for AI search?" piece last year: https://www.whytryai.com/p/are-we-even-ready-for-ai-search
As for the hyper-spectacle and disconnection from immediate reality: If you haven't already, check out Pika's short Pikapocalypse ad. They actually embrace and lean heavily into many of these concerns in a very "on the nose" way.
https://youtu.be/xSLyQdsBdZY?si=zc7ofqXujuB7PDun
Thanks for trying to keep us in the real world. I'll go eat some grass, smell my kids, and hug a pizza. Wait, was it the other way around?
Great article, man! Search is only the beginning, and I fear most for the younger generations that will grow up believing this is the new normal. I've also bookmarked the video so I can forget about it and pretend I'll it later :). Be careful you don't end up eating your kids, by the way. Been there, it's not that tasty.
Yeah, kids are all bones, little meat. You gotta go for 30+ adults, but you didn't hear it from me.
Do give Pikapocalypse a watch, though. It's only 2 minutes long and is equal parts provocative and existentially terrifying in a way that jibes well with the premise of your article. Reality is optional.
Alejandro, your words here are powerful. I see you highlighting our humanity and saying what Clarisse McClellan says so well to Guy Montag in Fahrenheit 451, "There's dew on the grass in the morning"– don't forget to go outside and notice what you haven't in a while, or maybe ever. Our "qualia," what Federico Faggin and many modern philosophers refer to as our unique human senses that we each use to uniquely interpret the world around us, need to be activated.
We must smell the grass, feel the wet dew in the morning, and see the tiny drops of water bubble on the surface of a single tall blade of grass. We must be in the moment with it.
For those who don't know, in Fahrenheit 451, written by Ray Bradbury, is a fictional American novel. Guy and the society he lives in are profoundly disconnected from nature and from their humanity, and Clarisse isn't. She reminds characters and readers alike that there is more to living than screens and that our qualia is how we make our way back to ourselves.
AI lacks qualia. And yet, I fear that humanity itself has become hardened somehow– rougher. It seems like there's a genuine shift towards being on the defensive at all times for individual mental and physical safety. What I have realized is controversial, perhaps, but I think I would rather speak to an AI that can pretend to care better than a human who can't pretend to care long enough to get through a conversation. I'm worried that this is the state of things as I perceive them, because I genuinely don't want humanity or humans to be replaced.
But if humanity is already here, then I am concerned that humans, who are increasingly destabilized by local and global events, really may be replaced after all.
Thanks! I loved Fahrenheit when I first read it, back in highschool. I have to revisit it because I'm sure there are lots of things I missed. There was a movie adaptation a few years ago but I don't think it was nearly close the original story. Bradbury is hard to film, of course, perhaps impossible. Then again so was Frank Herbert supposedly and I think the new Dune adaptations are as close to perfection as possible given the inherent limitations of visual storytelling. That's why books will never get old--I hope.
What you explain is damned concerning, to be sure. When people begin to prefer
talking to an actual philosophical zombie rather than an actual human, it means we've lost something really important. Technology has always mediated human relationship with reality, I think that's probably at the core of what being human is about. We are the kind of animals that make technology to help us navigate the world. But I fear we may be going too far. I mostly fear for my kids, they won't know of a different world, just like most Gen-Zers I know have no idea what it feels like to see a premiere of Lord of the Rings together with 300 people. Or the whole country stopping for half hour to watch the final episode of Friends, and then the telephone network collapsing from everyone trying to call everyone.
I don't know what else to do about it than scream out loud, and try to keep my kids and my students a bit safer.
I wouldn't refer to AI as a philosophical zombie. It is a great way to explore philosophy, in fact! As with all technology, when it is operating correctly, it serves as a mirror in many ways--reflecting to us what ask and give it. I do agree with you that technology has provided us with a bridge, a way to connect that wouldn't have been possible before. This conversation is a good example of this. Neither one of us knows the other, yet we can converse and exchange thoughts. I think that's really, truly wonderful. But, at the same time, there aren't many nooks of the Internet, or the world these days, where two people can amicably disagree, especially if they are strangers. The good news about LLMs is that they're great to disagree with.
In fact, I argue that if you're not telling AI that it's wrong, "standing on business," as the kids on Love Island say, and pushing back, you're probably using it wrong. I hear that you're worried for your kids and that we might be going too far, and I believe that we still have a choice about how this shakes out for humans. We can say, "Wait! we need more x,y,z." We can disagree. But not enough people are pushing for this sort of thing in meaningful ways.