The Bothy, where AI need not apply

It’s very trendy these days to hold a balanced view on AI. 

It’s considered a well-adjusted opinion when you acknowledge that AI can’t fix all of society’s problems, only to follow it with an asterisked but and proceed to talk about your favourite thing AI does for you. Alternatively there are the virtue signallers who acknowledge that AI can do all sorts of wonderful tricks, only to reveal they are in fact one of the clever few who understands where to draw the line. My own view, for better or worse, does not sit on this spectrum of acceptance.

I’m not much one for espousing second-hand quotes, but this one sticks with me and I’ve never discovered its origin.

“The tool shapes at both ends”

It’s a statement about technological advancement, and it makes the reader consider all the things in their life that claim to provide convenience, but when held under scrutiny, the claim falls apart very quickly.

The equation is: 

You have a task that is inconvenient → Create a tool to increase convenience → Tool-user becomes de-skilled / dependent on the tool → New inconvenience is unlocked.

I like to run this thought-problem whenever I encounter a shiny new tool. It’s true that I probably sit on the technophobic end of the spectrum, but I can usually offer some mental gymnastics to the defence of the tool I’m challenging. I can usually find common ground with tool-sympathisers and entertain that perhaps in their particular circumstances this invention is a net positive. For AI I lack such regard.

There are no other inventions, which I’m aware of, where the very problem the tool is trying to solve is problem-solving itself. Then, also consider that AI is both a tool and a tool user. In our pursuit of the path of least resistance, we are creating a feedback loop which also makes the tool less effective. Without original thought, AI will continue to regurgitate its own outputs until the information is just ‘slop’ - which would be totally fine if we hadn’t already sacrificed our own ability to think in the process.

To keep things light-hearted I also like to think of this concern in the ever-poetic dialogue of one original thinker, John Cooper Clarke, who simply says ‘not for me’. In his own eloquent words:

“I know how f***ing great they are [computers], that’s the very reason I can’t have one”

John Cooper Clarke is acclaimed in his field for his ability to be relatable to many. He understands that humour, fun, and joy, lies in the inconvenient. Whether that’s the inconvenient truth; the banal everyday; or the punkish spirit. Allowing a computer to make any of those creative observations would be end-game for Mr Clarke. It’s not a human-first approach, it’s a human-exclusive philosophy.. 

That’s a sentiment I’m borrowing here at the Bothy.

I felt the need to put this opinion down on record before I announce my intention to write a few more creative and hopefully thoughtful pieces of content here on our website. They won’t be doom and gloom like this one, and as you may have guessed there won’t be any artificial assistance. There is no schedule for these yet, it will just be as I find time and feel as though there is something valuable to talk about - keeping it organic, not just to draw clicks.

Catch you soon!

Louis

Sovereign Bothy