In the age of AI many worry that an effect of AI will be a severed connection to our humanity. While this is one possible outcome, I do not believe that this is the likely outcome. I believe that artificial intelligence gives us a chance to connect more deeply with our humanity than ever before. This is not a dream of a perfect future. It is an argument for the value of human connection and how AI can strengthen it.
Those against or in fear of artificial intelligence usually envision a takeover in the style of "The Matrix," robots that become so powerful that they enslave all of humanity to power themselves. I do not accept that this is the most likely dystopian outcome of this new age of technology. What I see as a more likely scenario is something like the movie "Her." A loss in humanity, not to a machine that took it with force, but in a willing, slow exchange for convenience and comfort. This is a more honest picture, whose roots did not begin with AI.
Our diminishing human connection has grown like bamboo. What grew underneath the visible surface during the beginning of the internet, and began to sprout in the age of social media is now hitting a make or break point in the coming age of AI. It is easy to blame all of our fears and issues on the most powerful, confusing and advanced technology any of us have ever seen, but what many of us fail to realize is that AI is what is uncovering the issues we already faced unknowingly for years. AI is not the cause but the amplifier.
On a micro and macro level, AI reflects what you bring to it. On a macro level, some of these things are out of the regular person's direct control, the decisions companies make, the way their models operate, or the guard rails they choose to put on their technologies. Although I believe we can make change on a macro level as well, we will focus on the micro. AI is a reflection of what you bring to it, your views on the world, your ideas, your faults and your passions. A disconnected humanity arrives at AI with disconnection and it gives back more of it. A human who embraces AI and chooses connection will receive more of it in return. The technology, smarter or not, does not decide this. We do.
We have the opportunity to live through a renaissance. AI is what makes it possible. What if we existed in a world where many of the biggest obstacles to pursuing our dreams were removed? What if the need to work mundane jobs just to survive no longer stood between us and what we care about most? What if disease and poor health due to lack of healthcare were no longer the tax on a person's potential?
A positive AI path does not crush artists but allows them to create art without having two side jobs to keep a roof over their heads. It allows creatives to have an idea for a video game one night, and play it the next, without years of grueling work for a big studio for a game they have no passion for, just to keep food on the table.
A positive AI path is one where those who wish to be something, simply can be. It allows us to form communities with like-minded people and show an appreciation for the things we enjoy building, the problems we like to solve, and the passions we share. Our human connection has diminished due to social media taking our attention to lives we do not live and energy toward people who do not care about us. Life's hardships and realities take us away from the dreams we care deeply about and strip us of our health, community, and true human experiences. In the same way a billionaire delegates responsibilities to free his time for his passions, family and friends, all of humanity should delegate to AI what AI can carry, so that humans carry what only humans can.
Those who are AI skeptics are probably thinking, how does AI make any of this more likely to be possible? While the answer is obvious in healthcare, such as removing the egos and ulterior motives that block research, it seems far less clear in creative, work, or day to day spaces. This is where I presume much of the angst and pushback regarding AI's impact on humanity resides, because almost nobody would scoff at free healthcare, eradication of disease, or a safer society. I am of strong conviction, if done right, AI will amplify and strengthen human connection in creative, work, and personal spaces. Being able to delegate many current jobs and responsibilities to robots would do wonders for the opportunities of more chances to create and pursue passions. The finance guy who works 7-7 in a cubicle but lives for philosophy, the barista by day, bartender by night who has a passion for singing, all able to receive their time back to pursue what they love most and to find a group of people who enjoy the same things. The less life becomes about money to live safely the more true purpose humans will find, together.
The foundational reasons there is aggressive pushback toward AI in creative and productive spaces are not a new conversation. The barriers to entry in music, animation, software engineering and countless other fields have been lowering for decades. AI did not begin this shift. It accelerated it to a degree that made the resistance deafening and impossible to ignore. Many purists believe that without a deep understanding of music theory, instrument mastery, or game development, a person has not earned the right to create. This instinct is understandable but it has appeared before and it has always been wrong.
Music made on a computer was not considered real music. Autotune was not considered real singing. Both faced the same resistance. Purists believed the removal of a barrier to entry was an attack on the art form itself. What actually happened was the opposite. Access expanded. More people created art and the field grew. There were more musicians in 2010 than 1810 not because standards collapsed but because the weight of the debris blocking the path became lighter. These critiques have always been shortsighted, choosing to ignore all of the evolution the field had seen from the very beginning (music is about 50,000 years old).
The resistance to AI in creative fields is rarely about the art at its core. I think it is about the identity attached to the difficulty of what came before. People place their pride not in the act of creation itself but in the skill, specifically in the comparison between themselves and someone who has less of it. The barrier becomes the thing to showcase while the creation then becomes secondary. You are not diminished as a creator because someone or something else can now create. The value was never in the exclusivity but always in what was created and how it impacted the people who experienced it.
The choice in this world is to continue as things were and spend two hours a week on what you truly care about or accept change and believe in the chance for a better tomorrow. The question has always been the same. What will you do with the opportunities you are given?