Μεταφέρω εδώ επιστολή αναγνώστριας με τίτλο “Public begins to face the harsh reality behind the AI hype”, η οποία δημοσιεύθηκε στην Φαϊνάνσιαλ Τάιμς της 9 Μαΐου 2026. Το δίχως άλλο, η απαισιοδοξία ξεχειλίζει, μα λείπουν τα εμπειρικά δεδομένα που πιθανώς θα την τεκμηρίωναν – πρόκειται κυρίως για ισχυρισμούς που σποραδικώς συνοδεύονται από ‘μαλακές’ ενδείξεις. Παρ’ όλα αυτά, η άποψη της (ειδήμονος πάντως) αναγνώστριας δεν προσπερνάται ελαφρά τη καρδία.
““Shahid Mahdi, a New York expert in energy regulatory policy, critical infrastructure and cyber security, says “The proliferation of AI . . . will act as a profound liberator that catalyses a renaissance in the classical and liberal arts” (Letters, April 13)
Meanwhile, down the hill from his Elysian home, an NBC News poll in March revealed that a massive majority see the risks of AI as outweighing the benefits: the only subjects less popular than AI were the Democratic Party and Iran.
Is this because the majority of us are too low in the hierarchy of intelligence to see the view from the AI Utopia? Or is it, perhaps, because of our experience?
Every time employers and employees are asked about the results of introducing AI in the workplace, the people who actually have to use it say it has made them less productive, not more. Partly, this is because the USP of ‘generative AI’ is in its name; it is designed to generate enormous quantities of slop, easily and quickly, which then needs to be sifted by human operators or by bots for any value it contains.
As a result, many young people have given up even trying to find work, knowing they’ll be competing with hundreds or thousands of indistinguishable AI-generated applications.
Coincidentally — or not — another recent piece of research reveals that the UK now has more people working in HR than as doctors or lawyers, and more than almost any other western country. HR is a rare growth story; but what is it growing? More forms, more bureaucracy and more “AI assistance” we were all quite happy to be without.
The sales pitch for GenAI was, indeed, that it would automate the drudge work and liberate us all to be artists and creators.
Not, “we’re going to cover the planet in data centres, reverse the green transition, throw half of you out of work, destroy career ladders by eliminating junior jobs, drown the rest of you in maddening chores and walk away with massive profits, leaving bankrupt governments struggling to keep you alive. Oh, and while we’re about it, create rogue programmes that may annihilate anyone left.”
The public seems to be judging by experience; and I would not presume to blame them.””
Sheila Hayman
Advisory Board, Minderoo Centre for Technology and Democracy, University of Cambridge, London NW1
Για την μεταφορά
νκ
Τεχνολογική δυστοπία;
poleconomix.gr
Μεταφέρω εδώ επιστολή αναγνώστριας με τίτλο “Public begins to face the harsh reality behind the AI hype”, η οποία δημοσιεύθηκε στην Φαϊνάνσιαλ Τάιμς της 9 Μαΐου 2026. Το δίχως άλλο, η απαισιοδοξία ξεχειλίζει, μα λείπουν τα εμπειρικά δεδομένα που πιθανώς θα την τεκμηρίωναν – πρόκειται κυρίως για ισχυρισμούς που σποραδικώς συνοδεύονται από ‘μαλακές’ ενδείξεις. Παρ’ όλα αυτά, η άποψη της (ειδήμονος πάντως) αναγνώστριας δεν προσπερνάται ελαφρά τη καρδία.
““Shahid Mahdi, a New York expert in energy regulatory policy, critical infrastructure and cyber security, says “The proliferation of AI . . . will act as a profound liberator that catalyses a renaissance in the classical and liberal arts” (Letters, April 13)
Meanwhile, down the hill from his Elysian home, an NBC News poll in March revealed that a massive majority see the risks of AI as outweighing the benefits: the only subjects less popular than AI were the Democratic Party and Iran.
Is this because the majority of us are too low in the hierarchy of intelligence to see the view from the AI Utopia? Or is it, perhaps, because of our experience?
Every time employers and employees are asked about the results of introducing AI in the workplace, the people who actually have to use it say it has made them less productive, not more. Partly, this is because the USP of ‘generative AI’ is in its name; it is designed to generate enormous quantities of slop, easily and quickly, which then needs to be sifted by human operators or by bots for any value it contains.
As a result, many young people have given up even trying to find work, knowing they’ll be competing with hundreds or thousands of indistinguishable AI-generated applications.
Coincidentally — or not — another recent piece of research reveals that the UK now has more people working in HR than as doctors or lawyers, and more than almost any other western country. HR is a rare growth story; but what is it growing? More forms, more bureaucracy and more “AI assistance” we were all quite happy to be without.
The sales pitch for GenAI was, indeed, that it would automate the drudge work and liberate us all to be artists and creators.
Not, “we’re going to cover the planet in data centres, reverse the green transition, throw half of you out of work, destroy career ladders by eliminating junior jobs, drown the rest of you in maddening chores and walk away with massive profits, leaving bankrupt governments struggling to keep you alive. Oh, and while we’re about it, create rogue programmes that may annihilate anyone left.”
The public seems to be judging by experience; and I would not presume to blame them.””
Sheila Hayman
Advisory Board, Minderoo Centre for Technology and Democracy, University of Cambridge, London NW1
Για την μεταφορά
νκ
Share:
σχετικά άρθρα
The New Wave of Nationalization
NICHOLAS MULDER Governments are taking over private enterprises and resources at the fastest pace in 50 years. Based on the past century’s multiple waves of
Independent central banks take more risk, not less
Bernhard Bartels, Barry Eichengreen, Julian Schumacher, Beatrice Weder di Mauro The fiscal dominance view holds that politically captured central banks are more likely to be
Καθαρή εισροή μεταναστών στις ΗΠΑ, 2000-2024 (εκατομμύρια ετησίως)