That’s what my librarian colleague called GPT chatbot makers during a recent conversation about GenAI tools. Despite being tech-savvy, a voracious reader, and (I think) a sci-fi enthusiast, she remains unwaveringly critical of all things GenAI.I understand why. Socially conscious information professionals strongly object to technologies that steal the livelihoods of the creative class. Knowledge professionals despise stolen art and are equally, if not more passionate about data authenticity, factual accuracy and sourcing. When you factor in power consumption and other environmental concerns, the GenAI conversation ends before it ever begins.Silicon Valley Technocrats, fighting to reach trillion dollar valuations, perhaps driven by some notion of “effective altruism”, argue GenAI is a vital first step toward the singularity. “Move fast and break things” remains a core value. AI advancement is positioned as a moral imperative—social justice concerns notwithstanding.
As a technologist, who’s been disrupted out of more than one career and is still dedicated to helping people leverage technology, I believe both perspectives have merit. The hype and money surrounding AI today are indeed intoxicating. And those who fear it’s all moving too fast have equally valid concerns. Examples: the proliferation of self-checkouts, ATMs, and now chatbots prepared to replace artists, copywriters, coders and front line service workers of all types.
We’re going to witness entirely new industries and dramatic new careers based on developing technology. We’ll also lose some jobs and even entire industries. Both statements are true.
Isn’t it really just two sides of the same coin?
I wish that, somehow, we could get the GenAI technocrats to re-read Orwell’s “1984” and not treat it like a “How To” manual. Not all technical advancements will lead to the “Star Trek” utopian universe.
And if you need to expand your own reading list…
Chat with a professional, neighborhood librarian instead of a GPT.
I’d also like to see the GPT resistance movement types, the ‘Clockwork Scorners’ embedded in the profession, apply simple lessons of ‘high-aim steering’ to life in 2025. The worst possible thing we can do right now is focus solely on what is directly in front of us. The road ahead is long, but we’re moving at speeds unachievable until now.
We’re all a little ‘tomorrow blind’. We can’t predict what’s ahead or lurking off to the side. Yet, a closed mind will miss important signs and wonderful opportunities almost every time.
See the “BIG Picture”.
GenAI is not perfect, but it is the early social proof, a conceptual demo, like a rocket, driving gigantic investments toward some pretty amazing human achievements.
Is AI the moon shot of this generation or
is it just a flock vultures laughing all the way to the bank?
That’s what my librarian colleague called GPT chatbot makers during a recent conversation about GenAI tools. Despite being tech-savvy, a voracious reader, and (I think) a sci-fi enthusiast, she remains unwaveringly critical of all things GenAI.I understand why. Socially conscious information professionals strongly object to technologies that steal the livelihoods of the creative class. Knowledge professionals despise stolen art and are equally, if not more passionate about data authenticity, factual accuracy and sourcing. When you factor in power consumption and other environmental concerns, the GenAI conversation ends before it ever begins.Silicon Valley Technocrats, fighting to reach trillion dollar valuations, perhaps driven by some notion of “effective altruism”, argue GenAI is a vital first step toward the singularity. “Move fast and break things” remains a core value. AI advancement is positioned as a moral imperative—social justice concerns notwithstanding.
As a technologist, who’s been disrupted out of more than one career and is still dedicated to helping people leverage technology, I believe both perspectives have merit. The hype and money surrounding AI today are indeed intoxicating. And those who fear it’s all moving too fast have equally valid concerns. Examples: the proliferation of self-checkouts, ATMs, and now chatbots prepared to replace artists, copywriters, coders and front line service workers of all types.
We’re going to witness entirely new industries and dramatic new careers based on developing technology. We’ll also lose some jobs and even entire industries. Both statements are true.
Isn’t it really just two sides of the same coin?
I wish that, somehow, we could get the GenAI technocrats to re-read Orwell’s “1984” and not treat it like a “How To” manual. Not all technical advancements will lead to the “Star Trek” utopian universe.
And if you need to expand your own reading list…
Chat with a professional, neighborhood librarian instead of a GPT.
I’d also like to see the GPT resistance movement types, the ‘Clockwork Scorners’ embedded in the profession, apply simple lessons of ‘high-aim steering’ to life in 2025. The worst possible thing we can do right now is focus solely on what is directly in front of us. The road ahead is long, but we’re moving at speeds unachievable until now.
We’re all a little ‘tomorrow blind’. We can’t predict what’s ahead or lurking off to the side. Yet, a closed mind will miss important signs and wonderful opportunities almost every time.
See the “BIG Picture”.
GenAI is not perfect, but it is the early social proof, a conceptual demo, like a rocket, driving gigantic investments toward some pretty amazing human achievements.
Is AI the moon shot of this generation or
is it just a flock vultures laughing all the way to the bank?