Embedded Files
Thea's views on AI.
Welcome to the matrix
Welcome to the matrix
Thea Schreiber
Thea Schreiber
AI is like a friend. A friend we can always trust because human creations have never, ever backfired-- so, obviously, something that has human intelligence and no moral code would not fail, either. We should let AI teach our children and do our jobs, especially art, since it is such a hassle to pay humanoids. Why spend years going to school and perfecting your style, even though people criticize you for doing what you love, when you can simply put a prompt into a machine and it can give you colors on a canvas that almost look like what you wanted? Who wants to work and earn money, anyway? If AI does my job, then my family and I can just starve on the streets instead! My children are being taught by a human being with independent thoughts and feelings? Can’t have that! Children should only be taught by biased, easy-to-rig machines run by the Illuminati in a dark basement with no human interaction whatsoever. That's where my money should go. Terminator? The Matrix? Never heard of it. Okay, let's turn down my God-level sarcasm for just a second and talk about AI.
The rise of AI has brought forth a dispute as controversial as pineapple on pizza, with many people both for and against it. One such vicious battleground is the argument about AI art. The BBC researched this topic with the help of mind-mangling philosopher Alice Helliwell from the Northeast University of London, invading minds like her ancestors invaded half the world. The real confounding conundrum here is: "What is art? What can be considered art?" Well, the brain-scratching color makers certainly don’t know. Nobody really knows anymore, since Agent of Chaos Marcel Duchamp entered a porcelain urinal for an exhibition in early 20th-century New York and said it was art. Nothing more majestic than relieving yourself, I guess. Helliwell says, “Historically, the way we understand the definition of art has shifted. It is hard to see why a urinal can be art, but art made by a generative algorithm could not be." I’m thinking my brain's primary thinking functions have been rotted away by spending hours on my phone because that makes sense. Perhaps that's just the philosopher's magic. Throughout history, radical art movements have reflected the concerns of the time and, now, those concerns are AI taking my job as a high school journalism student. Of course, this isn’t the problem of gallerist Aiden Meller and researcher Lucy Seal, who have made the humanoid AI artist Ai-Da. Have none of these people watched Terminator?
Of course, I can’t just focus on the imminent future of an AI-run world; I also have to talk about why AI is good or else the robotic shadow government won’t let me see my family again. AI isn't necessarily the end of human creativity but can instead help us see a whole new way of creating art, according to flesh robot (mathematician) Marcus du Sautoy at the University of Oxford. Marcus the robot spy says that humans are just as inclined to act as machines and robots will make us humans again because that makes total sense. And as I look at a picture of Ai-Da, I feel bad for AI for the first time. The haircut they gave this poor robot is atrocious. If Ai-Da does take over the world, then I wouldn’t blame her because they gave her a bob cut. She looks like a Karen. I cry the tears this robot cannot. Anyway, another part of the AI art issue is whether they can be credited as their own artists or if credit goes to their creators and programmers. This one really does get me thinking. I'm not going to say anymore on this issue and instead let you think about it, too, because I'm cruel like that and this one paragraph took way too long.
Image of Ai-Da by Ai-Da
Image of our future teachers (Terminator) by BBC
It's time for the next warning of the coming apocalypse: the use of AI in schools. According to the University of Illinois, there are both pros and cons-- and whoever wrote this article definitely wasn’t held at gunpoint. Over here on the pros side, we first have personalized learning. AI can teach you at your own pace and level, so there's no falling behind your classmates, because you don’t have any. You learn alone with only your annoying siblings in the house and my fellow only children won’t even have that. It will just be you. Alone. Always. Another pro is immediate feedback. The AI tracks your strong and weak points and knows your level of intelligence, perfect for taking over-- I mean, teaching you. Yeah, definitely just teaching you. No government plots possible here. AI is also more inclusive and has far more resources. I can’t actually refute this one. If it is misused, then it's the humans' fault, so don’t be stupid, people. AI can also make abstract concepts easier to understand, handle administrative tasks, and apparently foster critical thinkers. Bull, I say. Bull. Administrative tasks-- sure, make concepts easier to understand--- mehhhhhhhh. Foster critical thinkers-- no way. I'll admit: I don't speak for everyone when I say this but, when I'm in school, I just write stuff down and don’t learn anything. If a human with a personality can’t make me interested in chemical reactions, a robot can’t either.
And now, the beautiful cons list that I wish to print out, put on my wall, and adorn with gold. The greatest concern is security because, if that robot leaks the group chat, we're all doomed. Oh, there's also the whole government and scammers and stuff, but what does that matter when my search history is in danger? I know you can’t see me, but I'm trembling in fear right now. There's also potential bias towards Non-English speakers, which is kind of contradictory to their “AI is inclusive” point, but whatever. Another problem is the high implementation cost. These machines must be wearing jewels and silks of the highest quality because they are expensive. There's also the possibility of academic misconduct and possibly inaccurate information because the trolls won't stop trolling, no matter what we do. I won't go too much into it anymore because I think you're getting my point, and I should move on to the next issue.
We are almost done with this article. Then, you can restart the clock for when you have to read another one of my articles. Can’t get rid of me that easily, ha! Anyhow, it's time to address AI’s likelihood of taking our jobs and, for this ever-important topic, my source is… drumroll please… Forbes. Forbes predicts that, by 2025, AI will be a fundamental part of the global workforce, replacing many workers in various fields. According to some reports that Forbes is getting from who-knows-where, up to 30% of jobs could be fully automated and 50% heavily influenced by AI. Luckily for people in labor-intensive work such as construction, skilled trades, maintenance, installation and repair, your jobs aren’t under much threat. Of course, as the article I'm reading makes very clear, it’s all a matter of time and how fast AI progresses-- which is probably faster than you think. Leaving you with that ominous message my robotic overlords insisted I add: it's time to tell all of you captivated readers what jobs are most likely to be taken from right under your noses. First up, for people in data entry, scheduling, and customer service, AI is already prominent in your fields. Honestly, this doesn’t seem to be much of a loss because why would you want to serve Karen with the weird haircut and a strange addiction to cottage cheese, anyway? Graphic design and basic journalism (OooOOOh NOooOoOoO, I'm in DAnGer) are probably next on the Android anarchist’s list.
Image of Agent Smith (the first aura farmer) from The Matrix by Screen Rant
Now you can take the warning of the obviously superior being, who wrote this article, or you can let your little funny talky bot take over the world and end humanity in a few decades. I don’t care. I’m just here to watch it all burn. My suggestion to stop the robot apocalypse: better barbers.
Sources:
Page updated
Report abuse