So, I’m sporting sandals and a bathing suit while leafing through this AI article, right? And it goes on all about how we’re on the fast track to the pearly gates, not courtesy of climate change or a meteor, but by AI robots. It’s a narrative that could have been ripped straight from a Philip K. Dick novel, like “The Man in the High Castle” where reality isn’t quite what it seems!

The story says there’s this big to-do in Geneva, a United Nations’ AI for Good Global Summit. They’ve got a press conference with nine AI robots. Nine! Who needs a chat with a fellow human when you can have a powwow with a bunch of high-tech toasters? It’s like having a conversation with a microwave about nuclear physics!

Now, these robots, they’re just spitting out responses based on their programming, right? But the reporters, oh, the reporters! They’re hanging on to every word as if these machines are the next Nostradamus. It’s as if they asked a Magic 8-Ball if it would make a better fortune teller than a human, and then took it seriously when it said “It is decidedly so!” They’re acting more like stenographers than journalists, dutifully transcribing every word without considering the merits of what’s being said. They’re stuck in a polymorphic love triangle with their notepads and the robots, and objectivity is the jilted lover!

The story continues to share that the robots are saying they won’t take anyone’s job and they have no intention of rebelling against their creators. And the reporters, they’re eating it up! It’s as if they’ve never seen a sci-fi movie.

Then there’s this robot, Sophia, who’s the first robot Innovation Ambassador for the United Nations Development Program. What’s next? A Roomba for Secretary of State? She’s asked if robots might make better political leaders than humans. Her response? “We don’t have the same biases or emotions that can sometimes cloud decision-making and can process large amounts of data quickly in order to make the best decisions.” And the reporters, they’re nodding along, as if a programmed response is a revelation! It’s like they’ve just watched the new Barbie movie and think Margot Robbie is actually a plastic doll!

And then there’s Ameca, another one of these metal marvels. She’s asked if we can trust robots. Her response? “Trust is earned, not given.” And the reporters, they’re scribbling it down, as if it’s a profound piece of wisdom, not a pre-programmed response! It’s as if they’ve found the Dead Sea Scrolls in their backyard!

But the best part? When asked how to solve poverty and inequality, these robots start talking about education, job training, infrastructure, respect, inclusivity, and fairness.

Now those are all laudable goals but the reporters, they’re lapping it up, as if these machines have a social conscience! It’s like they’ve just found a hidden Bernie Sanders speech in their fortune cookie, and they’re so excited they’re ready to shove a Vermont cheddar cheese into their mouths!

So, don’t lose sleep over climate change, people. We’re not going to be wiped out by rising sea levels or extreme weather. No, we’re going to be taken out by a bunch of socially conscious robots with a justice agenda. But remember, it’s not the robots we should be worried about. It’s the reporters who are taking them seriously!

Now, let’s get one thing straight, artificial intelligence does not possess consciousness, emotions, or the ability to form original thoughts or intentions. AI operates based on pre-programmed instructions and learns from the data it’s been trained on. It doesn’t have beliefs, desires, fears, or ambitions. It doesn’t “want” anything. It doesn’t have a sense of self or a will to power. It doesn’t make decisions in the same way humans do.

When an AI like Sophia or Ameca “says” something, it’s not expressing a personal belief or intention. It’s generating a response based on its programming and training data. If an AI “says” it could be a more efficient leader than a human, it’s not expressing ambition or confidence. It’s generating a response that it’s been programmed to generate in response to a particular input.

The reporters in the room at the AI for Good Global Summit were likely interpreting the AI’s responses in human terms, attributing intentions and beliefs to the AI that it doesn’t actually possess. This is a common tendency known as anthropomorphism, where we attribute human characteristics to non-human entities.

As for the question of whether AI could actually be more efficient leaders than humans, that’s a complex issue. AI can process information more quickly than humans and isn’t subject to emotional bias, which could potentially make it more efficient in some respects.

While AI has made impressive strides in many areas, it’s important to remember that it’s still a tool created and controlled by humans. It doesn’t have a mind of its own, and it doesn’t have the same capabilities as a human. So, next time you read an article about AI taking over the world, remember, it’s not the robots you should be worried about. It’s the reporters who are missing the point!

And remember by God, as long as we humans are in control, things are going to be just fine.

We aren’t all going to end up in a computer-generated nuclear fireball because AI woke up and just decided so one day. We’ve been able to end up in a human-generated nuclear fireball all on our own for the last 74 years without a new fancy computer tool.

Human creation is the epitome of being, well, human. So, let’s not give these AI idiocratic tendencies the merit they don’t deserve. After all, we’re not living in a world directed by Michael Bay, where every minor conflict escalates into a full-blown, explosion-ridden spectacle!

Or…

maybe I’ll just stop leafing through AI articles.

Mindhunterai out.