Thinking about solutions to all of this, I published a book last year on Amazon called ‘The Western Gulag,’ in which I explore Transhumanism and alienation, coming from a Buddhist perspective. The remedy I proposed to that alienation brought about by a geek mentality was loving kindness or metta in Buddhist parlance. The thing is our views condition our emotions, and so if we think of ourselves as a thing or object then it is very likely we will feel numb or indifferent to ourselves, and thus be drawn to the kinds of distractions Generative AI offers. But if we try to see ourselves for what we really are - a human being with hopes and fears and dreams, then it is natural that we would care for ourselves, thus breaking the cycle of alienation. I have just joined Substack and am getting my head around it. I will be sharing my ideas on here presently.
I share many of your concerns. I don't think technological loneliness can be solved with more technology. I think we need to teach especially children and young people healthy habits regardig media intake and screen time as well as setting an example. Tiktok, Instagram, and even YouTube's algorithm are addictive and damaging much in the same way as cigarette smoking, this is just not common knowledge yet.
Technology is a way of forgetting about the daily routine. Going to work is exhausting -boring tasks and long commuting- and you end up wanting to do nothing. So digital tools fill up those periods of time of boredom and laziness.
A healthier working system would make people more willing to go out and hang out with friends.
Digital tools are inevitable and the only solution is creating an environment where an alternative to that technology is more appealing.
But with the current working systems, which take from you the best hours of the day, technology -and therefore, loneliness- will prevail.
Thanks for sharing this Michael, there’s a lot to unpack here and a huge amount of time and effort has obviously gone into writing this piece! I want to pick up on two small parts you cover:
1. Loneliness
2. Advertising potential
I don’t disagree with any of your points on loneliness/mental health but I think it’s also worth consider that for some people generative AI will give them a relief from loneliness. For example, the elderly that are more socially isolated or neurodiverse people who find social interactions harder. As with all technology, there is the potential for good and the potential for harm and I wouldn’t want the potential upsides for parts of society to be overlooked.
On the advertising front, I’m going to have to agree to disagree with you on some of your points. Part of the reason Google rushed Bard out is because they are so worried how disruptive generative AI till be to their search business. Microsoft have also been derided for the ham-fisted way they started to include advertising in Bing Chat. For me, I really like using ChaGPT because it allows me to get content without any advertising that is so intrusive online these days. I can’t read any online article without having to click away cookie notices, newsletter sign-up pop-ups and other intrusive ad formats. As someone who leads technology in one of the large advertising groups, I’m more concerned with how generative AI is going to reduce the opportunities for advertisers rather than increase them (and I actually see this as a good thing - less advertising is a positive for everyone, including advertisers!).
Thanks again for sharing the article - it’s a great thought provoker!
You make some solid points here Sean. Definitely Chatbots in search and Generative A.I's integration will strengthen Google's hold on Search Ads. Is it better info? Maybe? It's not that Ads are invasive outside of YouTube, it's how they make these companies operate in a more predatory manner that's the problem.
With Amazon, ByteDance, Apple, Microsoft and Netflix rushing for more market share share in digital advertising, the writing is sort of on the wall. Integrating gaming and Generative A.I.'s impact on gaming will be pretty significant over the next decade or two.
Mike, this was great to see. I appreciate you stepping outside of your normal wheelhouse, and the enthusiasm to share this view showed through.
I agree with your assessment. Our current trajectory is surely one of more isolation and loneliness, where an elite handful of people sort of rule the roost, and everyone else is just cordoned off into their own little silos. It's incumbent on us to raise awareness of this trajectory, and you're doing excellent work here to move the conversation forward.
I'll do what I can to amplify thought pieces like this.
Yes, I've read some and am by no means dismissing the potential for exacerbating loneliness, reactivity, and conflict. New information technology is inherently disruptive. I was just surprised to see these outcomes. In my field (workforce development) soft-skill challenges are an enormous problem to gainful employment and professional advancement. The bots seem to help. Again, early days!
Appreciate the sentiment but I'd put it in the category of "not proven". I'd also refer readers to Erik Brynholfsson's study on call center workers and the way chatbots are assisting people with deficits in social cognition. It's early days. The worst may happen or maybe something else will happen. https://plus.thebulwark.com/p/an-unexpected-role-ai-could-play-in-workplace
Have you read the literature Brent of what social media and advertising based platforms and app have done to our mental health? You do understand that Generative A.I. is mostly used currently to boost revenue from the Cloud, advertising and new subscription models right? So you think more time interacting with A.I. will mean better quality interactions with people? Pray tell is Pi going to help me improve my soft skills with all its emoji and fake humor?
“If you thought TikTok was addictive, or that Instagram held you visually in the infinite scroll, Generative A.I. will enable the design of unprecedented immersion that movies, music, art or other people, just won’t be able to compete with.”
This is a really good articulation of one of the central concerns associated with increasingly capable systems. In many ways it comes down to ‘manipulation’ - i.e. exerting influence by bypassing a person’s capacity for rational deliberation. The stickiness of AI systems has a lot in common with social media use (though I agree it could be much more severe), where first and second order preferences rub up against each other to the detriment of the user. (Here, first order basically means ‘what i want to do right now’ whereas second order is about ‘what type of person I want to be’. For example, I may not want to spend hours on TikTok – but I sure do want to watch just one more video.)
There's a lot of good work underway to understand the mechanisms by which systems can manipulate, the differences between persuasion and manipulation, and how AI can be built in a way that respects personal autonomy. There's obviously much farther to go, so I'm glad to see this sort of analysis!
Thank you Harry for your very thoughtful comment. What role do you think Monopoly capitalism might play as even more immersive products Enter the market? Companies like Apple or Amazon or building service platforms where every entertainment need might be able to be met.
If generative AI is a means to increasing cloud and advertising and subscription revenue don't the companies with the deepest pockets manage to trap consumers pretty much at every consumer experience touch point by dominating the implementation of smarter and smarter systems?
I believe this means the future of healthcare, education and banking will be in these platforms and via generative AI the winning platforms of silicon valley continue to strengthen their moats. In such an environment, AI regulation will actually be impossible.
Interesting question. I think clearly those firms that have the resources to build the most capable models will have an edge, but ultimately it depends on what the consumer layer of these technologies looks like and the extent to which they are (or not) interoperable. There's a future in which people use lots of different personal AIs for lots of different things, a future in which people use one personal AI for pretty much everything, and a future in which there's a primary AI that mediates interactions with a whole bunch of specialised secondary and tertiary systems. I imagine that regulation should remain possible providing states can properly engage at both the horizontal level (i.e. through broad AI-focused regulation) and the vertical level (i.e. in the context of specific sectors like health).
Increase or solve might be a bit of an unfair binary, but I assume that's unintentional. There's reason I had trouble picking between the two, because I feel there's a positive vision imaginable, where AI assistants helps us connect or bond with others (by teaching us communications skills for example, or allowing us to prepare for certain social situations in a safe space before having to approach real people in the real world).
There are other stories as well about people that benefitted from talking a non-judgemental, empathetic AI assistant and doing so helped them reconnect with friends or loved ones. I can see how in times of loneliness, AI assistants can fill that void. Being alone will certainly feel less lonely when you have always someone to talk to, even it that someone just exists in your phone.
This is precisely why I don't write op-eds. People think snarky comments are like knitting, soothing to them I hope. Devastating for my mental health though.
I wish you actually addressed the topic at hand, I feel as if technological loneliness is a serious concern for both Seniors and GenZ.
I do not at present have the time to answer every comment thoughtfully, or coherently. I am looking after family members with health issues. I am alone in a foreign country and do not speak the language. It took me the entire weekend to try to write this op-ed.
What you imply is certainly nothing to do with my concerns over this grave trend in society globally. It's a ridiculous thing to ask (the brain study for me is just an afterthought, I agree many studies can be flawed). I actually think your nitpicking is a form of evasion of your actual emotional response to this topic.
I am sorry that you are going through hard times and difficult circumstances. I had no intention of being snide or of attacking you. The brain study jumped out at me as it spoke directly to my own circumstances and temperament. I am an older person, an introvert and neurodiverse. And yes, I knit. I don’t need to make snide comments to sooth me though.
I’m fact I agree with many of your concerns.
I’m still navigating the etiquette of Substack comments. I’m old. I come from the world of Web2.0. I will just apologise and absent myself from your comments. I hope for better things for you.
Hi Michael,
Thinking about solutions to all of this, I published a book last year on Amazon called ‘The Western Gulag,’ in which I explore Transhumanism and alienation, coming from a Buddhist perspective. The remedy I proposed to that alienation brought about by a geek mentality was loving kindness or metta in Buddhist parlance. The thing is our views condition our emotions, and so if we think of ourselves as a thing or object then it is very likely we will feel numb or indifferent to ourselves, and thus be drawn to the kinds of distractions Generative AI offers. But if we try to see ourselves for what we really are - a human being with hopes and fears and dreams, then it is natural that we would care for ourselves, thus breaking the cycle of alienation. I have just joined Substack and am getting my head around it. I will be sharing my ideas on here presently.
I share many of your concerns. I don't think technological loneliness can be solved with more technology. I think we need to teach especially children and young people healthy habits regardig media intake and screen time as well as setting an example. Tiktok, Instagram, and even YouTube's algorithm are addictive and damaging much in the same way as cigarette smoking, this is just not common knowledge yet.
Technology is a way of forgetting about the daily routine. Going to work is exhausting -boring tasks and long commuting- and you end up wanting to do nothing. So digital tools fill up those periods of time of boredom and laziness.
A healthier working system would make people more willing to go out and hang out with friends.
Digital tools are inevitable and the only solution is creating an environment where an alternative to that technology is more appealing.
But with the current working systems, which take from you the best hours of the day, technology -and therefore, loneliness- will prevail.
Very interesting text, Michael.
Thanks for sharing this Michael, there’s a lot to unpack here and a huge amount of time and effort has obviously gone into writing this piece! I want to pick up on two small parts you cover:
1. Loneliness
2. Advertising potential
I don’t disagree with any of your points on loneliness/mental health but I think it’s also worth consider that for some people generative AI will give them a relief from loneliness. For example, the elderly that are more socially isolated or neurodiverse people who find social interactions harder. As with all technology, there is the potential for good and the potential for harm and I wouldn’t want the potential upsides for parts of society to be overlooked.
On the advertising front, I’m going to have to agree to disagree with you on some of your points. Part of the reason Google rushed Bard out is because they are so worried how disruptive generative AI till be to their search business. Microsoft have also been derided for the ham-fisted way they started to include advertising in Bing Chat. For me, I really like using ChaGPT because it allows me to get content without any advertising that is so intrusive online these days. I can’t read any online article without having to click away cookie notices, newsletter sign-up pop-ups and other intrusive ad formats. As someone who leads technology in one of the large advertising groups, I’m more concerned with how generative AI is going to reduce the opportunities for advertisers rather than increase them (and I actually see this as a good thing - less advertising is a positive for everyone, including advertisers!).
Thanks again for sharing the article - it’s a great thought provoker!
You make some solid points here Sean. Definitely Chatbots in search and Generative A.I's integration will strengthen Google's hold on Search Ads. Is it better info? Maybe? It's not that Ads are invasive outside of YouTube, it's how they make these companies operate in a more predatory manner that's the problem.
With Amazon, ByteDance, Apple, Microsoft and Netflix rushing for more market share share in digital advertising, the writing is sort of on the wall. Integrating gaming and Generative A.I.'s impact on gaming will be pretty significant over the next decade or two.
If anyone wants to comment on this article placed on Reddit, you may do so here: https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/15lk0sp/generative_ai_will_augment_technological/
Mike, this was great to see. I appreciate you stepping outside of your normal wheelhouse, and the enthusiasm to share this view showed through.
I agree with your assessment. Our current trajectory is surely one of more isolation and loneliness, where an elite handful of people sort of rule the roost, and everyone else is just cordoned off into their own little silos. It's incumbent on us to raise awareness of this trajectory, and you're doing excellent work here to move the conversation forward.
I'll do what I can to amplify thought pieces like this.
Yes, I've read some and am by no means dismissing the potential for exacerbating loneliness, reactivity, and conflict. New information technology is inherently disruptive. I was just surprised to see these outcomes. In my field (workforce development) soft-skill challenges are an enormous problem to gainful employment and professional advancement. The bots seem to help. Again, early days!
Appreciate the sentiment but I'd put it in the category of "not proven". I'd also refer readers to Erik Brynholfsson's study on call center workers and the way chatbots are assisting people with deficits in social cognition. It's early days. The worst may happen or maybe something else will happen. https://plus.thebulwark.com/p/an-unexpected-role-ai-could-play-in-workplace
Have you read the literature Brent of what social media and advertising based platforms and app have done to our mental health? You do understand that Generative A.I. is mostly used currently to boost revenue from the Cloud, advertising and new subscription models right? So you think more time interacting with A.I. will mean better quality interactions with people? Pray tell is Pi going to help me improve my soft skills with all its emoji and fake humor?
“If you thought TikTok was addictive, or that Instagram held you visually in the infinite scroll, Generative A.I. will enable the design of unprecedented immersion that movies, music, art or other people, just won’t be able to compete with.”
This is a really good articulation of one of the central concerns associated with increasingly capable systems. In many ways it comes down to ‘manipulation’ - i.e. exerting influence by bypassing a person’s capacity for rational deliberation. The stickiness of AI systems has a lot in common with social media use (though I agree it could be much more severe), where first and second order preferences rub up against each other to the detriment of the user. (Here, first order basically means ‘what i want to do right now’ whereas second order is about ‘what type of person I want to be’. For example, I may not want to spend hours on TikTok – but I sure do want to watch just one more video.)
There's a lot of good work underway to understand the mechanisms by which systems can manipulate, the differences between persuasion and manipulation, and how AI can be built in a way that respects personal autonomy. There's obviously much farther to go, so I'm glad to see this sort of analysis!
Thank you Harry for your very thoughtful comment. What role do you think Monopoly capitalism might play as even more immersive products Enter the market? Companies like Apple or Amazon or building service platforms where every entertainment need might be able to be met.
If generative AI is a means to increasing cloud and advertising and subscription revenue don't the companies with the deepest pockets manage to trap consumers pretty much at every consumer experience touch point by dominating the implementation of smarter and smarter systems?
I believe this means the future of healthcare, education and banking will be in these platforms and via generative AI the winning platforms of silicon valley continue to strengthen their moats. In such an environment, AI regulation will actually be impossible.
Interesting question. I think clearly those firms that have the resources to build the most capable models will have an edge, but ultimately it depends on what the consumer layer of these technologies looks like and the extent to which they are (or not) interoperable. There's a future in which people use lots of different personal AIs for lots of different things, a future in which people use one personal AI for pretty much everything, and a future in which there's a primary AI that mediates interactions with a whole bunch of specialised secondary and tertiary systems. I imagine that regulation should remain possible providing states can properly engage at both the horizontal level (i.e. through broad AI-focused regulation) and the vertical level (i.e. in the context of specific sectors like health).
Increase or solve might be a bit of an unfair binary, but I assume that's unintentional. There's reason I had trouble picking between the two, because I feel there's a positive vision imaginable, where AI assistants helps us connect or bond with others (by teaching us communications skills for example, or allowing us to prepare for certain social situations in a safe space before having to approach real people in the real world).
There are other stories as well about people that benefitted from talking a non-judgemental, empathetic AI assistant and doing so helped them reconnect with friends or loved ones. I can see how in times of loneliness, AI assistants can fill that void. Being alone will certainly feel less lonely when you have always someone to talk to, even it that someone just exists in your phone.
Thanks for your comment Linda, perhaps you can cover this topic better, I invite you to write about it on your Newsletter.
This is precisely why I don't write op-eds. People think snarky comments are like knitting, soothing to them I hope. Devastating for my mental health though.
I wish you actually addressed the topic at hand, I feel as if technological loneliness is a serious concern for both Seniors and GenZ.
I do not at present have the time to answer every comment thoughtfully, or coherently. I am looking after family members with health issues. I am alone in a foreign country and do not speak the language. It took me the entire weekend to try to write this op-ed.
What you imply is certainly nothing to do with my concerns over this grave trend in society globally. It's a ridiculous thing to ask (the brain study for me is just an afterthought, I agree many studies can be flawed). I actually think your nitpicking is a form of evasion of your actual emotional response to this topic.
I am sorry that you are going through hard times and difficult circumstances. I had no intention of being snide or of attacking you. The brain study jumped out at me as it spoke directly to my own circumstances and temperament. I am an older person, an introvert and neurodiverse. And yes, I knit. I don’t need to make snide comments to sooth me though.
I’m fact I agree with many of your concerns.
I’m still navigating the etiquette of Substack comments. I’m old. I come from the world of Web2.0. I will just apologise and absent myself from your comments. I hope for better things for you.