A typical phenomenon once Winston Churchill very well expressed, “We shape our tools and then the tools shape us.” It is no different for AI or any other major tech disruptions we had seen in the past. Regulators and NGOs indeed cooperate and take a delicate balancing act while considering social impact and progress.
Regarding the GenAI hype, maybe i diverge a little from you. GPT or GenAI is still its infancy stage (aka early adoption). Even today, sheer amount of genuine use cases is very promising and potent. The WOW factor for an average user is sound from what I have seen so far. The habit building will be formed by integrating genAI services/tools to our day-to-day routines in a contextually relevant way. As you emphasize, relying solely on AI is a "dead end", damaging our creativity, purpose and progress. However, if we reframe the AI story to "human augmentation" then we can still sitting in the driver's seat. Very sensitive topic, I really enjoyed your thoughts. Thanks!
A typical phenomenon once Winston Churchill very well expressed, “We shape our tools and then the tools shape us.” It is no different for AI or any other major tech disruptions we had seen in the past. Regulators and NGOs indeed cooperate and take a delicate balancing act while considering social impact and progress.
Regarding the GenAI hype, maybe i diverge a little from you. GPT or GenAI is still its infancy stage (aka early adoption). Even today, sheer amount of genuine use cases is very promising and potent. The WOW factor for an average user is sound from what I have seen so far. The habit building will be formed by integrating genAI services/tools to our day-to-day routines in a contextually relevant way. As you emphasize, relying solely on AI is a "dead end", damaging our creativity, purpose and progress. However, if we reframe the AI story to "human augmentation" then we can still sitting in the driver's seat. Very sensitive topic, I really enjoyed your thoughts. Thanks!