Why I back human over artificial intelligence

This July, an open letter signed by more than 1,300 experts declared AI a “force for good, not a threat to humanity”. It followed an earlier letter in which tech leaders including Elon Musk suggested AI posed an “existential risk”. So, which is it: a force for good or an existential risk?

I’m no technophobe, but I’m no digital native either, and I prefer to think for myself than rely on someone – or something – else to do it for me. As well as worrying it will make people mentally lazy, I’d like people to keep their jobs. A technology-driven (but not yet dependent) workforce is not akin to the coalmining industry, which awful though its demise was for those whose livelihoods depended upon it became obsolescent for good reason.

The experts we spoke to for the opening feature in our first BE Informed collection of thought leadership pieces, on ‘Everything you need to know about AI, tech and data’, are more equivocal. They tend to see the good as well as the bad in AI, and fair enough. They are the ones using it, after all.

But whether it’s because I lean towards a more Terminator-style vision of the future than a WALL-E one, I still favour HI (human intelligence) over AI, for all the former’s perceived limitations and latter’s seemingly limitless possibilities. In my chat with ChatGPT, while I was simultaneously impressed and unnerved at how plausible (if formulaic) its responses were, I was disturbed by disclaimers that ‘”the systems may occasionally generate incorrect or misleading information and produce offensive or biased content”.

My concerns are not assuaged when a contact tells me she’d heard of an instance where an AI chatbot had fabricated a court case in the absence of a relevant real one. That’s quite a notch up from using AI to cheat at essay writing (how do teachers know what’s HI and what’s AI, by the way?)

Neither am I reassured when I ask ChatGPT if it has ever been asked a question it couldn’t answer and it responds: “There may be times when I encounter questions that are beyond my knowledge or fall outside the scope of my training data… It’s important to note that while I strive to provide accurate and up-to-date information, my responses may not always reflect the most current news or developments, as my training data goes up until September 2021. Therefore, for the latest information, it’s always a good idea to consulted trusted sources or seek expert advice.”

Aside from the fact that a lot has happened since September 2021, not least war in Ukraine, a cost-of-living crisis and this summer’s wildfires, ChatGPT says in a disclaimer “it is not intended to give advice”, yet in the above response it implies that is exactly what it is used for. It’s a similar scenario with Google’s AI equivalent, Bard, which advises people to sense check responses… with Google.

Of course it does. Anyway, I was advised (by a human) that I’d elicit better answers from ChatGPT if I had a proper conversation with it, but truthfully? I’d rather cosy up to Terminator. You?

Essential summer reading

You will find these two AI features – as well as an array of thought leadership articles from experts in the fields of AI, tech and data – in our first ever BE Informed digital page turner. If you missed the chance to contribute to this one, don’t worry. We’re already working on the next one, a ‘back to school’ edit on ‘The future of the workplace’, which comes out in September. To find out more, please contact me (liz@benews.co.uk), our head of operations Sian Wilde (sian@benews.co.uk) or our head of sales Nick Stroffolino (nick@benews.co.uk).

In the meantime, enjoy our essential BE Informed summer edit!