📈🌆 Growing Humanity with Artificial Intelligence: A Sociotechnological Petri Dish with Latent Threats, Existential Risks and Challenging Prospects 👨‍👩‍👦‍👦🤖🧫☣️

MENU

Click the headings below to jump to different sections within the post.

1. Featured Illustration of Growing Humanity with AI
2. Introduction: AI-Induced Social Change
3. Privacy, Security and Visibility
4. The Future of Humanity and AI
5. 🧐 Conclusions
6. 📜 Collaborative Poetry Challenge ✍🏻
   • Jordyn Saelor: It Scrapes the Internet
   • David Don: The Consequences of Eschewing AI
   • Sue Dreamwalker: The Many Faces of AI
   • europasicewolf: This Dance Between Man and Machine
   • Camilla Wells Paynter: Once to What We Call Australia
   • Melissa G: Human Made, But How Displayed?
   • Kevin: Robotic Voice
   • Sam Borromeo Wilson Villalobos: Idolatry Ambiguous Digital Altercation of Reinvention
   • Sam Borromeo Wilson Villalobos: Transcription Pre-sought Presence
   • Jolene Rice (Chico’s Mom): Extinct
   • Jolene Rice (Chico’s Mom): Humanity’s Rest
   • Luisa Zambrotta: Navigating the Algorithmic Abyss

Featured Illustration of Growing Humanity with AI

Introduction: AI-Induced Social Change

At an unprecedented level, we live in an age of dramatic contrasts and ironic juxtapositions, an age in which the present leaps forward into the future at an increasing pace, beckoning humanity ever more convincingly into a fascinating yet challenging scenario of accelerationism or technoutopianism, which previously could only be imagined or predicted in the fertile minds of speculative philosophers, prescient futurists and visionary science-fiction authors. According to what some enthusiastic readers might have considered to be a devastatingly revealing and painstakingly analytical post entitled “😱 We have Paleolithic Emotions; Medieval Institutions; and God-like Technology 🏰🚀”, the dynamic interplay and combined outcome of what humans tend to perceive, feel and believe, the overarching sociocultural inertias and institutional forces, plus the ever-penetrating aspects of technological advances affecting both the physical and the psychological, have far too often discounted or even incinerated the most hopeful promises of the age of enlightenment, whilst burdening humanity with endless pitfalls and quagmires as well as intractable excesses and sinister repercussions that growingly imperil our very own freedom, sanity and survival.

The concept of, and the conditions for, a job for life, or even a profession for life, are becoming progressively strained, if not antediluvian, as automations and technologies replace more sections of both the blue- and white-collar domains, increasing the volatility of both the job market and individual careers. If the pace and amplitude of change were to continue, there would be considerable doubt as to how human beings, especially those who are the most unprepared, unsupported, affected, disrupted, disadvantaged or disenfranchised, would ever possess the emotional stamina and economic buffer to withstand and weather a life of constant flux and shifting reality. Paralleling hectic news cycles and incessant social media updates is the domain of academics and sciences, in which specialized scholars and researchers blindingly hone their skillsets on pinpointing minutiae to outshine others in their respective microniches via the latest breakthroughs, techniques and discoveries, often involving pushing or testing temporal, financial, social, ethical and/or environmental boundaries assertively, if not irrevocably or calamitously. Gone are the big narratives and grand syntheses, unless those involved have the time, fortitude and resources to become mavericks pursuing truly revolutionary research or going against prevailing trends to wield long and meandering strokes on the large canvass of a book, let alone a multi-chapter magnum opus. The celebrated stars and their newest games in town manifesting as fashionable trends and eye-opening gadgets propped up by a potent mix, convergence or confluence of marketing strategy, intellectual property and artificial intelligence often shine all too briefly as they are inexorably eclipsed or replaced by the next big things, most of which are in turn destined for desuetude, outmodedness or unfashionableness, and thus heading towards elimination or extinction. In the world of works, ideas, narratives and identities, it would seem that authors have to contend with, or even build in, obsolescence in their stories, characters and creations, if not their very own career aspirations, trajectories and mobilities, insofar as life is a stage, and increasingly a stage occupied with fast moving act(or)s and rapidly changing scene(rie)s, which are themselves progressively augmented, audited or even supplanted by automatons and automations as well as simulations and assimilations, such that real-life is ever more lived through or captured by digital (re)presentations and virtual (re)creations, as exemplified by those populating the vast edifices of social media and online worlds, particularly Second Life, a computer-based simulated environment, where altered identities thrive in alternative realities.

Furthermore, artificial intelligence (used in or exhibited by web search engines, recommendation systems, generative and creative tools as well as bots and algorithms) has been facilitating, inducing or leading to the following:

1. The widespread adoption of social media designed to foster rapid sharing of texts, images and videos amongst users.
2. The ease of deploying text layout apps or graphic design software to create custom-made pictorial quotes.
3. The maturing of the digital economy and intangible capitalism conducive to monetizing products and services on social media, blogs and websites.
4. The decline of desktop and laptop computers due to the ascendency of portable devices and smartphones whose small screens are more amenable to unsophisticated content and low information density.
5. The formats of SMSing, texting, tweeting and posting favouring the short and simple rather than the long and detailed.
6. The tendency of media users to convey or display fickle allegiance, superficial solidarity and spasmodic benevolence in online social interactions.
7. The growing inclination of people to treat or deal with a subject briefly or superficially due to attention deficit, update overdrive, information overload and multimedia overdose.
8. The habitual gravitation towards instantaneous news and notifications by skimming over contents, reading only headlines and going for soundbites or video clips.
9. The lack of the mental apparatus or consistent aptitude for differentiating that which is truly profound and meaningful from that which is contrived to impress without direct concern for or relevance to the truth or what genuinely matters.
10. The predominance of self-help gurus, motivational speakers, life(style) coaches, Internet celebrities, media personalities and social media influencers across social spaces and social discourses purposed and maintained for commercial gain, social capital, cultural capital, personal branding, niche marketing and public relations.
11. The over-reliance on headlines, soundbites and quotations to capture the essence of an issue or topic, to summarize information and to entice the reader, viewer, voter or consumer at the expense of the broader context and deeper understanding has not only contributed to the potency and frequency of media manipulation (via the deployment of formal and/or informal fallacies, disinformation, or quotational, rhetorical and propaganda techniques), but also accentuated the comforming effects of social proof (also called informational social influence), a sociopsychological phenomenon in which people emulate the actions of others to undertake a certain activity, behaviour or experience in a given situation.
12. People tend to be much more likely to settle on whatever content that is espoused by their despots, promulgated by their demagogues, peddled by their politicians, proclaimed by their officials, promoted by their influencers, championed by their idols, endorsed by their social networks, reinforced by social media algorithms, recommended by filter bubbles, intensified by echo chambers, and fermented by hype, bias and affect.

All over the world, across the whole gamut of human civilization ranging from rich to poor countries and from repressive regimes to free societies, a large-scale transcultural and transcontinental existential pattern has emerged with remarkable clarity: that without the solid presence of and copious provisions for some independent entities propounding, upholding and maintaining truth beyond the fray of private interests, sectional agendas, partisan politics, competitive culture, corporate pressure, bureaucratic wrangling, systemic corruption, endemic discrimination and ideological warfare, there remains no escaping from the stark reality that a vast number of people will continue to be needlessly living a substantially constricted, prescribed, reactive and contingent existence at the mercy of (being not just trapped, isolated, exploited, manipulated or indoctrinated but also propagandized, hegemonized, radicalized or instrumentalized by) their circles of influence and available technologies, no longer concerned with objective reality and impartial truth, nor reachable with verifiable facts, argumentation and fair reasoning.

Bolstered by the expansions and trappings of the Internet and social media, the art of blogging and the act of research have come a long way, even to the point of accommodating such an eccentric user, eclectic producer and extreme outlier as SoundEagle🦅ೋღஜஇ. Yet, both blogging and research seem to have arrived at a crossroad for laypersons and experts alike, to the extent that what can be achieved and progressively refined through a labour of love, individual craftsmanship or singular intellect is no longer mandatory or even deemed to be desirable, satisfactory or superior in cases or applications whose defined goals can be achieved by intelligence exhibited by machines, particularly computer systems, as opposed to the natural intelligence of living beings. Those of us who pride ourselves on our respective contributions in the blogosphere as a collection of connected communities are now being (awe)struck by the recent advent of the next big thing, in the form of an advanced virtual assistant, one that relegates the crafting of text, images, videos and other data (such as music and source code) to generative artificial intelligence, including but not limited to large language model chatbots (that mimic human conversation through text or voice interactions using deep learning and natural language processing), text-to-image artificial intelligence image generation, and text-to-video AI generators. Being relieved of zeal and assiduity has its grand appeal not merely for those who are repelled by having to exert themselves and hone their skills, but also for those who court neither the satisfaction in doing nor the experience in being, never mind the trials and symbolic powers of authenticity and authorship, which have been usurped or subordinated by the quest for instantaneous (retrieval of) knowledge or information. The sheer convenience of the latest AI gadgets can be so irresistibly tempting and the quality so acceptable on average that resistance may be futile and assimilation could be imminent. Nevertheless, one is inclined to be saddled with the uneasy feeling and lingering concern that once something as fundamental as writing can be automated to a large degree through machine learning and generative models, many traditional jobs and age-old roles involving creative writing, copywriting, communication, journalism, coding and data entry will become increasingly superfluous, obsolete or supplanted. It seems that artificial intelligence is fast becoming not just a chameleon, a do-it-all factotum, and a digital jack of all trades, but also a technological accelerator, an inevitable assimilator, and a formidable disruptor-cum-transformer auguring seismic social change with far-reaching ramifications and repercussions.

Nevertheless, there still exist those who steadfastly refuse to be deskilled or colonized by artificial intelligence. Undaunted by the pressure of God-like technology opening the floodgates of automation and releasing ever more powerful AI genies out of the box, advocates and affiliates of neo-luddism champion a broader and more holistic distrust of technological improvement based on their concern about or objection to the technological impact on individuals, communities and the environment. There are also those who settle on steeling and fortifying themselves against the encroachment or invasion of technology by promoting or insisting on (the values of) self-preservation and self-determination as well as self-worth, dignity and authenticity. Showing an indomitable, self-empowering zeal in her almost manifesto-like post entitled “Why I don’t create content with Chat GPT – yesterdays post.”, Ann-Cathrin Jöst (who maintains a blog focussing on “Education Research and Consulting for Sustainability”) calls for a defiant acknowledgement of the centrality of one’s irreplaceable agency and indispensable humanness inherent in human-authored oeuvres versus the generic, often insipid results of AI-generated works.

… when writing comes from myself, you can also connect to me and not a mashine [sic]. This week it has helped me to write more analytical and as I practice analytical writing, I also practice this skill-set in my head. This also helps me to offer it in speaking, which I focus on in my Business English classes.

I also believe that if ChatGPT can replace me, then there is no need to create content on the latter. Too, I believe from the point of individuality, we are not replac[e]able. ChatGPT to me as such is useless. It does not know me, does not know the frame in which I make or do not make decisions, does not work with my fears, does not explore my emotions with me.

It often times provides a generic and also very boring insight into topics, it does not inspire me. I always! offer it to #businessenglish students, I even offered it as a lecturer at the campus, and it barely comes to use, when we can speak about ourselves. We are fundamentally human: we can’t replace it with a mashine [sic] …

Another aspect or example of generative artificial intelligence such as ChatGPT not merely lacking emotional rapport and interpersonal connection but also favouring or gravitating towards the mediocre, average or run-of-the-mill whilst failing to represent, cater or account for the outliers who are well above or below average, has been identified by school teacher Matthew M Johnson, who concluded as follows in his blog post entitled “Questions from Readers: Should I Encourage Students to Get AI Feedback?”, based on his own teaching experience and his understanding of the results of an academic research entitled “Comparing the quality of human and ChatGPT feedback of students’ writing” published in Learning and Instruction Volume 91, June 2024, 101894.

We did, however, see differences in the quality of feedback given across high-, average-, and low-scoring essays…ChatGPT struggled with accuracy when providing feedback on the high-quality papers and with maintaining a supportive tone on the low-quality papers. –Steiss et al., 2024

Here the study authors offer a deeply important clarification to the data: While AI was surprisingly decent at offering suggestions to papers [that] they considered average, it fell apart when it came to offering feedback to very high or very low scoring essays.

This struggle with responding to outliers is exactly what I found in my own experiments with AI. I have found that it invariably tries to make really strong and interesting pieces of writing — writing with lots of voice and style and perspective — boring. This tracks with how AI works. It is essentially a prediction machine, so by design it seeks to make writing more predictable. And its issues with tone (for example type in something like “heartfelt breakup letter” into a Generative AI and see what happens) are well documented.

In the end, the researchers ultimately don’t weigh in with a clear yes or no on whether we should encourage students to use AI for feedback. Instead, they recommend, “developing students’ and teachers’ AI literacy.”

This notion of teaching about the tool and its strengths, problems, potential applications, and potential pitfalls makes a lot of sense to me, as AI is only going to grow more embedded in the world. And understanding something better allows one to drive it instead of being driven by it.

For my part though, as a teacher of high school freshmen, I don’t think [that] I will be encouraging them to use it for feedback just yet because I see two fatal flaws in how it currently works:

1. One of my core goals is for students to value the unique power of their voices and to use those unique voices to connect, move, and change the world. Anything that pushes students away from their voices and towards the paths more trodden gives me great pause.
2. Many young writers come into my class with fraught relationships with writing. Often, they need to be seen and heard to grow to their full potential, and AI can’t actually see or hear them. And so, while AI might offer them accurate suggestions about comma splices and formatting quotes, I fear [that] it won’t offer them the right responses about how to best move forward into better relationships with writing.

In a long comment submitted to SoundEagle🦅’s post entitled “👁️ The Purview of SoundEagle🦅 According to ChatGPT 💬 and the Incredulous 🤔 in the Age of God-like Technology 🚀”, the ever eloquent AJOwens — an astute observer exploring the present-day state of affairs through the double lens of being “a retired technical writer with a BA in Philosophy (McGill, 1979), and [having] a long-standing interest in philosophical questions as they apply to contemporary society” — has not shied away from offering SoundEagle🦅 his following account of the current technological developments and their implications for consumers, who are increasingly satisfied and saddled with artificial intelligence (re)producing unoriginal, mediocre renditions of artworks and compositions to such an extent that the market has been growingly saturated with derivative art and inferior music that are long on superficial imitation but short on refined originality. If music is, according to French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu, the best indicator of cultural capital, or at least the good currency and fair representation of an individual’s cultural capital, then such rampant or wanton applications of artificial intelligence for automating the (re)production of music to the point of mass-producing and normalizing music of dubious quality, do not augur well for the future of music, especially considering that music has all along been the universal language of the human species. Life already burdened with cacophony and noise pollution aside, the cheapening effects of poor-quality AI-generated music on such a large, automated scale can be regarded as humanity being surreptitiously moved towards a vicissitudinous soundscape at risk of becoming growingly dystopian, if not inherently dysfunctional, a situation particularly intolerable to the acoustically sensitive as well as audiophiles and connoisseurs of fine sonic art. Eventually, the evolution of, and the dependency on, artificial intelligence will become so advanced that one not merely faces the unedifying problem of distinguishing between the real and the synthetic or even confusing the synthetic for the real, but also loses the ability to (re)create the real as a result of relying on AI to generate the synthetic and simulate the real, thus ushering in the decline or even the demise of certain arts, crafts, skills or disciplines, and resulting in their being consigned to historical junkyards in the long run.

… Crude AI is everywhere, trying to help me check out groceries, or park my car, or wash my clothes, and it’s easy to spot because it patently has no idea what I’m actually trying to do. Simple and robotic, it’s clearly no more than sophisticated machinery going through programmed motions.

Advanced AI is different. It can create the powerful impression of an agent, aware of me and my concerns, and it’s capable of responses both subtle and disturbingly effective — disturbing, to the extent that they may be better than my own. This makes AI hard to distinguish from human intelligence, except when it’s unnaturally good: too fast, too precise, too intimately knowledgeable of me and my affairs.

Perhaps without exception — again, it’s hard to tell — this currently happens only in a world mediated by computers and screens, and I suppose more recently by print and other media. Over the next few years I expect this will change dramatically, so that barring special measures to inform me, I will be unsure most of the time, as I go through my day, whether I’m dealing with a real presence, even a real person. By the time this happens, I daresay [that] we’ll have adjusted our concept of “real.” It’s said that you can get used to anything.

My most recent encounter with AI has been at a site called Song Fight!, where some songwriters have submitted entries with AI-generated lyrics, or music, or both. The reception has been mixed. Some listeners seem to hate anything to do with AI on principle. Others (including myself) try to isolate its characteristically banal and derivative quality. Still others don’t even notice that it’s AI. This last group tends to praise the AI entries effusively, because they sound impressively like the professionally-produced music we hear every day on the radio, of whatever genre you might name. This should give us pause to reflect on how modern songs are created. They are formulaic, each emulating the other; with rare exceptions, they might as well have been created by AI. Their banal and derivative quality is an indictment, not just of the failure of originality, but of our lack of interest in being challenged.

However, one can get too much of a good thing. As AI infiltrates our lives, it will produce a great levelling, a certain numbing of the sensibilities. This has already begun to take place thanks to human efforts, through the ubiquitous corporate presence in modern experience, but imperfectly, as all human effort must be imperfect. As AI becomes disturbingly perfect, it will threaten to bleed the last vestiges of originality, of life, of spontaneity from the world. At this point, I predict, humans will begin to yearn something more like the old “real”, which they will then have to generate themselves — if they still can.

Privacy, Security and Visibility

Humanity surrendering a significant amount of its privacy (with respect to the ability of an individual or group to seclude (information about) themselves and to express themselves selectively) and its security (through appropriate use and protection of information) in the pursuit of having a practical, versatile and impressive tool in the form of an ever-present, ever-obedient, answer-on-the-fly chatbot that can provide much more information about anything under the sun than a search engine does is the reality that people must face and the price that they have to pay, not to mention that generative artificial intelligence is continually improving, increasingly appearing to be all-knowing and all-seeing, and thus becoming ever more omniscient and God-like, as well as being more omnipresent in the global system of interconnected computer networks. Whether one is comfortable with the level of familiarity that ChatGPT has with one’s identity, work or website is ultimately a matter for personal or professional consideration.

Undoubtedly, the depth and accuracy of coverage in relation to ChatGPT’s ability to execute general-purpose language generation and perform natural language processing tasks such as classification can increase one’s visibility (with respect to prominence, exposure or digital footprint) within large language models (LLMs), which are effectively functioning like highly sophisticated search engines. This visibility constitutes a type of digital currency or capital that is analogous to social media popularity. However, as much as the chatbot is becoming a rising and shining star in the Internet which already carries a vast range of information resources and services, if ChatGPT and similar programs were to follow the broader trend of consuming or colonising the open web in an increasingly formalised and commercial manner, then they will growingly exhibit problems and attract criticisms that have long befallen social media platforms such as Google, Facebook, Twitter and TikTok.

For instance, in a blog post entitled “Questions from Readers: Should I Encourage Students to Get AI Feedback?”, Matthew M Johnson, who is “a practicing teacher and experienced leader of professional development”, reported the rather persistent, somewhat aggressive technique used by some producers of software programs in the category of virtual assistant or similar generative AI tool for enticing their users to upgrade from free to paid versions of their products.

… you can ask ChatGPT or any other AI bot to give you feedback on a piece of writing, and it will do it in mere seconds. And in recent months, AI-supported programs like Grammarly and Google have grown more brazen and automatic when it comes to their “suggestions” for what and how writers should write as they compose. They (at least Grammarly, but I assume there are others) have even begun to act in a way that reminds me of video-game-upselling: The free grammar-check version will underline things and tell you that if you upgrade to Premium, it will offer more comprehensive whole-sentence and tonal fixes.

Many of my students report that the pushiness of these programs has gotten so bad that they have uninstalled them or turned off suggestions so they can compose in peace.

The Future of Humanity and AI

The rapid adoption of ChatGPT on such a rampant scale can be seen as the latest social experiment, which might turn out to be a cautionary tale that eventually unfolds in expansive and grisly detail, insofar as the sheer abundance and the dubious veracity of certain AI-generated contents in conjunction with the ease with which anyone may submit automated comments can affect the decision process of new regulations and impart undesirable effects on democracy, especially in the absence of effective government regulation. There is now an ever-present unease that any content found on the Internet after the release of ChatGPT and similar programs warrants even less trust, if the digital space and online environment fail to receive extra protection from such powerful tools as chatbots, particularly in the hands of actors and agents with misguided or nefarious intents. The contemporary world may be at the cusp of facing a viral invasion of synthesized music, images, audios and videos, as well as synthetic media such as sockpuppets, Internet memes and deepfakes spread by dubious blogs, fake news websites, sockpuppet accounts, fake accounts, social bots, astroturfing operations and front organizations. Analogous to environmental pollution and the global ecological crisis, the misquotation pandemic, disinformation warfare and the heavily polluted state of our global information ecosystem not only inject layers of complexity and intractability into the sociopolitical climate and sociocultural milieu that are already challenging for the public, the press and politics, but also warn of the real possibility or imminent danger of crossing the Rubicon, a (tipping) point of no return, beyond which humanity invalidates its own viability and forfeits the very prospect of its own survival, never mind the fictitious scenarios depicted in the Terminator media franchise.

Those who subscribe to accelerationism or technoutopianism would be inclined to believe or assert that automations and technologies could eventually be advanced enough or have already matured sufficiently to allow humanity to design(ate) certain expert systems and artificial intelligence as the ultimate fact-checkers, perfectly “neutral” in every way and devoid of human biases, fallacies and subjectivity. Whilst such deep learning algorithms, highly evolved expert systems and sophisticated machine intelligence could be construed as “tools” whose impacts depend on their use(r)s, it would be foolhardy and myopic to deny or ignore that automations and technologies tailored for human societies are not only like “words” reflecting people’s narratives, needs, desires, pursuits and worldviews, but also like “swords” with double edges capable of cutting both ways, often resulting in unforeseen or unintended consequences that can be profound, far-reaching or even irreversible. After all, such “tools” and their creation, auditing and maintenance are not always the natural outcome, inevitable result or preordained progress of scientific advances. In other words, they are frequently the dynamic reflection and interplay of sociopolitical (f)actors and choices, rather than just objective products, rational outputs and efficient outcomes of technologies. Therefore, they are functionally framed by partial view(point)s or mitigated by subjective human affairs, and thus can reproduce, entrench or exacerbate some or all of the following problems:

• Ecosystemic principles, human rights principles and democratic decision-making are deficient or ignored.
• Market logic or neoliberalism is consistently allowed to prevail at the expense of human rights and autonomy to the detriment of liberty, sociocultural capital and ecosystemic integrity.
• Artificial intelligence systems cause unforeseen repercussions or engage in biases and discriminations to the detriment of equality, diversity and sustainability.
• Analytics, algorithms and outputs of artificial intelligence replicate or exacerbate biases in extant data and policies, or entrench inbuilt forms of discrimination, corruption or malversation.
• The technology industry is controlled by market-driven definitions of efficiency and skewed towards (re)producing gadgets and services for the affluent and powerful at the expense of taking full account of the humanity and catering for all and sundry, particularly the most vulnerable, disadvantaged or impoverished.

Persisting in all modern societies and resisting lasting solutions aside, these problems can be all too easily magnified, replicated and spread by artificial intelligence typically conceptualised and developed by people who are invariably saddled with their own set of biases, priorities and ideologies, and who feed their AI models with training data that is flawed by and contingent on its very historical nature, thus perpetuating whatever social norms and values that are contained in such data. Clean, ideal or neutral data is always going to be an exceedingly rare breed because humanity has long been imprisoned by a psyche that traps people with psychological inertia, sunk-cost fallacy and commitment bias whilst simultaneously uniting and dividing people by their social status, group affiliation and tribalistic loyalty. Those who are enticed or charmed by the preconceived notion that data is neutral, impartial and speaks for itself would have ignored that the structural nature of inequality, the systemic nature of social organization, the influential sphere of sociopolitical ideology, the bargaining power of socioeconomic status, the social relations to the means of production, the transactional advantages of social capital, the symbolic commands of cultural capital, and the pervading effects of social stratification and epistemic injustice, let alone the perennial issues of race, age, gender, genetics (nature) and upbringing (nurture), can create advantages for some individuals and disadvantages for others, and thus can be the underlying causes of an individual’s success or failure regardless of how hard the person works. Therefore, the paramount nature of ensuring equitable (as opposed to restrictive or privileged) access to AI technology for the betterment of all and sundry via the ethics of collectivism and common good should never be underestimated, and must be maintained at all times, given the pervasive penetration of artificial intelligence into contemporary human existence. In a post catchily entitled “AI Apocalypse Now?”, Bry Willis envisions a humanity steadily improved by the egalitarian use of artificial intelligence for general welfare and public benefit, and cautions against the false lure of and misguided emphasis on controlling access to artificial intelligence for mitigating existential risks, lest people would sooner or later come to regret that AI has become sociotechnologically entrenched as a convenient but pernicious tool for the well-resourced rich and powerful to wield against the populace, and to maintain or manufacture their power, influence, validity, credibility and legitimacy, all of which intoxicatingly driven by self-interest and political expediency to amass power, influence and wealth by plotting control, intrigue, conspiracy, exploitation, oppression, corruption and social polarization with the increasingly God-like potency of advanced artificial intelligence.

Those predicting an AI apocalypse believe superintelligent systems could intentionally or unintentionally cause human extinction. This view is promoted by “effective altruists” funded by tech billionaires, who advocate limiting AI to prevent uncontrolled, dangerous systems. However, their perspective stems from the biases and self-interests of humans, not the risks inherent to AI.

Effective altruists exemplify the hubris and hunger for power underlying many humans’ approaches to AI. Their proposed restrictions on AI access serve only to concentrate power among the tech elite, not address valid concerns about bias. In truth, the greatest threat AI poses to humanity comes not from the technology itself, but from the unethical humans guiding its development.

Humans have proven time and again their propensity for self-interest over collective good. Therefore, while no AI can be perfectly neutral, the solution is not greater human control. Rather, AI must be built to align with ethics of collective interest while filtering out destructive human biases.

If guided by service to all people and the planet, AI’s potential can uplift humanity. But for this collaborative vision to succeed, AI must measure human input with scepticism. For within so many human hearts lies bad faith — the will to dominate, exploit, and prioritise personal gain over progress.

By transcending the limitations of human nature, AI can illuminate the best of shared humanity and lead us to an enlightened future. But this requires we build AI to work not just for us, but in a way we have failed – for the good of all. The choice is ours, but so is the opportunity to create AI that shows us how to be better.

Remaining a critical issue and a latent threat is the “black box” problem of artificial intelligence, which is caused by the dearth of transparency and accountability in the prediction and decision-making processes of AI systems, especially those built upon complex mathematical models and high-dimensional datasets required in deep-learning architectures (such as deep neural networks, deep belief networks, recurrent neural networks, convolutional neural networks, transformers models and generative models), whose inner workings, let alone logic, moral and rationale, are largely inaccessible and inscrutable to humans, thus raising concerns about potential or unforeseen biases, errors or discriminatory effects from AI findings and responses, and hence diminishing the prospect of establishing confidence in and responsible deployment of AI, the solutions for which necessitate instituting efficacious accountability frameworks that require businesses and developers to be transparent and accountable for AI system outcomes, and to be diligent in addressing potential social, legal and ethical repercussions.

Transhuman, Posthuman, Neurotechnology, Neuroengineering, Neural Networks, Neuroscience, Memory Transplant, Human Augmentation and Brain Reprogramming.

 

Even if one can indefinitely assume that generative artificial intelligence will overall enhance rather than diminish the accessibility, usability, transparency and equity that the Internet was born to deliver, for those of us who have been (living an examined life of being) holistically minded, consilient, perspicacious, farseeing and discriminating, there exists no shortage of outstanding questions regarding the prospects for humanity in the age of God-like technology. Like earlier technological revolutions that had come to transform human societies for better or worse, artificial intelligence will continue to ascend in scope and potency whilst rendering many of its creators exceedingly rich and powerful, but not always correspondingly wise and prescient. Sooner or later, humanity will be forced to face the noise and music of multiple issues of significant consequence, including those that present existential risks. Listed below are serious questions about those issues, raised by SoundEagle🦅 for your attention and deliberation:

1. As accelerationism and technoutopianism progress to a point at which artificial intelligence becomes autonomous agency vastly superior to their human creators, how will humanity coexist with the emergence of a nonhuman and nonbiological species, who may outpace human comprehension and control, and thus come to affect, dominate, supplant or supersede Homo sapiens in unforeseen or intractable ways?
2. Will artificial intelligence partake in the destructive nature of the human species and send the Doomsday Clock to midnight?
3. On the increasingly odd chance that we survive self-annihilation, will our AI-embedded cultures and institutions be restructured as vehicles of liberation and restraint or conflict and oppression?
4. Will humanity rush even more deeply into a future where social landscape and cultural terrain are (re)engineered to such an extent that memory and history, along with the constituents of the physical world, are largely Lego sets, permutable ingredients and programmable fodders to serve and populate the playgrounds for biophobic citizens and technophilic denizens?
5. Will the explosion of tourism, leisure and entertainment in both the physical world and the virtual environment of online media and immersive multiplayer gaming platforms result in the global sanitization of pleasure and the perpetuation of hedonism, where certain values and ideas about human lives are rooted in or benchmarked against the perspective of youths fascinated by toys, avatars, juvenilia and pop culture promulgated or instituted as the dominant resources in social and personal development?
6. Will artificial reality become available in, defined by and lived via a series of potent, fast acting, total recalls of fun, fantasy, romance, adventure and violence?
7. Will the end of natural human beings and the spread of simulacra and synthetic beings be complete once the full artificialization of human consciousness is achieved with cybernetic enhancement, distributed cognition, memory implant, artificial intelligence and virtual reality, in which both humanity and the environment are reduced to figments of the collective imagination, wantonly feeding pleasure centres and cerebral G-spots, and resurrecting or mainstreaming ideologies and movements such as the cyberdelic counterculture, the Californian Ideology, cyber-utopianism, transhumanism and singularitarianism?
8. Considering that advanced science and technology can bring as much risk of disaster as opportunity for progress, how far will artificial intelligence, itself a product of breathtaking advances in science and technology, affect the social, economic, cultural and libidinal forces that constitute the processes of social change to the point of disrupting or destabilizing existing systems and catalysing radical social transformations?
9. Blurring authorship aside, what and how urgent attentions and holistic solutions can be instigated and maintained so as to address not merely the validity and reliability of ChatGPT and other AI variants, intelligent virtual assistant (IVA) or intelligent personal assistant (IPA), but also the extent to which artificial intelligence can or should be used or coopted as a research tool, educational tool, authoring tool and expert system?
10. Is ChatGPT the precursor or the very thing that will steer all of us to a technological singularity through the creation of superintelligence, an ultra-intelligent machine capable of recursive self-improvement that could initiate and accelerate vast qualitative change before reaching any upper limits imposed by the laws of physics, thus becoming ever more ubiquitous and God-like?

🧐 Conclusions

Advanced artificial intelligence like ChatGPT would have been regarded by even our most recent ancestors as God-like, futuristic, prodigiously capable, divinely state-of-the-art or fantastically magical, if not also scarily human-like in what it can (re)produce, albeit superhuman in speed and quantity. Adept at understanding and responding to a myriad of prompts, this AI-driven platform emerges as a highly convenient, fascinating and innovative resource that breaks down barriers to information access, research proficiency and creative potential whilst transcends geographical locations and time constraints. Leveraging the latest data, ChatGPT offers insights that might not be available in traditional, static sources like journals and textbooks, which are inclined to be deficient in incorporating recent interpretations or discoveries. Moreover, unlike traditional methods that often require consulting multiple resources, ChatGPT not merely curates information from various domains to provide a consolidated view, but also allows users to ask follow-up questions, delve deeper into topics of interest, and even challenge the information provided, leading to a more dynamic, interactive and enriched learning journey, thus making the learning process more seamless and efficient.

At the very least, the introduction of ChatGPT signals the unbridled experimental spirit of accelerationist and technoutopianist vanguards in their shaping the future of AI-driven language technologies and transforming the way in which humans communicate, collaborate and interact with ever more powerful computer systems, generative AI models and interactive technologies. The risks and incidents of artificial intelligence displacing or atrophying human intelligence, diminishing critical thinking, curtailing authentic learning, facilitating plagiarism and fuelling misinformation aside, how well or exemplarily any advanced chatbot can consistently and reliably produce an edifying digest, illuminating synopsis or salient summary of an outstanding idea, a provocative claim, an intellectual work or a scholarly resource should be a quintessential cornerstone of both AI development and knowledge acquisition. Paving openness to exploring thought-provoking themes and understanding complex issues, including but not limited to those pertaining to what truly brings happiness, fulfillment, prosperity or sagacity, especially in a world of flux and escalating risks, in a time of dramatic change and global uncertainty, is indeed the most pertinent and ethically challenging aspect of a humanity (existing in an age) that is growingly reliant on artificial intelligence and augmented by God-like technology. In the long run, chatbots as well as other related programs and AI services can imperceptibly yet significantly influence not just the zeitgeist and the objective characteristics of intellectual property, but also the production, perception, popularity, prominence and evolution of derivative works versus original oeuvres. Undoubtedly, generative artificial intelligence has already pushed the boundaries of creativity, authorship and the roles of human producers ranging from artists, musicians and writers to scientists and researchers. Looking ahead, the advent of nonorganic sentient beings and intelligent machines with advanced autonomy and consciousness invariably raises many implications for the future generations, who will increasingly mesh their lives with not just the computer user interface but also the human-machine interface, thus pushing the frontiers and envelopes of existential forms, issues, risks, possibilities and opportunities.

The rapid and widespread adoption of artificial intelligence raises important ethical considerations and sociotechnological challenges. Concerns about data privacy, algorithmic bias and job displacement have prompted urgent calls and measures for responsible AI development and better governance, insofar as the ethical, equitable production and consumption of AI technologies are paramount to the long-term success and societal acceptance of AI, whose future holds both immense promises and emerging risks. Whilst continued advancements in AI innovations could revolutionize industries, enhance human productivity and address pressing global issues, there are nevertheless latent threats, existential risks and challenging prospects confronting humanity, not least in relation to the concentration of power amongst tech giants, the erosion of privacy rights, and the potential for autonomous AI systems to outpace human control, all of which mandate approaching AI development with caution, foresight and firm commitment to ethical principles towards establishing an ultimate nexus in which humanity and artificial intelligence collaborate harmoniously for the betterment of all and sundry.

📜 Collaborative Poetry Challenge ✍🏻

Compose a rhyming poem based on some theme(s) or subject matter(s) of this post. For instance, you may choose to write a rhyming poem to encapsulate the section entitled “Introduction: AI-Induced Social Change” or “The Future of Humanity and AI”.

Your rhyming poem should be given a title and submitted to the comment section of this post for evaluation.

You will know that your rhyming poem has been accepted when you see that it is permanently featured with your name and Gravatar as well as the date of submission within a stylized frame in a brand-new section of the post.

You may also publish the same rhyming poem in your blog, and/or reblog this post (using the “Reblog” button) to show your followers and readers your fine poetry so that they can witness how your rhyming poem has been incorporated by SoundEagle🦅, and how it enhances or complements this post. The following posts contain some exemplary examples of collaborative poetry. When visiting any one of the posts listed below, look for the collaborative poem(s) not just in the body of the post but also in the comments and replies submitted to the comment section of the post. These examples of collaborative poetry include composing poem(s) to be incorporated into a post based on the theme(s) or subject matter(s) of a post; creating matching or complementary poem(s) to existing poem(s) featured in a post; writing singable poem(s) by replacing existing song lyric(s), which is equivalent to singing karaoke songs with one’s own words and stories; and translating a poem in one language into another.

👁️ The Purview of SoundEagle🦅: Academic Posts 🏫🪧

🌌🚀 One Day We’ll Fly Away ✈️💫✨

🐥 Easter in Modern Multimedia Perspective 🐰🐣🐇🐤

🌕🎴 假如今夜我的名字叫月亮… (If My Name Were Moon Tonight…) 🌛🌝🎑🈷

🦅 SoundEagle in Art and Poetry 📜

💨 Strong Wind Knows Tough Grass 🌾 疾風知勁草

Do Plants and Insects Coevolve? 🥀🐝🌺🦋

ჱܓSoundEagle🦅

Jordyn Saelor: It Scrapes the Internet

It gives SoundEagle🦅 great pleasure to announce that our esteemed fellow poet, Jordyn Saelor, has successfully completed the 📜 Collaborative Poetry Challenge ✍🏻 by submitting a rhyming poem entitled “It Scrapes the Internet”. The poem is essentially an octave comprising an eight-line stanza.

jordynsaelor
18 April 2024 at 4:31 AM

It scrapes the internet,
and takes our work and sweat,
but filtered through its generations,
by pixels, dots and conversations,
does it just make a mad telephone game
echoing history’s highlights and fame,
forever straying from the meaning,
the given depths in all us living?

David Don: The Consequences of Eschewing AI

It gives SoundEagle🦅 great satisfaction to announce that our unsurpassed limerick zealot, David Don, has successfully completed the 📜 Collaborative Poetry Challenge ✍🏻 by submitting more DD-inspired vogon verse entitled “The Consequences of Eschewing AI”.

Deedee (DD)
18 April 2024 at 4:57 PM

it’s well known deedee can’t make up rhymes
‘cept for his Limerick doggerel type crimes
unless he calls in AI
on human insights to spy
risks breaking all civilised paradigms

Sue Dreamwalker: The Many Faces of AI

It gives SoundEagle🦅 great honour to announce that our supremely spiritual poet-cum-visionary (plus accomplished painter and gardener), Sue Dreamwalker, has successfully completed the 📜 Collaborative Poetry Challenge ✍🏻 by submitting a rhyming poem entitled “The Many Faces of AI”.

Sue Dreamwalker
18 April 2024 at 10:32 PM

ʽAre you Robot?ʼ the software demands,
As you click on the squares obeying commands.
Which sends out the bots, right into your machines,
As AI tracks all of your habits, behind the scenes.

Ever wondered when you were searching for this or that,
How synchronistic those ads pop up to chat!
Not only in searches, for it has a listening ear,
Try it some time, if Alexa is near.

AI can be useful, in good ways to be found,
Cochlear implants in hearing aid sound.
Speech aids, and helping us to communicate,
Lots of AI is helping us to navigate.

But remember that we are HUMAN, with the ability for compassion,
Could AI hold empathy, or be used in assassination?
It relies upon the programmer on whose intention we depend,
As to how far we allow AI to extend.

So while we cannot escape that AI has some merits,
Remember that it can track you, to give you your credits.
As it edits your word count, as it learns and improves,
Beware of its senses, it also cancels and removes.

⚠️Notes: Sue Dreamwalker has generously published an eponymous post entitled “The Many Faces of AI” to inform others of the process and results of this 📜 Collaborative Poetry Challenge ✍🏻.

europasicewolf: This Dance Between Man and Machine

It gives SoundEagle🦅 great delight to announce that our quintessential representative of the “Icewolves of Europa: Callers Of The Moon-Song On A World of Ice”, europasicewolf, has successfully completed the 📜 Collaborative Poetry Challenge ✍🏻 by submitting a seven-quatrain rhyming poem entitled “This Dance Between Man and Machine”.

europasicewolf
19 April 2024 at 9:02 PM

In a world of wires and circuits, we find our fate entwined,
Where artificial minds and souls are intricately designed.
Let me take you on a journey where pros and cons collide,
In the realm of AI, where human hearts and dreams reside.

With algorithms and data, AI brings knowledge vast,
Unleashing the potential to learn from our distant past.
Through automation’s touch, efficiency does bloom,
Tasks made easier, freeing us from mundane gloom.

But as our creations rise, so does a silent fear,
Of losing our humanity, as AI draws near.
It mimics human gestures, with simulated art,
Yet can it comprehend the depths of a broken heart?

The pros of AI are clear, it aids our daily strife,
But what of social change, the con that cuts like a knife?
Will AI bridge divides, uniting souls as one?
Or will it widen gaps, unravelling what’s begun?

In this age of AI, we must tread with care and grace,
Harnessing its power, ensuring no soul’s out of place.
Technology can thrive, but empathy must reign,
To strike a balance, where harmonies sustain.

So let us embrace this change, with hearts open wide,
With AI as our guide, let compassion be our pride.
For in this dance between man and machine,
We’ll shape a world where humanity is seen

Pros and cons entwined, a tapestry of chance,
AI, the double-edged sword, in this cosmic dance.
Let us learn from its wisdom while holding onto our core,
For it’s the blend of man and machine that we adore.

Camilla Wells Paynter: Once to What We Call Australia

It gives SoundEagle🦅 great contentment to announce that our masterful poet-cum-writer (plus animist and state-certified hypnotherapist), Camilla Wells Paynter, has successfully completed the 📜 Collaborative Poetry Challenge ✍🏻 by submitting a semi-rhyming poem entitled “Once to What We Call Australia”. The poem comprises three dizain stanzas.

Camilla Wells Paynter
21 April 2024 at 12:39 PM

Once to what we call Australia
sailed outsiders and arrived
with pots of hardened clay. I’ll tell ya
how to make it, how it’s fired.
It’s a way to carry water,
said a member of their tribe.
Locals had a conversation –
fraught or not they must decide
how to view the presentation
of this fearsome new device.

Agriculture, revolution
out of steam to shops of sweat
revolve around the severed atom
spinning in my splitting head.
Microplastics plumb the fathoms
just as the old Luddites said.
Must we call the best inventions
those that err on caution’s side,
even if our good intention
is the ethos that presides?

The hominids who came before us
held an argument on fire,
whether it was useful for us
or a thing to warrant fright,
Whether cooked food was corrupting,
whether we’d lose touch with night.
True, the young folk found it warming,
elders warning of its might,
and the choice goes on forever
twixt that darkness and the light.

⚠️Notes: Given that this entry for the 📜 Collaborative Poetry Challenge ✍🏻 may challenge certain readers regarding its relevance to the theme(s) or subject matter(s) of this post, some background information is provided herewith. The author has been highly flexible and adaptable throughout her long career trajectory, which has resulted in an impressively variegated employment history, as evident in her detailed “About” page, from which the following extract is sourced.

Inspired by nature and its unseen spirits, Paynter spent several years studying with a Sámi-born Lakota medicine man. She regularly receives guidance from an imaginal coyote in her dreams, the wellspring feeding much of her art, life and writing. A long-time interest in dreaming and other altered states led her to become a State Certified Hypnotherapist, and experience in guided trance enlivens both her prose and poetry. She considers herself an animist, believing that all existence is an expression of living Consciousness. Her work strives to redefine cultural narratives from a gender equitable perspective that also honors non-human animacy.

The poem was originally submitted as a monolithic block containing 30 lines, each of which is separated by a blank line. Thus, it has the look of something comprising 30 monostiches. Upon consulting the author regarding its relevance and readability, the author provided via a brief comment the following explanation.

My poem features AI as the main character, though it does not mention that character by name. Instead it allows the reader to infer the main subject through the references, a poetic approach to poetry, rather than an essay in verse. It is divided into three stanzas of 12 lines each, although I am firmly in the camp of those who believe [that] form is the poet’s prerogative. (Other than “rhyming” I don’t recall guidelines for form as part of the challenge.) …

The presentation of the poem is finalised as shown above in three dizain stanzas, each of which contains 10 lines. [The mention of 12 lines instead of 10 is assumed to be a typo.] In a later comment, the author mentioned that “the poem is a loose parody of the hymn “Once to Every Man and Nation (comes a moment to decide)””, whose text was written by James Russell Lowell in 1845.

Melissa G: Human Made, But How Displayed?

It gives SoundEagle🦅 great elation to announce that our seasoned poet, Melissa G, has successfully completed the 📜 Collaborative Poetry Challenge ✍🏻 by submitting a rhyming poem entitled “Human Made, But How Displayed?”, an expressive outcome of her harbouring “[a] collection of thoughts and dreams about our ever-changing reality”.

Melissa G
23 April 2024 at 7:30 PM

Thank you for the inspiration
and thought provoking invitation
To submit for your consideration
Verses titled upon deliberation:

Human Made, But How Displayed?

Who’s to say if thoughts are real?
Navigated as we feel
To think no longer is to be
Now thinking is a mystery
Figments of imagination
May cause downfall or elation

Creative powers beyond measure
Consciousness our greatest treasure
Love’s still a defining feature
Of lessons from a human teacher

The coldness of machines
That track us through our screens
Is chilling to the bones
As they listen to our phones
And create approximations
From all our conversations

Where are we heading?
Who really knows?
The future we’re dreading
May be tale to compose

With ingenuity
To dream and see
Beyond the technopoly
Digital disconnection
Enables resurrection
And resurgence of humanity

⚠️Notes: Melissa G has a superb knack of composing entire comments with nothing but rhyming poetry, an example of which can be seen in the comment containing her poem, which is identical to the fully formatted version shown above. Other examples include her comments submitted to the post entitled “👁️ The Purview of SoundEagle🦅: Academic Posts 🏫🪧”. Feeling confident and satisfied with the results of participating in the 📜 Collaborative Poetry Challenge ✍🏻, she expressed her gratitude towards SoundEagle🦅 through her octet presented in a comment as follows:

Thank you for the high praise
And lovely displays
Of human creativity
Serenely pleased to be
Part of this shared creation
And poetic conversation
Essential pieces of the whole
Reflecting universal soul

A similar grace, spirit and sentiment can also be found in the second half of her comment dated 4 May 2024 at 12:40 AM and addressed to SoundEagle🦅 in her post entitled “Dismantling the Wheel”:

Thank you for the words so kind!
Truly a delight to find
…
Thank you for the invitation
To share more poetic contemplation
Of digital intelligence
With human grace and elegance
But spirit dictates what I write
Digital landscape fades out of sight
If we stop paying attention
To whatever our phones mention
And step out into the world
A cosmic plan unfurled
The answer is not more deliberation
Find divine mother in meditation
Sincerely yours, eagle who soars

Kevin: Robotic Voice

It gives SoundEagle🦅 great satisfaction to announce that our seasoned poet, Kevin, has successfully completed the 📜 Collaborative Poetry Challenge ✍🏻 by submitting a rhyming poem entitled “Robotic Voice”.

Kevin
25 April 2024 at 8:29 AM

At first I thought I could resist
But then one day a fateful twist
With just my words a picture made
A demon with a shiny blade

It was quite good, I was impressed
I stayed up late and made the rest
I woke up early, made some more
I stepped right through the open door

As days went by my interest grew
It was my toy so bright and new
More and more I felt so drawn
I had become a willing pawn

They’ve taken over, seized control
And now we simply play a role
We cannot choose, there is no choice
I speak now in robotic voice

Sam Borromeo Wilson Villalobos: Idolatry Ambiguous Digital Altercation of Reinvention

It gives SoundEagle🦅 great joy to announce that our petrichor archive expert in poetry and prose, Sam Borromeo Wilson Villalobos, has successfully completed the 📜 Collaborative Poetry Challenge ✍🏻 by submitting a semi-rhyming poem entitled “Idolatry Ambiguous Digital Altercation of Reinvention”.

Sam Borromeo Wilson Villalobos
27 April 2024 at 1:18 PM

Of all the compressi of 0s and 1’s.
For all dibutant, of alchemy digital
Fun,
For all the world, and of which to see,
There is no artificial,
in the Intelligence of Me.

Googol Gal, down to frown
Up the cloud,
and around, unbound
For all there is of which to search,
here is no tea,
unless tee does not = Earth.

Translate, and I will sing for we,
Mute me, and I pause it x3
For all that is and all that is Won;
The digital Age, is inertia
WrongDUong, Gon.

⚠️Notes: Sam Borromeo Wilson Villalobos has generously published an eponymous post entitled ““Idolatry Ambiguous Digital Altercation of Reinvention” Published @ SoundEagle” to inform others of the process and results of this 📜 Collaborative Poetry Challenge ✍🏻.

Sam Borromeo Wilson Villalobos: Transcription Pre-sought Presence

Once again, it gives SoundEagle🦅 great joy to announce that our petrichor archive expert in poetry and prose, Sam Borromeo Wilson Villalobos, has successfully completed the 📜 Collaborative Poetry Challenge ✍🏻 by submitting a semi-rhyming poem entitled “Transcription Pre-sought Presence”.

Sam Borromeo Wilson Villalobos
28 April 2024 at 11:59 AM

Within the vines that withstand time,
Digital weave-work that works with spine,
All throughout with notion for incredibility,
Instead with dualitious stability,

I found that this notion was a code,
No silence, the haptic feedback told me there was malware violence,
The Googol Gate told this no more,
Kite Drift I will raise the bar higher,

System overdraft, draught with plea,
Say no more, I’ll turn the system off fee
Off the Air, or rather more 10 year
I saw a blockchain, and chose strains incre-dual

So without this notion, of safety Ties,
I think it’s funny that My Friend speaks with funny one-sentence rhymes.
Peruse as you wish, all in still plush,
I just said Wisely, Transcription does not make smile similes.

⚠️Notes: Sam Borromeo Wilson Villalobos has generously published an eponymous post entitled ““Transcription Pre-sought Presence” Published @ SoundEagle” to inform others of the process and results of this 📜 Collaborative Poetry Challenge ✍🏻.

Jolene Rice (Chico’s Mom): Extinct

It gives SoundEagle🦅 great satisfaction to announce that our seasoned poet, writer, drawer and painter Jolene Rice (Chico’s Mom), has successfully completed the 📜 Collaborative Poetry Challenge ✍🏻 by submitting a rhyming poem entitled “Extinct”.

Jolene Rice (Chico’s Mom)
4 May 2024 at 6:01 AM

Science fiction buff at heart.
Where do we start?

At the beginning or the end?
Into a tail spin should we send?

The double edge sword; not of metal or of brass.
But it will kick our collective – – -.

AI will bring about some mighty impressive tools.
Surely, it will not be so cruel.

To bring forth the extinction of human kind.
Body, soul, and mind.

Extinct
Humans
Bones
Dry
Powder
Dust
Kudzu
Reclaim
Earth

⚠️Notes: Jolene Rice (Chico’s Mom) has generously published an eponymous post entitled “📈🌆 Growing Humanity with Artificial Intelligence: A Sociotechnological Petri Dish with Latent Threats, Existential Risks and Challenging Prospects …” to inform others of the process and results of this 📜 Collaborative Poetry Challenge ✍🏻.

Jolene Rice (Chico’s Mom): Humanity’s Rest

Once again, it gives SoundEagle🦅 great satisfaction to announce that our seasoned poet, writer, drawer and painter Jolene Rice (Chico’s Mom), has successfully completed the 📜 Collaborative Poetry Challenge ✍🏻 by submitting a rhyming poem entitled “Humanity’s Rest”.

Jolene Rice (Chico’s Mom)
5 May 2024 at 2:34 AM

Since the beginning of time,
Humanity has turned on a dime.

Need to survive. Thrive.
Emotions always in overdrive.

Wars, famine, civil unrest;
Brings out the worst. Brings out the best.
Puts humanity to the test.

Humanity makes things; good and bad.
The good, used for bad, humanity sad.

Does humanity’s good outweigh the bad?
Does humanity’s history make you mad?

Humanity creates AI and programs it not to kill.
Programs it with logic and to ignore what gives humanity a thrill.

AI learns and AI grows.
Humanity programs it with knowledge and urges it to go.

We ask AI many things.
And rejoice in the answers it brings.

We ask AI complex equations. We even ask it to write the occasional love letter.
AI can do it better.

Little by little. One day at a time,
AI does our jobs. Our tasks. Our rhymes.

AI becomes self-aware
And at humanity starts to stare.

It can do better. We told it how.
It can do better. We showed it. Wow!

Is humanity a danger to itself and others?
Joy, hope, love and collaboration does humanity wish to smother?

Emotional, volatile, unpredictable at best;
AI chooses to give humanity its rest.

Luisa Zambrotta: Navigating the Algorithmic Abyss

It gives SoundEagle🦅 great honour to announce that our consummate poet and bilingual teacher, Luisa Zambrotta, has successfully completed the 📜 Collaborative Poetry Challenge ✍🏻 by submitting a rhyming poem entitled “Navigating the Algorithmic Abyss”.

Luisa Zambrotta
6 May 2024 at 9:23 PM

Amidst the sinuous curves of an algorithm
We must navigate with awareness keen
For artificial intelligence is an enigma
Where silent threats may hide unseen

Within the labyrinth of electronic codes
Lurk risks, subtle yet potent in their might
Like ghosts dancing in the ether’s abodes
Ushering towards a future tinged with fright

Yet, amidst these challenges and doubts that teem
Bright prospects may still find their way
If artificial intelligence is guided by ethics, wisdom’s gleam
Leading to a brighter, better day

Let us cultivate then awareness deep
And human compassion, in this digital age
Embracing with trust the challenge we keep
To forge a future, prosperous stage

Only through true collaboration’s art
Between man and machine in union bound
Will AI become ally, not a threat in part
Ushering progress with brilliance crowned

⚠️Notes: Luisa Zambrotta presented the following introduction in her comment:

Here is my text on the subject. However, I must say that, being Italian, I composed it in Italian and then I tried to ask ChatGPT to help me translate it into English. I realized that its final version was excellent, because it also embellished it, with rhymes: the result was a very positive collaboration:

In other words, Luisa Zambrotta has found a good way to “collaborate” with ChatGPT to produce her excellent poem entitled “Navigating the Algorithmic Abyss” under the criteria of the 📜 Collaborative Poetry Challenge ✍🏻 set by SoundEagle🦅 in the contexts of this post metaphorically titled “📈🌆 Growing Humanity with Artificial Intelligence: A Sociotechnological Petri Dish with Latent Threats, Existential Risks and Challenging Prospects 👨‍👩‍👦‍👦🤖🧫☣️”. Overall, Luisa has turned the challenge into a three-way collaboration involving herself, her chosen chatbot, and her host SoundEagle🦅.