When I was child, an omni-scient all-rounder used to dubbed a "walking encyclopaedia" (literally chodząca encyklopedia). Those humans who seem to have known an answer to every question embodied a desire to possess all the knowledge in the world. A quarter of century later this dream has come true in a way few had envisaged.
I have used the most popular AI tool, ChatGPT for a while. I use it out of curiosity, ask it uncanny questions, check if it can solve manifold problems. Despite its advanced age of two and a half years, it still has deficiencies, gets it wrong several times in a row, in spite of being prompted to mend its ways, acts as an outright liar or fails to substantiate the outcomes of its work.
Many point up its capacity as a therapist. I can confess to have tried it out, at times bounced quandaries off it. Its counselling is not mould-breaking and it still does not beat a bright therapist. Interactions with it remain still inferior to frank conversations with friends.
Some men (far more often than women) ask AI to aid them in online dating. I have also checked out how this works and here ChatGPT sounds like a typical boomer whose advice I wouldn't follow. With respect to romantic relationships, unless you are inexperienced or your emotional intelligence is well below average, I suggest AI does not offer dating counselling.
More and more frequently AI is used in situations when humans were told to use their brains. Falling back on AI dumbs people down. Intense thinking activates several parts of our brains, while relying on AI renders them idle. Over time humans might become helpless and prone to accelerated mental ageing.
Just like each invention, AI might be harnessed to pursue evil goals. You must be mindful of trolls farms on which people were paid for spreading disinformation and stirring things up. With AI in place, cost of producing fake content has dramatically decreased. As of now, what AI produces is easy to recognise (although the three-legged Marcon bait was swallowed by Polish right-wing journalists), but with time differences will fade. Touching on fake content, the percentage of people who take it in, without verifying, is disturbing, if not alarming. Needless to say right-wing voters and more likely to be manipulated in such way.
For months I have been hearing AI would take away most office jobs. AI tools keep developing fast, yet they are still far from the moment they threaten my current position. Just like in times of industrial revolution, machines have not rendered factory workers jobless, AI is unlikely to cause massive lay-offs. AI might to some extent take over mundane and repeatable tasks, but somebody will still need to oversee it, verify outcomes of its work and rectify errors made by AI.
If the exchange of goods and services is to continue, there must be a balance between supply and demand. Otherwise markets stall. In case AI replaces masses of white-collar workers and corporations realise their jobs are useless, the ultimate demand (for end products) will crash and thus the entire economy will go bust. An alternative scenario is that jobs of millions of people are redefined.
Some people have embraced AI excessively. At some point realising how much harm it can do and how many flaws it has will hopefully prompt humanity to take a step back with AI development, in order to make a few more prudent steps forward.
In the long run I see two conceivable scenarios: either most likely AI settles in a broad niche, facilitating our lives and jobs, with everyone keeping in mind humans remain superior to AI, or in a far less probable scenario AI grows uncontrollably, outwits humans, takes control over us and destroys our civilisation. Averting such scenario, whose probability is estimated by AI gurus at roughly 15%, lies in our hands only.
