A reluctant (and partial) defence of Mark Zuckerberg’s claims about AI friends
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y76n7Om3wUs
I’m in full agreement this is a bleak vision of the future, but I also think we need to grapple with the plausibility of what he’s describing here:
I think there a lot of these things that today there might be a little bit of a stigma around. I would guess that over time we will find the vocabulary as a society to be able to articulate why that is valuable and why the people that are doing these things … why they are rational for doing it and how it is adding value to their lives.
Even recognising the hyperstitional effects which come from the world’s third richest man making these claims*, it’s seems obviously true there will be a shift in vocabulary emerging from user cultures which grow up around these services. The metaverse provides a great example of how these effects can be overstated. Power isn’t sufficient to bring about these effects. It’s a bleak vision but I don’t think the sociotechnical trend is reducible to the corporate project of Meta, even if what’s particularly unsettling is how it’s being propounded by a man who has overseen the rise to global dominance of software which claimed to ‘connect the world’. Instead we now confront a situation with much greater loneliness than ever before, raising the question of how these developments will fold back into social media.
In this post Punya Mishra & Melissa Warr argue against framing this as a matter of individual choice, not just to analyse the trend but to establish normative responses to it:
Some may claim they can avoid becoming prey to these tactics through how they choose to interact with AI, but framing this as an individual choice misses the point. Even those who personally refuse to engage with AI companions at all will live in a world shaped by them. We need to recognize that personal abstention does not create a bubble untouched by the larger societal shifts these technologies unleash. A world of unregulated AI companions will be akin to social media on steroids: more addictive, more intrusive, more capable of reshaping identities, aspirations, and relationships. And whether or not we engage with these forms of AI, our socio-political ecosystems will be influenced by it. And we will be living in a world that intentionally, ruthlessly and systematically exploits our need for connection, validation, and intimacy.
https://www.civicsoftechnology.org/blog/artificial-intimacy
There’s already prima facie grounds for believing that personal-life uses of LLMs may be becoming the dominant category, even if there are grounds for being slightly cautious about the methodology of this HBR research:
It’s worth reading this piece in full because it’s very informative about the expanding range of ways in which people are using the platform.