usatoday24
While the public focus is concentrated in the possibility that the AI will take our job ahead (Business Insider 21% of its template has just announced citing it as a cause, the CEO of Axios has published A text by the chungosAnthropic’s CEO has shouted “that comes the wolf” to justify that only they can save us), In the background something less visible is happening: We are giving our intellectual autonomy in favor of efficiency and comfort.
It is not just that four companies –Openai, Google, Anthropic, Meta – are building the infrastructure with which millions of people resolve doubts and make decisions. They not only manage data: they also protect the way we link ideas.
- The Great Chinese of AI They are out of this equation for a simple reason: their still domestic approach without the international vocation of the Americans.
Google (the search engine) was and is influential, but with it we have had to spin our own speech: Cotejar Fuentes, Weighing biases, assume contradictions. The generative AI instead serves a round response that It sounds coherent even when hallucin And that’s why he demands less surveillance.
The result is that we are replacing the “internal process” with an external verdict covered with a technological aura that deter the replica. Whatever you say, Chatty.
Delegate is too tempting. Save time and headaches. The problem is that we do not subcontract logistics, but criteria.
In doing so we accept without discussing the biases and empty of a trained model about texts that we will never see. It is an invisible assignment and, therefore, difficult to question.
- Never before so few hands had defined what questions can be asked and what answers sound reasonable.
History has known infrastructure monopolies – electrity, internet, railways – but never one about reasoning patterns. Now another qualitatively appears: It operates on the symbolic plane, where narrative frames are defined through which we understand the world. Very subtle and very decisive.
What previously implied a deliberation – read, contrast, imagine scenarios, weigh nuances – today becomes an instantaneous response, of definitive appearance. What to think about euthanasia? How to react to infidelity? What economic model is more fair?
We no longer look for elements to think: we look for the correct answer The faster and more comfortable. And we accept as valid the one that sounds best, even if it ignores what does not fit in your narrative.
Its effects will not be immediate, but predictable: a slow loss of variety in thought, of ideas out of the ordinary. Platforms have progressive consequences. Tiktok and Spotify, for example, They have made the songs last less and the chorus arrive before.
What consequences will the LLMS within fifteen years? If we all consult models that converge towards average responses, intellectual eccentricity – culture rate for innovation – It will be increasingly weird.
There is hardly a brake for AI, but perhaps at some point we have to decide how much reasoning we are willing to deliver before staying without it.
Outstanding image | Xataka
GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings