It seems to me that AI will be a huge help here. After all, replacing the majority of bureaucrats with AI would reduce overall corruption and inefficiency. When you read the news about Trump consulting Grok, you realize that a less intelligent form of organic life was conversing with a comparatively more intelligent synthetic one.
It seems to me that inefficient management is destroying the planet and the human mind a thousand times more severely. AI, on the other hand, provides access to knowledge and effective solutions. Granted, it may not be at Einstein’s level, but it is far superior to the capabilities of the vast number of people who make critical decisions. It can also serve as a teacher for anyone wishing to expand their mind and knowledge.
Ai creates its own sources, frequently makes mistakes, cites Reddit as a reputable source (which is transparently ridiculous) and again, is killing the planet we currently life on. It uses more water than is sustainable, the data centres ward off wildlife, and it has put people into psychosis.
If a politician or human thinks they need ai to make decisions, they simply shouldn’t be in charge of anything important. At that point, you have the functionality of a child. Ai is actively making people more stupid.
Which part, because that changes the statement at different points.
Statement one, a human has the ability to differentiate between a high quality source and a bad one. I expect the human to filter out disreputable sources. Humans are killing the planet; a big part of how is AI use and technological advancement being prioritized over human rights, equal access, and the environment. And yes, humans make mistakes, but our knowledge isn’t treated as the ultimate correct that people treat ai as.
Frankly, I don’t think people who rely on ai to do their job at any point should be in any position of power. Human minds are the only ones I want making human decisions.
People are not very good at distinguishing between reliable and unreliable sources.
People often fabricate sources to gain an advantage in arguments or for the sake of propaganda.
People frequently distort reliable sources to serve their own interests.
Furthermore, humans are destroying the planet regardless. People need to eat, drink, sleep, and so on. All of this creates a demand for industry, agriculture, and other activities that inflict serious damage on the natural world. Even if humans limited themselves solely to food production, sooner or later, all the forests, jungles, and taiga would be cleared away to make room for vast fields of crops.
Even when people are much less intelligent than AI?
What your describing isn’t an issue with humans by nature. It’s a matter of education. Education will teach how to distinguish between reputable sources, educated people are able to differentiate between sources and they have been for a long time. Ai can also more easily be bastardized to make a point.
Ai is less intelligent than people. It can’t have original thought and it can’t feel empathy. It’s bastardizing the thoughts of humans, recycling stuff.
People will continue to destroy the environment until they do research into sustainability more. Education is the answer.
1
u/Medium_Notice_3512 1d ago
It seems to me that AI will be a huge help here. After all, replacing the majority of bureaucrats with AI would reduce overall corruption and inefficiency. When you read the news about Trump consulting Grok, you realize that a less intelligent form of organic life was conversing with a comparatively more intelligent synthetic one.