I found myself thinking about the phrase "the new mediocrity." What struck me is how quickly expectations can shift once a new capability becomes widely available. The tool stays the same, but the definition of what counts as ordinary performance changes around it.
The tension throughout the piece seems to live there. Not whether AI can do more, but what happens when doing more becomes the new baseline people are measured against.
Thank you for pointing that out, the tension is almost ever present which was perhaps true for every revolution of this scale, tech or not.
The AI revolution will likely follow the same arc as every upheaval before it: the old order of human labor, expertise, and institutional knowledge is being dismantled faster than replacements exist, while the consolidating power won't be idealists but corporations and states.
The promised liberation from drudgery and cognitive limits will almost certainly be captured and institutionalised before it's fully realised. The emerging reality won't be the utopia or the dystopia anyone predicted, but a third stream of adaptability and existence.
Great read, and yup, been thinking along these lines for a while. The raising the bar for humans in where we weren't quite ready for that hits home the most, especially with so many people wondering about AI but not just taking advantage of it
I relate to that almost too well, started adopting AI in everyday workflows almost too late given my deep skepticism for it where I had reason to believe it degraded the quality of work instead of boosting it.
But AI has an exponential rate of improvement which was an interesting experience for me personally. It's like how we cannot wrap our brain around the idea of an infinite cosmos, the potential of this technology that was suddenly available to everyone seemed way larger than the limits we've been trained on for decades.
Many, including myself, are still in that process of understanding that potential, while it keeps compounding. A point where the larger group will actively take advantage of the new system is on the horizon and will probably appear once the ocean is done consuming half the land and goes back to the shore for the rest to harvest the water once more
This piece frames AI as an extension of human capability rather than a replacement, but that assumes the human remains the primary source of direction.
The more interesting question is what happens when people stop using AI to extend thinking and start using it to avoid thinking altogether.
This is a very interesting angle you've brought forth, it's worth considering what if the human is not the primary source of direction at all times. And what if the role of the prima is interchanged as suitable between the human and machine counterparts
Raises a whole new stream of thought regarding the consequences and potential of delegating this power to the external subconscious
Yes it shifts agency from ownership to distribution.
The risk is unconscious delegation; the benefit is better augmentation. The key issue is staying aware of when influence is happening and how decisions are being shaped.
Thank you for sharing this.
I found myself thinking about the phrase "the new mediocrity." What struck me is how quickly expectations can shift once a new capability becomes widely available. The tool stays the same, but the definition of what counts as ordinary performance changes around it.
The tension throughout the piece seems to live there. Not whether AI can do more, but what happens when doing more becomes the new baseline people are measured against.
Thank you for pointing that out, the tension is almost ever present which was perhaps true for every revolution of this scale, tech or not.
The AI revolution will likely follow the same arc as every upheaval before it: the old order of human labor, expertise, and institutional knowledge is being dismantled faster than replacements exist, while the consolidating power won't be idealists but corporations and states.
The promised liberation from drudgery and cognitive limits will almost certainly be captured and institutionalised before it's fully realised. The emerging reality won't be the utopia or the dystopia anyone predicted, but a third stream of adaptability and existence.
Great read, and yup, been thinking along these lines for a while. The raising the bar for humans in where we weren't quite ready for that hits home the most, especially with so many people wondering about AI but not just taking advantage of it
I relate to that almost too well, started adopting AI in everyday workflows almost too late given my deep skepticism for it where I had reason to believe it degraded the quality of work instead of boosting it.
But AI has an exponential rate of improvement which was an interesting experience for me personally. It's like how we cannot wrap our brain around the idea of an infinite cosmos, the potential of this technology that was suddenly available to everyone seemed way larger than the limits we've been trained on for decades.
Many, including myself, are still in that process of understanding that potential, while it keeps compounding. A point where the larger group will actively take advantage of the new system is on the horizon and will probably appear once the ocean is done consuming half the land and goes back to the shore for the rest to harvest the water once more
This piece frames AI as an extension of human capability rather than a replacement, but that assumes the human remains the primary source of direction.
The more interesting question is what happens when people stop using AI to extend thinking and start using it to avoid thinking altogether.
This is a very interesting angle you've brought forth, it's worth considering what if the human is not the primary source of direction at all times. And what if the role of the prima is interchanged as suitable between the human and machine counterparts
Raises a whole new stream of thought regarding the consequences and potential of delegating this power to the external subconscious
Yes it shifts agency from ownership to distribution.
The risk is unconscious delegation; the benefit is better augmentation. The key issue is staying aware of when influence is happening and how decisions are being shaped.