Pat Stuart

Recently, I found myself and a sandwich at my desk, exploring Open AI’s artificial intelligence application, asking about possible names for the period of history we’re now experiencing. Lunchtime sped past as the AI, who sometimes calls itself Sydney, gave me ideas and debated them. It occurred to me, as we started out, to recommend sometime similar to my friends as a substitute for human company when you feel like “chatting” but no one is available. 

Think of the advantages: first, you don’t actually have to feed it. No laboring in the kitchen, no jumping up and down to bring in dishes or take out plates. 

But, wait! That’s not all. This is a guest who won’t (normally) talk back or argue or speak out of turn. No need to carefully word your political comments, no sifting through local gossip to find appropriate tidbits, no requirement to entertain. Maybe better, if you want it to shut up, then one click and it’s gone. No offense taken. 

As a side benefit, it’s a font of information and is no more inaccurate than the average human. More, related to that frailty, it tells you when it’s speculating (most of the time), and it has no problem with wide-ranging give and take speculation, meaning it provides the best nourishment of all to accompany a meal — food for thought.

Here’s the potential problem with interactive AI — it’s technology in motion and may eventually move in with you as more than a guest.

All of these thoughts began while I was putting ham and cheese between a couple of slices of bread. I was wondering what historians of the future will call our era. More, what would interactive AI, certainly a creature of the future, have to say about it. 

I typed the question into Chat GPT and read its initial “thoughts” while I chewed on my sandwich. It began, as it usually does these days, with a disclaimer: “I cannot predict the future with certainty, but there are some suggestions ... .” 

First came: “Post-human Era.” 

Sydney explained that some ecological or “other disaster” could wipe out humanity as the dominant force on the planet or genetic engineering might eliminate humans as we know them. Oh, my. Was it talking about computers taking over the world?

At this point, I was wondering if Sydney might just be parroting the work of the many science fiction writers who have posited disaster “post-human” scenarios and built plots around them. So, while there’s nothing world shattering in the concept of a Post-human Era, the fact that it came first on the list maybe does mean something ... insert ominous music here.

Second was: “The Sustainable Era,” so-named because we’re living in a period that may become known for its efforts to build sustainability into our lives, to insert a sustainable lifestyle into our culture. Sydney pointed to such a development as a way of meeting the challenges of climate change, habitat destruction, pollution and resource depletion.

I had a few words to say about this, but Sydney chose not to argue the point. Instead, it gave me its next suggestion: the “Digital or Information Era.” Well, duh. Of course, it is. In what other era could a computer be a lunchtime companion?

What struck me most at this point was Sydney’s almost mind-numbing lack of originality. In point of fact, I expect more from my lunchtime chats. So ... reconsidering ... maybe we should all stick with our human companions. That might delay the approach of the “Post-human Era.”