Tag Archives: politics

AI and the collapse of a shared reality

TikTok has introduced me to some very interesting content creators. One such person is Morten Rand-Hendriksen, who goes by the username @mor10web.

He shared this insight recently:

@mor10web

#AI image generation, the destruction of our shared perception of reality, and the inevitable collapse of democracy. Inspired by posts on the same topic from @Paige | AI Ethicist

♬ original sound – The Mor10 of the Web

After discussing the fact that people stuck in an echo chamber of like-minded people start to call a real photograph an AI generated fake… he says,

“Here’s what keeps me up at night: We’re converging on a point where it is easier to claim that real images are fake than it is to prove that images are generated using AI, or manipulated using AI. And that means we have no reasonable expectation of any image or any video or any audio being real. And we don’t have the tools or the media literacy to really do this analysis.

…and we are in the situation we’re in now where people can choose their own reality and live in a reality dysfunction. And AI provides the tools and capabilities to make that reality disfunction into our lived reality.”

Indeed, our shared reality has collapsed. AI generated fakes spread like wildfire through echo chambers of like-minded groups, and even when discovered to be fake, there is no effort to make corrections if the fake fits the group’s narrative… and any real media that doesn’t fit that same reality is easily dismissed as a fake.

Maya Angelou said, “We are more alike, my friends, than we unalike.” I would agree with that when we had a common shared reality, but I question it now in a world filled with AI generated fakes, and a lack of media savviness to determine what really is real. The collapse of a shared reality is a threat to our world, whether the split is socioeconomic, political, or religious. We are increasingly growing unalike.

Manufacturing Beliefs

“The mass media serve as a system for communicating messages and symbols to the general populace. It is their function to amuse, entertain, and inform, and to inculcate individuals with the values, beliefs, and codes of behavior that will integrate them into the institutional structures of the larger society. In a world of concentrated wealth and major conflicts of class interest, to fulfill this role requires systematic propaganda.”

~ Edward Herman & Noam Chomsky, Manufacturing Consent, 1988

Embrace yourself. We are in for a whirlwind of propaganda directed to both sway and embolden our beliefs. We will need to question the sources of our information. We will need to understand where the bias of the message is coming from. We will need to fact check for reliability, accuracy, and exaggeration.

We will be entertained. We will be angered. We will be emboldened. We will be ridiculed by those who disagree with us. And we will be the ones ridiculing others who hold different beliefs than us. Systematic propaganda will slowly lead us to more polarized views.

This is not a test of your emergency broadcasting system. This is also not an emergency. No, it is the emergence of political propaganda in a post Truth era. Find your own truth, fabricate your own truth. Because the media outlets you believed you believed in are not the ones in existence today… and they do not transmit Truth.

Marshall McLuhan was correct, ‘the medium is the message’, and the medium is designed not to inform but to entertain; to excite; to anger; to draw attention, clicks, and eyes on advertising. No, not to inform, to trick you. Sway your opinion, and lie to you.

Are your beliefs your own or have they been manufactured, manipulated, and swayed by the media you watch? Will you be able to answer that question as convincingly a year from now? Will your beliefs be yours or will they be governed by the propaganda you choose to watch and believe in? Be warned, the answer to that question might not be the answer you currently believe.

The hypocrisy of democracy

Democracy is supposed to empower people by a representative government that acts on behalf of and for the people. The hypocrisy of current democracy is that you are told that every vote matters and that you are the one who decides who is in power. The problem with that is that the platforms candidates run on are seldom what they enact. So you aren’t getting true representation of your wishes… and yet that’s what you voted for.

I’ve voted in every election since I became old enough to. I will continue to vote, to perform my civic duty, for the rest of my life. A democracy doesn’t work without a participatory public, and I would rather live in a democracy than any other system of government, and so I engage in the democratic process as expected.

But I’m tired of the hypocrisy. I want to see a party that can actually get things they platform on done. I want to see a system that is rigged for success rather than built on conflict, grandstanding, and hidden agendas. I want to see a party, once elected, get the support of other parties to accomplish their promised goals. Yes, other parties need to hold the current government accountable, but that is the ‘check and balance’ of an elected democracy. Fighting every move, every bill, and every promise the winning party made, simply to make the current government look bad during the next election cycle, actually undermines the strength of a democracy. The system is rigged to fail.

Give a party too much power and it is likely to reduce democratic freedoms, but don’t give it enough power and it becomes completely ineffective. This is a power dance we are seeing across the globe. What I fear is that democracy is not working like it should, and less free alternatives are rising in both power and appeal. With this we are also seeing less freedom.

Ultimately, democracies are now about voting for the extremes, and the extremes do not represent the vast majority of the people. But the majority don’t have a choice but to vote in a polarized way. So we aren’t voting for representation nearly as much as we are voting against values on the extreme side that is least like us. We aren’t voting for who we want to represent us, we are voting to avoid the election of someone we feel would represent us least.

And no matter who wins, we really aren’t represented by these representative governments. How do we change this? I don’t know. I’ll keep voting and doing my part, I just wish elected officials figured out a way to do the same and protect the very democracy that elected them.

Fashionable Opinions

I came across this quote by Adam Grant,

“We shouldn’t see our opinions as cherished possessions. We should treat them like everyday clothes.

Look at the views in your closet that were trendy once. Discard the ones that look silly to you now.

Wear the ideas that fit you today. Be ready to outgrow some of them tomorrow.”

I like the idea that we reflect and reconsider our opinions, ideas, and values… not getting stuck, and not growing. The challenge of ideas like this is that some things come into fashion that shouldn’t. Sometimes it is far more valuable to buck the current fashionable ideas and to wear your opinions no matter how unfashionable they may be at the time.

The question being danced around is: Is this just trendy or is it timeless?

Freedom, democracy, equity, fairness, justice, compassion… these are never out of style, even if not trendy at the time. Sure we need to, “Wear the ideas that fit you today. Be ready to outgrow some of them tomorrow.” But some ideas transcend the fashions of the time. And while these ideas are timeless, there are times where wearing them can be unfashionable.

So, while I agree with Adam Grant, don’t be afraid to be unfashionable for the right reasons.

Extreme beliefs

I went down a rabbit hole on Twitter yesterday. It started with me watching a video related to the attempted assassination of Donald Trump. The video following this was a fundamentalist Christian talking about how this assassination attempt was pre-ordained, and this was the start of the End Times. The videos didn’t stray from this theme afterwards.

The power of religious fundamentalism never ceases to amaze me. People hoping for the rapture, or for an eternity in the afterlife, willing to sacrifice living life now for a future beyond this life. People prepared to sacrifice their life in an attempt to take another life in the name of God. People draining their bank accounts to support a church. People advocating for terrorism and yet believing they will be set free by their faith.

Religious beliefs that teach us to love, and to share, and to support their communities as well as strangers… these are religions that serve those that need religion in their lives. Extreme religious beliefs that divide, segregate, and exclude others… these are religions we must fight.

We cannot turn the other cheek when we are facing groups that undermine our safety and security. We can’t ignore people who will disrupt and undermine our lives, our liberties, and our freedom. Extreme beliefs are dangerous and they need to be dealt with as threats, as dangerous, and not just something we deal with like we would any other issue… because those acting on their extreme beliefs aren’t acting in good faith.

((What an ironic sentence to end on.))

A deviously democratic plan

You’d have to be living under a rock to be unaware that the USA has an election coming up. And I’m probably not the only one holding the opinion that neither candidate is up to the job. Well, here is a devious non-partisan plan that I’d love to see Biden enact in order to flip the whole election on its head.

The Supreme Court’s recent decision that, “Presidents and former presidents have broad immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts they took while in office”… has created an opportunity for Biden to prevent Trump from running.

Step 1: Biden could pass an unconstitutional executive order making it illegal for someone who has committed Trump’s non-presidential related crimes from running for president. Now if Biden stops here, it would cause absolute chaos, and great civil unrest. So he’d have to do one more thing at the same time.

Step 2: Biden could choose not to run in the next election. What this does is that it completely levels the playing field for both Democrats and Republicans. It leaves both parties needing to find replacements at the same time. Both parties can then find new, younger, more suitable leaders, and maybe the craziness of the US election could become about platforms and not about people.

This won’t happen, but could you imagine if it did? I could legitimately see either party winning a fair fight. It would all depend on the candidates the parties choose. In both cases a moderate candidate would have a better chance than an extremist. A too far right republican candidate would not win over the ‘Never Trump’-ers’, and a too far left democrat candidate would push this same group and more to the republicans. Suddenly the entire election would be about the platforms and not personalities.

There’s the plan: A democrat using a republican biased court decision to rebalance an election. And the entire world would be in a better place than it is leading up to this election as it stands right now.

With a Discerning Eye

Yesterday, when I wrote ‘The inverted political bell curve’ about how politically many people have moved to the extremes. I ended by saying, “The bell curve is gone, only warring tribes remain, and the fighting is just going to get uglier.”

There are many reasons why I think this is true, and I think we are headed into a period before the US election where truth will be hard to discern, and extremist views will go viral. But I also think that many people can see it coming and will be ready. They will question, they will fact check, they will doubt the accuracy of what’s being spewed their way.

Will the extremes be loud, and will their messages be filled with personal attacks and un-researched facts that are actually fiction and propaganda? Yes.

But not everyone is going to listen. There are some savvy people who will be watching with a discerning eye. They will be the voices of reason. They will be as interested in determining the intent of the message as they will be in listening to it. They will hear something bad about a candidate they dislike, and still question the validity of what’s being said.

I don’t think this group will be a majority, but they will be present. And while yesterday I sounded like I saw a future of doom and gloom ahead of us, I also see some promise that not everyone is polarized and sitting on the extremes. And that keeps me hopeful that things might not get as messy as they could.

Watch the news and messaging on social media with a discerning eye in the coming months… question, fact check, and take the time to understand the context of things being quoted. We need common sense to prevail.

The inverted political bell curve

We no longer have an opportunity to be centrist. Extremes on either side make this challenging. Being centrist is too hard, hated by both sides because if you aren’t way over here on ‘our’ side, you lack the merit of being associated with ‘us’, so you belong with ‘them’. Rather than being seen as partial to common interests you are lumped in with everyone else that is not on ‘our’ extreme.

Examples: Liberal minded but worry about immigration? Well you may as well be fully right wing conservative. Believe in equal opportunities for gay marriage? Well then you might as well be a bleeding heart liberal, no matter how else your views may be conservative.

There used to be a bell curve where most people were not on the extremes, rather more centrist, more in the middle. That curve has inverted and flattened. Less people are ‘in the middle’ and more people are veering to the extremes. And it’s not getting any better because any political candidate who appeals to the center is not appealing to the masses. The once peripheral minorities are now a divided majority.

There is no room for nuance. No debate, just argument. Dichotomies, not a spectrum of ideas. But global issues are not well defined into clearly opposing views. Electric vehicles can be a net good while the environmental cost of dead batteries pose a problem. We can provide rights for some without taking them away from others. We can have strong border policies, and be both discerning and compassionate. We can disagree and not vilify, argue and not attack, debate facts and dismiss logical fallacies.

We can… but will we? Or are the propaganda machines too powerful right now? Are we entering an era where truth is elusive, and biased AI created videos constantly exaggerate perspectives? An era where fact checking is a requirement before accepting information? Throw in ad hominem, personal attacks, and intentional foreign interference focused on deepening polarization, and anti-social social media, and I’m afraid to think about where we are headed.

The bell curve majority of moderate thinkers have dispersed to the extremes, and these extremes are dragging everyone out of the middle. It’s 2024 and I can go on social media and watch a live debate between a scientist and a flat earther, and despite the evidence to the contrary, no flat earther is going to change their mind. I can find a bible prophecy that ignores wild extrapolations and factual inaccuracies, and no countervailing points will be accepted. I can find intelligent people arguing biased and counter factual points, and putting their intellect aside blindly to support a point, a belief, a perspective, or even a political candidate.

I’ve come to the realization that we are just monkeys. We are not civil, we are tribal animals, playing at being intelligent. We are more likely to solve disputes like other animals than we are as humans. We admire bravado, we look down on the meek, we beat our chests and vie for attention. Winning is more important than playing fair. I am safer when my tribe, my group, my monkey troop, is stronger and other troops are dominated.

The bell curve is gone, only warring tribes remain, and the fighting is just going to get uglier.

Ending discrimination

This article was in my inbox this morning: Premier’s, attorney general’s, parliamentary secretary’s statements on International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination

Niki Sharma, Attorney General, said:

“We all must do our part to fight racism in all its forms. But words are only as good as the actions that follow, which is why we will be introducing anti-racism legislation in the coming weeks to address systemic racism in government programs and services, and launching more supports for racialized people. On this International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, please join us in standing up against racism to create a more equitable and safer province for everyone.”

Imagine a world where we cared as little about skin colour as we do eye colour. A world where bodily autonomy wasn’t controlled by religiously biased policymakers. A world where entire groups of people were not disenfranchised or discriminated against based on how they looked or where they came from.

If you asked me 25 years ago, I might have said this was possible by now. Ask me now and I fear we are much more than 25 years away from this. How have we gone backwards? What will prevent a further slide? There will not be an end to discrimination in my lifetime, but I do hope it’s possible in my kids’ lifetime.

The greatest threat to mankind

I recently wrote about the Top Risks of 2024, which were in order of concern:

  • The United States versus itself
  • The Middle East on the brink
  • Partitioned Ukraine

Any of these three risks can have dire consequences on the stability of global politics, global trade, and global conflicts far beyond the borders of the mentioned countries.

These are imminent dangers that leave the rest of the world feeling like pawns on a chessboard filled with ‘other’ power pieces making all the strategic moves. But there is one danger on the geopolitical chessboard that I think will become the biggest threat we face when in the near future, and that’s the pawns themselves. Not the powerful pieces, but rather a rogue ‘nobody’.

While people fear Artificial Intelligence, and the rise of AI robots, what I fear is rogue humans using AI with harmful intent. The future will permit individuals with evil intentions to have too much power. It comes down to two well known adages: information is power, and power corrupts.

The problem isn’t a rogue leader, or a rogue country, it’s a rogue individual with too much information and too much power. A perfect example? See #5 on this article: ‘Why we’ll never actually destroy the last samples of smallpox’,

5) We could always recreate smallpox from genetic information

One could argue that in the information and genetics age, nothing really dies forever. It just dies until the technology to resurrect it appears. And for smallpox, that time is now.

The technology is here. And so is the necessary information: the complete DNA sequences of roughly 50 smallpox samples are available to the general public. This means that people could make smallpox in the lab. “Someone could if they wished recreate live virus from scratch just from that public information,”

We are less than a decade away from one intelligent crackpot, working in his or her (more likely an incel ‘his’) basement lab, creating or recreating a deadly virus and having it spread covid-19 style across the globe.

We are 15-20 years away from some crackpot scientist developing a nuclear bomb from parts and resources ordered online… without ever raising red flags to warn of his intentions.

The greatest threat to mankind isn’t wealthy people, politicians, and powerful countries, it’s one individual with malice in his heart and access to knowledge and information more power than anyone should ever have.