Ancient Greek myths – and their plot devices – are having a moment. With its memorable Trojan horse scene, Christopher Nolan’s blockbuster "The Odyssey" reminds viewers of dangers lurking within unsolicited gifts. And now, artificial intelligence and political leaders seem to be pitching AI as a deus ex machina: an unexpected yet all-powerful entity they hope to throw at society’s challenges.
Exactly how superintelligent AI might save humanity depends on which CEO or world leader you talk to – all of whom are locked in a fierce competition for either market dominance or geopolitical supremacy.
Companies like OpenAI and Google DeepMind envision AI revolutionizing work or eradicating disease.
The White House anticipates “broad economic and military”
spoils from winning a global AI race. Reporting on the America-China competition, journalist Evan Osnos notes that Chinese leaders have embedded AI into both industry and family life, while U.S. leaders covet the transformative possibilities of artificial general intelligence.
The United States and China may be pursuing AI to different ends, but their confident narratives of a technological savior seem unconvincing to many of their own citizens.
Why people mistrust or even fear an AI deus ex machina
According to a Gallup survey, Americans view AI as doing more harm than good and expect it to eliminate jobs. They trust neither businesses nor the U.S. government to manage AI responsibly. They believe that AI will diminish human abilities like creativity and decision-making.
In China, routine usage might have increased AI acceptance, albeit “panic-driven” by job anxiety. And while Chinese leaders may view AI as a “magical solution” to social and economic challenges, workers worry that AI is stealing their jobs and even their identities.
It should be no surprise that people mistrust or even fear an AI deus ex machina. Eleventh-hour plot twists make sense when they follow a logical series of events. But AI is often presented as a blunt instrument that uses machine agents to strip away human agency and shatters agreed-upon rules – as well as the audience’s trust in both the story and those telling it.
Take, for example, the idea that someone who works hard and plays by the rules will succeed in life. This becomes less believable when employers first insist workers adopt AI, then turn around and fire them, claiming AI made them redundant.
Small wonder, then, when young people renounce the broken promise of traditional career paths. That’s not all they’re giving up on – their concerns about instability have contributed to declining marriage and birth rates in China as well as in the United States.
Unfortunately for these young people’s prospects, the AI arms race shows little sign of slowing. Even while ostensibly calling for industrywide cooperation, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei fueled the zero-sum narrative of a global arms race, cautioning against placing AI “in the hands of authoritarian powers.”
Pressure Big Tech and government leaders to listen to us on AI
Arms races aren’t new, of course, nor are the fears they provoke. The Cold War threat of nuclear annihilation triggered feelings of powerlessness and widespread anxiety.
In today’s technological race, as some industry insiders publicly fret, AI powerful enough to save humanity could just as easily devastate it.
For all this, portraying AI as divine intervention seems to appeal to its builders. They proclaim their purpose to serve humanity, caution that their handiwork could save or doom us, and prophesize its inevitable arrival.
Whatever they believe, competitive mindsets and massive financial incentives drive them to keep pushing their products, even as many people have clearly soured on tech savior narratives.
Leaders who truly want AI to benefit society should treat it not as an external force to be used on or against us. The industry should acknowledge not just its own agency in how artificial intelligence is developed, but also that of the public in deciding how it is used.
Rather than seeking refuge in the supposed inevitability of artificial superintelligence, developers should recognize how their choices influence what tools are built and for whom.
Political leaders should acknowledge public distrust in how AI has been integrated into our lives. Rather than chasing an AI-powered magical solution, these leaders should work alongside experts and community members to determine when to employ AI – as one tool among many – toward problems the public cares about, like fairness and affordability.
Standing down from an AI arms race could involve industry cooperation, political mechanisms like establishing dialogue, or an AI hotline with China. But enduring change – as famed computer scientist Yoshua Bengio has argued – might require public pressure on industry and government leaders so they see that vying for superiority undermines our shared fates.
Only by speaking out and reclaiming our agency will these leaders listen to and work with us so that technology is developed, managed and guided by the people who it is intended to benefit.
When gods appear in stories like "The Odyssey," they often assume a familiar human form. Audiences think they recognize a fellow human – while the god’s true capabilities and intentions remain hidden. Those who portray AI as descending from the heavens to save us have given their audiences plenty of reasons to be skeptical about this latest god in the machine.
Douglas Yeung is a social psychologist who studies tech and society. He is writing a book about the engineer's mindset and how it dominates how we live today.
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: We have to reclaim our agency from the AI arms race | Opinion
