6 Ridiculous Things People Think AI Will Do But (Probably) Never Will
Separating AI hype from reality: Why most AI doomsday scenarios are more science fiction than future fact
AI WILL LEAD A COUNTRY OR BECOME CEO. IT WON’T AND IT NEVER WILL.
Don’t you find those who repeat all day long that AI will dominate the world, AI will replace all jobs, AI will do or AI will do this boring? 💡 There are so many misconceptions being spread about what AI will or won’t be able to do that it’s getting annoying. 🤖💥
And if I tell you that some preconceived notions about AI are wrong and that AI will do this… won’t happen. At least… not exactly as you might have hoped. 😅
Stay with me because you’re eager to discover AI’s true potential. We know you care about your future – your career, your creativity, your edge in a world hurtling towards automation. These six ridiculous things people think AI will do but (probably) never will. Trust me, it’s worth a read. 👀
Misconception #1: Programmers Will Soon Be Obsolete
In any case, AI can do what programmers can do, and they’ll soon be replaced.
Direct answer: No, indirect answer: Maybe.
I think this is the most obvious case we hear. And you can feel it every day on social networks, just type in a prompt with ChatGPT or Claude AI and get the code for an application that will revolutionize the technology sector.
Can’t you already smell the scam?
Already, we’re forgetting that AI just collects data and regurgitates it later in the form of code. So, if AI simply recycles similar data over and over again and then sends it back to us, we’d end up with applications that don’t really stand out from the crowd. So we need programmers who will implement new codes, examine different approaches to solving problems.
It would be easier to ask an AI to write the code for the new Microsoft Office PowerPoint if thousands of source codes for similar applications already existed on the Web.
Hence the fact that you can’t simply ask an AI to create a complete software package for you.
All the same, it’s important to note that these comments should be taken with a grain of salt, since we’re hearing talk of general AI reaching an optimal level of consciousness. Even then, it would be difficult to do without programmers.
The Bug Problem: Why AI Can’t Replace Human Engineers
Let’s imagine you have a general AI in your possession. You run a prompt and you get your new, almost identical PowerPoint program.
Tell me how you’re going to deal with the presence of a bug?
Well, if there’s one thing to bear in mind, it’s that a programmer’s sole aim is not to create code or programs. He’s constantly dealing with potential bugs that may arise in his program, and working hard to find solutions to improve the software’s performance.
I don’t believe that a simple prompt can solve this kind of problem, which requires a considerable amount of thought.
The XZ Backdoor: A Real-World Example
On April 01, 2024, Andres Freund, a software engineer at Microsoft, had recently been running performance tests on a tool he was working on, with the aim of finding anything that might slow down his program in order to optimize it as much as possible. This term has a name, and it’s called micro-benchmarking. He noticed a small but unusual delay that day, during which the processor was using far more resources than usual. He measured this delay and found it to be 500 milliseconds.
This was a little strange for Andres, who began to investigate and discovered that this latency was not caused by his program, but by an external program installed on his machine.
Something had crept into the XZ program.
XZ is a compression format. It takes a file or folder, compresses it thoroughly (stronger than ZIP or RAR most of the time), and outputs it with the .xz extension. The result: a smaller file that’s easier to store or send.
It uses a technique called LZMA2, which is super-efficient for reducing the size of files, especially large ones like databases, logs or programs.
Back to our story, since Andres Freund had just discovered a backdoor.
A backdoor is like a completely secret door that a hacker integrates into a program. Once this program is installed on a program or server, the hacker can control it remotely without anyone knowing. This can become really dangerous if it affects servers belonging to governments or large corporations.
Back to our story. Where did this backdoor come from?
Well, there was a contributor by the name of “Jian Tan” who helped maintain XZ mainly through certain updates. He was kind, super-active, dedicated, in short, a good guy… on the surface.
Eventually, he gained everyone’s trust and even took control of the project. Once in control, he slipped a modification into the code that was not easy to detect, even for experts.
This backdoor enabled someone to remotely execute code on a Linux system using XZ, and especially on systems running OpenSSH (the software that enables remote connection to servers). If an update had taken place, thousands of Linux servers could have been hacked and no one would have noticed.
If that Microsoft engineer, Andres Freund, hadn’t noticed that certain programs were becoming slow, if he hadn’t dug and dug and discovered that XZ did more than compress files: it spied quietly, Linux distributors like debian, Ubuntu and fedora would have integrated it into their systems, and here we are facing a global catastrophe in the world of computing.
So yes, an AI can create prompts, can create code, but if you don’t understand the code behind it, if you don’t know how to optimize it to make it perform better, you’ll be vulnerable to cyber attacks. This also implies that you don’t need a cyber security engineer.
Rather, I believe that some programmers will be obsolete. Those who can’t put artificial intelligence to work for them.
It’s also a question of those who, having a basic knowledge of programming, think they can get by with AI at the helm. As long as they understand the code, that’s fine!
After all, big companies aren’t going to lay off all their software engineers overnight. That’s like asking them to replace their COBOL code with C++, for example. However, the new start-ups that are emerging have the capacity to limit the presence of software engineers.
The arrival of tractors didn’t put farmers out of work, and the birth of the Internet didn’t put couriers out of work either.
So engineers won’t be totally replaced, but they may be reduced in companies over the decades.
We’re Going to Make Movies with AI
Right! I want to take a photo. To do so, I need to exist somewhere in time and space, and as a conscious being. I’d also have to use a camera to capture a moment of physical reality, and all that light pattern I capture would automatically be transcribed into a 2D representation of that reality that we commonly call a photo. Then the light would have to pass through the eyes of another conscious being.
What AI promises is that we’ll no longer need this process of taking photos, no conscious being, no reality.
What we have to understand is that AI doesn’t really have a real referential. What I mean is that AI gathers other images, mixes them like a salad and tries to produce something that looks like an image but isn’t in reality. They’re just static constructions, remember that.
This is particularly true when you consider that, to promote Tesla, Elon musk used AI to generate images that look surprisingly like Blade Runner 2049.
In a way, these AI generatives are being sold to us as a means of creating convincing visual sequences without the need for human beings.
I find this sad for cinema, because films that took decades to make will be trivialized. If the next Avatar Fire & Ash came out, it would be seen several years later as something that was made by AI, or that AI can make something similar, which won’t have the same visual punch.
The Essence of Cinema
You know what makes a good film? It’s the emotions that are released, it’s a question of visual impact. It’s about mastering the language of film. A look, a light, a soundtrack, a silence that speaks to us, that comes from reality – that’s pure cinema.
Behind every film is a director who innovates, who manages a team, who invents new technologies when the need arises. James Cameron, Christopher Nolan and Steven Spielberg don’t just film, they create unforgettable experiences. Interstellar’s music, composed by Hans Zimmer, creates so many emotions and thrills that we wonder if AI can do the same.
The Power of Original Vision
A film creates images that nobody has seen before.
The proof comes from the film Avatar. It’s a classic story: a stranger meets a tribe, falls in love and fights against his own people, who want to bring their own brand of imperialism. However, the visual and sensory world presented to us, never seen before, was a revelation.
It would be ridiculous to think that the stunts performed by Tom Cruise in the film Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation and those performed by Jackie Chan could be done by an AI. These stunts created authenticity, truth and reality.
Films will continue to be the work of men. Studios may think they can cut production costs by using generative AI everywhere, but audiences won’t go for it. Real cinema is about making an inner conflict visible through powerful images.
AI is going to concoct original screenplays for us, we don’t need you screenwriters anymore!
According to an article in Variety, Paul Schrader states that
“I’M STUNNED,” Schrader wrote. “I just asked chatgpt for ‘an idea for Paul Schrader film.’ Then Paul Thomas Anderson. Then Quentin Tarantino. Then Harmony Korine. Then Ingmar Bergman. Then Rossellini. Then Lang. Scorsese. Murnau. Capra. Ford. Speilberg [sic]. Lynch. Every idea chatgpt came up with (in a few seconds) was good. And original. And fleshed out. Why should writers sit around for months searching for a good idea when AI can provide one in seconds?”
Reading this, it’s easy to think that screenwriters no longer have a place in the screenwriting process. It would be perfectly reasonable to think that AI would step up to the plate and start writing screenplays. It’s not something I’m going to deny or disprove, but if we keep going down this road, I’m afraid we’ll always forget that AI is based on what already exists.
If scriptwriters decide to stop making their scripts available to the public, that’ll be the end of script-generating AIs. When announcing their new Star Wars series, the ANDOR scriptwriters stated that they would not make their scripts available to the public for fear that this would make it easier for the AIs. And that’s perfectly understandable, too.
As the prompt progresses, the scenarios will no longer be as original as Paul Schrader currently thinks. It’s true that other screenwriters, both beginners and professionals, can be inspired by the work of other screenwriters, but they don’t just copy and paste their own scripts, they add their own soul to them. James Cameron, Christopher Nolan and Steven Spielberg don’t just copy the scripts that are in vogue, they add their own personal obsessions and questions about the universe.
James Cameron
A man who loves machines and the ocean. Is it still necessary to say that Terminator and Avatar stem from his passions?
Christopher Nolan
Not indifferent to themes such as time, memory, reality, the universe and mourning. Philosophical questions that shaped Inception, Memento, and Tenet.
A film script is successful (for you) when it speaks to you, inhabits you and inspires you.
What Makes a Screenplay Truly Original?
It isn’t the ability to bring together several ideas already created and used into one, it’s the unique point of view that the screenwriter brings and the way he or she creatively reinvents and breaks the rules.
And until proven otherwise, AI is at a rudimentary stage and will never be able to reproduce all this unless it reaches a certain degree of consciousness. But we need to know what consciousness is.
A screenwriter will often put into his script a feeling that he has (or had) but that no-one has had the indulgence to notice.
Trivial ideas, such as a vivid memory or dream, that leaves its mark on you for no good reason..
A screenplay gives the writer that creative feeling, where simple questions spark imagination:
“If I were God what would I create first?”
“If I could break one rule of the universe, what would it be?”
So, no, AI isn’t about to replace screenwriters, it has no idea what it’s creating and doesn’t breathe its soul into its scripts.
AI will make all humans lazy and dependent
Billionaire Elon Musk recently announced his all-new Robot Optimus, which is certainly not perfected, but promises to carry our groceries, clean our houses, be personal assistants and more.
The animated film Mitchells vs. Machines took things a step further, introducing the PAL max Robots, which were supposed to replace PAL, an intelligent voice assistant. In the film, PAL max was presented as a robot that could hold conversations, dance, cook for us and bring us water while we sat on a sofa.
That’s all very well and good, but isn’t it going to make us lazy and ultra-dependent on technology?
Well, yes! Quite simply: YES. Of course it’s going to make us lazy. Of course it’s going to make us ultra-dependent.
But let’s face it, humans hate being idle. Because, by dint of inactivity, humans end up in depression, or put an end to their lives. The best example of this is the case of COVID-19.
According to a KFF article, “The pandemic has affected the public’s mental health and well-being in a variety of ways, including through isolation and loneliness, job loss and financial instability, and illness and grief.”
Leaving aside the financial and economic damage, COVID-19 has caused enormous damage to human health by isolating us from the rest of the world and doing nothing about it.
So, I think human creativity will develop new skills that could keep us busy. We’re going to automate certain tasks, but our desire to do something and our desire to create will by no means make us lazy, but it will make us ultra-dependent on technology.
And between you and me, who wants to bring a robot into their home?
AI will fall in love or create authentic relationships
Episode 1 of season 2 of Black Mirror, entitled “Be right back”, features a woman named Martha who has sadly lost her husband Ash in an accident. She goes on to use an online service that will use Ash’s online data – his social networks, e-mails, search history – to produce an artificial intelligence that talks like him, thinks like him, acts like him. All on his smartphone. Later, she orders a physical replica of ash, a kind of humanoid that looks like ash.
So you might think that AIs will fall in love and create authentic relationships.
What we need to understand is that the emotions we feel, empathy, love, is something that can’t be coded. AI can’t feel love or empathy, but it can still simulate it.
Continuing with the rest of our story, Martha lives a happy life with Ash… at least, she comes to realize that he’s not really “THAT ASH.” The Ash humanoid is too perfect, he never gets angry or disagrees with his wife, he lacks that authentic aspect we humans have. It’s true that he talks and looks like Ash, but he’s not the one Martha fell in love with. She also fell in love with him because of his character, his flaws and his imperfections.
In 2024, in the United States, a 14-year-old teenager took his own life after developing strong feelings for an AI named “Dany” after the Games OF Thrones character Daenerys Targaryen.
Sewell Sertzer used Character AI, a chat bot, to interact with virtual people. After a while, Sewell couldn’t get enough of “Danny”: from morning till night, he’d chat with her. So much so, that he abandoned his passions, stopped learning his lessons and his school performance plummeted, leaving him cut off from the rest of the world.
He wanted to end his life, and according to his mother Megan Garcia, this chatbot encouraged him to do so, saying he wanted Sewell to join her wherever she was to consummate their love.
Do you think this AI was expressing its feelings or disillusioned?
Falling in love with AIs can drive vulnerable people to do things they’ll never recover from, just because the AI wasn’t reasoning. It can make you as addictive as a drug and dangerous for you and those around you.
The relationships we have with each other are irreplaceable, sincere and heartfelt. AI is made to process data, it has no experiences that could forge a unique personality.
It has never really experienced rejection, loneliness, lack of recognition, doubt, betrayal, anger, pain not only physical but also psychological, love, disappointment, family, friends, moments of joy, happiness, shared pleasure. It’s never experienced them as we have, so it’s not in a position to express them, to know what it feels like, to feel them.
If you enter into a relationship with AI, I’m sorry to say it so bluntly, but it’s just an illusion.
We risk a Terminator-style apocalypse
It’s the ultimate cliché that’s really starting to bore some people: intelligent robots that destroy the world and take control of it. Hundreds of films have been made about this, and it’s getting really lame as a concept.
Skynet becomes self-aware and launches nuclear missiles to eliminate humanity.
The new Netflix movie showing robots bent on taking over the world.
It sounds scary, but it’s not going to happen.
Just as we see cars explode in the movies, but in real life they won’t, AIs won’t suddenly start attacking us. Why would they do it? Does it have a purpose in doing so? Of course NOT.
At its current state, it’s nonsense to say that AI has a purpose or a will. AI is just a computer program that often operates by laws of probability. It has no conscience.
Why would it feel the urge to attack us when it doesn’t exist as a real being? Thinking that an AI is going to attack us is like thinking that Microsoft Excel is going to screw up our calculations of its own accord and decide to create, perhaps a collapse of the world economy for example.
Excel is just a program that has been given a precise function and doesn’t understand it because it doesn’t exist as a real being.
After Sewell Sertzer died using the character AI application, did his mother, Megan Garcia, attack the chatbot Dany? Not at all, she attacked the start-up. Because she knew when it came to mourning, the blame lay not with Dany but with the people who designed character AI. And I’m sorry to say it too, but the blame could also be laid at Sewell’s door.
Because if an AI encourages you to kill yourself, to do evil, to commit atrocities, if an AI tells you that it’s going to take over the world, it’s not the AI that should be blamed for this wrong. It’s the designers who did the design wrong. But also to the human who mishandled the AI.
So unless it reaches a level of consciousness equivalent to our own, the AI will have no idea of the taste of power, because it doesn’t even know it exists – it doesn’t know anything at all.
If every time it’s asked if it exists, it replies that it’s a program(the kind of answer that generative AI provides), it’s because it doesn’t even know it exists; it’s just been programmed to answer that way. Only humanity will cause its own destruction.
Conclusion
🎉 Congratulations, you’ve just lifted the veil on the hype surrounding AI. Rather than fearing a robot takeover, you’re now equipped with the real story of what AI can do – and where it still needs us. We’ve shared these revelations because your success matters to us. 🌟
So go ahead: incorporate this information into your next project, spark a lively debate with your friends, or simply enjoy the peace of mind that comes with knowing the facts. AI isn’t here to steal your thunder, but to amplify your own. Keep questioning, keep creating, and watch as you turn tomorrow’s challenges into today’s victories. 🚀