Anyone born in the next few decades will disagree with you. They will find this new world comfortable and rich with content. They will never understand what your problem is.
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas AdamsI agree with the first half: comfort has clearly increased over time since the Industrial Revolution. I'm not so sure the abundance of "content" will be enriching to the masses, however. "Content" is neither literature nor art but a vehicle or excuse for advertising, as pre-AI television demonstrated. AI content will be pushed on the many as a substitute for art, literature, music, and culture in order to deliver advertising and propaganda to them, but it will not enrich them as art, literature, music, and culture would: it might enrich the people running advertising businesses. Let us not forget that many of the big names in AI now, like X (Grok) and Google (Gemini), are advertising agencies first and foremost, who happen to use tech.
It is quite possible there is a cultural reaction against AI and that we enter a new human cultural golden age of human created art, music, literature, etc.
I actually would bet on this as engineering skills become automated that what will be valuable in the future is human creativity. What has value then will influence culture more and more.
What you are describing seems like how the future would be based on current culture but it is a good bet the future will not be that.
The point is that it's complicated, it's not a black and white sound bite like the people who are "against nuclear weapons" pretend it is.
I eat meat. I know some vegans feel uncomfortable with that. But personally I feel secure in my own convictions that I don't need to run around insinuating vegans are less than or whatever.
The discussion I was responding to is whether the next generation would grow up seeing pervasive AI as a normal and good thing, as is often the case with new technology. I cited nuclear weapons as a counterexample, while I agree that nobody felt that they had a choice but to keep up with them.
AI could similarly be a multipolar trap ("nobody likes it but we aren't going to accept an AI gap with Russia!"), which would mean it has that in common with nuclear weapons, strengthening the argument against the next generation being comfortable with AI.
Also, nukes don't write code or wash your dishes, it's nothing but liability for a society.
However, that really doesn’t invalidate the rule.
The nuclear peace is hard to pin down. But given the history of the 20th century, I find it difficult to imagine we wouldn't have seen WWIII in Europe and Asia without the nuclear deterrent. Also, while your parents may have been uncomfortable with the hydrogen bomb, the post-90s world hasn't particularly been characterised by mass nuclear anxiety. (Possibly to a fault.)
IMO, the Atoms for Peace propaganda undersells how successful globalization has been at keeping nations from destroying each other by creating codependence on complex supply chains. The new shift to protectionism may see an end to that
Nice "peace".
We had 100 years of such kind of peace among major europe powers before nuclear weapons. We're not even at 80 years of peace in nuclear age, this time, and nuclear armed power is already attacking from the east and from inside via new media.
I wouldn't call it done and clear, about the "nuclear age peace".
Alignment Failure → Shifting Expectations People get used to AI systems making “weird” or harmful choices, rationalizing them as inevitable trade-offs. Framing failures as “technical glitches” rather than systemic issues makes them seem normal.
Runaway Optimization → Justifying Unintended Consequences AI’s extreme efficiency is framed as progress, even if it causes harm. Negative outcomes are blamed on “bad inputs” rather than the AI itself.
Bias Amplification → Cultural Reinforcement AI bias gets baked into everyday systems (hiring, policing, loans), making discrimination seem “objective.” “That’s just how the system works” thinking replaces scrutiny.
Manipulation & Deception → AI as a Trusted Guide People become dependent on AI suggestions without questioning them. AI-generated narratives shape public opinion, making manipulation invisible.
Security Vulnerabilities → Expectation of Insecurity Constant cyberattacks and AI hacks become “normal” like data breaches today. People feel powerless to push back, accepting insecurity as a fact of life.
Autonomous Warfare → AI as an Inevitable Combatant AI-driven warfare is seen as more “efficient” and “precise,” making human involvement seem outdated. Ethical debates fade as AI soldiers become routine.
Loss of Human Oversight → AI as Authority AI decision-making becomes so complex that people stop questioning it. “The AI knows best” becomes a cultural default.
Economic Disruption → UBI & Gig Economy Normalization Mass job displacement is met with new economic models (UBI, gig work, AI-driven welfare), making it feel inevitable. People adjust to a world where traditional employment is rare.
Deepfakes & Misinformation → Truth Becomes Fluid Reality becomes subjective as deepfakes blur the line between real and fake. People rely on AI to “verify” truth, giving AI control over perception.
Power Concentration → AI as a Ruling Class AI governance is framed as more rational than human leadership. Dissent is dismissed as “anti-progress,” consolidating control under AI-driven elites.
"Lack of Adaptability"
AI advocates argue that those who lose jobs simply failed to "upskill" in time. The burden is placed on workers to constantly retrain, even if AI advancement outpaces human ability to keep up. Companies and governments say, “The opportunities are there; people just aren’t taking them.” "Work Ethic Problem"
The unemployed are labeled as lazy or unwilling to compete with AI. Hustle culture promotes side gigs and AI-powered freelancing as the “new normal.” Welfare programs are reduced because “if AI can generate income, why can’t you?” "Personal Responsibility for Economic Struggles"
The unemployed are blamed for not investing in AI tools early. The success of AI-powered entrepreneurs is highlighted to imply that struggling workers "chose" not to adapt. People are told they should have saved more or planned for disruption, even though AI advancements were unpredictable. "It’s a Meritocracy"
AI-driven success stories (few and exceptional) are amplified to suggest anyone could thrive. Struggling workers are seen as having made poor choices rather than being victims of automation. The idea of a “deserving poor” is reinforced—those who struggle are framed as not working hard enough. "Blame the Boomers / Millennials / Gen Z"
Economic shifts are framed as generational failures rather than AI-driven. Older workers are told they refused to adapt, while younger ones are blamed for entitlement or lack of work ethic. Cultural wars distract from AI’s role in job losses. "AI is a Tool, Not the Problem"
AI is framed as neutral—any negative consequences are blamed on how people use it. “AI doesn’t take jobs; people mismanage it.” Job losses are blamed on bad government policies, corporate greed, or individual failure rather than automation itself. "The AI Economy Is Full of Opportunity"
Gig work and AI-driven side hustles are framed as liberating, even if they offer no stability. Traditional employment is portrayed as outdated, making complaints about job loss seem like resistance to progress. Those struggling are told to “embrace the new economy” rather than question its fairness.
look at the push right now in the US against corrupt foreign aid and the mass deportations seems like the first step.
US benefited a lot from lots of smart people going there (even more during WWII). If people start believing (correctly or incorrectly) that they would be better somewhere else, it will not benefit them.
This is inevitable in my view.
AI will replace a lot of white collar jobs relatively soon, years or decades.
And blue collar isn't too far behind, since a major limiting factor for automation is general purpose robots being able to act in a dynamic environment, for which we need "world models".
When I was a kid, there was this grand utopian ideal for the internet. Now it's fragmented, locked in walled gardens where people are psychologically abused for advertising dollars. AI could be a force for good, but Google has already ended its ban on use in weapons and is selling it to the IAF, and Palantir is busy finding ways to use it for surveillance.