This is an opinion from the Center.
Since the invention of public opinion polling, there has never been an advancement in communications technology that inspired more fear than excitement. Until now.
Most Americans are extremely and increasingly anxious about the growing impact of artificial intelligence in our society, and far more voters believe that AI will cause them more harm than good.
This is an almost entirely unprecedented phenomenon. While there were skeptics regarding the societal impact of the telephone, television, and first-generation Internet, the overwhelming majority of consumers looked forward to the availability of these devices with great anticipation and delight. Each of those breakthroughs caused significant disruption in our communities when they were introduced (as did the radio, telegraph, railroad, camera, and printing press, for that matter). But it’s difficult to argue that the economic benefits and the increased convenience that accompanied these advances have not greatly outweighed the downside.
But our feelings about social media have become far more complicated over the last several years. We have become nervous about whether our privacy has become overly compromised by insatiable algorithms, sophisticated geographic tracking capabilities, and omnipresent surveillance cameras. And the debate over AI has erupted with such a sudden fury and hostility that politicians from across the partisan and ideological divide have been scrambling to catch up to their constituents.
The most obvious and tangible target of this anger are the data centers needed to house the immense computer servers that the new generations of AI will require. Earlier this year, Republican and Democratic elected officials alike were hailing the benefits of these structures as job-creation engines that would economically bolster the surrounding communities, promising generous tax incentives and other incentives to lure these facilities to their regions. But while Donald Trump and a dwindling number of other politicians still argue that data centers are necessary so the US can successfully compete against China in the battle over global AI supremacy, large majorities of the nation’s political leaders have now turned against the centers, threatening onerous financial obligations, moratoriums, and outright bans.
The abrupt turn in public opinion has been propelled by fears of dramatically higher electricity costs, water shortages, and traffic, housing, and environmental damage. But it also reflects the broader concerns about AI’s impact on society that were outlined above. Young people exhibit the greatest concern about job loss, and parents worry about the content to which their children would be exposed and are especially anxious about the potential impact of artificial intelligence companions and conversational agents on the fragile minds and emotions of children and teens.
The AI companies did not help themselves by stoking these fears in the first few years after the technology’s release, warning of the potential dangers to their product that could emerge. The broader unsettled economic climate and income inequality have played a major contributing factor as well, as many voters suspect that the ultra-wealthy will realize eye-popping financial gains at the expense of the rest of the population.
But perhaps the most important factor driving these widespread fears may be the lack of political leadership and, more specifically, the absence of trustworthy leaders in both the public and private sectors to reassure a nervous country that we are capable of meeting this challenge. Neither Donald Trump nor Joe Biden has been the type of president to play the role of comforter-in-chief: Trump is far too combative, and Biden was far too diminished to take on such an important responsibility. Both were elected primarily as a visceral response to the perceived failures of their opponents and/or predecessors. Neither man took office with even grudging support beyond their most loyal respective support bases. Neither could have effectively taken on this charge if they had tried. And neither really tried at all.
Frightened countries turn inward, away from international economic and diplomatic opportunities. Frightened countries experience birth rate decline, as parental pessimism convinces many young couples to delay or forego having children. But a country that is so terrified of its own future that it instinctively turns against technological advancement is especially worrisome. The most important quality for us to seek in our next president might be the ability to re-instill the sense of optimism that has historically driven us to embrace the future rather than shrink from it.
Want to talk about this topic more? You can read more of Dan’s writing at www.danschnurpolitics.com.
.png.webp)
