Ever since the first at-home computer was released in 1977, technological advancements have only increased in speed. After personal computers came the World Wide Web, followed by Global Positioning Systems, mobile phones and social media — all within a fairly short period of time. The last time society experienced such an overhaul on a personal, societal and institutional level was during the Industrial Revolution, which revolutionized the communication, transportation and production industries and fundamentally changed how society functioned. As technology continues advancing, the span of time between one invention and the next becomes shorter and shorter, and society is expected to adapt to these changes with relative ease. 

The recent incorporation of artificial intelligence into our daily lives seems to be the most controversial change so far. On one end of the spectrum, users perceive AI as a net positive: With AI, you have an assistant, a teacher, a therapist, a friend. On the other hand, some consider AI to be the sum of everything wrong with the world. Owned by billionaires who consort with corrupt politicians, AI, as some opine, is not only fundamentally corrupt but also wasteful of our earth’s natural and ever-depleting resources. The centrists in these conversations use AI for daily tasks, but don’t see it as unique from other amoral technologies. They recognize its environmental harm, but continue using it due to the mass and institutional incorporation of AI into daily tasks on the micro and macro levels. 

In a capitalist society, ethically consuming anything is nearly impossible. Your cage-free eggs are from a farm that probably uses factory farming practices, and your favorite “green” brand probably sold out to a corporation that uses illegal labor practices to produce its products. By this logic, if AI is already being used by over one billion people across the world, perhaps our response to its implementation needs to change. As with every other technological revolution that faced mass controversy, we need to adapt to AI and consider ways to use it that are the least damaging for the health of society, the economy and our environment. This means that our personal adaptation to AI needs to exist in tandem with institutional regulation on AI, making sure that political, economic and sociological equilibrium is maintained.

Some people may argue that AI is perhaps the most damning technological “advancement” of them all. Not even considering its impact on the environment, AI has introduced new psychological, sociological and economic issues that cannot easily, if ever, be fixed. 31% of U.S. adult users of AI utilize it for discussions of their personal problems, and according to a Harvard Medical School study on trends in adolescent use of AI, the number of young users consulting it for mental health problems has sharply increased over the past year. Sociologically, the widespread and institutional use of AI imposes major issues for the labor market, making entry-level employment nearly impossible to get and additionally changing the way that the fields of medicine, law and accounting are structured. Economically, the owners and shareholders of AI companies hoard the wealth that the meteoric rise of AI has brought, further sharpening the gap between upper and lower class incomes. That being said, the vast majority of these issues could be significantly abated by political and institutional responses to AI. As with past technological advancements, our regulatory institutions need to advance in kind, changing on a structural level to accommodate the otherwise unfettered expansion of technology into our daily lives. When the Industrial Revolution consequently left millions without jobs, workers across the world protested in response. This eventually led to the introduction of legislation regulating corporate monopolies, curbing unfair labor practices and protecting the right of workers to organize, all of which enabled the economy to continue thriving unfettered. Though global institutional responses to the Industrial Revolution left much to be desired, it’s clear that from an economic and political perspective, part of the hurdle AI introduced can be minimized simply through a mobilized and coordinated governmental response. Considering America’s current political environment and apparent priorities, this may be too much to ask — but nonetheless, recognizing the responsibilities of our government in regulating AI is key to ensuring that it remains a safe resource for those who choose to use it.

Alongside a wider institutional response to AI, the importance of orientating of social responses to its existence also needs to be considered. AI is certainly one of the most dangerous technological developments humanity has faced thus far, and though we don’t know what the future holds, we know it’s here to stay. As such, conversations around the existence and use of AI require nuance. Glorifying it as the deus ex machina of humanity’s small inconveniences isn’t helpful, but neither is demonizing it. Establishing a happy middle where its many dangers and future benefits can be recognized is essential to creating a society where AI is used to our advantage and regulated in kind. 

The introduction of AI into our daily life is perhaps one of the most controversial advancements in humanity’s history. The way we respond to it from a social and political perspective is, similarly, key to making sure that future generations have a safe and equitable environment to live in. That being said, AI is not the big bad many make it out to be. As with anything, we are the fulcrum that the future of AI depends on. Keeping institutions accountable and having productive conversations about AI is essential to making sure that our response to it is ultimately proportional to the gravity it deserves. Making sure populations have equitable access to resources for counseling, the resources to afford it and environments that invite productive socialization would decrease the currently rising dependence on AI as a friend, partner or therapist. Continued political participation and civic activism to make our voices heard and advocating for labor laws to evolve along with AI would decrease its harmful effects on the economy and create space for structural changes.