All three of these readings played into a sense of societies’ discomfort with technology they don’t understand. It felt like all of the authors had more experience with AI through sci-fi stories than actual encounters with the systems.

That being said, the ideas these readings brought up were very interesting to me, especially the one on dis-information and how we are able to identify these. As new generations grow up with tech, it has been way easier for us to identify phishing emails and calls than for our parents and grandparents who were only introduced to the technology as adults and haven’t been immersed in it since they were children. I think the same will go for AI produced work, like deep-fakes. The uncanny valley elements will get harder to spot, but new generations will have so much more experience from young ages identifying it that it won’t be as big an issue for them. There will always be a percent of the population that will fall for such things, but I’m not sure that’s something we can concern ourselves with right now for the sake of this class.

I’m also not surprised a fairly basic work of AI art was accepted for auction by Christies - I interned for them a few summers back, and while the teams there are super smart and knowledgeable about their art periods, when I was there 5 years ago, there was no technology art department. I understand they wanted to be ahead of the curve and get the press and attention for being the first to sell this kind of work, but I don’t think they went about it in the right way.