AI Isn’t a Revolution—Yet
Just as British people did with steam power, the American public can shape how this technology spreads.
The debate over whether AI is a true revolution has been revived, much like the historical Industrial Revolution itself. In the 1980s, the Industrial Revolution's status as a "revolution" was called into question due to its slow and uneven pace. People and institutions ultimately determine whether a potentially groundbreaking invention will be considered a true revolution, not technology alone.
The Industrial Revolution's slow progression was partly due to British resistance to change brought on by steam power and factory organization. The term "Luddite" has since become a pejorative for resisting new technology, but these machine-wrecking activists were fighting exploitative relationships governing factory adoption. The CEOs of AI companies are exploiting this historical misunderstanding to argue for exemptions from accountability regulations.
However, the reality is that the march of economic and technological progress is not a predetermined path, but rather shaped by the agency of the masses and their willingness to resist.
Written by urgent.news from Foreign Policy's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
