The journalist Karen Hao – who published an absolutely fantastic book about OpenAI called “Empire of AI” recently – coined (as far as I know) one of the best terms for describing modern “AI” systems: Everything Machines. “AI” systems are not framed as specific tools that solve specific problems in specific ways but just as solution in itself: There is nothing “AI” cannot do, if it fails we just failed it by not prompting it right or not building large enough data centers or not waiting for another 6 months when these stochastic systems will totally be able to do whatever was needed. Pinky swear. This trick disconnects the physical and technical realities of the capabilities and lack thereof of connectivist “AI” systems built on stochastic correlations between patterns in data and what these systems are narratively positioned to be able to do. LLMs cannot really do people’s jobs – they might be able to kinda do very small parts, especially if quality is not a criterium – but they are always presented as such: Whether it’s by doomers who predict massive unemployment and poverty or by apologists who predict an age of leisure. The Everything Machine can do – as the name implies – everything. Solve everything. Lately I’ve been thinking about friction a lot. Not the physical force that allows us to walk and all that – even though that also is neat – but cognitive and social friction and its function. In tech circles friction is seen as bad, everything needs to be frictionless. Every interaction with anything needs to be smooth and uninterrupted. Which usually means the path to you parting with your money/attention needs to be as seamless as possible. It’s the logic of casinos: Don’t let gamblers see natural light or a clock so nothing disturbs the efficient process of moving money from a bunch of people to the casino owner. But it’s not only nefarious reasons that make people design frictionlessness: Errorless learning for example wants to remove the friction that making a mistake and being corrected creates in the hope of generating better outcomes. (It’s not a coincidence though, that specifically B. F. Skinner – known for inventing “Skinner Boxes” which is the theory that a lot of modern game and app design is based on to keep people hooked – is a big intellectual force in that space.) Friction can be annoying. Don’t we all just want things to work? Sure. But friction is not just “things not working properly”, it can also be read as being touched. Just as crowded spaces create friction by other people being in my way while moving, a process with friction makes me feel other people’s work, their point of view and how it differs from mine, makes me feel their needs and wants. Friction is part of what being in, being part of society is. The idea of frictionlessness has very narcissistic, “player character” vibes: You don’t experience friction if the whole world is build around you and your needs. When you get whatever you want when you want it. That is the Utopia of Frictionlessness: To never be touched by anyone or anything really. Because being actually touched, being inconvenienced, being emotionally moved, having your mind and perception changed means acknowledging your fellow human beings around you, realizing their differences to you and to recognize their value. It means seeing others to a certain degree as your equal. You might be richer, more influential, but we all have bodies that take up space for example. No matter how rich you are, when we all need to share space everyone will take up some. But especially if you are rich, you can change the equation. You can pay people to keep others away from you. Keep “your space” protected. Can get your demands met at any time. Can influence politics in your favour – which is how we end up not taxing the super rich, casting our societies into socially, economically and politically destructive inequality. Frictionlessness is individualistic and isolating, about disconnecting from the world in any way that does not cater to your specific need and want and demand. And this brings me back to “AI” as Everything Machines. Because that narrative (and the technologies that are deployed under that concept) are basically the crystallization of never having to be touched. If “AI” solves everything, can do everything you never have to acknowledge anyone else ever again. You never have to think about how we can change our mode of being in this world in a way that is sustainable for this planet and its ecosystem. You never have to think about how to talk to this other person that you need something from. Modern “AI” systems are sycophantic. Their conversational mode, their mode of interaction is based on frictionlessness. On keeping the conversation going regardless of what’s being said or its meaning or truth even. When interacting with an “AI” system you get to feel to be the only person that matters: Everything caters to you and your whims. This has been described as a technology that allows everyone to have the experience of having servants or worse without feeling guilty about it – and there’s something to that analysis. But it’s also about you disconnecting from the world and the people in it. We live in what is often called the “loneliness epidemic“. People increasingly feel isolated and alone. While the term gained traction during the start of the COVID-19 epidemic when social distancing rules enforced that kind of disconnect the seed for all that was planted way before: The economic situation forces more and more people to work longer and longer hours leaving less time for activities with others (think sports clubs or whatever), activities that also keep increasing in cost. COVID just poured gasoline on that fire. One way that some people combat this feeling of loneliness is by increasingly talking to chatbots. Digital communication has for a long time been a way for people with a small social circle to feel connected to someone, many do have large parts of what they call friends on reddit, Discord or wherever. “AI” has taken that and made it a whole different thing: You can get a chatbot that is there just for you that reacts to whatever you want. That never confronts you with something you don’t want to hear or that challenges you. A frictionless relationship with … yourself if we want to frame it nicely? And in the end it feels like that is the narrative promise of “AI”: To never ever have to be touched by anyone. Not people you right now might need to employ to keep your business running. Not your neighbours who might want to remove cars from the streets when you want to park in front of your house just to get in their quicker. Not the environment itself that keeps showing you the consequences of your actions as a member of this species. Nothing. The Utopia of “AI” is the Dystopia of never being touched by anything. Liked it? Take a second to support tante on Patreon! This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.