From the Editor…
I was online recently searching for new releases from one of my favourite wellness experts when I happened across one with an enticing title – about plants being bad for you. That struck me as odd, since he always recommends plant-based eating. The host site wasn't his, but hey, I thought, maybe he's guest appearing. I clicked on it.
Up came a video of his face, talking away about the top plants we shouldn't eat – I got through the first two, bananas and grapes. Now, not all plants are safe, poison ivy, for example, and everything should be in the right amount, but what's with no bananas or grapes? Ever hear of resveratrol?
It was only a minute or so before I realized something wasn't exactly right. It was his face, his voice, his mouth was moving in proper synchronization, but why would a site focus only and closely on a guest's face, and, where were his typical gestures, expressions, and idiosyncrasies? And this site seems to be pushing quite a bit for me to click on the 'like' and 'subscription' buttons. Those buttons are typically about revenue-generation, and he is all about charity.
The thought came to me: I think this is AI? I turned it off.
On a recent podcast by Bret Weinstein he spoke about the 'multiverse', a concept getting more attention among academics as AI infiltrates our lives. The concept, as Bret explains and I try to understand then summarize it (you should get the explanation straight from him), is that any time we face a critical doubt about our world, we create a mental universe to deal with its possibilities. For example, many people are conflicted over who shot JFK. If it was Oswald then the matter was resolved and our current world exists as it is. However, if it was a conspiracy, and if that conspiracy was internal to the government then we may not be living under the democracy we think we are living under – it may have changed that day. Some people have doubt, and have made room for the possibilities, trying to explain the world in the context of either possibility until they feel they know for certain. They set up more than one mental universe.
That's a little easier when you have some evidence to support your doubt, but it might become troubling as you create universes to handle it – that's your multiverse – although the option of multiverses might be better than one alternative.
I don't know for certain whether I was watching one of my favourite podcasters or an AI-generated likeness. I'll pack that away for when I have time to try to find out. So far, I doubt it was him. If I'm right, I'm on a good path. If I'm wrong, I'm missing an opportunity to be on a better path.
Lucky me, I was able to critically evaluate what I was experiencing and, so far, I believe, conclude safely. My critical evaluation was largely based on AI's inability to overcome it.
AI is a fast (artificial) learner. Pretty soon, it will likely surpass our ability to detect it. What then?
Pretty soon, AI will function in many aspects of our training, leadership, and other mission-critical functions. The benefits are endless and wonderful, but the best of them will be achieved through human critical thinking, a quality that will increasingly become a requirement of superior leadership.
As Sue Wells explores critical thought leadership, it will be interesting to see how we collectively get to assuring the utmost in the ability to think critically in tomorrow's fire service leaders.
Just a thought.
