At a conference, we discussed how we see Microsoft’s Co-Pilot becoming more dominant over time as it is embedded into O365. Is there a danger of us all receiving Microsoft’s view and opinion about the world as a single source of truth?
🔹 George Orwell 1984
As an experiment, I asked AI to summarise “The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism” from George Orwell’s 1984.
It did a good job:
The ruling parties maintain a state of perpetual war and direct production to military spending – bombs that literally destroy their own value when used.
The policy destroys surplus production that might otherwise improve people’s lives. However, the improvement could make them less reliant on the ruling parties and more prone to rebellion.
🔹 Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
AI did a good definition job here, too:
CCS is a process that captures CO2 emissions from industrial production and stores it in the ground.
🔹 Compare and Contrast CCS with 1984
I asked AI to compare and contrast the 1984 concept with Ed Miliband’s £21.7bn investment in Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS).
Out it immediately chundered with (paraphrasing): the two are totally different. Miliband’s policy stimulates economic growth, creates jobs, combats climate change, and can reduce the costs of carbon capture technologies over time.
🔹 Compare CCS with 1984
I tried again by asking it just to compare without contrasting.
It did a more nuanced job:
Some argue that climate change policies might be used to expand government control. However, climate policies are generally subject to democratic processes.
While there are some superficial similarities… such as both involve significant government funding and intervention in the economy”, Miliband creates jobs, stimulates… etc.
🔹 AI Marks out of 10
This is NOT a post about whether CCS and climate change policies are good or bad or whether they are Orwellian or Keynesian.
It’s about how AI is handling contentious and emotive issues. Which I know CCS to be, even amongst the Green community.
So, it was interesting that AI’s view was that CCS, or to be fair to it, government spending on CCS, was a positive thing.
I am not sure what I expected. That’s why I was experimenting.
But maybe I expected it to self-fact check – a postscript of: “The topics here are considered contentious and the subject of much discussion. Would you like a summary of the arguments for and against CCS? And a contrast of the Keynes vs Hayek economic theories on government spending?”
🔹 Conclusion
I did not get any of that, but maybe I expected too much. AI is not yet sophisticated enough to handle disputed matters like that.
I’m sure we will get there.
In the meantime, we will simply learn to be careful of it in the same way that we are naturally careful about what is posted on Facebook, X, and other sites.
What do you think?