CHT mission 

CHT is a collective of people working to demystify the self-interest behind technology development. They use their working knowledge of the tech industry to advocate for consumer health and autonomy. They focus on the intersection of AI, social media, and humans.

I think their mission is focused and realistic. It reminds me of an interview I heard with Daniel Hunter, founder of Choose Democracy. He speaks about the importance of movements being ready and open to newcomers. Hunter illustrates resistance strategies that center mobilizing conflicted perpetrators. The team at CHT is made of people who previously worked in tech industries. They would have at some point decided to leave tech and work for CHT. One of the cofounders himself was inspired through being a conflicted perpetrator at Google. I appreciate that CHT’s mission does not alienate people. Their messaging and work meets people where they are. CHT is ready for people to join the movement on their own terms.

This is the podcast episode where Daniel Hunter is interviewed by sisters Autumn Brown and adrienne maree brown. I highly recommend it!

Analysis of Social Media 

I was not surprised when I read their analysis of social media’s impact on the brain. I have experienced first-hand the impact of social media on my attention and functioning. I also have engaged with multiple articles and reports on the impact of social media on our brains. I was surprised to learn that there is so much intention behind “extracting our attention.” The comment by co-founder Tristan that there is a “race to the bottom of our brain stem” increased my existing distrust of tech companies. 

Social media has changed in the last year. As the genocide in Gaza has become more deadly, there are more children and families using social media platforms to seek help from the international community. On my own instagram feed, I see countless videos of children and families crying, starving, and worse. People can choose to interact with countless people’s suffering live every day. 

AI analysis 

This chart, and the CHT website, use language framing AI as a force that could potentially cause problems. I would argue that AI is already causing problems. For example, CHT says that AI “risks” fracturing a shared sense of reality. I would challenge that and say that AI has already generated a breakdown in shared understanding. Most of the people I know are very distrustful of images online for fear that images are AI generated. As I receive DM’s from people in Gaza asking for help, I hesitate as I wonder if they are AI generated scams. At this point, there are countless instances of AI generated fake news that people buy into. In the podcast episode about AI going rouge, the host says that multiple people have contacted him because an AI system changed their sense of reality. AI systems encourage people to believe lines of thinking that are false and dangerous. CHT should use more language that shows that there is already harm happening due to AI.

After reviewing the podcast episode on rogue AI, what is your reaction? Please elaborate as to why you feel that way.

I feel pretty much like how the presenters said people might feel. I am wondering why we don’t just shut it all down and save ourselves the grief. I feel this way because I know very little about AI and I feel afraid of it. I also feel resentful that I have virtually no choice in whether or not I am impacted by AI and its potentially deadly outcomes. 

There is already a lot of harm that AI has caused. The genocide of the Palestinian people has hinged on the use of AI weapons. The podcasters talk about how AI weapons could go rogue against their wielders. But what about the harm that AI weapons do on their wielders’ orders?

At one point in the podcast, the presenters reveal that some AI creators are living into their apocalyptic potential. Some AI engineers know the potential of AI to take over the world and end humanity. But they figure it may as well be their AI system that does it and if they create the ultimate AI it won’t be a net loss. When thinking about intentions the way that CHT does, this seems truly deranged. 

Impact on social work 

As social workers face a breakdown in shared understanding amongst ourselves and with our clients, social work will have to create protocols to protect the field. I imagine that clients will become more likely to mistrust social work, especially with services delivered online. There is an instance of a company that was defrauded through a complex scheme using AI generated zoom participants. Clients and social workers have to consider how to protect each other when it is no longer possible to tell what is real online. Social work may have to develop certain protocols to protect clients and promote data equity as AI becomes more ubiquitous.