Thinking critically about identifying AI creations

Someone asked me the other day about the best way to identify AI-generated media. “I don’t know,” was my honest answer. To be completely honest, I don’t even know if I can do that. That’s why I’m confident in my ability to distinguish student-written essays from AI (and have done so in the past). You can also easily spot suspicious-looking fingers or feet among the many AI-generated images. But, of course, such examples do not apply. all AI-generated media. Furthermore, what happens when AI advances to the point where it can overcome these small “nuances”? What happens if it can “deceive us” most of the time? Maybe I’m already being deceived, but I myself don’t even realize it.

Perhaps there is a better way to look at this problem of identification through a proactive lens. That is, let’s assume that you will be fooled on a regular basis (if you haven’t already). I don’t think “spotting fakes” is necessarily the right approach. Consistent with some articles I wrote on this blog a while back about finding fake news and why we fall for it, it’s more about the decision-making process about accepting what to believe. and the critical thinking required to make such decisions. It’s about identification itself. Indeed, AI has recently become a topic of discussion within critical thinking research (e.g. Dumitru & Halpern, 2023; Eigenauer, 2023; Saiz & Rivas, 2023). For example, regarding the potential impact on human attention and decision-making. , along with the current possibility of error, as explained above.

ask yourself questions

If you’re concerned about the information you’re reading or the videos/images you’re watching (the kind of care that requires critical thinking), you need to ask yourself some questions. For example, does “political candidate x” featured in a hypothetical video actually do or say what I see or hear? Is it in line with their attitude or out of character? If the latter, is this a glimpse of their true colors or am I being fooled? Are there other sources that suggest the same behavior? Are there other videos of the person that we can compare to? Simply put, we avoid jumping to conclusions about what we see or read, and avoid criticizing them. It is necessary to engage the reflexive judgment element of intellectual thinking.

Sounds like a lot of work. Well, no one said critical thinking was easy. But unfortunately, if you really care about the topic you’re thinking about, that’s what you need right now. If you’re a critical thinker, you’re probably already somewhat prepared for these advances in AI. We have been dealing with misinformation for hundreds of years. More recently, “deepfakes” (powered by AI) have emerged. News sources have competed for viewership and readership by sensationalizing news stories and offering unique perspectives on things. We needed critical thinking about those, and we need critical thinking about this.

new knowledge economy

For example, consider the “new knowledge economy,” a concept frequently discussed on this blog. Truth be told, it’s nothing “new” at all. Simply put, since the beginning of the 2000s we have seen an exponential increase in the amount of new information being created. From 1999 to 2002, the amount of newly created information is said to be equal to the amount of information previously developed throughout the history of the world, and furthermore, the creation of new information is said to double every two years. estimated (Jukes & McCain, 2002; Varian & Lyman, 2003)—dating back to the early 1990s. As of 2024, it is almost impossible to “guess” how many zettabytes of data are created every day. Importantly, even 20 years ago, simply being informed was not enough. We have had to adapt our thinking to account for multiple sources, multiple slants, multiple biases, and multiple “truths” of data we receive on a particular topic. The mechanisms by which we adapt to this have not changed. We needed critical thinking then, and we need it now. The need for this is perhaps even greater now, especially given the global events that have taken place since the dawn of this “new knowledge economy,” including increased political, economic, social, and health-related concerns. I am. Examples: “fake news,” gaps in political opinion among the general public, economic collapse, various social movements, the COVID-19 pandemic, etc.)

Indeed, the introduction of AI into the world has many implications. They are both spectacular and alarming, and adaptation may be a difficult challenge (Saiz & Rivas, 2023), but the mechanisms behind such adaptations are not what was needed 20 years ago. There’s no denying that not much has changed since then. If you really want to draw reasonable conclusions, solve problems, and make decisions about topics you care about, think critically about the information involved. Just as Socrates feared the written word more than 2,000 years ago, we now fear AI as the new frontier of technological progress. Because the world is forever evolving, we need to adapt, avoid relying solely on decline bias (e.g., fear of the new and different), and be proactive in ways that allow us to adapt. . We need critical thinking, along with more efforts to develop and strengthen critical thinking. In conclusion, I am not saying that AI is all good, and I am not saying that it is all bad, but it is developing and advancing whether we like it or not. And the most proactive thing we can do about AI is: Prepare yourself by developing critical thinking.

References