Digital Dilemma, True Confessions

Thinking for Thinking’s Sake

by  •  • 0 Comments

Last weekend I had a random conversation with a legal executive from a technology company. Business was booming for the company. This was mostly because it specialized in AI, something everybody wants to have. She found it slightly ironic that we don’t want kids to learn with AI in schools. Yet, when they graduate, the expectation is that they will work with it. Almost all the engineers and developers in her organization used AI regularly, generative and agentic.

Though I could see her point, it raised some interesting questions. I feel different about using AI. I already know how to write essays and communications, create powerpoints, and draft emails. For me, AI is a short cut and a time saver. My base skills are firmly entrenched. In essence, AI provides me with another tool in the toolbox. However, people using AI as the main method don’t understand the full process before determining where AI is helpful or time saving. Instead, they rely on AI as the base skill to complete work.

I considered this over the next few days. One puzzling aspect is that sometimes people, even those raised on Google and ChatGPT, often don’t think to use it. They don’t even think to use something that literally does the thinking for them. For example, last summer when we had a trapped skunk in the window well, nobody thought about using search to save this poor animal. It was astounding to me. Instead, they all went about smelling the stink and shrugging their shoulders. I guarantee the stench of a dead, rotting animal would have been far more pungent than scared skunk stink.

I also experience this when people are tasked to figure something out. In other words, performing a self-directed task. In an earlier blog, I wrote my reliance on the library, or asking others for answers. It’s almost as if the lack of resources forced us to become more resourceful. With the abundance of resources, they’re so ubiquitous people have the lost the ability to even think of using them. For example, if I don’t understand instructions, I use Google, or even ask someone, for further clarification. I might even use something like ChatGPT or CoPilot (generative AI) to suggest an approach or for additional clarificaiton. What I wouldn’t do is sit around confused and unable to start, not with so many resources at my fingertips.

Digital Dilemma

Agent Smarts

by  •  • 1 Comment

I had to schedule a session with the mechanic to check my car due to a product update. This time, when I called to schedule a time, the entire conversation happened with a ChatBot. A previous experience in 2023 trying to schedule a routine tire swap felt disastrous and left me feeling leery of future attempts with a machine. However, unlike previous times, it actually went pretty well. The Chatbot understood what I was saying. No guessing and interpreting from the ChatBot.

Even though it wasn’t disclosed I was speaking to a chatbot I could tell. The cadence and lilt of the voice wasn’t exactly like human language, but it was pretty close. However, the chatbot did a great job capturing the necessary details accurately. For example, my last name is tricky to spell. A “t” in in my last name sometimes ends up as a “c”, “p”, or “d”. Same as a I do with a human, I say “t like tango” when I get to this letter to avoid misspellings. When the chatbot spelled my name back to me I was expecting it to have inserted the word “tango” into the spelling, but it didn’t! It had correctly interpreted that I was using “tango” only to indicate the letter “t”. Score 1 point for the chatbot.

Through the phone call I also provided my phone number, VIN, and product recall case number. All in all, the transaction felt pretty smooth. I could feel myself remaining calm and unflustered providing the routine details. The Chatbot was accurate and quick! I spent no time on idle chitchat, waiting for something, or being put on hold. The call was efficient and informative. I even scheduled a drop off time and coordinated a shuttle service. The Chatbot even answered questions about how long the service appointment would take and provided some additional information.

The only tricky part came at the end. I disconnected still a bit unclear if somebody (i.e., a human) would be reaching out to confirm the appointment. I felt like the Chatbot scheduled it. But even if it didn’t end up confirmed, I feel confident that at least my information is accurate. At this particular dealership I’ve dealt with issues because somebody (i.e., a human), input the VIN number wrong. They inadvertently transposed two digits. It caused a lot of confusion with scheduling until it was eventually corrected.

Digital Dilemma, True Confessions

The Lost Language of the Library

by  •  • 1 Comment

I grew up in the analog-age when we didn’t have quick access to information. Learning something meant a trip to the library. Or we had to ask around to find an expert. Mostly, we learned through reading books, articles, newspapers, etc. Basically anything paper-based, or sometimes the odd VHS tape or audio option, provided us with what we needed. Researching something, or learning something new, could take time and effort. Even going to the library meant thumbing through card catalogs or browsing through the shelves hoping to get lucky. In library school this practice was often referred to as “serendipity.” Though not a technical library term, it flashed through our first-year class at school as a primary argument on the benefits of shelf browsing.

By my last year in library school, in the early 2000’s, I could comfortably search for whatever I needed without leaving my home. All I needed was an internet connection and some good search queries. However, even though Google and other search engines were available, this was not a good substitute for what the library offered if I needed to do serious research. Rather Google, and other search engines, remained great options to find out about restaurants, events, movies, or for shopping. The library, however, remained a place to search a collection of carefully curated and quality assured resources.

The library offers a wealth of information, all vetted and sourced by qualified information professionals. I feel confident about resources I find in the library that they are factual, high quality, and legitimate. I don’t feel this same sense of reassurance when I search on the internet. This feeling is amplified now that most sites offer a regurgitated, bulleted list of mish-mashed AI-generated jumbles. Usually this is the “top” search result.

I feel concerned about how people receive information today. It was already difficult to navigate the murkiness of disinformation and misinformation. This intensified with the introduction of generative AI, which adds doubts about the credibility of photos and videos. We’re being lulled into a void of complacency and false narratives by believing what we see and read in those first few AI-generated points when we search. Instead, we should be reinforcing our attention and focus towards the libraries. In today’s world, the services offered by a library feel even more critical and relevant, especially if we need solid footing on information we can trust.

Digital Dilemma, True Confessions

A Touch of Nostalgia

by  •  • 2 Comments

At a popup outdoor event one weekend, one of the booths was giving away an old-fashioned game. I say “old-fashioned” because I recognized it from my childhood. Though of course this 2026 version was fancier with brighter colors and flashier images. It even included sparkles! However, I have no doubt that it worked just as well as the ones I had growing up.

The game looks simple, but it can be tricky. Basically, pushing the yellow knobs on either side moves the little rings around. The goal is to hook as many rings as possible on the blue sword-like points on either side. What I like about it is that it’s fun, engaging, just challenging enough, and not on a screen.

Looking around at today’s youth, always glued to some kind of electronic, or attached to a device, I felt a bit sad for them. Everything they interact with is designed to dominate and hijack their attention. Games feature realistic graphics, catchy sound tracks, add-ons and features. All of which guarantees hooking even the most savvy users. Even worse, it makes every other experience seem dull and somehow, not quite sensational enough to keep one’s attention.

Growing up with these analog-type games where the action is simple, engaging, yet hard enough to be fun, provides a different experience. An experience, I feel, is also important for connecting. You can use your brain differently, or even feel bored with something because it provides the same action repeatedly. Games like this are easy to share with one another. You can pass this game to a friend without fearing your whole life is going with it, as we might sharing a smartphone with somebody.

I’m not sure what this will mean for today’s youth, growing up in an environment hyper saturated with the most sensational, stimulating everything. However, I do know at least some young people, are experiencing amoneia (longing for nostalgic things one never experienced) and looking for ways to be bored. They should try going analog once in a while to stimulate their brain in new ways.

Digital Photos

Seeing Isn’t Believing

by  •  • 1 Comment

It used to be that a picture, or video, carried a lot of weight in terms of evidence. I don’t think this is the case anymore with the advent of AI. In a relatively short amount of time, AI capabilities have transformed and undermined the credibility of photos and video. Creating or altering images with AI is inexpensive, easy, and available to everyone. Within minutes, (or mere seconds!) AI can generate a realistic image designed to fool us, sometimes by imitating or mimicking something real with a few specific tweaks. Even worse, it’s getting more difficult to tell when AI is generating something.

I think about all the wars going on with their horrific photos. Even while I can’t imagine what it’s like for these people to live through these realities, I know that others sit there and use AI to generate fake images of these wars. I’ve seen them and they look very realistic and seem believable to somebody like myself who lives far away and never witnessed such events in person. Yet, these photos only serve to muddy up accounts of what’s really happening. They often get posted and reposted, mingling with the real images making it impossible to determine fact from fabrication.

Photos I take with my smartphone have AI built in. Some features, however, remain enabled, no matter what. For example, on some photos, an eerie, sparkling white border flashes around the main focus of the image. I’ve tried to Google what this means and how to turn it off, but haven’t been successful yet.

I suppose in some ways the big tech companies think baking in all these AI features is helpful. However, they do a disservice to us all by not allowing us to choose which features we want to use or disable. Maybe I don’t want AI automatically removing blemishes and imperfections in my photos. Maybe I don’t want AI making suggestions for me about parts of my photo with weird, shiny white borders. Or at least I don’t want these things happening without being able to have a choice.

Photos have made so many wonderful advances. I love being able to take digital photos and share them. I’ve even grown to love making digital scrapbooks. But I don’t like the way it’s so easy to manipulate and fool people with access to a powerful AI tool and a few clever prompts.

Digital Dilemma, True Confessions

Imagination Stagnation

by  •  • 0 Comments

This weekend I went to see The Dog Man Musical. It was a live performance. Throughout the show, I felt really impressed how the actors moved through different roles, scenes, and moods. They accomplished this all with simple props, voice changes, and accesories. For example, one character was both L’il Petey, a tiny cute kitten, a nurse, plus other minor characters and scenery. To switch between the nurse and kitten, she put on an orange hat with ears or a nurse’s hat. When she was the kitten, she unrolled her orange shirt sleeves which had black stripes on them. The point is, the actors did a few small things and my imagination filled in the gaps. This demonstrates the magic of live performance and the power of our own internal creativity.

During the show, the main set remained the same, inside of a treehouse. However, similar to the actors changing roles, the treehouse transformed into many different scenes. Again, this was accomplished with simple prop changes, most of the which the actors moved on and off themselves as part of the action. For example, during the two hospital scenes, the patient lay on a desk in the treehouse. Then one of the actors held up a sheet so we didn’t actually “see” the action, but got a strong idea of what was happening anyway. After, the sheet was removed and we saw the end result. Again, our imaginations taking care of some steps.

With the introduction of generative, and now agentic AI, on the scene, I feel concerned about our imaginations. Sometimes too much automation and technology isn’t beneficial for our development. The other week I read an article in the NYTimes, “What 370,000 College Essays Tell Us About A.I.’s Effects on Creativity.” In short, the results were not good. Based on the analysis, the essays submitted post-AI demonstrated less variety and range of original, different ideas. Basically, the use of AI was resulting in a more limited number of ideas. This is presumably because AI is based on prediction derived from what happened previously. That doesn’t leave a lot of room for something new, innovative, and totally different.

Sometimes less is more when it comes to developing and cutlivating our imaginative powers.