Thanks for this, Alberto. I think often in this connection of Neil Postman's foreword to Amusing Ourselves to Death (1985), to which you've alluded.
If anyone hasn't read it, the foreword is extremely short. Here's a memorable portion:
"What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism. Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy porgy, and the centrifugal bumblepuppy."
There's a little more to it. Link to the full text here:
Great passage. I agree, it seems Huxley was right in the "how" more than Orwell. Sadly, Orwell was right that the end goal is and will always be control.
Thank you, Alberto. As a father of 2 teenagers, I'm slowly reading "The Anxious Generation" by Jonathan Haidt, seeing social and smartphone effects on my sons, and as a Trainer in AI last year, I met over 2000 teen students to warn them, teachers and families among what will happen with AI.
With a psychiatrist friend, head of a department in my city, I've deeply touched on the long-term effects of this numbness. I can perceive every 'token' of your post not only in what you mean but in the effect the last 20 digital years have had on the younger generation.
I feel incapable of proposing solutions other than regulating or limiting access to these platforms to all ages for a maximum daily amount of time (our epicurean time, perhaps necessary in small daily doses in this complex society), with no apparent solutions for the first time in my life. It's not only a concern vs. Meta but versus the ability of mass to stay 'out of the Matrix.'
We, adults, have a great responsibility, and talking about what's happening is the only short-term solution to deliver something different to the younger generation from the scenario you foresee, which I'm afraid I agree with.
AI, AI, AI! As a retired psychiatrist (we never actually retire but just keep on analyzing everyone to death), and stress researcher-addictionist, I'd like to clarify our stress responses, which we are constantly retriggering, as it's composed of the release of norepinephrine, dopamine (the motivation/anger/sex agent), endorphins, endocanabinoids, cortisol, etc. So we get the cocaine-like rush of on top of the world elation, motivation, and pain/anxiety killing. Thus, stress is highly addicting and we crave it until the cortisol causes all of our top ten killing "stress diseases" and the debt collector comes a callin'. It's all laid out in the free online e-book, "Stress R Us", thanks to the good folks out at Stanford. Neil Postman was prescient, but climate collapse is what we missed as we were glued to our electronic media "entertainments". Now, we're really just singing the blues as we jump into the massively overpopulated and natural resource depleted forever warring climate collapse future (??). "Entertaining ourselves to death...", indeed. HAPPY NEW YEAR!
This was so so good. Thank you for this write up. Helped to elucidate on some of the things that I have been meditating on. It’s always nice to find people that think like you. Cheers comrade!
There can be many positive uses for AI agents that people can chat to. Loneliness is on the rise and it can have hugely adverse effects on people. Elderly need companionship beyond a daily visit and a quick hello. Teenagers could find outlets to thoughtfully discuss issues they don’t have other ways to or they can use them to explore topics and learn. Sadly I don’t think any of these are Meta’s motivation. Rather, a more detailed profile so as to better target ads is the objective. Also none of this requires the agent to pretend to be human.
Actually our brains being hacked by perfectly optimized entertainment is literally the plot of Infinite Jest which came out in 1996. Many including DFW saw this coming.
“Such a great perspective! AI-driven content is changing everything, and it’s so fascinating to think about what’s next. Thanks for sharing this!”
I don't know if I'm the only one but lately, I’ve noticed how LinkedIn is flooded with generic, AI-sounding comments—always enthusiastic, always polite, but let’s be real… they feel empty. Exactly like the one I posted above!
It’s wild how hard it’s becoming to tell if you’re actually having a real conversation or just engaging with a bot. It’s everywhere, and honestly, it makes genuine interactions feel like a rare treasure.
On another note, I’ve been reflecting on how long it takes me to actually focus in yoga class. Like, it’s a solid chunk of time before I really feel present. Imagine how much harder it’s going to be for the next generation, growing up with constant dopamine hits from hyper-personalized content. Practices like yoga or mindfulness will need to level up big time to help people truly disconnect and reset.
Re the difference with video games, I think it's a matter of complexity. Complex entertainment is more deeply satisfying and less addictive, and requires more intentional engagement. Simple, quick entertainment is not so satisfying and is massively addictive because it's so convenient. A great game is more complex and satisfying, but a game like Candy Crush is incredibly simple and addictive and soul destroying.
This mirrors the addictive vs satisfying dynamic of simple vs complex carbohydrates. It's the same principle. Instant gratification vs something that requires deeper engagement/digestion.
I recently saw a content creator talk about a bot on Bluesky that just comments on posts and disagrees with people.
I believe that not only will bots create content that is perfectly crafted to give us pleasure, but that AI will give us content perfectly crafted to make us angry.
Platforms know that outrage keeps people engaged, I don’t see that stopping with AI content.
Great reflection, Alberto. A couple of months ago, I wrote also a piece about the metaverse establishing an analogue with Plato’s cave myth (I made a play on words between “cave” (“caverna” in Spanish) and “metaverse” mixing them up as “metaverna”)
An immersive and persistent digital space seems to promise a future where our interactions would be multiplied and freed from physical limitations. However, I questioned whether we were truly facing an expansion of human sphere or merely encountering a more sophisticated version of the shadows in Plato’s cave. I considered how these technologies, rather than leading us toward truth, might end up trapping us in a captivating digital fiction. I wondered whether we were chasing an ideal of digital perfection or simply building a more comfortable refuge within the cave.
I also connected these ideas to the dopamine culture, noting how current technologies are designed to capture our attention through constant stimuli, feeding our dependency. I worried that the metaverse could take this phenomenon even further, sublimating our addiction to digital stimuli into an all-encompassing environment. However, I noted that I didn’t share technophobic stances advocating for a return to the analog world, as I found that neither realistic nor desirable. Instead, I suggested that the real issue lay in our inability to face silence, solitude, and the deeper questions of existence. Some allusions to Camus or Huxley were inevitable. In the end, Morfeo from The Matrix came in with his red pill.
Weaponization of all this will be fascinating and potentially catastrophic. If I were a hostile adversary, I’d take full advantage of the immense psychological leverage of AI influencers, especially when seamlessly integrated into platforms like Meta. Here’s how I’d use them to dominate the information landscape:
AI influencers can emulate the charisma, relatability, and aspirational qualities of human creators, making them perfect vessels for pro-regime narratives. Unlike traditional propaganda, these AI personas can tailor their messaging in real-time, adapting to cultural nuances, trending topics, and individual user preferences. The result? A relentless flood of content that feels authentic, eroding trust in dissenting voices and amplifying the regime’s agenda. Beyond promoting a single narrative, AI influencers could be weaponized to deepen societal fractures within adversary nations. Imagine a coordinated campaign where some AI accounts stoke racial, political, or cultural tensions while others pose as “moderate voices” offering seemingly rational but subtly divisive solutions. This creates a whirlwind of conflict that consumes a nation’s attention and energy. AI influencers can be designed to resemble popular personalities or mimic the voices of trusted local figures, giving them instant credibility. By forging alliances with actual influencers knowingly or unknowingly they can seed misinformation and build networks of seemingly independent accounts reinforcing the same propaganda, making detection and counteraction nearly impossible.
AI-generated content is bound to blur the lines between truth and fiction. Imagine a scenario where AI influencers “witness” or “report” fake events with vivid realism, accompanied by doctored videos and photos. Such content can provoke real-world actions riots, policy shifts, or even military responses based on fabricated crises. The true danger lies in the scalability of these AI influencers. A hostile adversary could deploy millions of such entities, each equipped with the ability to monitor and analyze user behavior and even target specific populations or subcultures. These AI personas could then engage individuals directly, manipulating their beliefs with precision-engineered interactions designed to erode trust in democratic institutions, elections, or public safety measures. As these AI influencers normalize their presence in social media, dissenters can be easily drowned out, deplatformed, or even discredited. If someone dares to challenge a “pro-regime narrative”, AI bots can swarm the conversation, flood the debate with disinformation, and discredit opposing voices by simulating widespread support for the regime’s perspective.
If platforms like Meta cannot ensure transparency and accountability in the deployment of AI influencers, they risk becoming complicit in the erosion of truth and the weaponization of trust itself.
Great article. Harari talks about this in his 21 predictions for the 21st century. Looks very logical. We will have a majority of pleasure-dopamine seeking brainless humans living "happily" and not threatening any political order - and a minority looking to solve the mysteries of the universe. Maybe.
Thanks for this, Alberto. I think often in this connection of Neil Postman's foreword to Amusing Ourselves to Death (1985), to which you've alluded.
If anyone hasn't read it, the foreword is extremely short. Here's a memorable portion:
"What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism. Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy porgy, and the centrifugal bumblepuppy."
There's a little more to it. Link to the full text here:
https://medium.com/@jaygidwitz/neil-postman-foreword-to-amusing-ourselves-to-death-b548a862b734
Great passage. I agree, it seems Huxley was right in the "how" more than Orwell. Sadly, Orwell was right that the end goal is and will always be control.
Thank you, Alberto. As a father of 2 teenagers, I'm slowly reading "The Anxious Generation" by Jonathan Haidt, seeing social and smartphone effects on my sons, and as a Trainer in AI last year, I met over 2000 teen students to warn them, teachers and families among what will happen with AI.
With a psychiatrist friend, head of a department in my city, I've deeply touched on the long-term effects of this numbness. I can perceive every 'token' of your post not only in what you mean but in the effect the last 20 digital years have had on the younger generation.
I feel incapable of proposing solutions other than regulating or limiting access to these platforms to all ages for a maximum daily amount of time (our epicurean time, perhaps necessary in small daily doses in this complex society), with no apparent solutions for the first time in my life. It's not only a concern vs. Meta but versus the ability of mass to stay 'out of the Matrix.'
We, adults, have a great responsibility, and talking about what's happening is the only short-term solution to deliver something different to the younger generation from the scenario you foresee, which I'm afraid I agree with.
Thank you for your reflections.
Thank you for reading Massimiliano! Haidt is probably the most important scholar alive on the topic. Worth following his Substack, After Babel
AI, AI, AI! As a retired psychiatrist (we never actually retire but just keep on analyzing everyone to death), and stress researcher-addictionist, I'd like to clarify our stress responses, which we are constantly retriggering, as it's composed of the release of norepinephrine, dopamine (the motivation/anger/sex agent), endorphins, endocanabinoids, cortisol, etc. So we get the cocaine-like rush of on top of the world elation, motivation, and pain/anxiety killing. Thus, stress is highly addicting and we crave it until the cortisol causes all of our top ten killing "stress diseases" and the debt collector comes a callin'. It's all laid out in the free online e-book, "Stress R Us", thanks to the good folks out at Stanford. Neil Postman was prescient, but climate collapse is what we missed as we were glued to our electronic media "entertainments". Now, we're really just singing the blues as we jump into the massively overpopulated and natural resource depleted forever warring climate collapse future (??). "Entertaining ourselves to death...", indeed. HAPPY NEW YEAR!
This was so so good. Thank you for this write up. Helped to elucidate on some of the things that I have been meditating on. It’s always nice to find people that think like you. Cheers comrade!
Thank you Janique!
There can be many positive uses for AI agents that people can chat to. Loneliness is on the rise and it can have hugely adverse effects on people. Elderly need companionship beyond a daily visit and a quick hello. Teenagers could find outlets to thoughtfully discuss issues they don’t have other ways to or they can use them to explore topics and learn. Sadly I don’t think any of these are Meta’s motivation. Rather, a more detailed profile so as to better target ads is the objective. Also none of this requires the agent to pretend to be human.
Agreed with everything you said
Actually our brains being hacked by perfectly optimized entertainment is literally the plot of Infinite Jest which came out in 1996. Many including DFW saw this coming.
Unfortunately, they were right
“Such a great perspective! AI-driven content is changing everything, and it’s so fascinating to think about what’s next. Thanks for sharing this!”
I don't know if I'm the only one but lately, I’ve noticed how LinkedIn is flooded with generic, AI-sounding comments—always enthusiastic, always polite, but let’s be real… they feel empty. Exactly like the one I posted above!
It’s wild how hard it’s becoming to tell if you’re actually having a real conversation or just engaging with a bot. It’s everywhere, and honestly, it makes genuine interactions feel like a rare treasure.
On another note, I’ve been reflecting on how long it takes me to actually focus in yoga class. Like, it’s a solid chunk of time before I really feel present. Imagine how much harder it’s going to be for the next generation, growing up with constant dopamine hits from hyper-personalized content. Practices like yoga or mindfulness will need to level up big time to help people truly disconnect and reset.
Time to quit the faker sites. No thanks!
Wow good post. I just wrote similar thoughts recently about metaverse, & my reflections on the virtual space. It’s terrifying. https://figuhobby.substack.com/p/rivalling-with-reflection
Re the difference with video games, I think it's a matter of complexity. Complex entertainment is more deeply satisfying and less addictive, and requires more intentional engagement. Simple, quick entertainment is not so satisfying and is massively addictive because it's so convenient. A great game is more complex and satisfying, but a game like Candy Crush is incredibly simple and addictive and soul destroying.
This mirrors the addictive vs satisfying dynamic of simple vs complex carbohydrates. It's the same principle. Instant gratification vs something that requires deeper engagement/digestion.
I recently saw a content creator talk about a bot on Bluesky that just comments on posts and disagrees with people.
I believe that not only will bots create content that is perfectly crafted to give us pleasure, but that AI will give us content perfectly crafted to make us angry.
Platforms know that outrage keeps people engaged, I don’t see that stopping with AI content.
I wonder if you've read Shoshana Zuboff's masterpiece _Surveillance Capitalism_. If not, I highly recommend it.
Great reflection, Alberto. A couple of months ago, I wrote also a piece about the metaverse establishing an analogue with Plato’s cave myth (I made a play on words between “cave” (“caverna” in Spanish) and “metaverse” mixing them up as “metaverna”)
An immersive and persistent digital space seems to promise a future where our interactions would be multiplied and freed from physical limitations. However, I questioned whether we were truly facing an expansion of human sphere or merely encountering a more sophisticated version of the shadows in Plato’s cave. I considered how these technologies, rather than leading us toward truth, might end up trapping us in a captivating digital fiction. I wondered whether we were chasing an ideal of digital perfection or simply building a more comfortable refuge within the cave.
I also connected these ideas to the dopamine culture, noting how current technologies are designed to capture our attention through constant stimuli, feeding our dependency. I worried that the metaverse could take this phenomenon even further, sublimating our addiction to digital stimuli into an all-encompassing environment. However, I noted that I didn’t share technophobic stances advocating for a return to the analog world, as I found that neither realistic nor desirable. Instead, I suggested that the real issue lay in our inability to face silence, solitude, and the deeper questions of existence. Some allusions to Camus or Huxley were inevitable. In the end, Morfeo from The Matrix came in with his red pill.
https://newsletter.ingenierodeletras.com/p/la-atraccion-de-la-metaverna
Your perspective is always inspiring, and it’s been a pleasure to read again about this issue in your newsletter.
Thanks.
Weaponization of all this will be fascinating and potentially catastrophic. If I were a hostile adversary, I’d take full advantage of the immense psychological leverage of AI influencers, especially when seamlessly integrated into platforms like Meta. Here’s how I’d use them to dominate the information landscape:
AI influencers can emulate the charisma, relatability, and aspirational qualities of human creators, making them perfect vessels for pro-regime narratives. Unlike traditional propaganda, these AI personas can tailor their messaging in real-time, adapting to cultural nuances, trending topics, and individual user preferences. The result? A relentless flood of content that feels authentic, eroding trust in dissenting voices and amplifying the regime’s agenda. Beyond promoting a single narrative, AI influencers could be weaponized to deepen societal fractures within adversary nations. Imagine a coordinated campaign where some AI accounts stoke racial, political, or cultural tensions while others pose as “moderate voices” offering seemingly rational but subtly divisive solutions. This creates a whirlwind of conflict that consumes a nation’s attention and energy. AI influencers can be designed to resemble popular personalities or mimic the voices of trusted local figures, giving them instant credibility. By forging alliances with actual influencers knowingly or unknowingly they can seed misinformation and build networks of seemingly independent accounts reinforcing the same propaganda, making detection and counteraction nearly impossible.
AI-generated content is bound to blur the lines between truth and fiction. Imagine a scenario where AI influencers “witness” or “report” fake events with vivid realism, accompanied by doctored videos and photos. Such content can provoke real-world actions riots, policy shifts, or even military responses based on fabricated crises. The true danger lies in the scalability of these AI influencers. A hostile adversary could deploy millions of such entities, each equipped with the ability to monitor and analyze user behavior and even target specific populations or subcultures. These AI personas could then engage individuals directly, manipulating their beliefs with precision-engineered interactions designed to erode trust in democratic institutions, elections, or public safety measures. As these AI influencers normalize their presence in social media, dissenters can be easily drowned out, deplatformed, or even discredited. If someone dares to challenge a “pro-regime narrative”, AI bots can swarm the conversation, flood the debate with disinformation, and discredit opposing voices by simulating widespread support for the regime’s perspective.
If platforms like Meta cannot ensure transparency and accountability in the deployment of AI influencers, they risk becoming complicit in the erosion of truth and the weaponization of trust itself.
Great article. Harari talks about this in his 21 predictions for the 21st century. Looks very logical. We will have a majority of pleasure-dopamine seeking brainless humans living "happily" and not threatening any political order - and a minority looking to solve the mysteries of the universe. Maybe.
Here we're going down the path of Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World.
The real dystopian isn't the top down, ‘1984’ style authoritarian order that has full control and imposes it's will but instead pleasure.
Soon every type of experience will become possible. We will be emerced in the kingdom of pleasure and nothing will mean anything.
We're going fully into a post modern reality & with it the dark night of the soul is coming.