Has artificial intelligence become the new mantra of our time? In many sectors, the message sounds almost self-evident: AI will inexorably shape our future. A well-oiled speech, hammered out by the major tech groups (OpenAI which multiplies initiatives to ensure its profitability, Google and its numerous projects, Meta, or even Apple with Apple Intelligence), but also by their cronies from other circles .
This rhetoric of the inevitable has imposed itself in the public debate with implacable force. From medicine to education, including defense and industry, no sector escapes this new technological doxa. Yet, beneath this veneer of unanimity, dissonant voices emerge. A team of researchers from the Center for Applied Ethics at UMass Boston University is calling into question these well-established certainties. Their analysis dismantles the arguments of the “technoprophets” and invites us to rethink our relationship with this technology. Beyond the hype and the fantastic promises, what is the reality of this so-called revolution? Do the benefits really justify such massive and rushed adoption?
Economic performance below expectations
The private sector continues to tout the merits of AI. Start-ups are multiplying, investments are soaring (a little too much), and consultants are predicting a radical transformation of the world of work. But behind this media excitement lies a much less glorious reality. The economic analysis published by The Economist in July 2024 paints a mixed picture: the benefits still remain marginal and productivity gains are struggling to materialize.
Large groups, caught in a frantic race for innovation, deploy AI solutions sometimes without any real strategic vision. Forced automation generates hidden costs: team training, process adaptation, system maintenance. Even more worrying, some companies are sacrificing essential human skills on the altar of technological modernization.
Teaching in danger in the face of the AI wave
The educational environment is also going through a period of profound change. Establishments are investing massively in AI tools, overturning centuries of educational traditions. The exercise of the dissertation, the cornerstone of intellectual training, is particularly threatened. How can we assess a student’s thinking ability when algorithms can produce increasingly sophisticated texts? What to do about plagiarism?
Beyond evaluation questions, it’s the entire relationship to knowledge that is turned upside down. Memorization, structuring of thought, comparison with original texts: all fundamental skills potentially weakened by excessive use of AI. Researchers also warn of the risk of seeing the development of a growing cognitive dependence on these digital 4.0 tools.
Hidden geostrategic issues
The militarization of artificial intelligence sets the boundaries of a new global geopolitics with dizzying implications. Beyond the martial declarations on technological superiority, it is the very foundations of international balance that are shaken. In this new digital cold war, the United States, China and Russia areare waging a silent battle for control of autonomous weapon systems.
In this race, However, essential questions are largely evaded. The countries of the South, excluded from this competition due to lack of resources, see the specter of increased military dependence looming. Their territories could become life-size laboratories for technologies that are still in their infancy. Yemen, for example, the scene of clashes between combat drones for around ten years, perhaps foreshadows this worrying future.
The legal vacuum surrounding these new forms of conflict alarms experts in international law. How to apply the Geneva Conventions, adopted in 1864, to machines whose decisions are beyond human control ? Existing protocols, designed for conventional wars, thus prove to be completely obsolete in the face of weapons capable of learning and autonomy.
The analysis by researchers at the Center for Applied Ethics therefore calls us to rethink our relationship with AI. Rather than blind submission to technological diktat, They prefer a reflective and measured approach to this. Their message challenges the prevailing conformism: innovation is not an end in itself, but a means to human development.
This debate can no longer be reduced to a simplistic alternative between blissful technophilia and sterile technophobia. The issues – economic, social, environmental – require in-depth collective reflection. What place should be given to automation in our societies? How can we preserve our intellectual autonomy in the face of decision support systems? How can we guarantee equitable access to these technologies while limiting their ecological footprint? The answer to these questions cannot come from experts or industrial players alone and requires, ideally, the involvement of all citizens in a renewed democratic debate. The future is not written and AI will not change this reality. Between technological submission and radical rejection, a third path is emerging: that of an enlightened mastery of AI in the service of the common good. It’s up to us to borrow it, while there is still time.
- The promises of AI are often exaggerated, with economic and productive gains still limited despite massive investments.
- The rapid adoption of AI poses risks to education, human skills and the global geopolitical balance.
- A thoughtful and democratic approach is essential to integrating AI for the common good.
