When most people hear the phrase “artificial intelligence,” they imagine something futuristic, almost magical. A technology that can think and learn like a human. But what does “artificial” actually mean? In Nathan Wrigley and Bob Dunn’s recent conversation, they tackle this question with humor and skepticism, questioning whether intelligence can truly be artificial or if we are simply slapping a smarter-sounding label on ordinary computing.
They draw a playful analogy to artificial plants. Just like a fake plant might catch your eye from across a room and blend in perfectly, it’s only after closer inspection that you realize it is not the real thing. So, is AI just technology dressed up to look intelligent? But artificial often means fake. So why do we hold AI in such high regard when we might scoff at a plastic flower?
Our sponsors keep the lights on.
Take a moment to check them out.
Blackwall keeps the bots, scrapers, and bad traffic away from your sites and your clients’ sites before it ever becomes a problem. If you’re a developer or agency managing WordPress installs, it’s worth a serious look. Check them out at Blackwall.com.
Omnisend just dropped SMS pricing to $0.007, and their migration team moves your automations, templates and contacts in five days, free. That means you could be saving up to 35% in less than a week. Use the code OpenChannels and get 30% off your first 3 months of any paid plan.
The conversation pushes further, questioning why society increasingly gives machines human traits through their names and functions. From “smartphones” to computers that “sleep,” these labels suggest cognitive abilities where there are none. A smartphone isn’t actually smarter than a regular phone, it just has more features. It’s branding and PR at work, designed to make us feel that these devices are more than their circuits and code.
Behind the humorous banter is a real concern: as this technology becomes more integrated and less distinguishable from real human skills, will we even care what’s “artificial” and what’s not? Nathan admits he feels conflicted. While he’d prefer to know if art or music is machine-made or human-created, he acknowledges that cost, convenience and entertainment might ultimately outweigh his ideals.
As more aspects of life become algorithmically generated, being able to spot the difference between the authentic and the artificial may become less important to many. But, as Bob notes, perhaps we should be labeling and acknowledging what’s human and what’s engineered. Is it time to be more honest about what is actually “intelligent” and what is just impressively artificial?
This repurposed from the episode “Artificial [fill in the blank]”
