Opinion: In defense of individualistic resistance

Someone asks ChatGPT how to use their phone less. Art by Dasha Allyn.

Last year, I wrote a piece arguing against the use of artificial intelligence and large language models. Foolishly, I believed generative artificial intelligence (AI) could be a flash in the pan. I assumed it would go the way of NFTs, rather than cement its place as a generation-defining technological advance. If everyone resisted, considered its detrimental impact on the environment and its potential for economic devastation, maybe we could get rid of AI. Clearly, we’re past that point. AI is everywhere. AI-generated images dominate social media, while comments sections devolve into meaningless conversations between bots. Music streaming platforms are platforming AI artists. It’s being used to create advertisements, and new AI capabilities are being added to many existing services. It’s even expanding outside of the business world and into people’s personal lives. 

With generative AI becoming so pervasive, personal resistance may seem fruitless and even obstinate. But that doesn’t diminish the value that can be found in fighting back. 

Many people have decided opposing this new technology is likely to be ineffective and therefore meaningless. AI can make work more efficient through data analysis and taking over mundane tasks. Even for those who acknowledge the negative environmental impacts of AI, defiance seems pointless, considering the impact of an individual's ChatGPT usage feels negligible in comparison to greenhouse gas emissions and environmental degradation by governments and larger corporations. Additionally, abstaining from AI feels particularly foolish when considering the history of technological innovation and its accompanying opposition. 

Technological advancements have always impacted the job market. During the industrial revolution, a group of workers called the Luddites destroyed the technology they believed was ruining their quality of life. After the invention of the automatic switchboard, switchboard operators, a majority female workforce, lost their jobs. While this loss negatively impacted these women for many years, eventually, new jobs were created. 

One may argue that technology isn’t the enemy in these situations. It isn’t truly the technology that leads workers to lose their jobs; it’s the profit-driven forces of the capitalist market. It could also be argued that these technologies are less harmful when government regulation catches up to innovation. 

These points are reasonable. However, technology doesn’t just impact the economic or political landscape. It impacts the way people communicate and connect with one another. And the current mode of artificial intelligence seems to be having detrimental effects on people’s well-being and socialization. 

Social media has already contributed to isolation and a growing mental health crisis. AI has only broadened this social separation. People are turning to AI for therapy, companionship and even romantic relationships. It may be cringe. In some cases, it may be rooted in many men’s patriarchal desire to have a woman to control. Yet, more than anything, it feels like evidence of people’s loneliness or vulnerability being taken advantage of. AI companies encourage people to be reliant on their services for their emotional well-being, but users have no way to hold these corporations accountable and may lose access to these services when they are put behind a paywall. 

It feels like everything is for sale now. Advertising is everywhere, everything is a streaming service, and everyone wants your attention. Our attention and personal data are hot commodities. Now, with people divulging more of their personal lives to chat bots run by large corporations, our hopes, dreams and fears are a commodity, too. 

Even before this rise in generative AI, there were people pushing back against the way our attention is bought and sold. Some people have rid themselves of the internet entirely, but for most, the necessities of everyday life make an offline existence mere fantasy. However, there are still ways to limit our subservience to the digital world. Some are investing in dumb phones, while others are making a push to reinvest in physical media. It may require more initial effort to purchase a CD or DVD player, but it allows users greater distance from their phone and control over what they consume. 

The movement toward rejection of digital media seems like a potential blueprint for those skeptical of AI. It’s not realistic to expect AI to go away or for there to be a universal pushback. No one can control the opinions of everyone around them. But recognizing that AI appears to have a detrimental impact on one’s quality of life, and thus abstaining from it, is a positive start.

This issue reminds me of a story by journalist Evan Ratcliff, wherein he reckons with the evolving role of AI in society, grappling with its prevalence and abilities through the lens of a New York Times article from 1924. The article is titled “This Machine-Made World Conquers One More Rebel,” and it covers a shopkeeper who finally got a telephone after years of resistance. The shopkeeper’s unhappy with this choice; it goes against his personal philosophy, and he holds a distaste for all that the telephone represents. Nonetheless, “progress”marches forward. 

Previously, I might have looked down on his resistance. I may have wondered why someone on the precipice of such innovation was so resistant to it. Now, I understand. I recognize that future generations may look at the resistance of those who oppose AI as foolish and futile. Many people view it that way, even today. It is, undoubtedly, a resistance to ease. To efficiency. To maximizing productivity.

However, this is not a detraction from such defiance. It is the reason for it. There’s no value in a life that’s primary goal is efficiency. Be unproductive. Less successful, even. But retain your values, your humanity. Indulge not in slop but in that which delights you. Consume art that lacks machine-made sheen but brims with emotion. Seek comfort not in the arms of a machine but in the warm embrace of your fellow man. 

Maybe someday, you too will succumb to the ongoing parade of technological advancement. Nonetheless, your opposition will have been worthwhile. One of the rebels against the telephone told the reporter, “I have no telephone, but I have peace.” Even for those who cannot resist forever, that peace, momentary as it may be, is worth pursuing.