The Machine That Fooled Napoleon

During an 1809 visit to Vienna, Napoleon Bonaparte was presented with a dazzling new piece of technology, an automaton that could beat even the greatest chess masters. Perhaps feeling overconfident, the French emperor asked to play against “the Mechanical Turk,” as it was known. At first, he cheated, wishing to see if the machine would notice. It did, and promptly swept away the pieces from the board. In a rematch, the Mechanical Turk beat the emperor. 

No one should have been shocked when, years later, the son of the mechanical Turk’s creator revealed the illusion behind the machine that had fooled some of the world’s most powerful people. In every match the automaton ever played, a chess master hired by its creator was hiding inside, moving the pieces with magnets.

With AI, the gears running the machine are mathematical computation. Nothing new, but the presentation of the automaton as an independent being is no less dishonest. The magic hidden inside is, in fact, theft. AI realists will caution that this is a normal technology, that many of the debates are being driven by an industry that sees the removal of moral guardrails as its guiding principle. Want to fire employees? Let the machine handle it. Want an excuse to kill Iranian or Palestinian civilians? Have the machine shoot first and create a statistical justification afterward.

Sir Roger Penrose, one of the leading theoretical physicists behind our understanding of black holes and the nature of the universe, asserts that the fundamental flaw in AI is that it doesn’t place value on whether something is true. “Understanding is different from computing.” 

In a sense these errors are self-correcting. AI hiring agents will eventually be overwhelmed by AI applicants. Surveillance systems are likely to reveal a truth everyone already knows: that everyone hates the people operating them.

One day we will have a clearer picture of how many people have been murdered by this technology–and by the men behind it who sold it to governments. How many have been killed because they matched an approximation? How many hours do humans have to pour over the endless list of disasters which have already been set in motion? How long until investors see the industry leaders the way the public does, as increasingly disconnected and delusional?

AI is a misnomer. The technology has dazzled boomers and devoured a large share of the world’s largest economy. But just as the U.S. was an incubator for many tech advances, it also appears to be leading the backlash in public opinion. 

According to Gallup, 71% of Americans oppose data center construction in their areas, while many impacted counties are exploring moratoriums and blanket bans on new construction. In Virginia, the global epicenter of the data processing industry, 92% of voters say politicians are failing to manage the sector’s rapid growth and environmental burden. In a highly contentious midterm election year in the U.S., sheer disgust at AI data centers and their environmental and economic impact is proving to be a rare unifying issue.

Most notably, the AI boom appears losing both of its anticipated drivers—businesses and young users. While increasing numbers of large businesses are rehiring people amid rising AI costs, younger generations are souring on the technologies as such: anger (31%) and anxiety (42%) have surpassed excitement (26%) and hope (18%). It’s an open secret that using the term “AI” in consumer advertising has become a sure way to scare off customers. 

There’s a reason young people are confident enough to cut through the lies of tech billionaires who sell their tools to the average YouTube viewer as if they had large work forces or stock portfolios to automate. The generation that grew up with access to advanced computers in the palm of its hands are naturally unimpressed by what is essentially faster computing, with an emphasis on mimicry and fraud. Selling people something they hate at great cost is unwise. 

This has been a topic of great discussion within our editorial board. Of course, we still have a lot of questions and doubts about this new technology that in the coming years will have an impact we are unable to grasp at the moment. How will it develop? What kind of impact is it  having on new generations? And will we be able to maintain critical thinking? These are some of the questions we are asking ourselves, and we wish to explore in the incoming months.

But we need to be honest, we can’t keep up with the pace the world is moving. Sometimes we are also overwhelmed by the news cycle focusing on wars and violence. We’d rather our articles be deep and nuanced than fast and approximate. So this month we’re taking a short publishing break, while preparing the July theme which will focus on the impact of war and who is paying the cost. 

This short break doesn’t mean we’re slowing down — if anything, we’re busier. A few

months ago we started making podcasts—for now, conversations around each issue’s theme, though we’re already thinking about where it will bring us. On our social media channels, we are publishing short news that we find meaningful and important, which might get lost in the news bombardment.

So we wish you a happy start of the summer, and please if you have any questions or story ideas, do not hesitate to contact us.