Leah Figer: President Trump has historically taken an anti-regulation stance on artificial intelligence. During the first year of his administration, AI czar David Sacks even said, “We’re not regulating it.” Today, however, the White House appears more cautious, particularly in response to national security concerns, cyberattacks, and other AI-related threats. While the administration continues to support artificial intelligence, it has also introduced policies to address its potential risks.
Leah Figer: No matter how enthusiastic or optimistic you are about AI, it is impossible to ignore the fact that these systems need to be taken seriously. Artificial intelligence is no longer limited to helping with childcare, solving everyday problems, or teaching your children how to cook. Its influence now extends into national security, employment, and other critical areas of society.
Brian Barrett: And even if AI were limited to those uses, would you really want it to stay that way? We also ran this essay through Pangram, our most trusted AI-detection tool. It was written by a human, Leah.
Leah Figer: I love that.
Brian Barrett: AI may be useful for finding recipes to make with my daughter, but it is not quite ready to write a manifesto.
Leah Figer: I think that is beautiful.
Brian Barrett: In other news, WIRED senior writer Kate Taylor has reported on another hilarious—and potentially dystopian—AI trend. She identified an increasingly common pattern in the hiring process: Many initial job interviews are now being conducted by artificial intelligence.
Brian Barrett: In these automated job interviews, candidates sit in front of a screen while an AI interviewer asks a series of programmed questions. Instead of speaking with a recruiter or hiring manager, applicants record their answers through software, often without any immediate human review. Because these systems are available around the clock, candidates can complete interviews whenever it is convenient.
Brian Barrett: As a result, Kate found that job seekers are increasingly scheduling AI interviews late at night—sometimes as late as 1 a.m.—to avoid conflicts with family responsibilities, work schedules, or other appointments. Rather than rearranging their lives to speak with a recruiter, people can now sit in their living rooms after putting their children to bed and answer questions from the AI systems that may determine their professional future.
Leah Figer: I think you may be surprised by my reaction.
Brian Barrett: I’m ready.
Leah Figer: I like it.
Brian Barrett: Wow.
Leah Figer: I like the flexibility.
Brian Barrett: Which part?
Leah Figer: Historically, I have been terrible at scheduling doctor’s and dentist appointments. It is not because I do not care about my health; I simply struggle to organize my day. I do not want to spend an afternoon waiting for an appointment when I have work and other responsibilities.
Leah Figer: The ability to complete something important—whether it is a job interview, a medical appointment, or another necessary task—on my own schedule is a genuine benefit. That is one positive outcome I see in the rise of automation and AI assistants.
Leah Figer: I understand the concerns, though. Is automating job interviews really what I want right now? Absolutely not. Human beings bring creativity, personality, judgment, and emotional intelligence to the workplace—qualities that chatbots cannot fully capture. But if this is the direction society is taking, then we need to acknowledge it and adapt.
Source: www.wired.com