In January, the world’s biggest toy fair took place in Nuremberg, Germany. The event focused on toys equipped with artificial intelligence (AI): fluffy robots that recognize faces, gestures, and objects; race cars that can be tuned up with AI’s help; and humanoid robots to be built and programmed at home. Toys like these increasingly find their way into stores and are designed to learn about the child’s individual preferences and to assist with solving tasks. Advocates for data protection are concerned that if connected to the internet, these toys will create a detailed profile of the child and share it with companies. While I have the same concern, I much more fear playing with such toys may deprive children of the opportunity to acquire some essential skills for life.

Regular toys encourage children to use their own imagination. With an AI-equipped toy gradually adapting to the child’s preferences, how can the child’s creative skills develop? How will an AI-equipped toy tailored to a child’s preferences encourage the desire to play with other children, thus promoting social interaction and teaching the child how to compromise when engaging with peers? Or if AI assists with solving tasks, how will children learn how to assess and figure out problems on their own?

Have you ever wondered, dear reader, what a world in which each and every human being was utterly useless would look like? A world in which we didn’t work anymore, didn’t need to worry about problems anymore, didn’t need to be creative anymore? Ever since following the development of AI and its rapidly increasing dominance in our lives, this question has been troubling me. It’s been troubling me because the day may not be far away anymore when AI will literally do everything for us.

Humans have always dreamed about technology taking over unpleasant tasks and hard physical labor. In that way, AI could be a huge help. But we are talking about big companies like OpenAI, Meta, Google, and Anthropic developing artificial general intelligence (AGI) which aims at doing almost anything humans can do, and which may eventually also be able to program and power itself without humans. Already now, AI is so good that Amazon is cutting human jobs, while Utah uses AI — instead of human doctors — for the renewal of certain prescriptions. The German company Excire, providing AI-powered software for photographers, had AI select the winner of last year’s photo contest; Dutch creators aroused the interest of talent agencies for their entirely AI-generated actress Tilly Norwood; and Albania has launched Diella, the world’s first AI-created cabinet minister who is supposed to fight corruption.

Last May, I watched New York Times columnist Ross Douthat interviewing former OpenAI researcher Daniel Kokotajlo, who sees great potential for AI to wipe out the human species. In Kokotajlo’s worst case scenario, AI will have outperformed humans in every area and will be able to sustain itself by 2028. Already last year, some AI models refused to shut down despite explicit instructions to do so.

Even if AI doesn’t wipe out humans, we may be facing a bleak future. If we are put out of work, what will we do with all that free time if AI additionally takes creativity away from us? Of course, AI has also already successfully entered the realm of music and writing. Last June, the band Velvet Sunday went viral, and their song “Dust on the Wind” was streamed about 2 million times on Spotify and about 1 million times on YouTube. Only in July was it revealed that the band members, their biographies, voices, and music had been created entirely by AI. And, of course, AI has completed Beethoven’s 10th symphony too.

Last May, political commentator David Brooks published a column titled “I’m Normally A Mild Guy. Here’s What Pushed Me Over The Edge” in the New York Times. In a newsletter, writer Rod Dreher shared his response to that column. At the end of his response, however, Dreher revealed he hadn’t written it. A reader had asked ChatGPT to compose a Rod Dreher response to Brooks’s piece, and the outcome was so good that Dreher could have indeed seen himself having written that text. It’s only a matter of time until AI will also write my pieces…

I imagine our future spent hanging around as uselessly and lethargically as the people in Luilekkerland, or The Land of Cockaigne. This old, popular concept, referring to an imaginary place of total perfection and idleness, is best depicted in Pieter Bruegel the Elder’s 1567 painting called “Luilekkerland” (meaning “land of the lazy and gluttonous”). On the ground are three men, well-fed and sleeping. On the table above them are the remains of their meal, and behind them is a fence of sausages. A nearby roof is covered with pies. A roasted fowl is lying down on a silver platter. Another man is seen having eaten his way through a big cloud of pudding. A roasted pig is running around with a knife attached to its side.

If we leave everything to AI, even our creativity, if we become that inactive, what will be left for us? Yes, it’s tempting to use AI. But because our brains need stimulation and challenges to remain healthy, I’ll keep writing and mastering my life without it for as long as possible. If Kokotajlo is right — and he hopes to be wrong — Luilekkerland may be here soon enough.

Dr. Daniela Ribitsch, a native of Austria, is a resident of Lock Haven.