Jony, Sam, Steve, and Dieter – On missing nuance and critical thinking around design, AI, and the world we want to leave behind
Now that the news cycle has had time to push the “next big thing” through our eyeballs into our brains, let’s talk about what was missing from the OpenAI deal and what it means for design and business
It’s been quiet on the newsletter for a couple months due to… life and work. So, I’m using Markus Albers’ interview with me as an opportunity to share some thoughts coming out of many recent conversations from my podcast to my colleagues at Princeton and the Design Executive Council over the last months.
The simplest way to summarize: I believe in a humanistic future of the world. One which is hopeful, soulful, and good for people and the planet. And we have a long way to get there. Design, to me, is about thoughtfully imagining and building that future.
Spelling it out like this sounds almost naive.
Because the dominant narrative sounds very much like that’s utopia and unachievable as my guest Avi Alpert so wonderfully outlined in our conversation. The dominant, omnipresent “AI arms race” narrative is telling us that humans must and will be replaced. Automated away. In the name of progress.
And I can’t help but reject the underlying fear of our own shared humanity.
Human nature is paradox. It’s messy and beautiful. Cruel and kind. Painful, and entirely healing. Destructive and creative. The challenge is to come back to the better angels of our nature over and over again. To embrace the romantic beauty of poetry, and contribute to something bigger than ourselves. Something we can proudly leave behind for our kids and theirs.
So, as I’ve been learning from my conversations with artists, poets, thinkers, makers, scientists, entrepreneurs, I’ve also been thinking a lot about nuance. And how it’s missing from the current AI discussion; and all the subsequent socio economic conversations that come from it.
If you’re skeptical, you’re a critic. If you talk about slowing down, you’re holding up progress. And if you’re asking about unintended consequences, you’re a nay sayer.
To no surprise, I see the OpenAI / Jony Ive news in the same light. You can read more about that below.
In all of this, I remain hopeful, long-term optimistic and excited by the possibilities of this new powerful technology to help us cure currently incurable diseases, educate more children, imagine new ways harness energy in ways that doesn’t exploit the planet’s finite resources. Because I believe that most people are fundamentally good.
My “The Tough Question” interview with Markus Albers
My phone blew up with messages when the news about the Jony Ive and Sam Altman broke (coincidentally, during Google’s big week of AI announcements). When my friend Markus Albers then asked me last week if he could interview me for his brand-new newsletter series, it felt like a good time to reflect on what the news about OpenAI meant – and what it didn’t.
Especially during a hype cycle it’s imperative that we take any news with more than a grain of salt. Design is relevant, it always was and it will continue to be. The prosperity and success of capitalism is (fortunately/unfortunately) tied to industrial and communications design.
As we’re at the very beginning of an era that will resemble the another Industrial Revolution, I believe it’s crucial that we talk with nuance about what’s happening at what’s ahead. Design, after all, is critical thinking. And it must be grounded in a humanist worldview. Or else, what is it good for?
During the Bauhaus era, it was clearly articulated that design needs “Haltung”, a moral stance / worldview that it expresses. And that included accounting for the socio economic consequences of our work.
So, in my interview with Markus I tried to add some nuance, some critical thinking, and call-outs of what I feel was missing in the news coverage about OpenAI buying one of the most consequential industrial designers.
I’m optimistic about the power of design and how we can use it to leave the world (people and planet) better than we found it. But it requires us to own up fully to the immense responsibility we carry, and develop a healthy skepticism that allows us to apply the tool of critique with the goal to avoid unintended consequences.
The interview is available in German and in English.
3 interesting links
Danielle McClune’s substack offers some of the best, most original and thought-provoking content on AI
AI as normal technology is a remarkable essay by Arvind Narayanah and Sayash Kapoor
The latest Poets & Thinkers episode (#7): “Slot Machine Creativity: On the value of friction to create meaningful works of art with Nando Costa”
You made it. Thank you!
Kudos to you for making it all the way to the end. Please share your feedback, questions or any topics you’d like me to touch on.
And if you liked what you read, please subscribe and send this newsletter to someone you care about and who would appreciate the content.
