2 November 2025

Is AI going to make us more honest with each other - and ourselves?

| By Zoe Cartwright
Join the conversation
12
organic hand with a pencil writing on a pad next to an AI hand writing on a tablet

Zoe Cartwright loves a good work whinge – who doesn’t? But an experiment with ChatGPT made her reassess her perspective. Photo: Google Gemini – AI Generated.

As an experiment this week, my editor whacked a few prompts into ChatGPT to see if it could write my weekly column.

In less than five minutes it spat out 500 words on the dangers of the Aldi special aisle.

“Hey,” my editor said, “this is pretty good.”

Dear reader, it was pretty good – and produced work much faster (with fewer typos) than anything I could churn out.

But it wasn’t real. ChatGPT hadn’t experienced the siren song of the specials aisle, and it never would.

READ ALSO Are you a slave to the scroll? Or have you transcended socials?

There was no real person out there with the precise perspective and opinions the AI espoused.

“So what,” you might think, “Harry Potter isn’t real either.”

While this is true, it misses something fundamental to the act of making anything at all.

Whether you write fiction or non-fiction (or silly little columns), make art or build houses, some part of yourself will leak into your work.

No matter how hard you try to edit it out, every time you create something you put a small piece of yourself out into the universe.

We’re social creatures who know ourselves, our world, and our place in it through the reflections we see from other people, so I think it’s pretty dang consequential if the stories and art we begin to consume are made by … no one at all.

Here’s another thing.

I read this week that AI can now research, write, assess and grade academic papers itself, potentially putting thousands of academics out of their jobs – or making them a million miles more efficient.

I have a sneaking suspicion that people who make a career out of academia might actually, on some level, enjoy doing those things.

I like to complain about having no good ideas, or too many deadlines, and getting myself to do the actual writing part of my job is like pulling teeth from a donkey, but deep down, secretly, I do enjoy it.

In the same way that a chippie feels a sense of accomplishment when he drives past a house he’s built, when someone talks about an article I wrote, I’m chuffed.

READ ALSO Here’s how you can feel awe-inspired from your own couch this weekend

We are designed to make things and to interact with the things other people make.

Technology that helps us make things better or more easily, or that removes unnecessary labour (I’m looking lovingly at my washing machine) is a wonderful gift.

Technology that robs us of the joy (and frustration) of creating and connecting seems like something a little more ominous.

If we’re going to push back against it, maybe we need to admit to ourselves – and the people around us – that there are parts of our jobs we actually quite like doing ourselves.

Free Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? We package the most-read Canberra stories and send them to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.
Loading
By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.

Join the conversation

12
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

a creation can’t rise higher than its creator, but must always be less than it.
Therefore, because the technocrats are horribly dishonest with themselves and others, AI will be even worse.
A lot of whatever AI is good at, then, means a re-evaluation of the value of those things, if only to knock them down a peg or two

Making as little sense as ever.

“a creation can’t rise higher than its creator”, this made laugh though, seems some Christians are genuinely worried that AI will surpass that creator beliefs….lol.

That opening clause by Vasily M is so shot through with basic fallacies, both definitional and begging the question, that it could be an introductory exercise for a school class.

go on, then, Axon

I had an ironic response but I will offer you part of an answer, Vasily M, if Region permits.

Define each of the following words meaningfully in the context of your post: creation, rise, higher, creator. Analyse extent of general acceptance or evidence for your chosen definitions.
In what respect does an inanimate invention “rise”, and “higher” than what?
You beg the question of creator, without which belief you would not attempt your usual little word salads. Otherwise I could point to a nearby building, definitely higher than its creators, but Vasily prefers question-begging over evidence.

The following is adapted from some work by the philosopher Graham Oppy:
– There is no evidence for entities which are causally related to things hereabouts but not spatially related to things hereabouts (no souls, spooks, entelechies or gods).
– None of the kinds of entities mentioned has managed to show value as a theoretical construct.
– Thus there is no sufficiently good reason for believing in such entities.

Axon, if there’s no intelligence behind the world, yet humans are intelligent and intelligence is more intelligent than no-intelligence, then humans should be absolutely smarter than the world and should by now have solved everything it decided was a problem, including all illness and even death.

So to sum up this nonsensical word salad Vasily, you’re putting 2 and 2 together and getting yellow.

Gregg Heldon6:47 am 03 Nov 25

There is nothing wrong with the “weird arse” aisle in Aldi. It’s why you go to Aldi.

LOL So true. But I guess that reveals why we shouldn’t rely on AI for these things. That article needed to by typed by someone who has experienced shopping at Aldi.

But aren’t the AI companies trying to sell to your boss, not you? On the premise that they can cut costs by cutting staff? Granted the AI will produce low quality work, but is that what some bosses may settle for?

True. This reminds me when I learnt about the Industrial Revolution as a child, I thought ‘but aren’t machines created to help humanity work, not replace us?’ That’s how it should be, technology should be created to help us not replace us. Sadly, I’m the only one who thinks this way….

Karl, I very much appreciate machines, or technology and engineering in general, explicitly replacing certain human effort, as well as the myriad of machines which merely assist us. Whether or how AI is useful is yet to be seen, and in that respect I do not disagree with Rob.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Region Canberra stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.