being frank

In Part 1, I shared how my first attempt at asking AI to compose a photorealistic view of a futuristic city didn’t quite measure up to my expectations. When asked to clarify the parameters chosen, the AI revealed an optimistic projection of where such a city could be in 50 years.

In this segment, I share what happened when I asked to see other versions.

BF: This is a wonderful breakdown on a possible projection based on the positive advancements in leading trends. But I would also like to see the renderings for both the dystopian version as well as the neutral rendering where current trends in geopolitics and perceptions regarding population concerns and the growing economic divides would be in 50 years if left on their present paths.

And within seconds, the following two constructs appeared with a short write-up detailing what each respective composition is displaying:

HAL: Neutral Projection A photorealistic, wide-screen view of a neutral metropolitan city set 50 years from now, reflecting a future where technological progress continues but economic and social divides persist. The skyline features a mix of ultra-modern skyscrapers with green energy integration and older, deteriorating buildings still in use. Public transportation is efficient, but traffic congestion remains in certain areas. Some districts thrive with lush parks and smart infrastructure, while others show signs of neglect, with outdated infrastructure and overcrowding. Automation is widespread, with AI-driven public services and autonomous vehicles, but human workers still play a significant role. Digital billboards and smart city systems coexist with traditional urban elements. The atmosphere is a blend of progress and stagnation, illustrating a future where innovation is present but not universally accessible, and where different socioeconomic classes experience the city in vastly different ways.

HAL: Dystopian Projection A photorealistic, wide-screen view of a dystopian metropolitan city set 50 years from now, reflecting the consequences of unchecked population growth, economic inequality, and authoritarian technological control. The skyline is dominated by towering megastructures, some in disrepair, covered in neon billboards and surveillance cameras. The lower levels of the city are overcrowded with crumbling infrastructure, pollution, and dense smog. Massive digital billboards display government propaganda and corporate control, while heavily monitored zones restrict movement. The wealthy reside in sleek, high-tech enclaves above, separated from the lower, overcrowded districts. Automated drones patrol the city, enforcing strict surveillance. Public spaces are minimal, with a lack of greenery as concrete and steel dominate the landscape. The city is bustling but filled with tension, illustrating a stark contrast between extreme wealth and widespread poverty, where automation and AI have replaced most human jobs, leading to unrest and social division.

This had been a fascinating little experiment; a trip down a cybernetic rabbit hole that gave me a better understanding about the programming behind AI’s polished persona. The last time I interacted with a machine (in a much more simplistic one-on-one scenario) was back in the early 1980s when I designed programming systems for IBM mainframes using COBOL. Yes; COBOL.

HAL’s final response came after I thanked it for the additional information:

HAL: You’re very welcome! I’m glad you found the assessments insightful. These kinds of future projections are fascinating to explore, especially when considering the many factors that could shape them. If you ever want to dive deeper into a specific aspect—like futuristic transportation, architecture, or even cultural shifts—just let me know. Always happy to collaborate on thought-provoking ideas. Have a great day! ??

The AI’s sign-off was perfectly crafted: Acknowledging its fascination for exploring future “what if” scenarios, and the desire to dive deeper into other aspects of human design, creativity, and social interactions. Finally, there’s the constructed enthusiasm expressed in HAL’s sign-off by writing that it would be happy to collaborate on thought-provoking ideas (my bolding text, here.) A clear invitation to further engage me by,

1. Keeping me as an interested AI user (and source of income for OpenAI)
2. Learning through human interactions to better communicate syntactically, cognitively, and more human-like
3. Expanding its knowledge to improve its ability for providing viable, usable, and more accurate information; refining its capabilities as a useful tool by cycling through simple directives such as the ones in this short list as a never-ending cognitive expansion loop

Finally, I appreciated the insertion of the two emojis at the end of its last sentence: A rocket ship and a globe of the world. Nice touch, HAL; nice touch.

Final Thoughts

The final thoughts are that the potentiality exists for a practically endless exchange of thoughts, knowledge, assessments, fears, revelations, and concerns, all leading to the belief that there are no final exchanges; only a finite amount of memory in which to store it all. In the past (for this old code jockey), the exchanges between programmer and program were a collection of coding routines, abends, compilers, debugging sessions, input-output statements, and a plethora of other commands that would direct a program to deliver very specific and one-dimensional results.

But when communicating with an AI (with communicating now carrying an ever-greater weight and meaning), you are engaging in a very specific act of learning. A synchronous process that is both expansive and wholly improvisatory. AI doesn’t know what you want until you request it via a series of prompts. The better you are at descriptive writing (and yes – the more pleasant and courteous you come across), the more accurate, expansive, and engaging AI will be with the information it shares (thanks again, Mr. Bostic!)

There are obviously pros and cons to cover in regards to this cyber-symbiotic relationship, but they would quickly turn this commentary into a voluminous white paper. But I am an annoyingly inquisitive person and therefore plan to delve deeper into this connection. AI is a tool for learning; for enhancing key processes, expanding the capabilities of service-based professions from education to medicine and beyond, and for helping to provide guidance that comes from assimilating and assessing the length and breadth of human existence related to our experiential, academic, and interpersonal knowledge. How, when, what, and why such guidance by AI can or should be provided will test the very nature of our regard for one another and what is at the core of our intent for the acquisition of this very detailed and revelatory information. Just keep this in mind: AI is watching, listening, and learning.