Eight years ago, the results of the US election in November deeply shocked the small staff at Backchannel, the technology publication I ran. The next morning, an editor posted in our Slack that working on a technology story seemed tone-deaf, if not pointless. On a plane from New York to San Francisco, I wrote a column to respond to that impulse, directed as much to myself and my colleagues as to readers. I maintained that, regardless of the enormity of this event, one thing had not changed; The greatest story of our time was still the technological revolution we were experiencing. Disruptive politicians, even destructive ones, can come and go, or refuse to go. But the chip, the network, the mobile device and everything they entailed were changing humanity, and perhaps what it will mean to be human. Our job was to chronicle that epic transformation, no matter who was politically in charge. The headline of my column was “iPhone is bigger than Donald Trump.”
This week, Trump was elected president once again despite… oh hell, I won’t repeat the litany of what would seem to be definitive disqualifiers. You’ve heard it all, and for most voters, it doesn’t matter. It is an incredible story and the next few years will undoubtedly go down in history. Maybe not in a good way. Perhaps in a very bad way for a country where many hoped to celebrate its enduring values on America’s 250th birthday. (For the sake of unity, I will use the qualifier “maybe,” since losers must be humble and who knows what awaits them.)
However, I do not deviate from the thought I had in 2016. As Stewart Brand states once said“Human nature doesn’t change much; Science does it, and change occurs, altering the world irreversibly.” What is happening in technology and science remains the activity that will ultimately have the greatest impact on our species. Hundreds of years later, future generations (and possibly Ray Kurzweil) will look back on this era and identify it as the period when microchips and neural network software changed everything. and who was That strong man with the weird hair who destroyed the country that used to occupy real estate in the Western Hemisphere? I no longer run a publication and instead represent a single voice among a much larger staff. (For WIRED’s institutional vision, please note my boss’s words, which I endorse.) So, speaking for myself, I emphatically repeat my 2016 statement of purpose, with a slight adjustment: AI is bigger than Donald Trump.
Of course, journalists must vigorously cover Trump’s second presidency, with relentless demands for accountability. In the short term (for some of us idiots, that may be all the mandate we have left!), what happens in our community and country will have a greater influence on our daily lives than the latest version of Claude, ChatGPT or even Apple Intelligence. (Sorry, Tim Apple.) If you lose your health care or your reproductive rights, or find yourself in a deportation camp or prison cell because of the policies of our returning president, the knowledge that AI, Mixed reality and quantum computers that will one day redefine us will not lessen the pain.
Additionally, those of us who cover technology will definitely end up reporting on the Trump presidency; Politics, as always, affects the course of technology. (Remember, the US government produced this thing called the Internet.) A debate is raging right now about how, or whether, we should regulate or restrict AI, a technology some refer to as “the latest invention.” I am already hearing discussions that the new administration will reject the elaborate executive order on AI that Joe Biden ordered. Some are concerned that the new president’s mega-advisor, Elon Musk, who has his own artificial intelligence company and integrates it into his other companies, such as Tesla and Neuralink, has outsized and possibly inappropriate influence on government policies and contracts. I’ve also heard speculation that the movement to regulate AI could be, um, overtaken by the threat of China’s strenuous efforts in this field. This is important, because the basic rules of today’s AI and the quirks of its inventors can affect whether the worst fears about the technology come true.
So, the day after Donald Trump’s re-election, I visited an artificial intelligence company and interviewed one of its leaders and a prominent engineer. Yes, on the way back to the office I thought about the election results and got depressed again. But I’ll finish the article on that company and then do another one, sticking to the technological pace as long as my broken heart beats. After all, AI is still the biggest story in town.
