On the frustration of agreeing with everyone about AI - Francis Irving

Skip to content

On the frustration of agreeing with everyone about AI

17 June 2026

Conversations about AI are febrile and have been for a while now. Everyone has different views.

It&rsquo;s frustrating for me because not only do I empathise with all of you, in some ways I<br>have every major position in my mind.

I find myself impossible, messed up. Niller-nally, retwixt, fragmented.

I agree with the accelerationists

I briefly used an open source agentic programming tool with 1000 tokens/second<br>of a top Chinese model. It was like a drug pumped straight into my veins. I worked on<br>artificial life 27 years ago - we were trying to<br>do the same at CyberLife, just much earlier. Creation can be beautiful, and helpful, warm and<br>purposeful. There&rsquo;s diseases to cure, climate models to optimise, software to make perfect<br>for each person.

I agree with the artists

Our work has all been stolen, and remixed into a bland slop of the world&rsquo;s cultural<br>heritage. I&rsquo;m more radical here than nearly anyone - I think<br>model weights are a derived work<br>of every bit of content they&rsquo;re trained on. Power is winning, not rules. Because power<br>wins. We can&rsquo;t keep human emotion in art without a relentless disavowal of AI-generated<br>art. Every single nuance needs editing, curating. I care about human emotion in art.

I agree with the nationalists

I watched the US administration suddenly declare<br>that a powerful new model is available only to US citizens. It turned my stomach.<br>My empathy runs high when the European Commission responds that<br>Europe needs &ldquo;technological sovereignty&rdquo; in AI. It&rsquo;s a race.

I agree with the doomers

I look at PauseAI and think… Yep, this technology can<br>cause harm. Existential harm - if not with with current architectures as they scale,<br>then at some point in the next decade or next century with another technology. It is<br>necessary to regulate it, to sign international treaties. It&rsquo;s nukes but accelerated not<br>only by Government dominance, but also by business value.

I agree with the openness freaks

I&rsquo;ve loved open source software since 1997. So when<br>I see an argument that open models level the playing field,<br>I&rsquo;ve already watched it play out with software, and despite the problems, I agree. As the models work better and<br>better, it is worse and worse that we&rsquo;re locked into a limited set of providers, that<br>power accumulates with the few.

(I guess I don&rsquo;t really agree with people opposed to data centres because of water or power<br>use - as that seems solvable with the right infrastructure. And the other issues dominate<br>those proximate questions, however much of an environmentalist I am. There are stronger<br>reasons to oppose data centres.)

… breathe …

Yes that all contradicts. It fragments. Open models is the worst for doom, AI sovereignty<br>is the opposite of a pause, protecting artists&rsquo; works blocks acceleration. Nothing<br>functions.

Why am I this splinter of contradictions?

Because all the arguments are right, but which is right the most depends on what happens.

If we&rsquo;re at the top of the S-curve and AI capability stalls with a few more 10%<br>improvements that cost 2x the amount… Then yes let&rsquo;s roll it out, let&rsquo;s make it open<br>for everyone, and regulate the mundane risks, remove all the problems, gain all the<br>benefits. Can&rsquo;t stop capitalism, can get it right.

If AI gets vastly more capable , but somehow without its own &ldquo;will to power&rdquo;, then I want<br>to be in a large empire which controls its use for my benefit. The consequences for<br>defense are mind-collapsing, unthinkable. The military acceleration unbearable. But what<br>happens if instead you opt out? It&rsquo;s bad.

If AI not only gets more powerful, but we lose control , these alien minds start acting<br>at scale and in a way we lose collective and individual control of. It spreads, either an<br>inert cancer growing through our civilisation eating it up, or a willful Cthulhu monster<br>carelessly and deliberately breaking everything apart.

And nobody knows what is going to happen.

I&rsquo;m kind of tired, agreeing and disagreeing simultaneously with every post on the topic.

Frozen.

I guess I&rsquo;ll email my MP about holding AI developers<br>liable for severe harm. That seems a good next step.

Loading replies…