One of the most blatant lies told to the younger generations is that, at least to some extent, we live in a meritocracy. That generally speaking, those with wealth, power and influence got there because they deserve it. It’s what allows figures like Elon Musk or Warren Buffet to be idolised and praised, rather than shamed or mocked for having such a material view of the world, all the while offering very little of value to anybody outside their personal circle.
But the actions of these powerful individuals are not founded in a utilitarian attempt to make bold executive decisions for the greater good. Instead, western society at large has adopted an alternative framework, one in which merit is implied through demonstrations of power or wealth. So much so that billionaires are praised for ´cleverly´ avoiding taxes and the likes of Donald Trump are elected president of the United States, with the hope that they ´run the country like a business´.
All is fair in the modern age, as is in love, and as is in war. The principled, the noble, and the decent are outnumbered, overtaken and rendered obsolete by those willing to cut corners and put others at risk to further their own personal interests at any cost. The name of the game is who can break the rules and the winner is whoever isn’t caught.
Sure, we soapbox every now and then, pointing fingers and damning others for their actions, but in reality many of us are willing to do all sorts of things we would judge others for doing. It’s a simple psychological reality that is sometimes difficult to swallow; being completely intellectually honest and consistent is extremely difficult, if not downright impossible. One place this hypocrisy in tandem with the rise of generative AI is becoming an issue is in the context of higher education.
Studies have shown that, given the opportunity, most students in academia are willing to cheat. In a series of surveys conducted over decades by Donald McCabe, 60% of students admitted to cheating in one form or another. Due to the nature of the questions in the survey, it’s fair to assume the real number is even greater. Another study from 2022 found that students were far more likely to cheat if they thought their classmates were themselves cheating. Individual students may be unlikely to cheat on their own accord, but many wouldn’t turn down another student offering them a glimpse at the answer sheet.
Because generative AI is so easily accessible, widely accepted and integrated into people’s lives, there is enormous pressure amongst students to use generative AI more and more, risking dependency especially because of the cumulative nature of higher education. There’s also an unspoken agreement between students that, while potentially unethical, using generative AI to complete assignments is not exactly cheating. This is no accident.
Just take a look at the advertising behind companies like OpenAI directed at students. They fall just short of explicitly encouraging the use of generative AI to cheat the system and get ahead, but people are smart, they’ll use generative AI to do whatever they can think of, not just what an ad tells them to. The companies advertising these services to students are wholly aware of this; they just need to plant the seed in students’ minds that difficult assignments can be overcome with generative AI. The students will then seek out the technology on their own when they are next faced with a challenging task.
However, the real point of peddling a ChatGPT or Claude or Perplexity subscription to students is not merely to sell to them, but to normalise the use of generative AI in education as much as possible. This technology has yet to be profitable, and AI moguls are desperate to solidify generative AI into the Zeitgeist so that it cannot be discarded or ignored as easily. The plan is to turn everyone into a hypocrite, so then, just as with the tobacco, meat, and dairy industries, people will hesitate to change their minds and even then struggle to change their behaviour.
What better way is there to directly influence the future of the global economy than through the youngest generation of entrepreneurs and members of the future workforce? By pushing students to rely on generative AI, these companies are creating long-term customers that they hope act as living, breathing billboards. Every assignment you complete starts to feel more and more silly when students all around you are automating their work with ease and getting better grades than you despite all your effort. All the while, each student individually becomes less likely to take a stand against generative AI the more they use it.
Rather than a shameful secret, many students who graduate using generative AI to carry them through their education treat their ill-gotten degrees as tokens of pride. Evidence that only a fool would shed so much blood, sweat and tears for something so easily achieved, but so important. It is perhaps this hubris that shines a bit of hope on the future graduates around the world; as it seems to be pushing more and more students away from generative AI, not necessarily because they don’t see its merit, but instead because they dislike or fear the way this technology is changing the world at such a rapid pace.
And it’s easy to see why. If nothing else, it’s clear that AI solves some problems while creating others. But a lot of the justification behind the investment and unethical development process of generative AI models lies in the utopian future that generative AI promises. If this technology isn’t capable of delivering practical, effective and efficient solutions to real world problems, it isn’t worth the price tag. It isn’t worth the risk.
There is no telling the impact that this shift will have in the years to come. The question is not if, but how many unqualified graduates will flood the workforce, how many people will lose their livelihoods in the event of an economic crisis, how much it’s all going to cost us. I’ve experienced first hand how students and teachers, therapists, salesmen and government agencies are embracing AI, and it isn’t always for the better, as I’m sure you’ve noticed yourself.
These companies look at a flower, see that it needs water, sunlight and oxygen to survive, and aim to give it a stomach so they can regularly sell it food. We do not need generative AI, at least, not like this. Not as a “free upgrade” of our own cognitive ability. Sure, it has its uses, but just as we shouldn’t start duct-taping every problem humanity faces, we desperately need to give up this obsession with AI being a one-size-fits-all fixy-majig that’s going to save us without any of us having to actually do anything.
We shouldn’t turn to AI, or to the trillionaires so detached from reality they seem almost alien, but to each other, before it’s too late. Together, and only together, we can make ourselves heard. We can push back against the rich and powerful. We can say “No” to things once assumed inevitable.
It is up to us to be there for one another so that lonely, desperate people don’t have to turn to AI for companionship. To teach and uplift each other so we don’t feel a need to use AI to scam or deceive others to make something of ourselves. To understand that no invention will ever truly cure the human condition; that nobody is coming to fix the world for us.
Truth Decay 
Leave a comment