BIZARRE: Stupid ai screenshots - What They Never Told You

To better understand public sentiment regarding AI, we can look at a survey of more than 5,000 people in the United States conducted by the Pew Research Center earlier this year.

The study revealed that Americans under 50 are far more likely than those 50 and older to use chatbots. About six in ten adults under 50 (63%) now use these tools, compared with roughly four in ten of those ages 50 to 64, and even fewer among those 65 and older.

However, chatbot use has risen steadily over time across all age groups. In fact, a steep increase in adoption among adults in their 30s and 40s has now put them on par with younger users.

Daily chatbot use is also significantly more common among the under-50 crowd. A third of adults under 50 say they use these tools every day, while far fewer older adults report doing so.

About half of adults ages 18 to 49 use chatbots to search for information. In comparison, smaller shares of adults ages 50 to 64 (37%) or 65 and older (20%) say they use them for this purpose.

Roughly four in ten employed adults under age 50 use chatbots for work tasks. Fewer older workers report doing the same, dropping to 29% among 50-to-64-year-olds and just 18% for workers ages 65 and older.

Younger adults are also significantly more likely than their older counterparts to use these tools for entertainment or to look up medical advice.

As use of chatbots rises, bigger and bigger debates have surfaced about their impact on efficiency, creativity, and personal connections.

The Pew survey discovered that people are more likely to say chatbots help rather than hurt their productivity and how informed they are. Three in ten say using chatbots helps make them more productive. And a similar share says chatbots help keep them informed.

Very few (5% each) say chatbots hurt them in either way.

Americans are also more likely to see chatbots helping than hurting their creativity. About one in five say these tools help them in this way, compared with 11% who say chatbots hurt their creativity.

Few say chatbots impact their happiness or relationships. Americans most commonly say chatbots neither help nor hurt in these areas.

At the recent AI and Society Forum at MIT, experts from across the Institute discussed the potential benefits and drawbacks of technological innovation on labor, the nature of work, civil discourse, election administration, and other important topics.

Held in the Tull Concert Hall in MIT’s Linde Music Building, the May 12 forum opened with a keynote presentation from economist David Autor, the Daniel (1972) and Gail Rubinfeld Professor in the MIT Department of Economics. Autor challenged the common narrative that AI will simply eliminate jobs, proposing instead that technology's impact depends on how it affects the scarcity and value of human expertise.

Autor said that what matters is whether automation removes routine supporting tasks or removes expert tasks. He argued that AI will likely create new specialized work, requiring proactive policies around worker training, wage insurance, and broader capital ownership.

The day's second session focused on AI technology and its impact on democracy.

Chara Podimata, the Class of 1942 Career Development Assistant Professor and assistant professor of operations research and statistics in the MIT Sloan School of Management, presented her research on auditing large language models for bias in election information.

"Algorithms decide a lot of things about our lives right now," she said. "With regard to chatbots and election information, if I take two people and they interact with the same chatbot ... how will the chatbot respond? How will it personalize the information it gives to these people?"

A longitudinal study of 12 major models during the 2024 U.S. presidential election season found responses varied dramatically based on stated demographics and political leanings. Podimata's research team is now working on a new audit of the 2026 U.S. midterm elections, using a redesigned survey with input from political science experts.

Those who raise concerns that AI users could be surrendering the cognitive friction that sharpens thinking also suggest that we, as a society, may have fewer original ideas. So should we be worried?

"On a high level, yes," says Adam Green, a professor of neuroscience and director of the Laboratory for Relational Cognition at Georgetown University in the US. There's a lot of nuance here, but AI will do work that used to require mental labor. "There's plenty of evidence that if you are not doing as much of the actual thinking, then your capability to do that kind of thinking is going to atrophy."

Even if you don't seek to use ChatGPT or Claude, there are AI responses at the top of Google, and tech giants are rushing to shove more of it onto our phones. The technology is getting hard to avoid. But we can't completely surrender to it.