Article
To the Editor:
Re "A.I. Will Empower Humanity," by Reid Hoffman (Opinion guest essay, nytimes.com, Jan. 25):
Mr. Hoffman is whistling past the graveyard when he airily dismisses the dystopian potential of artificial intelligence that, as he proposes, will have access to so much of our personal data that it knows us better than we know ourselves.
In the hands of a totalitarian regime, A.I. that analyzes, as Mr. Hoffman writes, “anything — or everything — you do on your PC, phone and other devices” can easily identify dissenters and activists. His vision will constrain liberty in subtler but no less pernicious ways: Mr. Hoffman celebrates A.I. that will tell us to play video games rather than go for a walk, or avoid buying a book we might not read.
I do not welcome A.I. that enables increased government surveillance and oppression, eliminates chance meetings on the street that might alter my life, or dissuades me from discovering a book that opens my mind to something unexpected and wonderful.
— Daniel Gerwin, Los Angeles
To the Editor:
Although Reid Hoffman acknowledges the growing concerns regarding the potential harms of A.I., his argument to better appreciate the technology’s benefits and risks is wholly unpersuasive.
Note that Mr. Hoffman doesn’t deny that Big Tech can or will use A.I. in manipulative or harmful ways. He doesn’t even argue against such irresponsible uses. Instead, we should simply feed large amounts of sensitive personal information into the models to enjoy their personal insights and images that may or may not be accurate or even sane? He also avoids mentioning that most of A.I.’s benefits will likely accrue to its investors, like him, while most risks will likely be borne by unwitting consumers and those “disrupted” in the labor market.
The U.S. needs a sober discussion of how to stay globally competitive with A.I., but in a socially responsible manner, with firm guardrails. Apparently, Mr. Hoffman’s financial stake in OpenAI clouds his objectivity to contribute to that discussion.
— Dane D’Alessandro, Atlanta
To the Editor:
Reid Hoffman shows some of the ways that A.I. might positively reshape human life. But while he alludes to “critics of Big Tech” on the possibility of Orwellian government or corporate control, he writes nothing to refute these critiques. Instead, he deflects readers’ attention to all the cool things that A.I. can do to empower individuals.
As Ronan Farrow reports in the recent documentary “Surveilled,” tech companies have developed digital spyware that can hack into any phone, turn on the camera or recorder, access all data and leave without a trace. The biggest customer for these companies: governments.
So here’s a helpful exercise: Imagine you’ve installed all of the apps “that enable you to automatically record, store and analyze virtually anything — or everything — you do” along with an A.I. assistant.
Then, after each of Mr. Hoffman’s paragraphs discussing the new ways that they can help you make decisions, organize your life, rethink your career or finances — or maybe organize a political protest or romantic liaison — insert the sentence: “And the Trump administration, as well as the governments of Saudi Arabia, Oman and others, will likely have full access to all of this.”
— David McMahan, Lancaster, Pa.
Withdrawing From W.H.O.: A Bad Health Move
To the Editor:
Re “Trump Withdraws U.S. From World Health Organization” (news article, nytimes.com, Jan. 20):
It is difficult to not feel paralyzed by the sheer number of ill-informed and dangerous decisions made by President Trump in the first few days since his inauguration. However, we must resist this paralysis and speak out against his damaging policies wherever possible, even while his Republican colleagues remain too fearful or foolish to do the same.
As a primary care physician who was on the front lines of treating patients with Covid-19 throughout the pandemic, I object in the most serious possible terms to Mr. Trump’s planned withdrawal from the World Health Organization. Many have short memories of the early days of the Covid pandemic, but not those of us in medicine. The question is not if we will have another pandemic, but when. And if we do not learn from our past we will repeat it.
It is critical that we cooperate with governments and agencies around the world to monitor for outbreaks of both previously recognized diseases like Ebola and Covid, and of unknown pathogens to come. Without early recognition, the development of rapid detection techniques and novel treatments will be slowed, allowing diseases to spread. In our era of rapid world travel, “once in a century” pandemics may start coming once a decade or sooner.
Politics must not interfere with medical progress. I urge my medical colleagues across the country to speak up and demand that the United States does all that it can to collaborate with the rest of the world to prevent future outbreaks and save lives.
— John Butler, Huntingdon Valley, Pa.
The Voices of 10 Children Amid the L.A. Fires
To the Editor:
Re “Children Lament Fire Losses: ‘My Whole Life Broke’” (news article, Jan. 29):
Thank you to the 10 children who bravely shared their experiences of loss and escape from the devastating Los Angeles wildfires. At times of great tragedy, it is rare that the direct experiences of children are elevated, and the rawness of what they shared is heart-rending.
It is difficult to understand the magnitude of catastrophic events. Learning from children about their experiences of the fires renders undeniable the depth of suffering and displacements so many have experienced, at the most basic and universal human level. You describe a child searching for her baby blanket before evacuating, holding on to a connection to a lifetime of memories on the cusp of irretrievable loss.
To read, in their own words, how they process the loss of their homes and schools, how their lives have been altered, reminds us all of how vulnerable we are, and of the preciousness of life. Their reflections on what excites them for the future, something as simple as playing again on monkey bars, is humbling.
To build — or rebuild — communities and public systems that support the health and well-being of children and families, we must listen to the experiences of young people and prioritize their insights. Our collective futures demand it.
— Shakti Belway, Oakland, Calif.
A Candle in the Window
To the Editor:
If you, like me and so many others, are left feeling overwhelmed and impotent in the face of the blizzard of assaults on democracy and individual rights, here’s a little idea:
Put a candle (battery operated) in your window to demonstrate your resistance and determination. And, if you are willing and able to answer your door to someone who may be in danger, add a sign that says, “Safety Here.”
You and they will not be alone.
— M.B. Barlow, Eugene, Ore.
Conclusion:
The letters to the editor cover a range of topics, including artificial intelligence, the World Health Organization, and the experiences of children during the Los Angeles wildfires. The writers express their concerns about the potential negative consequences of these issues and urge readers to be vigilant and take action.
FAQs:
Q: What is the main theme of the letters to the editor?
A: The main theme is the importance of being vigilant and taking action in the face of various challenges, including the potential negative consequences of artificial intelligence, the withdrawal from the World Health Organization, and the experiences of children during the Los Angeles wildfires.
Q: What are some of the specific concerns expressed by the writers?
A: The writers express concerns about the potential negative consequences of artificial intelligence, including the potential for government surveillance and oppression, and the potential for Big Tech companies to use A.I. in manipulative or harmful ways. They also express concerns about the withdrawal from the World Health Organization and its potential impact on global health.
Q: What is the tone of the letters to the editor?
A: The tone is generally serious and concerned, with a sense of urgency and a call to action. The writers urge readers to be vigilant and take action to address the challenges they are facing.
