Our minds aren’t equipped to handle AI
Essay argues brain-as-computer thinking misleads AI and that generative tools undermine long-evolved human cognition.
Benjamin Riley argues in The Verge that comparing brains to computers, a view associated with Demis Hassabis and Elon Musk, misreads human cognition and helps explain AI's cultural effects. He contrasts Turing-style input, computation, and output with neuroscientist Paul Cisek's account of brains as evolved feedback-control systems, using examples from catching a fly ball to the hippocampus and episodic memory. The essay calls generative AI cognitively tempting but harmful over time. It is commentary, not a model launch, benchmark, or reported AI security incident.
- Essay rejects the brain-as-computer model common in AI.
- Cites Paul Cisek's feedback-control view of brain evolution.
- Compares generative AI to junk food for cognition.
- No model release, benchmark, or security incident is reported.
From the original article
11 min read at theverge.com
Norbert Wiener, godfather of cybernetics, once said, "The thought of every age is reflected in its technique." For the past century, our thought has been reflected in our computers, including by those in the AI industry. Google's Demis Hassabis calls the brain "a biological approximation to a Turing machine."
By Benjamin Riley · theverge.com
A short excerpt; the article and its images belong to the publisher. Summary, key facts and assessment above are AI-written from the article and can be wrong.