“AI as a Normal Technology should be a vision” by June Jimenez

"AI as a Normal Technology" (AINT), proposed as a counterweight to "AI as an Abnormal Technology" (AIAbT) makes much more sense as a prescriptive / normative framework than a descriptive one. To be clear, the fact that they could be different frameworks isn’t an entirely novel observation; the authors directly invite the distinction in their introductory piece: The statement “AI is normal technology” is three things: a description of current AI, a prediction about the foreseeable future of AI, and a prescription about how we should treat it. We view AI as a tool that we can and should remain in control of, and we argue that this goal does not require drastic policy interventions or technical breakthroughs. We do not think that viewing AI as a humanlike intelligence is currently accurate or useful for understanding its societal impacts, nor is it likely to be in our vision of the future. AI as Normal Technology, Arvind Narayanan & Sayash Kapoor, April 15, 2025 But I think much of their communication and modelling would be clearer and more accurate if they unbundled their three core frameworks into: A description of current AI capabilities (plausibly true at the time [...] The original text contained 6 footnotes which were omitted from this narration. --- First published: October 19th, 2026 Source: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/3eD7Bab5kArqkdrQs/ai-as-a-normal-technology-should-be-a-vision --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. --- Images from the article: Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.