Which Tasks Should Be Automated With AI — and Which Should Always Stay Human?

We should never automate the evaluation of human labour. Using AI to scan resumes, monitor employee keystrokes, or conduct performance reviews is deeply dystopian. It reduces a human being's worth to a set of machine-readable metrics, ignoring context, potential, and soft skills (https://www.epi.org/publication/algorithmic-management/). When you are managed by an algorithm, you aren't an employee; you are a biological component in a machine. Have you ever felt like you were being evaluated by an...

We should automate 'Maintenance' and keep 'Creation' human (https://www.theparisreview.org/blog/2023/05/15/ai-and-the-end-of-art/). Let AI fix the bugs in the code, balance the spreadsheets, and optimise the supply chain routes. But the initial spark of creation, writing the first draft of a novel, designing the architecture of a building, composing a melody, must remain human. If we automate creation, we lose the cultural mirror that helps us understand ourselves. Art is how humans talk to huma...

We must never automate the allocation of scarce, life-altering resources (https://jme.bmj.com/content/47/12/e84). Triage in an emergency room, the approval of organ transplants, or the sentencing of a criminal. AI is fundamentally utilitarian, it will optimise for the greatest statistical good. But human justice is often deontological; we believe certain rights cannot be violated, even if it's statistically optimal to do so. An AI might calculate that giving a liver to a 20-year-old billionaire ...