Ok, that’s not *quite* what I meant, Midjourney

This is what AI is for

No BS. This is what we need AI for. (Hint: I mean the stronger kind.)

It’s not for what you think it is, folks. We’re not going to be curing cancer or ending our starvation or clean water problems. Sure, people whose net worth is consistently at least a million will find it safer to make it from sea level to outerspace more safely (my apologies, Christa McAuliffe, wherever you are) and people from the Ziploc company will “save us from the ravages of plastic bags that won’t zip properly” but the real reason why we’re developing AI?

To marginalize consumers more effectively than ever.

And I can feel Big Brother frowning upon this piece — which, once I go through it with ChatGPT-4 a few times will be ready for the New York Times if not the Boston Herald (which I’ve put here in italics because they’re just better than the NYT even though they’re harder to find in hardcopy.)

Frown on me, brother man! You know it’s true. You know that every single elderly person who has ever cut themselves in the mad knife frustration which always follows one’s inability to peel apart two sides of a flimsy plastic bag with an indestructible zipper curses your name, too. You know very well that the $0.002 worth of additional plastic which would be necessary to render the bag functional versus a royal nuisance (*and excuse to use a more ‘professional’ Ziploc bag from the pantry*) amounted to a utterly pitiful difference to your shareholders on that $8 package of lunch meat.

But here’s the kicker for the folks at home:

They know about this type of thing already and they don’t give a flying fuck what you think about it. Which means they’re annoying us DELIBERATELY.

How do I know this?

I asked ChatGPT-4 the most cryptic of questions, figuring it couldn’t possibly answer it accurately. I asked it this:

“Ok I’m going to describe two different very bad annoyances that customers can experience. Your task is to think of at least twenty more in a similar vein.”

then, I described the Ziploc bag annoyance and the Chevy Bolt’s impossible to turn off radio (it’s true, I know how difficult that is to believe but it’s true.)

It followed with this:

I understand the kind of annoyances you’re referring to — design or functionality aspects of products or services that can be frustrating for users. Here are twenty more:

1. Condiment Packets: Those tiny ketchup or sauce packets that are nearly impossible to tear open without spilling.
2. Tin Foil Boxes: The roll often comes out when you try to pull the foil.
3. Software Updates: Mandatory updates that force you to restart your device in the middle of important tasks.
4. Printer Design: Printers that refuse to print black and white documents because one unrelated color cartridge is empty.
5. Medicine Bottles: Childproof caps that even adults find hard to open.
6. Coffee Lids: Lids that don’t align properly with the cup, causing spills.
7. Soda Cans: Tabs that break off without opening the can.
8. Vacuum Cleaners: Designs where the cord is too short to cover a decent area without constantly changing outlets.
9. TV Remotes: Lack of a backlit option, making them hard to use in the dark.
10. Microwave UI: Microwaves that make a series of loud beeps even after you’ve opened the door, signaling that it’s done.
11. Soap Dispensers: Automatic dispensers that either give too little or drench your hand in soap.
12. Toothpaste Tubes: Designs that make it difficult to extract the last bit of product.
13. Mobile Autocorrect: Overzealous autocorrect changing correctly spelled words to something unrelated.
14. Online Services: Unskippable advertisements, especially ones that pop up multiple times in short content.
15. Mobile Apps: Apps that force you to rate them before you’ve had a chance to use them properly.
16. Plastic Packaging: “Clamshell” packaging that’s almost impossible to open without scissors and risk of injury.
17. Earbuds: Tangle-prone wires, no matter how neatly you think you’ve stored them.
18. Refrigerator Design: Drawers that get stuck or don’t pull out fully unless both doors are open.
19. Car Dashboards: Digital dashboards with no physical knobs, requiring drivers to navigate touchscreen menus for simple tasks like adjusting volume or air conditioning.
20. Automatic Sinks: Faucets that either don’t detect hands or turn off while you’re still using them.

It then summarized in this very telling fashion:

These design quirks and functionalities can sometimes make users question the product development process and can be especially frustrating when encountered daily.

Now you’re probably thinking, “Ok, so what’s the big deal here, all of those things are basically true about customer annoyances, so what?”

That’s understandable — but only from the perspective in which we as consumers individually experience those precise types of nuisance out of what amounts to a CEO’s indifference toward the customer’s experience and concomitant fealty to shareholders.

It certainly does not seem acceptable from the perspective of shareholders who would like to keep their customers. But…let’s double check something for a minute. We can’t just go lynch the CEO’s of these companies — half of them have MBAs from the Ivy League. They gotta be smart somehow, right?

I checked back with ChatGPT-4 with this question:

Ok, just for giggles let’s have you rank those in two different ways: firstly from “least excusable to most excusable” — which implies significance of difficulty, from easiest to fix to hardest or most expensive and then secondly from least expensive to most expensive.

[Note: this is literally exactly what happened. I’ve changed none of the text.]

Alright, let’s rank them. Please note that the rankings are a bit subjective, and the exact order could vary based on personal opinions or specific conditions.

Least Excusable to Most Excusable (Easiest to Fix to Hardest):

1. Mobile Apps forcing ratings
2. TV Remotes without backlit
3. Microwave loud beeping after door opened
4. Soda Can tabs breaking off
5. Unskippable online ads
6. Mobile Autocorrect mistakes
7. Condiment Packets hard to open
8. Toothpaste Tubes not allowing full extraction
9. Soap Dispensers giving wrong amount
10. Tangle-prone Earbud wires
11. Coffee Lids misaligning
12. Clamshell packaging
13. Printer not printing due to unrelated cartridge empty
14. Medicine Bottles being hard to open
15. Tin Foil box design issues
16. Vacuum Cleaner with short cord
17. Refrigerator drawer design
18. Automatic Sinks not detecting hands properly
19. Car Dashboard without physical knobs
20. Software forcing updates

Least Expensive to Most Expensive to Rectify:

1. Mobile Apps forcing ratings
2. Microwave loud beeping after door opened
3. Mobile Autocorrect mistakes
4. TV Remotes without backlit
5. Unskippable online ads (might even save money)
6. Soda Can tabs breaking off
7. Condiment Packets hard to open
8. Coffee Lids misaligning
9. Tangle-prone Earbud wires
10. Soap Dispensers giving wrong amount
11. Toothpaste Tubes not allowing full extraction
12. Clamshell packaging
13. Medicine Bottles being hard to open
14. Tin Foil box design issues
15. Printer not printing due to unrelated cartridge empty
16. Vacuum Cleaner with short cord
17. Refrigerator drawer design
18. Automatic Sinks not detecting hands properly
19. Car Dashboard without physical knobs
20. Software forcing updates (requires extensive backend development and testing)

The considerations for “excusability” include not just the cost, but also the apparentness of the problem and how long it has persisted in product design. The cost to rectify includes potential research, materials, manufacturing changes, and software development, among other factors.

Then I had it match the numbers from the “easiest” and the “cheapest” lists, and list them. It gave this:

Of course! Here’s the paired list based on the rankings:

1. Mobile Apps forcing ratings — (1, 1)
2. TV Remotes without backlit — (2, 4)
3. Microwave loud beeping after door opened — (3, 2)
4. Soda Can tabs breaking off — (4, 6)
5. Unskippable online ads — (5, 5)
6. Mobile Autocorrect mistakes — (6, 3)
7. Condiment Packets hard to open — (7, 7)
8. Toothpaste Tubes not allowing full extraction — (8, 11)
9. Soap Dispensers giving wrong amount — (9, 10)
10. Tangle-prone Earbud wires — (10, 9)
11. Coffee Lids misaligning — (11, 7)
12. Clamshell packaging — (12, 12)
13. Printer not printing due to unrelated cartridge empty — (13, 15)
14. Medicine Bottles being hard to open — (14, 13)
15. Tin Foil box design issues — (15, 14)
16. Vacuum Cleaner with short cord — (16, 16)
17. Refrigerator drawer design — (17, 17)
18. Automatic Sinks not detecting hands properly — (18, 18)
19. Car Dashboard without physical knobs — (19, 19)
20. Software forcing updates — (20, 20)

This format pairs each annoyance with its ranking from both lists for clarity.

What have we learned? Well, to my way of thinking, I’d say that today we’ve learned that most if not all of the problems we experience as customers are already known by the VIPs of the handful of conglomerates which make the products we use and they don’t give a shit about fixing them.

In fact, we can easily ascertain that AI will help companies to even further marginalize their customers, and we’ll see new versions of Shrinkflation everywhere we turn.

Yes, we already knew that not only was the sugar from the Crack Jack recipe replaced with corn syrup (it’s cheaper, after all) but the ratio of peanuts to popcorn (and undoubtedly the ratio of coating to popcorn as well, because, after all, if you’re going to fuck something up you might as well go all the way, right?) was too. We knew about the difference in price-per-pound of the cookie and the middle part of the Oreo, too. That Double and Triple stuff had us fooled for a bit, though. Almost had us.

The half gallons of ice cream that are 52 ounces. The cartons of juice that will never be the same again. All the packages which use 50% more air-puffed packaging material in places where it’s a lot less understandable than potato chips.

So yes, THIS is what strong AI is for. I mean, since we’re ignoring the rampant starvation, jobless and homelessness, the stagnant water filled with bacteria that hundreds of millions (or even a billion, because after all, we’ve no idea, right?) people live on. Not to organize a coup and take over the Nabisco factory. Nope. Not at all. Not even to demand our products be returned to their original formula in their original packages at the original volume or weight.

But rather to demand that all those companies who have followed that practice cough up the fucking numbers they jumbled all around and the dates they did it. Out of respect for common decency and full disclosure.

Face it: that’s just not going to happen. What’s worse? Well, the fact that they’re going to keep right on doing it — and “doing it better” with the “help” of AI.

And that’s the bottom line I wanted you to read to:

AI is a tool for making the richer richer and the rest? Ah, who cares about them.