AI’s disruption stems from decisions, not predictions

(SeaPRwire) –   When Palantir CEO Alex Karp claimed AI would chip away at the economic influence of “humanities-educated, mostly Democratic voters” to benefit “working-class, frequently male voters,” he wasn’t issuing a prediction. Instead, he was making a deliberate choice and framing it as an unavoidable fate.

Karp’s remarks outline his vision for the future, but this isn’t a fixed result. We have the power to choose whether we want to bring that vision to life.

AI has progressed more quickly than nearly everyone anticipated. Recent geopolitical upheavals have added to the uncertainty. The key question shouldn’t be about who gains or loses, but whether AI can benefit every segment of society, no matter their political affiliation.

Disruption Isn’t the Same as Progress

The AI age has created immense wealth. Both Nvidia and Microsoft are valued at trillions of dollars. ChatGPT now has 900 million weekly users. By traditional standards, this revolution is succeeding.

At the same time, U.S. unemployment reached a four-year peak last November. The wealth gap between the top 1% and the bottom half of the population has grown since ChatGPT’s debut. Fast progress and record market results aren’t indicators of success; they’re just signs of how quickly things are moving.

Yet a technology that can enable unprecedented scientific breakthroughs and automate work should do more than rearrange who holds economic power. It hasn’t done so yet, mainly because industries and governments haven’t clearly defined the outcomes they want AI to achieve or who it should serve. Instead, it should be a force that lifts everyone up.

Trust Is the Missing Ingredient

People embraced smartphones because they could see the direct benefits to their daily lives. No one will adopt a technology that’s meant to replace them.

But that’s precisely how some of AI’s most vocal proponents talk about it. The outcome is foreseeable: caution, doubt, and a growing divide between AI’s huge potential and its real-world value.

For the U.S. to stay the world’s leading superpower, the public must trust AI. This means they need to experience its benefits firsthand.

Where AI Should Actually Go to Work

If AI is reducing manual labor, the smart economic and social choice is to channel that capacity into the sectors that need it most: healthcare, human services, and infrastructure.

These fields are dealing with severe labor shortages and overworked employees. They’re also areas where automating routine tasks would have the biggest impact without putting workers out of jobs:

• Doctors being able to spend more time diagnosing and treating patients instead of doing paperwork for visits
• Caseworkers remaining in their positions because catching up on administrative tasks no longer takes up their weekends
• Transit systems operating more consistently as maintenance and reporting processes are automated

That’s not disruption. That’s real progress.

Build With Workers, Not For Them

The U.S. is a leader in AI talent, research, and infrastructure. The main challenge isn’t creating the technology; it’s applying it to the right issues.

One significant change since ChatGPT launched: the level of skills needed to use AI has fallen sharply. Companies developing these tools are more and more hiring frontline workers — those who know exactly what’s wrong in healthcare or social services — to make sure the tools are tailored to their specific needs. My team, which has frontline experience, often leads training for workers on how to use our technology.

A software engineer doesn’t understand what it’s like to be a doctor or a caseworker. If AI is going to serve our most essential workers, industries must build it alongside them, not just for them. Government purchasing processes should follow suit, consulting staff at every step of the procurement. That’s how you achieve both value and trust.

Stop Predicting. Start Deciding.

Karp is correct that AI will change the landscape of economic power. But he’s wrong to see this change as something that can’t be avoided, rather than something that’s shaped by our choices.

The most pressing problems aren’t hard to find. We know where inequality exists. We know which services are struggling. America has built its greatness over centuries as a land of opportunity. If the leaders creating this technology want it to endure, they should stop guessing who will be left out — and start making choices about who will be lifted up.