In a Pluralistic essay, Cory Doctorow argues that many AI debates rest on false equivalencies between fundamentally different processes that merely produce similar-looking outputs. He illustrates this with examples including statistical prediction versus genuine understanding, AI-driven job losses versus employers buying defective tools on false promises, and proposals to extend rights to nature being conflated with extending them to artificial systems. Doctorow contends that distinguishing between these \”two different tricks\” is essential for judging AI’s real capabilities and for separating outcomes that benefit society from those that merely enrich investors.
