Many people brush generative AI aside as being _just_ _a tool_. ChatGPT describes itself as such (I asked). I think it’s more complicated than that, and this post is going to be an attempt to explain why. I’m not sure about much of what follows and welcome any thoughts you may have on whether this resonates with you and, if not, why not. ### What makes something a tool I think that to call something a tool is shorthand for it having _all_ of the following 5 attributes: 1. It is **an object** (physical, digital, cognitive, procedural, organizational, structural, conceptual, spiritual, etc. – i.e. the thing we normally identify as the tool), 2. **used with/designed for a purpose** , that 3. **can extend the capabilities of an actor** (an intelligent agent, typically human), who 4. **may perform an organized action or series of actions with it** , that 5. **cause changes to a subject other than the tool itself** (such as a foodstuff, or piece of paper, a mental state, or a configuration of bits), More informally, less precisely, but perhaps more memorably: ### A tool is something that an intelligent agent _does_ something _with_ in order to _do_ something _to_ something else Let me unpack that a bit. A pebble used as a knife sharpener is a tool, but one used to reinforce concrete is not. A pen used to write on paper is a tool, but the paper is not. The toolness in each case emerges from what the agent does and the fact that it is done to something, in order to achieve something (a sharp knife, some writing). Any object we label as a tool can become part of another with different organization. A screwdriver can become an indefinitely large number of other tools apart from one intended for driving screws. In fact, almost _anything_ can become a tool with the right organization. The paper can be a tool if it is, say, used to scoop up dirt. And, when I say “paper”, remember that this is the label for the object I am calling a tool, but it is the purpose, what it does, how it is organized, and the subject it acts upon that makes it so. It is not always easy to identify the “something else” that a tool affects. A saw used to cut wood is an archetypal tool, but a saw played with a bow to make music is, I think, not. Perhaps the bow is a tool, and maybe we could think of the saw as a tool acting on air molecules, but I think we tend to perceive it as the thing that is acted upon rather than the thing we do something with. Toolness is intransitive: a computer may be a tool for running programs, and a program running on it may be a tool that fixes a corrupt disk, but a computer is not a tool for fixing a corrupt disk. A great many tools are also a technologies in their own right. The intention and technique of the tool maker combines with that of the tool user, so the tool user may achieve more (or more reliably, faster, more consistently, etc) than would be possible without both. A fountain pen adds more to the writing assembly than a quill, for instance, so demanding less of the writer. Many tools are partnerships of this nature, allowing the cognition of more than one person to be shared. This is the ratchet that makes humans smart. Often, the organization performed by the maker of a technology entirely replaces that of the tool user. A dish sponge is a tool, but a dishwasher is not: it is an appliance. Some skill is needed to load it but the dishwashing itself – the purpose for which it is designed – is entirely managed by the machine. The case is less clear for an appliance like, say, a vacuum cleaner. I think this is because there are two aspects to the device: the mechanism that autonomously sucks dirt is what makes it an appliance, but the hose (or whatever) used to select the dirt to be removed is a tool. This is reflected in common usage, inasmuch as a vacuum cleaner is normally sold with what are universally described as tools (i.e. the things that a person actively manipulates). The same distinction is still there in a handheld machine, too – in fact, many come with additional tools – though I would be much more comfortable describing the whole device as a tool, because that’s what is manipulated to suck up the dirt. Many power tools fit in this category: they do some of the work autonomously but they are still things people do something with in order to do something to something else. Humans _can_ occasionally be accurately described as tools: the movie Swiss Army Man, for instance, features Daniel Radcliffe as a corpse that turns out to have many highly inventive uses. For real live humans, though, the case is less clear. Employees in scripted call centres, or teachers following scripted lesson plans are more like appliances than tools: having been “programmed”, they run autonomously, so the scripts may be tools but the people are not. Most other ways of using other people are even less tool-like. If I ask you to pick up some shopping for me, say, then my techniques of persuasion may be tools, but you are the one organizing phenomena to shop, which is the purpose in question. The case is similar for sheepdogs (though they are not themselves tool users), that I would be reluctant to label as tools, though skills are clearly needed to make them do our bidding and they do serve tool-like purposes as part of the technology of shepherding. The tools, though, are the commands, methods of training, treats, and so on, not the animals themselves. ### Why generative AIs are not tools For the same reasons of transitivity that dishwashers, people, and sheepdogs are not normally tools, neither are generative AIs. Prompts and other means of getting AIs to do our bidding _are_ tools but generative AIs themselves work autonomously. This comes with the proviso that almost anything can be repurposed so there is nothing that is not at least latently a tool but, at least in their most familiar guises, generative AIs tend not to be. Unlike conventional appliances, but more like sheepdogs, the work generative AIs perform is neither designed by humans nor scrutable to us. Unlike sheepdogs, but more like humans, generative AIs are tool users, too: not just (or not so much) words, but libraries, programming languages, web crawlers, filters, and so on. Unlike humans, though, generative AIs act with their users’ intentions, not their own, expressed through the tools with which we interact with them. They are a bit like partial brains, perhaps, remarkably capable but not aware of nor able to use that capability autonomously. It’s not just chatbots. Many recommender systems and search engines (increasingly incorporating deep learning), also sit uncomfortably in the category of tools, though they are often presented as such. Amazon’s search, say, is not (primarily) designed to help you find what you are looking for but to push things at you that Amazon would like you to buy, which is why you must troll through countless not-quite-right things despite it being perfectly capable of exactly matching your needs. If it is anyone’s tool, it is Amazon’s, not ours. The same for a Google search: the tools are your search terms, not Google Search, and it is acting quite independently in performing the search and returning results that are likely more beneficial to Google than to you. This is not true of all search systems. If I search for a file on my own computer then, if it fails to provide what I am looking for, it is a sign that the tool (and I think it is a tool because the results should be entirely determinate) is malfunctioning. Back in those far off days when Amazon wanted you to find what you wanted or Google tried to provide the closest match to your search term, if not tools then we could at least think of them as appliances designed to be controlled by us. I think we need a different term for these things. I like “metatool” because it is catchy and fairly accurate. A metatool is something that uses tools to do our bidding, not a tool in its own right. It is something that we use tools to act upon that is itself a tool user. I think this is better than a lot of other metaphors we might use: slave, assistant (Claude describes itself, incidentally, not as ‘merely’ a tool, but as an intelligent assistant), partner, co-worker, contractor, etc all suggest more agency and intention than generative AIs actually possess, but appliance, machine, device, etc fail to capture the creativity, tailoring, and unpredictability of the results. ### Why it matters The big problem with treating generative AIs as tools is that it overplays our own agency and underplays the creative agency of the AI. It encourages us to think of them, like actual tools, as, cognitive prostheses, ways of augmenting and amplifying but still using and preserving human cognitive capabilities, when what we are actually doing is using theirs. It also encourages us to think the results will be more deterministic than they actually are. This is not to negate the skill needed to use prompts effectively, nor to underplay the need to understand what the prompt is acting upon. Just as the shepherd needs to know the sheepdog, the genAI user has to know how their tools will affect the medium. Like all technologies, these strange partial brains effectively enlarge our own. All other technologies, though, embed or embody other humans’ thinking and/or our own. Though largely consisting of the compressed expressed thoughts of millions of people, AI’s thoughts are not human thoughts: even using the most transparent of them, we have very little access to the mechanisms behind their probablistic deliberations. And yet, nor are they independent thinking agents. Like any technology we might think of them as cognitive extensions but, if they are, then it is as though we have undergone an extreme form of corpus callosotomy, or we are experiencing something like Jaynes’s bicameral mind. Generative AIs are their own thing: an embodiment of collective intelligence as well as contributors to our own, wrapped up in a whole bunch of intentional programming and training that imbues them, in part, with (and I find this very troubling) the values of their creators and in part with the sum output of a great many humans who created the data on which they are trained. I don’t know whether this is, ultimately, a bad thing. Perhaps it is another stage in our evolution that will make us more fit to deal with the complex world and new problems in it that we collectively continue to create. Perhaps it will make us less smart, or more the same, or less creative. Perhaps it will have the opposite effects. Most likely it will involve a bit of all of that. I think it is important that we recognize it as something new in the world, though, and not just another tool. ### Share this: * Click to share on Bluesky (Opens in new window) Bluesky * Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn * Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window) Pocket * Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit * Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest * Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram * Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr * Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook * Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X * Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email * Click to print (Opens in new window) Print * Click to share on Threads (Opens in new window) Threads * Click to share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon * ### Like this: Like Loading... ### _Related_

Attached: 1 image "Un monde différent ne peut être bâti par des gens indifférents." https://www.lemonde.fr/livres/article/2009/11/26/arundhati-roy-la-mauvaise-conscience-de-la-democratie-indienne_1272334_3260.html (pas de source précise pour la photo)

We may earn revenue from the products available on this page and participate in affiliate programs. Learn more › ## Sign Up For Goods 🛍️ Product news, reviews, and must-have deals. Email address Sign Up Thank you! Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. Cleaning your laptop is an important job for several reasons. First and foremost: It keeps your laptop in good working order. If dust and dirt are getting into the ports, into the screen hinge, and between the keys then you’re going to run into problems sooner rather than later. Keep your laptop neat and tidy and it’ll last longer. There are plenty of other reasons, from being able to take out your laptop in the local coffee shop without embarrassment to getting more money for it if you upgrade. You might be surprised at how much more people are willing to pay for a second-hand laptop if it’s in good condition. Don’t let the idea that it’s an expensive or time-consuming chore put you off either, because it isn’t. A little cleaning every so often is all you need. Here’s how to go about it without causing any damage to your computer. Before you get started, turn off your laptop, unplug all cables from ports, and disconnect it from any power outlets. ## What you’ll need You can clean your laptop with a small number of inexpensive materials and supplies. Less is generally more: * Soft, lint-free, microfiber cloths * Water * 70 percent isopropyl alcohol wipes * Screen cleaning solution * A can of compressed air ## Cleaning the screen Don’t leave your laptop screen on when cleaning it._Image:Bram Naus/Unsplash_ The screen is perhaps the most delicate part of your laptop, so you want to take extra care here: A busted display essentially makes your laptop useless (unless you have a spare external monitor on hand), and it’s an expensive repair too. Always err on the side of caution when cleaning your laptop screen. The best approach here (and Apple agrees) is to use a lint-free, microfiber cloth that’s only slightly damp. Water is recommended, though 70 percent isopropyl wipes are OK if you have noticeable marks to remove. Be gentle with the wiping, and work methodically from the top of the screen to the bottom. It’s fine to buy a screen-cleaning solution if you think the situation demands it, but make sure you’re getting a product that’s certified for use on your type of machine, and check the reviews before buying. If you use a liquid, apply it to the cloth you’re using first—don’t apply it directly to the screen. As HP says, use careful circular motions to create the friction needed to remove the accumulated grime. Don’t apply any more pressure than you need to—holding the back of the laptop lid with the other hand can help here—then use a dry part of your cloth or a separate cloth to clean off any moisture. ## Cleaning the base With the rest of your laptop, you’re dealing with components that are a little less fragile than the display. However, the general approach is the same. Most manufacturers (including Dell) recommend using a soft, microfiber cloth to wipe away dirt and debris. (The microfiber will ensure you don’t add any scratches or marks while cleaning.) Use the same liquids as for the screen, if you need to—water, 70 percent isopropyl wipes, approved laptop cleaning fluid—but use small amounts, applied to the cloth first, and avoid getting anything inside ports or between keys. Any liquid that creeps inside your laptop chassis is likely to cause damage. Avoid using household cleaners, aerosol sprays, solvents, and abrasives, as these are likely to cause damage too. You can either leave your laptop to dry, or dry it off with a clean part of the cloth you’re using (or a separate cloth). Avoid paper towels and facial tissues, which may be too harsh on your laptop (and might leave pieces behind). One other useful recommendation from Samsung and others is to use a can of compressed air: This can help blast away bits of dirt and small particles that have gathered around ports or between laptop keys. As with the other instructions though, be careful, as you don’t want sharp blasts of air affecting anything inside the laptop. Use short bursts, angled in a way where they won’t do any damage. ### More deals, reviews, and buying guides The PopSci team has tested hundreds of products and spent thousands of hours trying to find the best gear and gadgets you can buy. SEE MORE GEAR ## David Nield ### Contributor, DIY David Nield produces how-to guides and explainers on everything from improving your smartphone photos to boosting the security of your laptop. * * * * * * Computers * Gear * Laptops

Vancouver has received the dubious honour of being named the fourth most "impossibly unaffordable" housing market on the planet.

SearXNG — a privacy-respecting, open metasearch engine