82. Work, wellness and creativity with Harriet Pellereau

Transcript created using DeepGram.com

Hi, and welcome to the Machine Ethics Podcast. This time, we're talking to Harriet Pellereau. This episode was recorded in the 4th October 2023. Harriet and I talk about AI's lack of reasoning ability, the company Mind Over Tech, uses of generative AI, and indeed, what is creativity. We briefly bring up a new idea, creative duty.

We also talk about work life balance and the global initiative 4 Day Week Global, the hidden costs of convenience, responsible technology, and much, much more. If you like this episode, you can find more episodes at machinedashethics. Net. You can contact us at hello@machine-ethics.net. You can also follow us on Twitter, machine_ethics, Instagram, machineethicspodcast.

Youtube, youtube.comforward/at machinedashethics. And if you can, you can support us on patreon, patreon.comforward /machineethics. Thanks for listening, and hope you enjoy. Cool. So hi, Harriet.

Thanks for joining the podcast. Thanks for having me. If you could tell me who you are and what do you do. Sure. My name is Harriet Pelerault, and I am the cofounder of a digital habits behavior change company called Mind of a Tech.

But I also wear many other hats. I have worn the hat of creative. I did a BA in model making and worked in advertising for Spell. And then that drew me into the world of programming. And I was a technologist for Spell.

I was making stuff with code and building apps. And that led me to being a teacher where I was teaching people about code and about how cool it is. And then that led me to being a teaching director where I was teaching people how to teach people how cool code was. And in the midst that process, I also became a mother. I have an an 8 year old daughter and a 6 year old son.

And but today, I'm just excited to be here. So thanks very much for having me. You're welcome. It's very, very, nice to have you. So the first question on this podcast, because we are predominantly I would like to say an AI podcast, but it's mostly about the ethics of, technology, I guess.

It's it it feels like it's getting broader and broader these days, as these technologies both overlap with our other technologies also within our lives. But to kick us off, what is AI, for you, Harriet? What is AI? I think that the first thing that is sensible to do is to actually define intelligence because, you know, that's that's a kind of component of that. And, you know, we could describe that as the ability to understand and learn and problem solve, and adapt, but also to reason.

Obviously, artificial intelligence is when those behaviors, those actions are being completed by something that's been created by man, like a computer. Yeah. So I sort of been thinking a lot about therefore what, like, what fundamentally is different between the 2. I do think a lot a lot of the kind of questions that we have are around the fact that artificial intelligence is, like, slightly limited in its, ability to reason. You know, like, human reasoning is informed by facts and and logic.

Although, neuroscience have actually proven that emotions are, like, integral to to decision making. I think there's, like, some studies. I think there's a study from, like, the nineties where there were kind of there were some of patients that had had that sort of emotional region of their brain damaged. The was it the amygdala and the prefrontal cortex, those sort of areas which are kind of key to emotion. And in those states, the the patients were rendered, like, unable to make decisions.

And so, yeah, I think that whilst, you know, we can we can definitely attribute some modes of intelligence to artificial intelligence, ultimately, like, the the kind of the lack of emotion. Computers lack emotion, and therefore, they can't they can't perform reason to the same extent that humans can. And and so I I would say that artificial artificial intelligence is slightly misleading as a term because it suggests an intention and a and a kind of, an ability to reason that I don't think they can truly have in a comparative way to humans. That would be a good for you there then. Yeah.

Thank you for that. I can I mean, in in truth, I I it's fascinating the different things that people come up with as a solution to that? Sometimes people are very short and know exactly what and and other times it's like, oh my god. I hate this question. I don't know.

It's it's gonna be a while. It I I one of the things I think it was interesting with what you just said was that I guess it's in it's always in comparison. Right? So in comparison to us, this is the case. But maybe if we're thinking of these systems as an other thing, which has maybe, let's say, an intelligence which is other and not necessarily directly comparable, but lives that that kind of style of thinking that the the thinking itself, let's say, is just different.

Then maybe it has its own thing of way of working, and maybe we just need to think of a better term for it, you know, and a better category because, you know, we humans like to categorize things and put them in buckets so we can talk about them. I mean, that's another way of thinking about it. That it's this other way of thinking that we've created artificially, which works in this other different way. And Yeah. I think that's really that's really true.

Maybe it's almost a time like an aspirational form of intelligence because, like, you know, like you've just said, true reason is slightly out of humanity's grasp because it it will always come laced and and filtered by emotion. Computers are free from that. So there's a there's a form of of logic and decision making that can be made that's very different, to ours. So, yeah, I think maybe artificial intelligence is the right term, but a form of a form of thinking, learning, reacting that is, complementary Yes. To intelligence perhaps.

Yeah. I like that idea. So for context, could you give me a short description, I guess, of what Mind Over Tech is is and is doing and wants to do and is striving for and all those sorts of things? Absolutely. Okay.

So I described Mind of Tech as a digital habits behavior change company. So we work with organizations to help their people use digital devices in a way that supports their well-being, productivity, and connection. Why do we do this? Because as I said, I have a background as a technologist, so as my cofounder, we both love technology. We both think it's incredibly empowering and exciting.

Brilliant. But, you know, I think it's as well as being aware of what it can give us, we're quite aware of what it can take away. And so we focus on helping people take action in that situation, helping teams take practical steps to become more intentional in the way that they use their devices. And we provide physical toolkits, and we give talks, and we run workshops and training programs that help organizations build effective digital workplace cultures. And we work with big companies, tech and financial companies, and, a range of companies who are going through a period of intense change.

Like, we partner with 4 Day Week Global. They're working with companies who are transitioning to a whole new way of working, a whole new work week. And so, we can kind of fit into those specific, moments of change as well. But you're it's not like you're a consultant who's, like, recommending technology. You're helping to I think I was trying to think of the way that you were describing it before, but you're enabling them to essentially reflect on what will what will work best for them going forward and the people within the the company organization so that they can, almost, you know, go forward and and help themselves, essentially.

Right? Exactly. Like, it's not it's not in our, you know, power to you know, it's not for us to say what are good ways of using technology and what are, you know, bad habits and what are good habits is it's our role to help people learn through experience, what works for help teams discover different ways of using technology in the workplace that actually could lead to high levels of productivity, you know, increased well-being, increased connection between those teams. So we try and help people become, like I said, you know, more intentional in the way they approach that when I think often with technology, we're so excited about it. We we we let it in and we we launch forth into it without fully considering, the cost and the impact of it.

So it's maybe, yeah, just encouraging that sense of intention and for people to learn for themselves what works, what works for them. Yeah. Yeah. What is it? Like, I think a couple of years ago, it was just plainly apparent that having conversations with anyone who worked in an office was struggling to either switch off, or to control the amount of emails they were getting, or to, get away from the office, or, like, all these different dials, which you you can twist on, like you're saying, like, the work life balance and the wellness element, which then also impacts obviously the, the organization itself.

You know, if you have all these people who are always on and they're burning out because you have a boss who sends them 20 emails, every day and they don't have a structure, then they might not understand actually that that what they're doing might be, hurting people or that certain people might need certain other ways of working, or if you're working from home, all these different things. So I I think in the the digital work environment, it just feels like unless you're magic and you've made all this work for you and it's all groovy, then then it's probably worth, like, Yeah. Yeah, is that there's yeah. I just said a lot. Sorry.

But, No. No. I I, yeah, I I I agree. I think that it's easy to assume. Mhmm.

And, also, it's easy to just slip into ways of working and habits that that actually aren't serving the direction a a team wants to go or the the kind of values of a an organization. And, moments to reflect upon that, I think, is super important. You also see something that around, like, different people having different needs. That's extremely important and a reason why, again, we don't tell people what to do, but we try and help them discover it because everyone has different needs. And I think actually becoming aware that everyone may have different needs to you as well.

You know, there's a there's a huge impact in diversity. And when I was at at school, I was, you know, told I had an assessment, and I I was told I was dyslexic. And it's only been in in turning 40, like being 40 now, that I've actually had a diagnosis for ADHD, which actually makes so much sense of my whole career and why I think technology is amazing and I'm always I'm so delighted to solve problems and, you know, it's been a incredibly useful, I think, part of who I am and discovering, what's been driving me all these years. But it also explains why I do find self regulation of my, you know, tech and my devices extra difficult because my brain is constantly jumping around and searching for novelty and and all the rest. And so actually being aware of how our minds work and how to create boundaries and set ourselves up in an environment where, you know, we're reducing the cognitive and constant distraction that's all around us.

Like, how can we set our workspace up so that that's mitigated? And be aware of working colleagues and their neurodiversity of what they need and how they actually perform best. And there's lots and lots of stuff. There's lots of lots of ideas. You know, I mentioned physical toolkit, a mind of a tech.

We have a, set of cards, a box of cards called the digital habit lab that contains 56 different experiments and different sort of scientific evidence experiments that, have been really well tested and that people can try out to disrupt their habits. And that allows people to actually take action. Because I think it's it's all very well to talk about this and, you know, to say how hard it is. Behavior change is really difficult, and I think it's particularly difficult with technology. It's similar, I'd say, if you had a a kind of eating disorder.

You know, you still need to eat. You still need to have food. And we can't really completely cut technology out of our lives, certainly not, you know, every minute. We need and it and it's extremely beneficial to us and is a huge part of modern life. So it's like trying to figure out how we can port ourselves to self regulate in those in those instances.

Yeah. So a couple of maybe a couple of months ago now, you so I subscribed to your newsletter, because I love you guys and what you guys do. And, there was a piece on the kind of impending changes to creativity, kind of the AI generative stuff, which was, highlighted in that newsletter and some of your thoughts about it, which drove me to get in contact with you even though, I would have loved to talk to you anyway. Because we're kind of on, we we almost got a mini series on generative AI at the moment, as it's high in people's minds. They can see it.

They can touch it themselves. So I wanted to talk to you about your feelings about the the use of AI. And, it's interesting for me what your opinions are because, one, you are a creative person, and you want to make things with technology. But also, you have spent a lot of time teaching people about technology. And it's funny because this technology almost changes that relationship as well.

Like, again, so especially when you're talking about generating code or just generating artifacts. So I was wondering it feels like a new, an epoch. And how do you feel about that? Yeah. Oh, it's it really just has been a question that's been bubbling in my mind for a while.

And, you know, I've I'm also a huge fan of your of your podcast and this. I feel like you were so early in these in this space to be discussing these questions. And thanks to you, I I began thinking about it as well and and how it kind of would shift over time as as new abilities, you know, became you know, technology was able to do more and more. In terms of creativity, this this yeah. I I I posted about this recently.

I wrote a a kind of long form article about it because generative AI, I think, has challenged a lot of people, and it's challenged a lot of assumptions and and opinions we have about the way we work, and what creativity is. And then I think when any new technology becomes popularized, there is a natural, you know, sort of polarizing of opinion. Some people are extremely excited about it. I've normally been on that side. There's always gonna be fear.

There's always gonna be a sense of what will this take away. What what, you know, can we be replaced, etcetera. And I I think I was sort of speaking to that, and and actually looking at and reflecting on some of the things I'd seen that year. Like, this year, it's been some really interesting stuff. So, like, in my article, I I kinda talk about this photography competition, the Sony World Photography Competition that was, in April.

And an artist called Boris Eldigson won the, you know, this this award, won the kind of creativity, award with an image that was generated with AI. He didn't disclose it had been before he entered and says that he did it to see if these competitions were, quote, unquote, ready for AI. And he declared they are not ready because, you know, they obviously couldn't tell. And he was of very strongly of the opinion that the AI gen anyway, AI generated images are not photography. 1 is creating an image with light, 1 is creating it with prompts, and I I absolutely agree with him.

I think what's interesting is where you where you kind of apply value, and what you think is is it it's still a beautiful image, still a really haunting image that he created. And, clearly, the the judges thought that it was award winning. And then also this year in May, this game jam, GMTK, prohibited the use of AI, to generate assets or code in their annual game making marathon, which was, you know, really interesting a really interesting move because it's it's a it's a techno it's a it's a coding tech creative, event. You know? And you had people saying, like, why don't they just, like, ban Photoshop and make us, you know, code our own engine and you know?

So confused by the movement. It made me think, like, why is it different? What is different? You know? And it poses a question.

Is it because, you know, AI is like a performance enhancing drug. It's so creative that, you know, it can't it can't be put into a competition. And, yeah, and and and then and then and then in June, I went to, the London Design Biennale at Somerset House, and went to a forum called AI Made in Our Image with John Mack, artist, who's very interested in this in this world of of technology and humanity. And there was, an artist there who created, a robot that he called Ada, a humanoid artist robot. She was not just a robot.

She was an artist, and she had an artist's smock on and a paintbrush. And they were discussing, you know, the nature of creativity and AI. So Ada has, like, cameras in her eyes, and she looks at stuff and and, has kind of these algorithms that she draws and and and creates paintings and sculptures and all this kind of stuff. And, artwork attributed to her has sold for 1,000,000 of dollars. So it's a quite interesting it's an interesting kind of opportunity to discuss what is creativity and what is she an artist, etcetera.

He actually said in the in this event, you know, AJ is not capable of true creativity, which, you know, I think is true. The, you know, the I think it's Yeah. It feels like a bit of a caveat though, isn't it? Like, what is true creativity? Like, yeah.

I know. Like and, you know, and you look at how the artworks are made. You know, she's the the the stuff that she makes is 3 d printed by a Swedish computer scientist. Things that she paints and are rendered and painted by real female actual, like, woman painter, female, artist called Susie Emery. The algorithm that she's using is was trained on, like, datasets that were all labeled paint you know, painstakingly by humans.

So, yeah, that was kind of where I got to an article that there's this, like, hidden ghost in the shell. There's, like, a whole world of ghost workers who are actually driving, not just the creators themselves who are producing the artwork, but actually the the laborers who are labeling stuff and and allowing these algorithms to leverage that information. So I, yeah, I think I was have always been really interested in it, but it feels like it's come to a bit of a head this year with lots of in lots of different arenas and lots of different creative spaces. And, yeah. So I was kind of interested to to explore it.

And and yeah. And I I think I was also it made me think about, like, what creativity is. You know, we start questioning, can a computer really be creative? Oh, okay. Well, that like, in the same way, what is artificial intelligence?

What's intelligence? What's creativity? I really like, Joey Capone who has this incredible book, The Laws of Creativity. And his definition is humankind's, so he even begins, humankind, unique ability to combine unrelated and abstract ideas, and, you know, find finding patterns, finding and and making unusual connections. So I and I do think that AI can find patterns and relate unrelated information in really curious and interesting ways.

But I do not think that they're that they're truly creative and Yes. Yeah. That is. But I think I think you could I I mean, it feels like you could make up loads of caveats to this stuff. Right?

Yeah. Yeah. So arbitrary kind of extensions of that. So you're only creative if you can make abstract connections and patterns, and you like it. Okay?

You know what I mean? It's like Yeah. Computer because the systems aren't they're they're not sitting there making works of art, are they? They're they are prompted to do an action because we, as human beings, have prompted it to do an action. Yeah.

And we're deriving value, hopefully, doing anything, not feeling anything, and not not being being creative. It's maybe producing creative works. Yeah. But it doesn't want the creativity itself. You know what I mean?

Yeah. Yeah. 100%. I mean, a 100% agree. I don't you know, I I agree with Boris Mhmm.

And his in his, you know, application for this this award. I do not think that photography I I I I think it's really interesting when you think about copyright, you know, like, again, this year, the US copyright office withdrew copyright protection from a comic book Mhmm. When they found out that it it the imagery had been generated with Midjourney, and saying that, you know, it was not the product of human authorship. And I, you know, I kind of agree with that sentiment that creative work produced by generative AI is not truly created by humans and it's not truly created by machines. You know, it's like an extension.

I think that's where I settled. It's like it's an extension. It's a tool. It's not a replacement. And but it's but it's an interesting question.

Like, it comes to your point, intention behind it. And again, I come back to my my reason of what is intelligence and why. You know, the the the kind of intention behind the, you know, creation of something, is is is is is really critical to it. So, yeah, I mean, I I think the other thing I explored in this article that slightly prompted it was, I did, as I said, I did a BA in model making. What a random thing, Harry.

I just really liked films. I liked art, and I wanted to do art that had you know, could be used in films. So I went down that road, and I actually did we did lots of different models. We did kinda architecture, like beautiful, tiny, little miniature fascination projects of tiny buildings. We did stuff out of clay and card.

We made stuff in silicon and fiberglass and all this kind of stuff. And, in my second year, I came to Bristol. I came to Bristol, and I I did a placement, working and making props for the Wallace and Gromit film, The Curse of the Were Rabbit. Yeah. Nice.

Aardman classic. And, actually, interestingly, one of the first Aardman productions to use CGI, in the production. And I it was quite a pivotal moment for me because I was in my my my sort of final year of this degree, and I remember see speaking to a very senior prop maker and talking about computers because, you know, I'm I'm a bit of a nerd. I like computers, so I always like playing around with them. I did a lot of.

That's where I started learning 3 d animation was on this degree. And I was chatting to, the spot maker, and she was like, yeah. It's not just model making. Like, it's not just stop motion. Like, every every area of model making is changing.

Card and clay and all these traditional materials, we just kinda can't compete with with what they're able to do and actually the the kind of costs and the speeds of it. And the reason I was interested this year is that I started seeing, like, various posts and things about with CGI model makers Mhmm. Basically saying, we're all gonna be out of a job because of AI. Yep. It's gonna destroy our industry and and, like, panic and fear.

And and, you know, I do I I I think it it will, you know, whilst we could argue that it's not, quote, unquote, true creativity, it's gonna change. It's gonna change the ways of working. Maybe in the in line with the way it always had some, but it it will change the ways that we do things. Yeah. So there's more I could say about this.

Yeah. I feel like you're alluding to that it's gonna be this kind of artisanal, like, 3 d art house, like, prop makers. Like, oh, we make, the finest 3 d generated by hand in the computer. No AI, textured only by hand. Yeah.

I mean, you know, you do see, like, actors talking about, you know, how kind of challenging it is to work in a full blue screen environment and how I know we're watching some of the extra bonus features from the latest Indiana Jones, which I loved. I loved it. Yeah. Haven't seen it. I haven't seen it.

But style of destiny. Yeah. Okay. Like, classic indie. Really good.

I also would love to be Phoebe Waller Bridge, so that was a joke. And, yeah, in that he's, you know, in some of the other stuff, they're talking about the fact that they made New York, and they've kind of created this whole, you know, this whole carnival and and everything was going on. He was really riding a horse and all that kind of stuff, and actually, you know, just the actors find it tricky to work when they're when everything is being done by a computer. So that kind of getting back to getting back to something tangible and that we can touch, I think is is something that there's balancing between always. And obviously, not every studio can afford the budget of doing that.

And that that may still used a whole load of CGI on on Indiana Jones. Of course, they did. But this idea that actually, it's not always the right tool in in every situation, I guess. Yeah. Yeah.

But in terms of, like, the the future Mhmm. And and jobs and, you know, how this this disruption will go, I don't know if you saw, but there was someone from Morgan Stanley recently forecasting, like, changes in the labor market, and saying that, like, is it Brian Nowak saying that, like, you know, AI will affect 44% of the labor force in the next few years. You know? And, obviously, it's like the labor force in general. Like, when you think about creative roles, how is that gonna change them?

The more I've thought about this and actually read about it, and I've think it's such an interesting question, I do think that whilst it will change jobs, that there will always be need for a human at the center of it. That, you know, even this this guy who who submitted this this photograph, Elle Dixon, he he was really good at using those tools. Like, he was very good at writing prompts but he was also very aware of art history and how photographs should be composed. There was a huge amount of skill and that was writing the prompt. Obviously, then we've talked about the other humans are part of that.

And, you know, they've got this they're still not resolved, isn't it? They've got the act to strike at the moment where they're trying to figure out, you know, in Hollywood how they can protect their voice and body being used, without their consent. It's like a really interesting ethical moment for questioning how we reuse creative material. And so, yeah, in terms of creative roles, writers, photographers, designers, illustrators, model makers, etcetera, I do think there will be a lot of disruption, but I don't think it will replace the human creative. And also actually I think a big part of that does come down to this, like, copyright question.

You know? Like, we we we don't consider something that has been created by generative AI to be copyrightable, perhaps. It's unclear completely on on Midjourney's platform, but in certain arenas perhaps. So in order for there to be, you know, for a studio to, like, own something, it needs to it needs to be done in a in a in a different way. But that doesn't mean that the AI can't augment and it can't help.

You know? So I I I think that that there will always be need of creatives. The way creatives work, I think, will shift. And and I and my yeah. I guess my, like, position on this is that it's positive thing because I'm, I I think, an eternal optimist.

I don't I don't think I I can change that. I think I will always be optimistic even in the face of things going wrong. Yeah. I'm just like, oh, but it's it's gonna be fine. And so I I do think I do think it's positive, everything that's shifting around us, and it's good that it we're we're kind of challenging and questioning it but, you know, it's ultimately, it's a tool.

And, oh, and I did this I did the course. You know, they do lectures, courses. So I did their, like, oh, something like use chat GPT like a pro. They're like talking about being a pro a lot, which I find quite fun with David Hyatt. And this was all about writing and how how to use, you know, tools like how to use GPT tools to improve your writing.

And his big takeaway was use this as a tool to be become a better writer. Mhmm. Don't, like don't use it to just rewrite to write stuff for you. Use it to research, brainstorm, challenge your assumptions, coach coach you, you know, provide alternatives, compare your work to some of the work that you aspire to be like, you know, the artists that you aspire to be, the writers you aspire to to be, and, like, just disrupt the way you do things. And I guess that's sort of maybe how I view the way that AI will impact the world in a in a creative sense will be through augmenting the human, supporting the human to do those those things that all artists all artistic pursuits require researching and challenging and and rethinking and comparing and coaching and all of that stuff is relevant for all of them.

And I do think that, you know, as as general these kind of general AI tools get more powerful and more specialist AI tools, come. Mhmm. You know, these kind of maybe, like, less interesting uncreative repetitive tasks, we'll we can dial them down and hand them somewhere where maybe some a machine is better at and that we can and and, you know, we can actually lift. This is my optimistic Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. I like I like the idea of that, like, that you kind of have a choice to say, well, all these things, I actually this is redundant for me to do. Like, this is this is ridiculous that I'm doing this when this system can just do this much faster and better. And it's not something that we enjoy doing in the first place. And that feels like a total win win.

Right? Yeah. But then there will be places where it's like, well, you know what? Actually, I do really wanna write this thing today, and I I I've got a good idea for it, you know? And I don't wanna sit here with a couple of prompts or whatever it is, And just blast away at it for 10 minute for like half an hour trying to find the right thing.

When actually, I kind of know I kinda know what the right thing is. Right? So I'm just gonna write it down or I'm just gonna start painting. Or I'm gonna talk to someone, and we're gonna work this thing out. And we're gonna make a and direct a film about it.

Whatever. I feel I I feel like that is a nice place to get to, but it's it's kind of like where how do you keep hold of that autonomy of that, like, decision making within a like, essentially the commercialness of that situation? And having it so that, like, all those decisions aren't already commercially decided previously because it's cheap. It's just cheaper. Right?

We've already fired all of those people anyway. So the choice isn't there. Anyway, you know what I mean? So it's like holding on to the possibility space around some of that work. Almost not completely getting hollowed out by, you know, it is easier, faster, and is maybe doesn't get consumed as much, but it's still making us money.

So it's the right thing to do. Bop. Like Yeah. And I I think a concern in this whole space is that we're gonna just devolve to the mean and Yeah. Yeah.

Exactly. We'll reduce creativity because it will be it will be draw we'll all be drawing from the same part with the same resource, producing, images, music, writing that's all, like, the same. It's all generic and all bland. And I think that Yeah. There's a there's, like, a duty to keep topping up that well of that we're all drawing from now, this melting pot of of of creative work.

And, you know, I think that's the mid journey imagery is is not copyrightable but it and it can be used and goes back in to the to the system to generate and be used by others to create other things. So continuing to encourage, I guess, people to take photographs and make models and write their own stories, but then also not be afraid. I think this is mind of attack classic. Mind of attack is like, how can you get the best out of it whilst retaining humanity, while retaining your your your intention and your and your values and your purpose. You know, how use it to be more creative.

Mhmm. How can we use it to to lift up the work that we already do? And that's that's what interests me. So, yeah, I watch with interest, but I I'm, you know, using all of these tools. I think they're Mhmm.

They're powerful and they're and they're very cool. But lots of ethical questions are being raised, and I think it's a very interesting time. Do you think, Harriet? Hi. Hi, Ben.

Do you have an idea for what those new opportunities or new jobs or new creative practices actually could look like. If you're throwing something at the wall going, okay. Well, 10 years time, guys, we're gonna have this crazy thing because we can now do this new thing, and we extrapolate that out a little bit, and we get to x y zed. You know? Is it have you got any ideas or or or or aspirations around that almost?

Such a good question. It makes me think of my children because, you know, there's some brilliant stat out there, which I'm gonna butcher, that's like, oh, I don't know. I'll make something up. 90% of the jobs that our children will have haven't been invented yet. Like, what are you I know that's a stupid thing to say.

But, like, what is it that my children are gonna end up doing? And there was obviously a time in history when that was always that was super clear, and it was a very limited palette of options. And now what are they gonna end up doing? I hope it's something creative. I hope that we use technology in the way that we maybe the the science fiction writers hoped when it went when there was a more optimistic science fiction.

When was that? Yeah. I think it's just that we landed on the moon. I I I listening to, help me. Who wrote Game of Thrones?

JRR Martin. Alright. Yeah. Alright. And him saying that, you know, everyone was so thrilled that we landed on the moon.

What they didn't expect is that we would stop. That we would that's where we would stop. Yeah. Yeah. That's where, you know, for him, it sort of started becoming much more dystopian, the vibe of science fiction.

But, anyway, there were also I because we're working a lot, and we've partnered with, 4 Day Week Global, which is very interesting. Like, I think I mentioned this already. It's a very interesting mission around, like, helping people change the working week. There were predictions again, I can't quite remember the stats, but there were predictions that by now we would be working, you know Yeah. Yeah.

No. Like, 10 hour weeks or something because technology would be lifting and doing and doing everything, and it's kind of gone the other way. It's pervaded into all of our personal life instead. What I hope, my dream, would be be that the roles that are available for my kids are creative, and they are pushing boundaries of what we can do now. Mhmm.

Of course, there will always be the bottom line in in in, you know, there will always be companies wanting to create more for less and create more value for less. But fundamentally, humans exist to create. It's we have such an urge for it. We have such an urge to make new things and to to kind of help people. So maybe that's what I would wish for.

I would wish for there to be opportunities for people to be creative and to share their creative ideas and an output with the world And opportunities for us to be able to help people in a in a future way. Whether that's through advances in medicines. Lot going on in in health tech. It's really interesting. I think an opportunity for us to find a better I don't want to use the word balance, but for for us to find a better way of working that allows us to, you know, stay connected with each other, and and feel like we know what we're trying to achieve in life.

And using technology. I'm not really answering your question because you're like, what are the jobs that we keep coming from? Then. You know, like, I guess we'll always want stories. Like, people love stories.

So, like, how can we how can we use these tools to to to tell better stories? Tell stories to help people, yeah, in those in those kind of areas. But exactly what? I don't know. Will it be space travel?

Will it be learning more about the bottom of the ocean? Because there's a whole load of unknowns about the what's underneath the sea. I don't know, Ben. What do you think? Goddamn it.

That's not the point of this podcast. It's not about me, Harry. It's about you and who I'm interviewing. Oh, my god. No.

You you can interview me another time, and I'll tell you what I think. How's that? I don't know. I think I think there's a lot of a lot of interesting things that we could be doing, and this is obviously side stepping the question completely. And I hope that we we pick the ones which are gonna be most beneficial for us, as the ethicist in me, and not the ones which are going to be detrimental.

And that's a nice segue because my next question is what scares you about, our techno technologically mediated feature? What scares me? I mean, I guess the trend that I've just said where we're working harder and and have higher expectations from what we can achieve in a working day than ever, and we're all working in silos and remotely and not having enough human contact and not able to being able to self regulate for our well-being and being just less human. I guess that would be my fear. As I said, I'm I'm not I'm an optimist, so I like to think that won't happen.

Having said that, there are certain new jobs that aren't in the future. They exist right now. You know? Working in places which sort out packages and those kind of centers where I think that people aren't necessarily treated in a way that we would hope, and don't live lives that feel full of meaning and purpose and not well connected. I think it's happening now in some areas.

So maybe there's a fear I have that there will be an increase in that and that by serving our desire for convenience, for example, to get a parcel delivered Mhmm. In an hour's time or by the next day, which sometimes is extremely, extremely important, but most of the time, it's entirely unnecessary. But by pushing towards that service of human convenience, that we actually create another less convenient world for someone else, shall we say. I I think I worry about the hidden cost of some of the advances of our brilliance. Because I think that, you know, you look at you look at some some tool like chat gbt, and it's breathtaking.

And then I'm still scratching the surface of what it can do for me. It's quite easy to forget what it's founded on and the human effort that it's founded on and continues to be. You know, I think there's a fear around people not going into artistic careers because they can't, you know, have a a a kind of make a living, and they can't. So, yes, those are some of my fears, would be around a dissolving of humanity in the face of technology. Yeah.

And I mean, it it it strikes me coming back to that promise that we had, you know, from the fifties, sixties of the future. Well, it's gonna be a space race, and we're going to have a 2 day week, or whatever, a 3 you know, whatever it is. I feel like there should be more emphasis on the technology to enable us to to to get to this, you know, creative place where we are fulfilled in our work and our families and our sustenance and all these things that are make us, you know, physically human. Very, very, obvious things. And then if you're going, like, up the tower, of the pyramid of needs and things like that, then, you know, we have an opportunity to to do exciting things, but they don't necessarily, like you say, they don't necessarily mean a package delivered the next day or, you know, people who are, monitoring the AI's being harrowed daily by the things that they see there.

And, you know, that that that isn't necessarily, the case that we need to do those things. So, it's weighing those those things up, in a it's this sounds very utilitarian, but, like, you know, we we have a choice there about how that operates. And I would probably take a pay cut to have a 3 day week. You know what I mean? You know, there there are there are certain things where it's like, no.

Actually, guys, come on. Like, I don't I don't need I don't need a Porsche. Don't don't give it to me. I don't need it. Like, and and all the Porsche owners, they don't need them either.

So don't worry about it. You're not the only one. I'm not. Yeah. I'm not.

Yeah. I'm not. Very poor. No. You're not the only one.

You know? Since the pandemic, I think a lot of people have reevaluated, their values. I think that applications for becoming a teacher for teacher training, like, skyrocketed because people thought, what am I doing? Like, I actually teach people and I'll spend time more time with my family and have a life that is actually giving me opportunity to spend it with the people I love. Yeah.

And so I think this idea of actually people pursuing time for themselves with their work and taking that over pay. It's a very common, sentiment. Whether everyone can achieve that is, you know, not not always a privilege that's available, but, like, I think people are very much questioning what life is for and and and how they spend it. And it's very it's a very interesting question as we started to work remotely. How we kind of work in the future.

What will the future workplaces look like? Many companies are fully pushing for people to come back and return to their commute. Many people are resisting that. There's arguments both sides of of, you know, what works best for individuals, but I do think there's it's been a good a good time of reckoning about how we want to spend our time. Yeah.

And I'm not sure where it will all end up, but it's yeah. Again. Yeah. I'm optimistic. Good.

I like it. I like I like an optimist. I think it's very easy to get dragged down by these things as well. So, I think that's positive. So, yeah, I think the other area is is around what we can do, and I I I really do think that what I'm interested in and what Mindiva Tech is being founded on is the idea of taking action.

We all know lots of things that we could do, but it's just hard to start doing them. So we kind of focus on taking action. And when we're working with a a company, there's an individual responsibility for being more aware of how we're using technology and and questioning maybe, the digital habit culture of an organization. There's also a responsibility for leadership to look at what's currently going on, maybe challenging some of the ways of working, and probably what we see most of all being more explicit and clear about what they expect because employees will kind of assume a certain behavior is expected. Oh, I I should reply to this Slack message as soon as it comes in because I I I'm probably expected to.

It's never been said. You know, we've had CEOs in sessions before say, we would prefer that you took half a day and came back with the right answer that was considered than, you know, a knee jerk reaction, in in the moment that distracted you from whatever you were doing. Just having that said out loud, I think was important for that business. So having a sort of like digital agreement, a way of working, I think, can be really useful. So this idea of there being responsibility in 2 directions, I think the same is true of of, you know, the world as a as a as a wider thing.

You know, you've got I think there's a huge responsibility for tech companies to be thinking about the way that they design things and the way they design their tools and how they fund that and questioning the attention economy and how we're making decisions on tools and how they work. I think there's a responsibility from policy makers to set ground rules and expectations for everyone in that space. And then I'm starting to see more and more people who kind of curate a community, making more decisions upon how can technology is used in those environments. Schools who are making decisions that children are not to bring their own devices to school. They're not allowed to use them at certain times of the day.

There's a town in Ireland where everyone agreed that, you know, they wouldn't get phones until a certain age because peer pressure is so strong that actually if everyone is in the same situation, then it becomes much easier. So Yep. There's a lot that we can do at different levels. And also in this in this idea of, like, where technology will take us and the fears that we've just shared around where we have it doesn't, we have power as consumers. You know, we have power in how we use tools, what we pay for, what we sign up for, and to think.

Just take a minute and think, you know, am I comfortable? Do I really understand how this works? And maybe question some of the impact of these things as they come. Well, lovely. I think we'll leave it there for now.

Another good segue. If they want if people want to find out about how these things work, then do message us ethical.design, because we do run workshops and talks about AI. But obviously, very interested in AI ethics and how AI can be leveraged ethically, and how you do that in a, process in your company. So, but also, if you are interested in mind over tech, how do we find out about you, Harriet, and what you're doing at Mind Over Tech and how people can get hold of you? Oh, we'd love to hear from anyone.

You can find out about Mind Over Tech at mindovertech.com. You can find me on LinkedIn. My surname is very odd, but I think mind of attack will be the best route to find me. But my I think your name will be in the description of this this episode. So okay.

Easy does it. Yeah. Exactly. And, yeah, it would it would just be really interesting to to continue talking about this because because I think that's that's the most important thing, isn't it? Just to keep questioning, talking, discussing.

So would welcome comments on all the different platforms and places that we we could connect with people. Thank you so much for listening, and thanks for having me then. Thank you. And I'll, hopefully speak to you very soon. Yeah.

Take care. Thank you. Bye. Hello, and welcome to the end of the podcast. Thanks again to Harriet for coming to talk to us.

Do check out, Mind Over Tech. I've actually got a couple of talks and workshops planned for the New Year's. So if you'd like to get in contact with me personally, you can email hello at machinedashethics.net, or you can go to the website ethicalby dot design. One of the things I really liked about our conversation was this idea of creative duty or the values we have in creativity in general. What kind of, responsibilities, what, duties, what ethics lie in in the area of creativity in of itself is, quite interesting and something that I haven't, thought of in that way before.

So maybe an up one for another podcast or maybe a article or something. Thanks again for listening and if you like to support us you can go to patreon.com/machine You can also check out more episodes, machinedashethics.net. And if you can, please recommend us to friends and write a review wherever you get your podcasts. Thanks very much and I'll see you next time.