{"id":650394,"date":"2026-08-22T08:09:13","date_gmt":"2026-08-22T08:09:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/650394\/"},"modified":"2026-08-22T08:09:13","modified_gmt":"2026-08-22T08:09:13","slug":"there-are-lies-damned-lies-and-ai-why-i-despise-artificial-intelligence-the-irish-times","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/650394\/","title":{"rendered":"There are lies, damned lies and AI: why I despise \u2018artificial intelligence\u2019 \u2013 The Irish Times"},"content":{"rendered":"

Until very recently, I thought AI was artificial insemination. Then I had experience of the unreal world of artificial intelligence<\/a> and decided that it is corrupt, disingenuous and utterly untrustworthy. AI creates lies and I do not trust liars. That\u2019s the short answer.<\/p>\n

Here\u2019s the long answer.<\/p>\n

I was contacted by a PhD candidate, who asked me where she could obtain a book I had written. As I had not, in fact, written such a book, I told her so. \u201cBut you must have written it\u201d she said. \u201cIt\u2019s on the internet.\u201d I was puzzled and ignorant. She told me she had found the information on ChatGPT<\/a>. I investigated and discovered not only that I had written this book, but two other books, which I also knew did not exist, were listed about related subjects.<\/p>\n

Then a university professor told me he had received an essay from a student who had included in her bibliography 15 (yes, 15) works that did not exist but which she claimed to have consulted.<\/p>\n

So at one level AI can create \u201cfacts\u201d that do not actually exist. At another, and perhaps more worrying level, someone makes use of those \u201cfacts\u201d, thus in some obscene way validating what is, at the very least, a lie, a deceit.<\/p>\n

I next discovered that a retired professor of accountancy, Richard Murphy, had a similar experience: an essay allegedly by him that he hadn\u2019t written. Murphy had engaged in correspondence with ChatGPT, which admitted that the alleged work did not exist and that a \u201cmistake\u201d had occurred in what ChatGPT called \u201cgenerating plausible-sounding article titles and publication dates\u201d. There was no apology, just an acknowledgment that more care must be taken in future in this creation of \u201cplausible-sounding\u201d fakes \u2013 sorry, \u201cmistakes\u201d.<\/p>\n

What does this tell me about AI-generated information? It tells me that ChatGPT, chatbot (which I had thought was simply a wine label \u2013 Chateau Bottled) and similar sources of disinformation are liars and should not be trusted even if they say that Christmas Day falls on December 25th each year. They may not have the intention to deceive, but the result is the same: disinformation, untruths, falsities.<\/p>\n

At a time when we are continually being introduced to \u201cthe new\u201d, it is very important to realise that artificial intelligence isn\u2019t \u201cnew\u201d at all, that we have had some form of computerised human wisdom available since at least the second century BC when the so-called Antikythera mechanism was built, described today as the world\u2019s first analogue computer.<\/p>\n

Fast forward to the 1950s when a computer known as the Parametric Artificial Talker (PAT) was developed at Edinburgh University<\/a> with the capacity for human speech. <\/p>\n

Although there were jokes about whether PAT could write novels, a serious warning had already been voiced by Alan Turing \u2013 largely credited with busting the German Enigma code in the second World War<\/a>. In his 1948 paper Intelligent Machinery, Turing had questioned the entire ethical implications of \u201cintelligent behaviour\u201d; he even developed a \u201cTuring test\u201d <\/b>to discover whether a computer could think like a human and replicate human behaviour. <\/p>\n

If he had lived beyond age 41 \u2013 he died by suicide in 1954 \u2013 Turing would probably have argued against the development of what we now readily accept as books written by AI, on the grounds that they were ethically wrong, or, in his words, promethean. Today, the Alan Turing Institute in London does precisely that.<\/p>\n

In the late 1960s the poet Lawrence Durrell, who had encountered PAT at Edinburgh in 1962, foresaw the coming of a \u201cnew age when the first book of poems by a defective and visionary computer\u201d would be \u201claunched upon an astonished world\u201d. So it\u2019s not new at all.<\/p>\n

The insidious presence of AI is causing havoc in the publishing industry, which has become suspicious of anything that looks as if it might have been written by a computer. A book withdrawn because its purported author did not actually write it is not mere plagiarism. This is an assault on \u2013 dare I say it \u2013 our intelligence.<\/p>\n

The idea that a company called Anthropic<\/a>, which sounds like a benevolent relative, is scanning books in order to replicate them <\/b>with bogus versions is repulsive to anyone interested in the truth. This is the third level of misinformation: when we entrust our credibility to a suspect entity we are opening ourselves to the likelihood of being deceived. Lecteurs complaisants?<\/p>\n

There are quite possibly AI-generated books that are entertaining. I think a book written by a robot would be hugely preferable to some written by younger writers whose work I regard as lacking in literacy or grammatical cohesion. But I am old-fashioned.<\/p>\n

If politicians are caught telling lies then we cease to trust them. If our partner cheats on us then we stop trusting him or her, don\u2019t we. To accept AI and its lies into our lives means adding yet another layer of what is, in effect, self-deceit. It is, really, another form of artificial insemination. <\/p>\n

Richard Pine is an author living in Corfu, Greece, and contributes a Greece Letter to The Irish Times<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Until very recently, I thought AI was artificial insemination. Then I had experience of the unreal world of…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":650395,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_share_on_mastodon":"0"},"categories":[261],"tags":[291,6006,289,290,297,241969,18,19,17,30114,82],"class_list":["post-650394","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-artificial-intelligence","tag-ai","tag-anthropic","tag-artificial-intelligence","tag-artificialintelligence","tag-chatgpt","tag-edinburgh-university","tag-eire","tag-ie","tag-ireland","tag-second-world-war","tag-technology"],"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@ie\/117138146366612389","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/650394","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=650394"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/650394\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/650395"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=650394"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=650394"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=650394"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}