Last week Pew Research Center released a new report with the title “How the American public and AI experts look at artificial intelligence.” The report examined 5,961 people – including AI experts and the public – to better understand each group’s beliefs about Artificial intelligence (AI) and the use of the technology.
As I said in the last Last week in AI Column, if you have been aware of AI or have built it, it will not shock you that some of the answers from both groups feel synchronized with reality. But it is not necessarily because one of these groups is wrong while the other is right, but rather because they come from a completely different vantage point.
The public sees risk; Experts see the opportunity
One of the biggest takeaways from the report is the difference in how AI experts and everyday people see AI’s impact.
According to data, 43% of the public considers more likely damage them than to help them. Only 24% think it will benefit them, and the remaining 33% are uncertain. Compare that with AI experts, where 76% believe that AI is more likely to benefit them, and only 15% think it can hurt.
This pattern continues throughout the report – AI experts are consistently more optimistic, while the public is much more worried. Take labor loss As an example: 64% of the public believe that AI will lead to fewer jobs in the United States over the next 20 years, but only 39% of experts feel the same way. When asked if they were very concerned about AI-related job loss, 56% of the public said yes, and only 25% of AI experts shared that problem.
So what drives this gap?
The connection between AI users and non-users
For me, the real root of this gap seems to be an experience. The more you have used AI system, the less likely you will be swung by extreme predictions. The report supports this: 98% of AI experts reported that they had used a chatbot. Only 33% of the public said the same thing.
In addition, when AI experts were asked how often they believe that the average American interacts with AI daily, 79% guessed that people use it “several times a day.” This highlights a large connection, as only 27% of the public reported interacting with AI several times a day.
This shows that experts make assumptions based on their routines and workflows, where AI tools like ChatgptMidjourney and Claude are probably woven into their everyday lives. But for the average person, AI just doesn’t seem integrated in his day in the same way.
This is where the information begins to tell a story: people who do not use AI regularly are more likely to believe that it is a threat. And honestly, it’s meaningful. If your experience with AI is minimal, or worse, based on headings and popular media, it is easy to imagine the worst case. You rely mainly on used information or anecdotal experiences instead of direct commitment.
We have seen this before with other new techniques. When something new rolls out, early adopters quickly build a deep understanding of technology through trial and wrong, while the average person is more likely to take a “wait and see” method and get their information from headings, social media and their personal networks while watching the sideline. We saw this with blockchainAnd AI is no different.
The more you use these systems, the more you learn what they can and can’t do. This is probably why AI experts are not as afraid of loss of jobs. They have seen the restrictions up close. However, the public is told that These tools come for everyone’s job And that robots will replace entire industries.
But at the same time, it is important to encourage experts to overestimate AI’s reach and impact in the opposite direction.
In technical circles you are often surrounded by other builders, researchers and enthusiasts. It will be easy to forget that most people do not think you do. This creates an echo chamber, one where your optimism about AI’s capacity begins to feel like common sense when it is in reality a niche view.
The Pew data suggests that this is exactly what happens to AI experts. Their vision is shaped by constant exposure to innovation And speed, but it is not necessarily representative of the average person’s reality.
If you are in a community that welcomes new technology, test new tools and iterates quickly, AI’s potential is exciting … but that perspective can be exaggerated. It can start to feel like AI is already part of everyone’s daily lives when the truth is, for many people it is still a mystery or even something to be afraid of.
Somewhere between hype and headlines
The Pew report really tells what two very different groups think about AI. What we remain with is part of the future, one filled with caution and the other filled with conviction and optimism.
In reality? The truth is probably somewhere in the middle. AI probably comes Transform some industries totally … but it’s probably will not dry out The labor market overnight. Despite what the experts think, it is not embedded in all corners of our lives yet.
This shade is crucial, especially when considering the real consequences. If decision -makers, investors and the public work from different basic lines for understanding, then we will see more error adaptation, more overreactions and more underestimates in the future.
Interestingly, the public’s doubt can be more revealing than meeting the eye. Although it is just a data method, the Pew report seems to support a story that has been given traction: the story that AI service providers may be Scale back their data center development plans Because public demand is not there yet.
In order for artificial intelligence (AI) to work properly within the law and thrive on growing challenges, it must integrate a corporate blockchain system that ensures data input quality and ownership – which makes it possible to keep data secure and at the same time guarantee data impossible. Check out COINGEEK’s coverage on this new technology to learn more Why Enterprise Blockchain will be the spine in AI.
Watch: Transformative AI applications will
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TW1_T3U5SOE Title = “Youtube video player” Ramborder = “0” Allow = “Accelerometer; Autoplay; Clipboard writing; encrypted media; Gyroscopes; Image-in-Image; Web-Share” Reference Policy = “Strict-Origin-When-Cross-Origin” Permitting Lorscreen = “” “” “”
