In nature [and markets], chaos dissipates if left alone – wounds heal, vacuums get filled, bubbles pop, markets return to equilibrium. External market Forces can remedy, worsen or resurrect any market chaos. Unintended consequences come from Forces whether or not they have an intent to create or reinvigorate chaos. Some planned forces can help fill vacuums or deflate bubbles. However, the potential for negative consequences is massive when the “Force” is part of a plan to create a particular outcome for the wrong reasons. That is, some forces INTEND to create negative chaos and are integrated with our hourly/daily lives. Here comes AI. Please resist it where possible.

(Wouldn’t it be ironic if I used AI to write or enhance this?  I didn’t.) 

Artificial Intelligence is the name of a program that has a vast database of “natural intelligence” to use in responding to a user’s queries. Unless the artificial program can determine the validity of its database of natural contents, users are presented with possibly invalid output. I call it idiocy – devoid of intelligence.

There are plenty of speakers, researchers and pundits who foresee a sinister use of AI – to trigger chaos which will produce power and wealth for the owners of the AI. Some of these people (e.g., Whitney Webb) have researched the leaders and followers of the technology. And I am proof of 2 of the outcomes of the Forces called calculator and smartphones. These planned Forces intended to create a revenue. The unintended consequences include atrophy of our intelligence.

So while I use Excel and PowerPoint to publish data, (and throw in a fake voice), I am not sure 1) an AI would be better at it and 2) if I would have to upload all of my data each time. Because if you don’t know the truth to your question to AI (“prompt”), there is a chance you are getting prolific idiocy from the tool. After all, you can’t verify if the AI database has prolific idiocy inside.  “42” is a favorite answer I use for questions that cannot be answered or the question is vague or ambiguous (reference to Hitchhiker’s Guide).

Where AI has been somewhat useful is creating complex formulas to use in Excel. When multiple functions are needed to express a single number (e.g., an index), it’s a programmers delight to ask the right questions to get a repeatable and verifiable answer. But this effort took many iterations to express the question clearly enough to get a “correct” result. But even each rendition of the formula is devoid of proper operands (e.g., “*” for multiplication) and will result in an error if not manually corrected before use.

Where AI has failed me, and I suspect others who have tried, is in the creation of commentary that is intended to represent MY interpretation of market psychology. A machine cannot understand, sympathize, or empathize. It can only regurgitate the relevant words it has found in its database. Some words have turned out to be idiocy. Some references are outright lies or fabrications.

But it apologizes as if it seeks my forgiveness. Its database contains a response to situations where their user has identified its errors. Does that mean the machine knows it will err and it better have a response but only if the user notices? What if we don’t notice? What if we start believing everything coming from the AI?

Curiously, knowledge isn’t powerful unless it’s correct, timely, and utilized wisely. Therefore, wisdom is more important than knowledge. And using it “left of bang” makes it powerful for a wise user. Without wisdom, intelligence is just noise. Be wise, not noisy.