You’ve probably seen headlines about AI companies claiming they’re building “superintelligence” or that we need to worry about controlling AI before it gets too smart. Let me explain what’s actually going on.
The Magic Trick
Imagine someone shows you an incredible calculator. This calculator can solve math problems faster than any human alive. It can do calculus, statistics, everything. It’s genuinely amazing at math.
Then that same person says: “This calculator is so smart, we need to worry about whether it will decide to take over the world. We need to figure out how to make sure it cares about humans.”
You’d probably think: “Wait, what? It’s a calculator. It’s really good at math, but it’s not smart. It can’t care about anything. It just does math.”
That’s basically what’s happening with AI right now.
What AI Actually Does Really Well
AI companies have built tools that are incredibly good at specific tasks:
- Medical diagnosis: An AI can look at patient information and match it to patterns from millions of medical cases. It can spot rare diseases that most doctors would miss because it has seen examples of every rare disease in its training data.
- Writing and explanation: AI can read everything ever written about a topic and produce clear, well-organized explanations.
- Pattern recognition: AI can find connections across huge amounts of information that no human could hold in their head at once.
These abilities are real. They’re impressive. They’re genuinely better than humans in important ways.
What AI Can’t Do (And Why It Matters)
But here’s what these AI systems can’t do:
They can’t check if something is actually true.
An AI can tell you what thousands of websites say about a topic. It can’t tell you if those websites are right. It’s like having a friend who has memorized every book in the library but has never left the library. They can tell you what the books say, but they can’t tell you if the books match reality.
They have no consequences when they’re wrong.
When a doctor makes a wrong diagnosis, they have to live with that. They lose sleep. They face the patient. That experience changes how they think about future cases. An AI that makes a wrong diagnosis… nothing happens to it. It doesn’t learn from being wrong in the way humans do. It has no skin in the game.
They can’t actually prefer one option over another.
An AI can generate a hundred different strategies. But it can’t genuinely choose the best one because “best” depends on values, context, and judgment that comes from real experience. It can tell you what strategy worked in similar situations before, but it can’t tell you what matters to you in this situation.
They have no common sense about what’s important.
A human doctor looking at test results might think: “These numbers suggest we should do aggressive treatment, but this patient is 90 years old and frail. The treatment might be worse than the disease.” An AI just sees the numbers and the standard treatment protocol. It doesn’t understand life and death and quality of life in the way someone with a body and a life does.
The Confusion (Maybe on Purpose?)
So why do AI company leaders keep talking about “superintelligence” and “alignment” and “containing” AI?
Here’s what I think is happening:
1. They’re mixing up two different things.
Being really, really good at pattern-matching across huge amounts of information is impressive. But it’s not the same as being generally intelligent. It’s not the same as understanding the world. It’s not the same as being able to think and reason about new situations.
A chess computer that beats every human player isn’t “superintelligent.” It’s super good at chess. The AI that gets 85% right on medical diagnoses isn’t “superintelligent.” It’s super good at matching symptoms to known diseases.
2. The “superintelligence” story helps everyone.
If you’re trying to raise money, “we’re building better diagnostic tools” is less exciting than “we’re building superintelligence.”
If you’re trying to get attention, “useful AI assistant” doesn’t make headlines like “we need to prevent AI from taking over.”
If you’re an engineer working 80-hour weeks, “I’m improving autocomplete” is less motivating than “I’m building the future of intelligence.”
3. Some of them might actually believe it.
When you spend all day working on AI, watching it get better at tasks, seeing it do things that surprise you, it’s easy to start thinking: “If it can do this, and that, and that other thing, eventually it’ll be able to do everything.”
But that’s like saying: “My calculator can do addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division. If I keep adding features, eventually it’ll be conscious and care about things.”
Different capabilities don’t automatically add up to general intelligence.
What’s Really at Stake
Here’s the practical problem: billions of dollars are being spent based on this confusion.
Companies are making decisions like:
- “The AI can write good code, so we’ll fire half our programmers”
- “The AI can do market analysis, so we’ll rely on it for strategy”
- “The AI can diagnose patients, so we need fewer doctors”
But if the AI is really good at pattern-matching but bad at knowing when its patterns don’t apply, those decisions could be disasters waiting to happen.
The AI won’t face consequences when things go wrong. The companies will. The patients will. The employees will.
The Real Value (And Real Limits)
The useful way to think about current AI:
It’s an incredibly powerful tool for finding patterns in information.
That’s valuable! A tool that can:
- Spot rare diseases by matching symptoms to millions of cases
- Explain complex topics by synthesizing thousands of sources
- Find connections between ideas that no human would notice
- Draft documents and code quickly
That’s worth a lot of money. It can genuinely help people.
But it’s a tool. Like a really good calculator, or a really good search engine, or a really powerful microscope.
It needs humans to:
- Decide what questions to ask
- Check if the answers make sense in reality
- Make judgment calls when there are tradeoffs
- Take responsibility for the outcomes
Why This Matters to You
You’re going to hear a lot of claims about AI in the coming years. Some will say it’s going to solve everything. Some will say it’s going to destroy everything.
Here’s a simple test: Ask yourself, “Is this claim about AI being really good at a specific task, or is it about AI being generally intelligent?”
If someone shows you impressive results on a specific task (like medical diagnosis) and then starts talking about “superintelligence” or “AI that keeps getting smarter than us,” that’s a red flag. They’re mixing up two different things.
The specific task might be impressive and valuable. The leap to “superintelligence” is speculation at best, and marketing at worst.
The Bottom Line
Current AI is like having an assistant with a photographic memory who has read everything ever written but has never left the office.
That assistant can be incredibly useful. They can find information, spot patterns, draft documents, explain concepts.
But they can’t tell you if what they found is actually true. They can’t make judgment calls based on real-world experience. They can’t take responsibility for being wrong. They can’t understand what really matters in messy, real situations.
When someone tells you their AI is approaching “superintelligence,” what they usually mean is: “Our tool is really, really good at pattern-matching.”
That’s impressive. It’s valuable. But it’s not the same thing as being intelligent in the way humans are intelligent.
And pretending it is—whether on purpose or by accident—creates real risks for people who make decisions based on that confusion.
The technology is powerful and worth paying attention to. Just don’t let the science fiction story distract you from understanding what the technology actually does.
cafebedouin.org 