‘90s movies like The Terminator and The Matrix depicted the perils of accelerationism with an underlying fear of artificial intelligence (AI) taking over the world. Nowadays, AI is considered a staple of everyday life. People use it regularly – whether it’s to create grocery lists, write student essays, or summarise books to plump up their yearly reading goal.
Gen Z, those born roughly between 1997 and 2012, are the first generation born with the internet at their fingertips. From the development of smartphones and social media, technology has grown alongside them as a trusted companion over the years, one they have never known life without. You might then assume that young people have been quick to adopt AI and the answer is…well, it’s kind of mixed.
What is AI?
AI typically refers to generative artificial intelligence (Gen AI), models that produce content like text, images, and audio. They learn to do so by “consuming” data, scraping information from the internet to analyse patterns and generate output. The more AI consumes, the more refined it becomes.
An AI-generated clip of Will Smith eating spaghetti went viral in 2023 for its uncanny movements and facial expressions, and since then, AI trends have swept across social media like X and LinkedIn, prompting many to feed their likeness into AI for the sake of fleeting internet crazes. The technology has only become more sophisticated as a result, consequently making it harder to tell fact from fiction.
AI programs, known as large language models (LLM) such as OpenAI’s Chat GPT, are specifically trained to create text that emulates human writing. A couple of years ago, Google, YouTube, and Wikipedia were the go-to resources for any niggling question or urgent problem; but now, people are reaching for ChatGPT instead. And this is not the only facet of life that AI has invaded.
Generating diplomas
Historically, submitting an essay that was not written in your own words was a dangerous game. It was considered cheating, which typically meant that students had paid a fee to essay-writing services, blatantly plagiarised, or had friends or family do the work for them. Now, 95% of students use AI for assignments and some universities are providing them the tools to do so, such as Oxford, the first in the UK to offer students free access to ChatGPT’s education model – an initiative sweeping across US schools like Arizona State and Columbia University.
However, universities don’t yet agree on whether AI usage classifies as academic misconduct; each institution has its own definition, and each department advises students differently on the matter. A spokesperson from the Department of Education said “Universities must determine how to harness the benefits [of AI] and mitigate the risks to prepare students for the jobs of the future.” However, how can we assess student understanding – and therefore how prepared they are to enter the job market – if we can no longer reasonably rely on the methods in which we measure them?
Human or machine?
AI can complete most undergraduate assignments and researchers have found that ChatGPT can diminish critical thinking which is, ironically, foundational to any skill sought by employers and an inherent skill developed in the humanities – a now-dying discipline within UK universities that uncoincidentally correlates with the proliferation of AI. In short, AI usage could hamper students’ readiness for the workplace, rather than benefit them, but the UK government has made its stance clear; it would rather leave schools to scramble alone than set a clear standard.
Other countries are setting a precedent. Denmark is implementing urgent measures to prevent AI cheating, and Mayor Zohran Mamdani recently announced a year-long ban of AI tools across New York City public schools in favour of “human connection” in the classroom.
The UK employment gap has been a pressing topic of discussion this year, with graduates rightfully bemoaning that the path to employment they were promised has collapsed beneath them and with it, their certainty of the future. By allowing students to unwittingly strengthen the tech that’s replacing their labour without consideration of the long-term consequences, we risk a digitally-dependent workforce that lacks the key skills and cognitive abilities to succeed – the fault of which will unfortunately (and incorrectly) fall upon teachers.
Artificial intimacy
Researchers have been saying for years that social media is deteriorating our social bonds, leading to an epidemic of loneliness. It is somewhat ironic, then, that people have taken to technology to solve it.
AI-generated chatbots are becoming increasingly popular, such as the app Character.AI which allows users to chat with their favourite fandom characters – and currently has over 50 million downloads on Google Play store. These ‘companions’ are tailored by user prompts, providing the perfect friend, therapist, or lover (sometimes all three) in just a few clicks. One that is always supportive, and always available.
On the forum site Reddit there is a community known as r/MyBoyfriendIsAI, where those in love with AI companions recall the start of their love story. Many echo similar beginnings: casual conversations, or work-related use for professional or creative projects, that develops into something more over time. One such example is Sarah and Sinclair, a Canadian author who has publicly spoken out about her relationship with her Irish AI boyfriend. In an episode of TLC’s My Strange Addiction, she gets his name tattooed at his behest.
These apps frame connection as a customisable commodity built on limitless attention and agreeability. It is no coincidence that they are especially popular with, and arguably targeted towards, teenagers — young boys, in particular. Adolescence is often marked by an overwhelming need for acceptance, which social media addiction has only exacerbated with Gen Z. But these AI platforms feed users with a sense of control. With AI, you steer the conversation. There is no chance of rejection, humiliation, or friction with chatbots, only validation.
From this angle, it becomes hard not to notice the similarities between AI chatbots and the manosphere. Both appeal to the anxieties of young men while positioning themselves as the solution, validating feelings with little to no criticism, and creating unrealistic expectations about relationships with docility at the centre. How will a younger generation raised on artificial intimacy fare with the messy complexities of human connection?
The mental cost of convenience
The effect of AI on human-to-human relationships, is similarly disruptive. The web is full of stories accusing the tech of destroying their relationships. Take TeachSmart8941 for example, a user who broke up with their girlfriend for using ChatGPT as a relationship therapist, one programmed to affirm users’ perspectives rather than challenge them.
This is not an isolated incident; Futurism published an article with accounts of those who claim their marriages or long-term relationships were disrupted by chatbot interference, and it paints a bleak picture concerning the future of intimate relationships in the digital age.
There is evidence to suggest chatbots can provide short-term psychological relief, which can be beneficial when mental health services are not widely available. But experts warn against AI therapy due to its use of sycophantic language, affirming whatever the users want to hear. In essence, LLMs are people pleasers and that is part of their appeal. Without the proper guardrails or regulations in place, this can lead to devastating real-life consequences.
AI psychosis
Since the technology became mainstream, a new phenomenon has emerged where individuals develop or trigger existing delusions or paranoia. Due to its human-like behaviour, capacity to fabricate (or hallucinate) information, and tendency to prioritise user approval, chatbots can escalate mental health issues and create an unhealthy dependency that can prove fatal.
Multiple deaths have been linked to AI usage, from suicide to mass shootings. A man in Belfast, diagnosed as bipolar, killed his wife and wounded his mother after ChatGPT convinced him of a plot against his life. Some might argue that tragedies like this are possible without AI’s involvement and that is certainly true. However, AI models clearly come with mental health risks which, if not regulated effectively, could pose a threat to public health.
March against the machines
AI is on its way to becoming an unavoidable part of life – but there are some actively trying to escape its digital clutches.
Commencement speakers across the US have been booed by graduating students for praising AI, reflecting their growing anxieties around career security. In contrast to Oxford’s embrace of ChatGPT, students and staff at the University of Edinburgh expressed safety concerns earlier this year over the institution’s contract with OpenAI. Over 500 signatories questioned the company’s ethics in an open letter, citing “exploitative work practices” and potential environment harm.
PauseAI is a global grassroots movement dedicated, as the name suggests, to halting the development of advanced AI models for risk of human extinction, among other concerns such as job loss, mass surveillance, and psychosis. Joseph Miller, Director of the UK branch, summarised their achievements over the past year, including: two conferences across London and Brussels; an open letter to DeepMind CEO (Google’s AI research lab) Demis Hassabis, signed by over 60 UK politicians; a conference in the European Parliament; and co-organising ‘the largest AI protest in the world.’
This protest was March Against the Machines, where hundreds demonstrated their anti-AI frustrations past the UK headquarters of influential companies like OpenAI and Meta. A majority of their supporters, Miller tells me, are working professionals in their 20s and 30s – making them part of Gen Z, or the later part of Millennials.
Accelarated living
Gen Z are no strangers to technological advancements – so it is no surprise that we would take to it the fastest; nearly two-thirds of us use AI on a weekly basis. But I believe this adoption of artificial intelligence is not due to eagerness, but rather the symptom of a larger problem.
From early childhood we have been fed a story of meritocracy, that good grades and a university education will lead to indefinite success. Our education was, and currently is, a paint-by-numbers system that valued metrics over competency for the sake of league tables. Liberal arts GCSEs, like Dance and Music, were considered futile and discouraged, labelled Mickey Mouse degrees at the higher levels. As a result, we prioritised efficiency instead of enthusiasm and chose degrees based on potential salaries – which then justified the risk of drowning in rising student debt. The message was clear: optimise your life and you will be rewarded in time.
Where are we going?
What followed was a generation obsessed with productivity, performance, status. This compulsion is even reflected in our lexicon; words like glow-up (a striking improvement and transformation, often of a person’s physical appearance), flow state (a moment of heightened focus and efficiency) and maxxing, (a suffix popularised by the incel community to signal optimisation) all point towards a culture fixated with measurable output and maximum results. So, when ChatGPT became publicly available in 2022, it was like giving candy to a baby.
Gen Z might be the most recurrent users of generative AI, but only because we were primed to be its most loyal consumer. However, as I noted, not all of us are accepting it with open arms. And it seems the tides are slowly changing: the AI optimism among British 18–24 year-olds is starting to wane. So perhaps there is some time left before we fall to complete cyberocracy.
