Protecting vulnerable people from digital misinformation

In my last post, I discussed how pursuing human activities was the key to happiness in the Age of AI and automation. I discussed how digital life is profoundly alienating for many people and how it was in nature and our human relationships that we can find true fulfillment.

Several readers suggested that I write about vulnerable populations in an Age of AI. Take seniors for example. Already, digital life is bewildering and disempowering for many who are not familiar with ins and outs of the internet and smartphones. Imagine how confusing it is now for those folks — it is hard for them to tell what is real and what is fake. An AI avatar or a digital image can seem more real than the real thing to many.

Imagine the feeling of powerlessness, vulnerability and helplessness that older people — or any one who is uncomfortable with the complexities of digital life — in a world peopled by AI agents who convincingly look like fake people.

To make matters even more confusing and frustrating, organizations and governments are increasingly guiding clients to the website, smartphone/tablet app, or a telephone call to transact business. However, seniors, people with disabilities, and other vulnerable folks have been told over and over that they shouldn’t trust digital messages or telephone calls when it comes to banking or making purchases.

It makes these transactions feel like a frustrating, disempowering catch-22.

I have discussed this matter with friends in the tech industry. Their first impulse is to treat it as a UX (user experience) matter. This is true, but the real issue seems to be the lack of human contact. Going to see a human teller at the bank and being told you should call in or go through the website is a frustrating contradictory message when it comes to cyber security for seniors and other vulnerable people.

So what to do?

I think that as organizations save more money by shifting a lot of their business toward automation, avatars and AI agents, they are well-advised to retain a portion of those savings to continue to offer high-touch services to seniors and other vulnerable people. Allotting the resources necessary to make this happen is a good gesture toward a population that has resources and capital. It is also a good gesture of corporate social responsibility that would go far toward securing social license for greater automation in dealing with other populations.

An expense to make life easier for a large and growing population. An expense possibly justified by significant savings offered elsewhere by automation.

Just a thought.