In a recent exploration of my Instagram settings, I stumbled upon Meta’s now obsolete feature that previously allowed individuals to generate AI deepfakes of my likeness without my permission. Frustration swelled as I navigated the cumbersome opt-out process.
Rather than succumbing to anger and hurling my phone, I suggested to my partner that we should abandon San Francisco to become off-grid sheep farmers. In that moment, any alternative to the distress brought on by generative AI seemed preferable.
This growing discontent with generative AI is echoed by many Americans. “The AI revolution has unfolded, and the sentiment is largely negative,” asserts Meredith Broussard, a New York University data journalism professor and author of "Artificial Unintelligence: How Computers Misunderstand the World." A recent Gallup poll highlights a trend: as awareness of generative AI rises, so too does the skepticism towards it, particularly among younger individuals aged 18 to 29, nearly half of whom perceive generative AI as more harmful than beneficial.
As this backlash against AI technology becomes more pronounced, companies are beginning to respond directly to these concerns. For instance, LinkedIn has introduced a button to report AI-generated content, labeling it as “AI slop,” despite still offering a variety of generative AI tools. Snapchat has decided that entirely AI-generated videos will no longer feature in its discovery feed. Meanwhile, Substack has rolled out an AI detection feature to monitor content produced by writers.
The root of this backlash is straightforward: many Americans feel they were never asked to consent to these developments. The realization that my digital interactions could be utilized for training AI models without my knowledge was shocking. I didn’t request Instagram to activate deepfake capabilities on my profile, nor did I wish for Google to prominently display AI-generated responses in search results. One day, I found generative AI features integrated into the tools I depend upon, all without any approval from me.
Whether it’s AI systems harvesting our data or intrusive data centers appearing nearby, the rise of AI feels like a force impacting us without giving a sense of participation in the process.
“Consent is a crucial issue,” Broussard emphasizes to WIRED. “This concern ties into how vulnerable groups—women, LGBTQ+ individuals, people of color, and other minorities—have historically been exploited online. Tech companies have consistently overlooked the significance of consent.”
Public criticism is beginning to effectively challenge unwanted AI functionalities. “Companies tend to launch features and see what resonates, mostly because there’s little understanding of their utility,” remarks Nick Seaver, an anthropology professor at Tufts University who studies technology's societal impact. Following critical reporting, Google swiftly retracted the option to modify satellite images with generative AI shortly after it was introduced. Additionally, Meta disabled the contentious deepfake tool on Instagram merely three days after facing substantial public backlash and viral criticism.
There's also a notable shift away from generative AI in advertising, with prominent brands such as McDonald’s and Coca-Cola facing negative responses when they employed AI-generated visuals in promotions. Even local businesses have received pushback for using AI-created posters to advertise events.
Beyond online dissent, a growing movement is emerging against the establishment of data centers that support AI technologies. “There’s significant resistance forming around data centers," notes Emily Bender, co-author of "The AI Con." "These facilities are critical as they represent centers of environmental and economic impact.” Recently, protests against data center construction have drawn individuals from across the political spectrum, showcasing widespread concern over the implications of AI.
