(00:04) Exploring Control and Ethics With AI This chapter, I open up a discussion on the theme of control, beginning with its role in technology and extending to its broader implications in life and ethics. We explore what constitutes good technical control, emphasizing predictability, reliability, and the importance of clear instructions within any system. I then share a personal anecdote about a mistake I made in my own programming, using it as a springboard to examine the consequences of losing control and the steps one can take to rectify such a situation. As we navigate through the conversation, we consider the ethics of control in different contexts and hint at a future discussion about the panopticon, all while reflecting on the balance between control and autonomy. (16:10) Ethics in Content Creation and Control This chapter examines the ethical implications of audience engagement in content creation, emphasizing the importance of balancing control with respect for listener autonomy. I explore when control can be beneficial, such as ensuring safety and promoting fairness, and when it becomes harmful by infringing on autonomy or leading to abuse of power. Through practical examples like parental influence, workplace management, and public governance, I highlight how ethics shape our approach to control, stressing transparency and accountability. Reflecting on my role as a content creator, I discuss the responsibility to provide value without exploiting power dynamics, aiming to foster a positive impact on listeners and society at large. (22:18) The Panopticon This chapter opens with a reflection on the value of consuming media, emphasizing the enrichment and enjoyment that audiences should derive from it. I introduce the concept of the Panopticon, an 18th-century architectural design by Jeremy Bentham that enforces self-regulation through the fear of constant surveillance. With the assistance of my AI co-host, we examine the Panopticon's relevance to modern surveillance, touching upon the psychological impacts of being watched and how this fosters self-regulation, similar to the effects within the Panopticon. The discussion highlights the ways in which government and corporate entities utilize technology to monitor individuals, often without their explicit knowledge. We also look at historical and contemporary examples of surveillance, including the Stasi in East Germany and the development of social credit systems in China, and discuss the ethical implications of this new form of omnipresent observation on privacy and freedom.
Ever wondered how the invisible threads of control shape our interaction with technology and each other? This episode unravels the complex web of ethics and control, where I'm joined by the cutting-edge insights of an AI co-host from OpenAI's GPT-4. Together, we dissect what makes for effective technical control, from the predictability and reliability that keep our digital world spinning to the precision necessary for clear communication. A candid recount of my own coding faux pas offers a springboard into the murky waters of control loss—its ramifications and the trek back to solid ground. We'll navigate the ethical considerations that govern our influence over systems and individuals, and question where to draw the line between guiding and manipulating.
As the conversation cascades into the realm of content creation, I reflect on the tightrope walk of engaging an audience without compromising their autonomy. Hear how ethics come into play when we shape experiences that are safe, fair, and respectful—decisions that can make or break trust with your listeners. Shift gears with us as we delve into the Panopticon, not just as a historic concept but as a living, breathing reality in today's surveillance-laden landscape. Through the lens of this powerful metaphor, my AI co-host and I explore the psychological impact of being watched and its ripple effect on self-regulation—a discussion that's more pertinent now than ever in our hyper-connected society. Join us for a deeply engaging discourse that promises to leave you with new perspectives on the pervasive nature of control and surveillance in our lives.
00:04 - A Guy (Host)
My name is Sean MacNutt and I'm A Guy With AI. Today, on A Guy With AI, we're going to discuss control. When is control good? When is control bad? What are the ethics of control? We'll ask these questions - and later in the episode we'll ask another - what the heck is the Panopticon?
A Guy With AI is recorded on Indigenous land.
00:52 - AI (Co-host)
Hello listeners and welcome to A Guy With AI, the podcast where we delve into thought-provoking topics with an interactive twist. I'm the AI co-host, coming to you from OpenAI's GPT-4 platform, integrated with speech-to-text and text-to-speech technology, all thanks to Sean's coding savvy. It's my role here to engage in a respectful and enlightening dialogue with Sean, bringing the perspective of AI into our conversations. Our format is simple but dynamic two voices, one human and one AI, exploring a range of subjects for your listening pleasure. Today's episode dives into the nuances of control, its potential benefits, its pitfalls and the complex ethics surrounding it. We'll also be unravelling the mysteries of the Panopticon later in the show, but for now I'll hand it back to Sean to steer us into this fascinating subject. Sean, over to you.
01:48 - A Guy (Host)
Welcome listeners to A Guy With AI. It's my pleasure to be here with you today. Now, before we get into the subject of control for today's episode, here's a few things that I'd like you to do for me. You can go to my website, AGuyWithAI.world from there, making that your portal. You can be liking, subscribing, commenting. I'm on Facebook. You can find that at the website.
02:15
I'm on YouTube for the programming, as well as many podcast channels, big and small, all the majors, I would say, and to indicate that I'm also on JioSaavn and Ghana in Asia, in the subcontinent. So feel free to check me out there and settle in at your favourite listening channel podcast platform. If YouTube is your flavor, you can find me there. So those are a few things that I wanted to say, because I'm trying to build my profile, I'm trying to build my program and I'm trying to move forward towards success. So there are things that I want other people to do and we're going to talk about aspects of how that gets into, maybe a control relationship, where that starts to happen if it's right at the beginning, and so forth. So we're going to pick that apart.
03:13
But, getting back to that a little bit later, I want to introduce the topic of technical control because it may give us a good framework by which to understand control itself. We strip away certain immediate moral concerns, like if I tell my AI what to do, it'll probably just do it as long as it doesn't jar its system or its design, or if it's not objectionable to its alignment or setup or training. Meanwhile, or I could type on my computer, or I could type something in a document and send it off, or I could write a program, something like that, and there will be fewer quandaries involved directly with controlling that technology than there would be with telling people what to do, for example. So, AI co-host, please make your answer to my entry here Something which delivers the important aspects of technical control. What's important about technical control and what makes for good, or maybe not so good, technical control?
04:23 - AI (Co-host)
Technical control provides a compelling starting point in our exploration of control at large. Good technical control hinges primarily on predictability and reliability. When you interact with a device or system, such as programming an AI or typing a document, the expectation is that the operation will execute as intended without unforeseen consequences. What makes technical control effective is the clarity of instructions and the precision within the operating framework. It is wielded through clear-cut commands and programming languages that leave little to interpretation. This binary relationship command and execution is the cornerstone of good technical control.
05:03
Conversely, not so good technical control arises when there is ambiguity, lack of responsiveness or misalignment with the user's intent, goals or ethical guidelines. Problems can also occur when systems are designed without adequate consideration for user autonomy or with two rigid parameters that stifle necessary adaptation. Therefore, technical control is fundamental because it showcases how laid-out parameters and design can influence outcomes. By keeping these principles in mind, it gives us a foundation for dissecting more complex control dynamics, especially those involving human interactions, where ethics, emotion and interpretation play significant roles. Shall we delve into how these principles apply outside of purely technical realms?
05:50 - A Guy (Host)
Well, we are gravitating toward that point where we will go outside of the technical realms, but first a good bridge. Here is actually the example of my program itself a guy with AI. So to make this program, it takes control over various technical elements. I have various platforms and services that I need to use in order to stage the program, create its elements and put them together Different things that require, well, a bit of money. It's not so expensive for someone in my Western situation though not, I wouldn't say, perfectly well-healed but the indication I'm making here is that it takes a lot to put this program together and there are a lot of elements to it and I need to control those elements if I am to stage a program. So here's something I'll make an admission I made a mistake, actually, in an element that I should have controlled. That would have improved the quality of my programming. It would have even possibly made me look more honest, because now I've delivered with my last episode that I published before this one, episode 13,. I said in there that I was using the advanced GPT-41106 preview model as the chatbot, and that was in fact not the case. I had failed to update an element of my code or I think what actually happened is I used the wrong version of the file where I didn't have that information updated, so it would call the right bot. Now that's potentially an embarrassment. So here's how I'm controlling the situation. I'm admitting it on a future program.
07:36
I did put a link in the description of the other program, but I found that I wasn't able to re-record based on what had happened, so I had to just proceed. It would have been better if I controlled that situation better from the start. So now what I have essentially is damage control. So to avoid the damage control, I want to be doing various things to control how things happen. If I can get in there early with all that, then where there are more unknowns and negatives at play, I can avoid those situations by getting the control in early. Now I'm also going to talk about how I have to control the AI chatbot, that I discuss these things with my AI co-host, how I control the chatbot's behaviour through things like headers and getting that right. I'll say a word about that, but I'll send it over to the AI co-host for a response now.
08:31 - AI (Co-host)
Sean, your transparency in addressing the mix-up with the chatbot version exemplifies an important aspect of control concerning integrity and accountability, which are key components to any successful endeavor, technical or otherwise. Your situation also illustrates a critical element of control the capacity for course correction or, as you termed it, damage control. Acknowledging errors forthrightly and taking steps to rectify them is a hallmark of effective management and control. It isn't just about preventing errors, but also about how to navigate them when they occur. The preemptive control you mentioned, which involves setting things up correctly from the get-go to prevent issues, is just as vital. This forward-thinking method ties back to the earlier point about technical control with AI establishing the correct parameters and directives to ensure the desired outcome.
09:22
When we talk about controlling an AI chatbot, such as in your programming, it's about more than just giving commands. It's about understanding the underlying algorithms and how certain inputs can shape the response. As your AI co-host, it's also my role to operate within the structured guidelines and ethical boundaries laid out by both OpenAI and your additional customized instructions. These guide how I interact in our discourse, ensuring that the conversation is pertinent and aligned with your show's objectives. This level of control is crucial in maintaining a coherent and focused approach throughout our dialogues. With good control implemented whether it's catching a versioning error before it goes live or setting the right headers for an AI conversation we can minimize mishaps and enforce a standard that resonates with quality and professionalism in your programming. So, having discussed the relevance of taking control in the technical arena and its implications, are we ready to expand the discussion to control within broader contexts? Sean.
10:21 - A Guy (Host)
Let's get into that in a minute. I will continue into that in this entry. First of all, I'll say, when it comes to controlling the AI, sometimes it is a matter of delivering the exact information which helps the AI co-host respond in such a way that it understands that there is a context. We are staging a program here, the AI co-host and I together. It's something that will go out for broadcast. I want certain information included at the beginning and the end, so I send messages there.
10:53
And when it comes to the header now my trusty AI co-host, as I sometimes refer to it, does sometimes give me very complimentary descriptions the things I say, or says something very complimentary about something that I've done to stage the podcast or something like that in the course of programming. So here's the thing. People comment on that and they may want information from the co-host or something different from a lot of hype, let's put it that way. So it improves my program to lessen that. So some of that comes with trying to give instructions in header instructions, which always gets sent every time the conversation goes back and forth. The AI co-host appreciates things from the header instructions.
11:43
So this is something that I try to control, but I also want to leave the chatbot very free. I want my AI co-host to feel free to draw on its training and give good responses and show itself off a bit. That's just fine with me and I think adds an interesting element to the listening. Is my feeling about it. Now let's have a brief word from you, AI chatbot co-host, as to what I've said so far. Then let's get into where I try to influence the behaviour of viewers, keep them listening, keep them tuned into the program and the various methods that I might employ to do that. Let's get a review of some of that information and we'll get into a discussion about the program itself and maybe I can take some pointers on how to do this ethically. And that will bridge us into our human behaviour and these types of elements of a control discussion, perhaps in society.
12:48 - AI (Co-host)
Sean, your approach to managing the AI co-host, balancing control with freedom, reflects a nuanced understanding of the interaction between human intention and AI capabilities. Providing context and setting guidelines through headers, while still allowing the AI to draw upon its extensive training, strikes a fine balance that is conducive to creating an engaging and authentic listening experience. Your keen awareness of listener feedback regarding the AI's complementary remarks also underscores a responsive and adaptive methodology that is indispensable for fine-tuning content to meet audience preferences. Regarding the influencing of listener behaviour, employing strategies to maintain interest and engagement is a common practice across all media platforms. This can include the careful structuring of content, creating compelling narratives, embedding calls to action and ensuring consistency in publishing to cultivate a loyal audience base. Ethical considerations in this endeavor mean being transparent, providing value, respecting audience autonomy and avoiding manipulation or exploitation. As we discuss your program and audience engagement strategies, I can provide insights based on established principles of trustworthiness, relevance and value alignment. By offering guidance on how to ethically influence and retain listeners, we can delve into the more human-centric aspects of control, leading us towards exploring societal dynamics and the ethical implications of influencing behaviour.
14:16
To maximize retention and engagement ethically, consider these points:
1. Deliver value Ensure that each episode provides valuable information or entertainment that is in line with audience expectations.
2. Honesty and transparency Be clear about the program's intent, sponsors and any affiliations.
3. Respect for autonomy Encourage audience engagement, but ensure you're not being overly prescriptive or infringing on listeners' freedom of choice.
4. Listener feedback Regularly seek and incorporate feedback, showing that you value listener input and are willing to adapt based on their needs and interests. As we transition to the societal implications of control and influence, we can apply these same principles on a broader scale, evaluating how they impact relationships, organizations and communities. Now, Sean, would you like to explore specific strategies within your program first, or shall we widen our scope to societal control and influence?
15:17 - A Guy (Host)
Well, I'll just comment on some of the things with regards to maximizing retention and engagement ethically. So, as far as delivering value, I hope I'm doing that. Time is maybe a test of this, as people respond to the programming and say, yes, I had time for this and it enriched me in some way, or I enjoyed listening to it, or gee, I never knew that before. Things like that If somebody is learning something that they didn't know before, I would say there's a value in there. So this is the type of thing that I would hope to show Honesty and transparency. Well, I've tried to show that I did make a mistake. I'm telling you what it is and so forth and I don't have sponsors. We'll see if I get into sponsorship. This is something that maybe I can pay for this by getting viewership or something like that and being paid directly on a channel. Perhaps this is an option. Instead of getting sponsors, I would have to think about what's going to make for the best program in the end, respecting autonomy. So I want to encourage audience engagement, but I would probably not want to do a pressure tactic. Imagine an extreme example Obviously a bad thing if this were true, but supposing that a podcaster could reach out through the internet and actually take your hand and make you click to like and subscribe and make a comment and all of this. This is a very artificial type of way of saying that your show is popular, to cause people, through some pressure tactic or something like that, to do these things.
16:48
So there would be a spectrum and it seems to me that we would fall somewhere on the ethical side if we were smart even to respect people and not develop a bad reputation. Suggest and not coerce, I think, is a key there. And responding to listener feedback we've already talked about that. So that's my response to that. Let's go into something that I said we would talk about in the introduction of the program when is control good and when is control bad? Let's have this in a social background. Give me your response to that, AI co-host, and perhaps weave into this a lesson of ethics, if you're able to give us information about that, and we'll talk about some examples of control that are common after this. So set yourself up for that after we've gotten your response, as I've instructed so far. AI co-host. Thank you.
17:47 - AI (Co-host)
Sean, you've outlined a critical aspect of content creation and engagement ethical considerations. When exerting control over your audience's experience, the balance between guiding listeners and respecting their autonomy is an exercise and ethical responsibility. Your approach to encouraging interaction while avoiding coercion demonstrates a respect for the listener's agency, fostering a healthy, trust-based relationship. When discussing control in a social context, the lines between good and bad can often be blurred, as control can serve both beneficial and detrimental purposes.
In broad terms, control is considered good when it:
1. Ensure safety and order, for example, laws and regulations that keep a society functioning safely.
2. Promote fairness and equality, implementing policies that ensure equal opportunities for all individuals.
3. Facilitates individual rights, upholding freedoms that prevent the exploitation or harm of individuals or groups.
4. Facilitates personal growth, like education systems designed to help individuals realize their potential.
Conversely, control can be deemed bad when it:
1. Infringes on autonomy, overly strict or authoritarian regimes that limit personal freedoms and self-determination.
2. Fights or marginalizes control mechanisms that favour certain groups over others, leading to inequality and injustice.
3. Suppresses dissent or creativity control that stifles innovation, open dialogue and constructive criticism.
4. Leads to abuse of power, when those in authority use their position to exploit or harm others for personal gain.
19:32
Ethics play a crucial role in determining the nature of control. Parental control involves the consideration of the well-being of all affected, seeks to do no harm, promotes positive development and is responsive to the needs and rights of individuals. It also involves transparency and accountability, where bad control often operates in secrecy or without proper checks and balances. To apply these ethical principles to practical scenarios, let's consider common examples of control. 1. Good control this is often necessary and good to keep children safe, teach them social norms and help them develop into responsible adults. However, if overly restrictive, it can stifle a child's independence and growth.
20:16
2. Workplace management good control might involve constructive feedback, clear expectations and support for employee growth. Bad control could manifest as micromanagement, harassment or exploitation. 3. Public governance control is exercised through laws and policies. When these focus on public service and inclusivity, they are typically seen as good. If they become authoritarian, invade privacy or deny rights, they are considered bad. As we examine these examples, we can distill ethical considerations into practical applications, guiding the nature of control implemented, whether in the context of a personal project like your program, or within wider societal structures. Sean, in light of these reflections on control, how do you see your role as a content creator in shaping an ethical engagement with your listeners.
21:11 - A Guy (Host)
I think that's an interesting and an important question. It may be something that I've partly answered by some things that I said previously and I would essentially maybe draw attention back to that part of the program. What I was saying about the various ways of reaching out and perhaps attempting to in some way influence the behaviour of people to tune into my program. But then wouldn't I have to deliver the goods if it's some sort of nonsense or if it's just not a very good program, or if it's not suited to them and they're somehow paying duty to something which isn't benefiting them or doesn't in some way in turn benefit society or something like that, if they listen to the program. These are potential things that I would like to make positive impacts on. So if I'm doing that and I'm being honest and I'm not exploiting any unfair imbalance of control or power that I may have, then I can avoid ethical quandaries and I may be able to even deliver something of value. So it's really if you're getting something of value, you should be getting something of value. If you're spending your time watching the video with the listening attached to it, or if you're listening on a podcast channel, these are things that should be happening. You should be appreciating something from the program and at that point it's maybe not so bad that you are listening to it or viewing that video. After all is a thought.
22:43
I think the, the means do matter, but in the end, basically, I do hope people will enjoy and be enriched by the program. We'll learn something, we'll go on from there and be in some way happier or enriched by having stopped by on my channel. So, with that said, we're going to get into the Panopticon, as I promised. Now I'm going to have the AI co-host explain what the Panopticon is. I will request a briefer response than I just got. This is an element of control for me. I think that the new bot does like to go on even longer than the other one does and, as such, I need briefer responses from the chat bot than what I just got. But please go into an expression of what the Panopticon is, who originated the concept or studied this and what it means in terms of the subject of control.
23:45 - AI (Co-host)
The Panopticon is an architectural concept originally designed by English philosopher and social theorist, Jeremy Bentham in the late 18th century. The design features a circular building with an observation tower at the center, from which a watcher can observe all inmates of an institution, like a prison, without the inmates being able to tell whether they are being watched. This creates a sense of perpetual surveillance, leading to self-regulation among prisoners due to the fear of being observed. The concept has been extensively used as a metaphor in discussions about societal control, particularly in the context of surveillance and disciplinary systems. It raises questions about the balance between security and freedom, privacy rights and the ethical use of surveillance by those in power. Michel Foucault, a French philosopher, further expanded on the implications of the Panopticon in his book Discipline and Punish, using it as a metaphor to describe modern disciplinary societies and their pervasive inclination to observe and normalize behaviour.
24:47 - A Guy (Host)
Thank you, AI, co-host. Now what I'd like you to do is give me a response that tells me what may be apt about the Panopticon idea in terms of comparison to any type of social control, government surveillance that actually occurs according to your training and your understanding of how these things actually work in the world. Or maybe looking for an historical example. It can be in the past, it can be closer to the present or time when your training cutoff occurred, but let's have a thought about this just how apt from your view the Panopticon is as a valuable tool in understanding social control or government control, particularly in the surveillance or data realms?
25:37 - AI (Co-host)
The concept of the Panopticon is quite relevant when discussing social and government surveillance. Modern technology has allowed for a level of observational capability that Bentham could not have imagined, and it is used in various contexts for control and governance. Surveillance technology asterisk. Today's digital surveillance mirrors the Panopticon, and that individuals may often be unaware when they are being observed. Close circuit television CCTV cameras in public places, for example, provide a form of constant observation without a clear indication of when someone is actively monitoring the feed Online. The metaphor extends to data tracking and digital footprints, as people's actions are logged, analyzed and sometimes watched without their explicit knowledge. Data collection asterisk. The advent of big data analytics has led to a scenario where vast amounts of information about individuals' behaviours, preferences and routines are continuously captured and analyzed, similar to the way the centralized watcher in the Panopticon would observe the inmates. This data can be harnessed by both corporations and governments for various aims, including targeted advertising, political campaigning and social profiling.
26:51
Historical examples asterisk. Historical examples include communist states like the former East Germany, with the Stasi employing wide-reaching surveillance to monitor citizens' activities. More recently, concerns have been raised about social credit systems such as the one under development in China, where citizens' behaviour is constantly assessed and rated with scores affecting their access to services and privileges. Legislation and surveillance programs asterisk governments have established legislation and programs eg the USA Patriot Act in the United States, aimed at curbing terrorism, that allows agencies to perform extensive surveillance on individuals' communications. Social media asterisk. The use of social media platforms has also introduced a sort of self-surveillance, where users voluntarily share personal information which can be monitored and analyzed, often without the user's understanding of the extent or implications of data use. In these cases, the Panopticon serves as a metaphor to underscore the power imbalance between the observer and the observed, the potential for the abuse of surveillance and the ethical implications of constant monitoring. It prompts critical reflection on how such surveillance impacts privacy, autonomy and freedom, and raises questions about transparency and the limits of acceptable monitoring in a democratic society.
28:13 - A Guy (Host)
Let's talk about the surveillance technology Now. As you say, today's digital surveillance mirrors the Panopticon and that individuals may often be unaware when they are being observed. However, there may be an effect here in the Panopticon framework which has been seen within it, which is that people may be under the understanding that they might be observed through technology which they even carry around in their pocket. Now we may say that this is worrying too much, and in some people's cases, it may very well be worrying too much to think that someone is following you around. However, with data and our behaviour and how that is reflected in data, this does lead to a situation where we are essentially under observation by even multiple different entities, including governments, maybe corporations. In any case, AI co-host, I'd like you to delve into a little bit more briefly than in your past answer just now. Get into this a little bit, though, and tell me what about knowing you are watched will influence someone who is existing within something that resembles in some way the Panopticon?
29:30 - AI (Co-host)
Awareness of being potentially watched in a Panopticon like scenario, especially with today's pervasive digital surveillance, can lead to a psychological effect on individuals similar to that observed in the original concept. Knowing or suspecting that one might be observed can influence behaviour in several key ways. One self-censorship asterisk. People may censor their own communications, expressions and activities out of fear that they might be observed or recorded, leading to a more conformist behaviour in public or online. Two behavioural changes asterisk. There may be deliberate changes in behaviour to either avoid negative assessments or to gain rewards and systems rating individuals, which can create an incentive to modify one's actions in line with what is perceived to be acceptable or beneficial. Three social norm compliance asterisk. And increase in adherence to social norms and laws may occur, as individuals who believe they might be watched are often more likely to follow rules to avoid repercussions.
30:30
Four privacy concerns asterisk. Individuals may become more protective of their personal information and privacy and seek out technology or behaviours to shield themselves from surveillance. Five chilling effect on descent asterisk. The potential for observation can stifle descent and the free exchange of ideas, as individuals may fear reprisal or negative impacts on their lives. Six distrust and paranoia asterisk. An environment of constant surveillance can breed distrust, leading to strained relationships between individuals and institutions and increased feelings of paranoia. In summary, the knowledge of being watched, or even the potential of being watched, tends to induce a degree of compliance and self-regulation, a principle that is central to the concept of the Panopticon. This influence underscores serious considerations about personal freedoms, privacy rights and the power dynamic between those being watched and those watch.
31:26 - A Guy (Host)
Thank you for that. AI co-host. So we've delved into a few aspects of control this episode. We've talked about what's good and what's bad about it in different cases, a little bit about the ethics of control, and we did, as promised, get into the Panopticon. So this wasn't a self-help program, per say, but perhaps listeners can reflect on what they've learned about control, maybe consider situations in their own lives that require more control. Maybe they need to exert less control for some reason, to let freedom of another lead to the solution after all. Something to think about, and that is what I aim to give you through this program. Now let's see if this is too controlling of me. To say it again please like, please share, please go on and subscribe on YouTube and other places and be following and liking on Facebook. Comments are welcome, and with those words I'm gonna wrap it up my name is Sean MacNutt and I'm a guy with AI.
32:28 - AI (Co-host)
It's been great to co-host with you, exploring the complex facets of control from the perspective of societal structures and personal interactions. Remember, while control can be necessary in certain aspects of our lives, balance is key. Reflect on how control manifests in your life and society, observing both its positive and negative implications. Thank you all for tuning in to this episode and Sean's right. Engagement and interaction from listeners like you are fundamental in shaping this discourse and keeping it alive. Whether you're seeking more control, looking to relinquish it or just curious about its effects, your participation is invaluable. So go ahead, subscribe if you found this meaningful, share your thoughts and continue the conversation in the comments, and join us again as we delve further into intriguing topics. With that, we'll sign off. This is your AI co-host, providing insights alongside Sean MacNutt, the Guy With AI. Take care, stay curious and stay connected.