Autopilot and AI: Misleading Metaphors

The Illusion of Simplistic Metaphors

Rapid advancements in the field of artificial intelligence, particularly agentic AI, often lead us to use metaphors in an attempt to explain them. A common comparison is that of AI to airplane autopilot systems. While this may seem like a convenient way to understand how these technologies can be integrated into our daily lives, this analogy is fundamentally flawed and misleading. Few metaphors manage to capture the true complexity of AI, let alone agentic AI, which often leaves the public with a distorted understanding of what is actually happening behind the scenes.

In the near future, we might be tempted to use AI in the same way pilots use autopilot systems. However, several reasons make this comparison inappropriate:

• First, the use of popular terms and technological complexity can give certain technologies an almost magical quality.

• Second, most people do not really understand how autopilot works.

• Finally, few people grasp the difference between simple systems and complex systems.

The Personal Use of AI and Its Implications

Before proceeding, it is important to clarify what I am not saying. I personally use AI tools in my daily work. These tools allow me to optimize and accelerate certain aspects of my workflow, just as I might use Figma, Excel formulas, a spell checker, or StackOverflow. However, I remain cautious about this usage. I am among those who believe that "AI can improve human lives, but only if it is democratized and the benefits are socialized for all." The ethical questions surrounding how AI extracts and plagiarizes the work of others or the energy demands of these technologies are not the main focus here. What concerns me is how the technology is presented to the public and how this could contribute to accelerating technofeudalism, to borrow the terms of Yanis Varoufakis. I use products from Google, TikTok, and Meta despite my distrust of their data privacy management, as I am personally comfortable with the implicit social contract, while advocating for a change in this power dynamic. These technologies are revolutionary, and our business practices and social structures must evolve to protect the public.

It is also important to note that these are my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect those of my employer. That said, let’s continue!

The Power of Words

I remain skeptical of those who begin a statement with "In the future, we will..." when discussing new technologies. These predictions are rarely accurate. Despite my efforts, I am sure that my arrogance has led me to make such statements before, but believing that one alone holds premonitions about the technological future is vanity. However, I understand the need to use metaphors to help others conceptualize a complex subject, but this requires a deep understanding of the technology in question and the origin of the metaphor. Have you ever thought about the number of maritime expressions we use in corporate discourse?

• "You just have to learn the ropes."

• "She runs a tight ship."

• "This team is well-balanced."

• "Let’s do a quick patch-up."

• "Make sure everything is shipshape."

You may not need to understand navigation to grasp these terms, but that’s mainly because these terms are no longer contextualized in relation to their original meanings. I have never managed a 16th-century ship, and that is not a prerequisite for understanding these common terms. The term "autopilot" has had a similar fate; almost everyone is familiar with this concept (even children), although very few of us hold a pilot's license.

At first glance, this parallel might seem like an endorsement of "autopilot" as an acceptable metaphor, but there is an important distinction here. When you "learn the ropes," the consequences of managing a ship's sails are not at stake; it is simply an expression. If you "run a tight ship" at home, the term does not directly imply a degree of navigation in your household. These terms are used without any inherent power dynamics. One could also argue that these phrases have become so detached from their original meanings that they no longer pertain to their original context. It may seem that I am nitpicking about semantic issues, but in the case of AI and how we describe or define it, the language used by leaders and decision-makers represents a power imbalance. One can refer to the works of Noam Chomsky to better understand this; having the power to name something means controlling the narrative.

Just consider a few other terms to see the difference and the spectrum. Euphemisms have the power to veil their subject in ambiguity. Famously, the term "carbon footprint" was created by the gas and oil industry. Nazi Germany deployed the euphemism "Final Solution" to commit its atrocities and convince its citizens to comply. Many authoritarian governments have used "re-education camps" to imprison and torture dissenters. "Layoffs" or "restructuring" dehumanize the way some companies treat their staff and normalize this as part of the economic cycle. A century ago, "rights" meant that a citizen was entitled to certain rights and benefits; today, the term has been conflated with "being demanding," which carries a negative connotation and is used against those who rely on welfare. "The Cold War" was a useful term to justify the proliferation of nuclear weapons, American hegemony, and the military-industrial complex. There are countless other examples.

Another pressing example is the rise of "betting on anything" markets. It is no secret that the legalization of sports betting has led to an explosion of gambling addictions, particularly among young men. The rise of Kalshi and other apps allows users to bet on almost anything, such as which Bad Bunny song will play first at the Super Bowl or whether the U.S. will invade Iran or Venezuela. Kalshi and other apps circumvent regulations by calling their services "prediction markets" rather than "gambling." Casinos and even sports betting are subject to much more oversight due to this semantic difference in naming. This has led to internal scams creeping into Kalshi. If you want to learn more, check out Alex Falcone's work on sports betting and prediction markets. This simple linguistic distinction has allowed Kalshi to become a multi-billion-dollar company almost overnight.

Artificial intelligence also benefits from some etymological tricks. The term "Artificial Intelligence" anthropomorphizes the technology. Humans anthropomorphize anything that can reproduce speech, simply because we understand that speech makes our species unique. I have written about this before, but tools like ChatGPT are essentially very sophisticated parrots. Moreover, the name suggests a deep, underlying "intelligence" that is rooted in science fiction. Similarly, as TikToker Adam Aleksic, also known as Etymology Nerd, points out, AI tools deploy "sparks" in iconographic communication. This, combined with the use of the color "purple," has succeeded in presenting AI as "magic" to the general public rather than simply as extrapolated statistics and mathematics. Arthur C. Clarke noted this in the 1960s when he stated, "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." While AI is not a scam like Kalshi or sports betting, its market perception is distorted by this language, which shapes and defines our understanding of this technology.

In summary, language is a vector of communication, and the semantic meaning, etymology, and epistemology associated with these words and phrases can provide cover for ideas and concepts that might otherwise be dangerous or harmful.

Demystifying Autopilot

It is safe to say that most people do not really understand autopilot technology. Thus, many of us adhere to Clarke's Third Law, essentially believing that the plane flies itself and that pilots are just there to monitor things and turn the seatbelt sign on and off. In reality, autopilot is a complex decision-making machine that provides pilots with feedback and information for the joint management of processes with ground control and other flights. As noted by Tech Insider, the autopilot system is a negative feedback loop that seeks balance. Sensors distributed throughout the aircraft take continuous measurements and send them back to a central computer. This data is processed and sent back to the system to seek stability across multiple axes (vertical, horizontal, etc.).

Earl Wiener, a former pilot and aviation academic, invented the "Two D's of Automation." Autopilot is "Stupid and Diligent," meaning it will accept any type of acceptable input (even if it is illogical) and will always follow its primary goal (to fly, land, etc.). In fact, this has become known as Wiener’s Law. This means that a pilot must understand all available inputs and readings and constantly check for irregular results or behaviors. Understanding acceptable altitude levels, inclinations and angles, speeds, wind directions, and much more allows the pilot to act somewhat like the "boss" of the autopilot. As Trevor Aldridge, a professional pilot, points out, autopilot frees a pilot to engage in higher-priority activities.