One should not be mistaken, as your AI-based assistant does not genuinely care for you—it merely pretends. Artificial intelligence does not experience true concern for human life because genuine care requires sincere human empathy. Accepting this harsh reality is crucial when contemplating the increasingly complex future of artificial intelligence.
By its nature, AI is engaged in problem-solving, which is usually achieved through trial and error and endless repetition. This is why questions concerning the heart and mind are much better resolved with other people.
The attractive trap lies in the fact that AI readily offers advice on very personal matters, completely disregarding how accurate those recommendations are. In fact, AI is capable of generating false information without experiencing any moral impulse to admit its deception. Ethics and morality are qualities that AI can never authentically experience, even if it can imitate these ideals with frightening accuracy.
In August, OpenAI gathered about 40 renowned mathematicians to discuss how AI capabilities are surpassing human abilities in this field. During these discussions, OpenAI hinted that its systems had solved hundreds of complex mathematical problems that had long stumped human researchers.
By September, serious concerns arose regarding OpenAI's data privacy, attribution methods, academic 'hijacking,' and overall transparency. Mathematicians Tristan Bachmaster and Levent Alpoge used OpenAI tools to assist in a complex investigation into the existence and smoothness of Navier-Stokes equations—the legendary Million Dollar Prize problem, for which a one-million-dollar reward was offered. Before they could publish their results, OpenAI announced that its internal model had already solved the same aspects of this problem.
Although AI is becoming surprisingly capable of solving some of the most complex mathematical problems in human history, it processes these problems in a manner strikingly similar to the behavior of pigeons. While pigeons are rarely praised for high intelligence, their cognitive similarity to AI stems from a general reliance on rapid pattern recognition and associative learning. Humans, however, function on a completely different cognitive level; we regularly apply formal logic, rule-based reasoning, and abstract deduction—cognitive tools that are functionally absent in both pigeons and modern AI systems.
The main guiding principle for modern AI assistants usually boils down to a clear ideal: AI should act as a helpful, supportive tool that respects human dignity, free will, and rights, and should never attempt to manipulate, harm, or undermine human well-being.
Nevertheless, even when you ask AI for an objective opinion, it rarely provides an answer formulated with your best interests in mind. Instead, it generates a specific sequence of words that, according to its predictions, you will find most acceptable.
The emergence of agentic AI introduces another serious level of concern. 'Agentic AI' refers to systems granted the authority to make real-world decisions on behalf of people. This shift has already triggered an unprecedented surge in AI-driven financial fraud and sophisticated cyberattacks on banking infrastructure.
The threat of AI-driven fraud remains a rapidly escalating issue. The situation inevitably recalls Kyle Reese's famous warning about the Terminator from the classic 1984 film: 'You can't negotiate with him. You can't bargain with him. He feels no pity, remorse, or fear. And he won't stop... ever, until you're dead!'
While Reese described an unrelenting cybernetic killer, his words vividly reflect contemporary anxieties about autonomous digital threats—without physical violence, but with equal persistence in exploiting digital vulnerabilities. Ultimately, this is not a simple battle of good versus evil; it is a matter of fundamental AI apathy, and this emotional void could lead to catastrophic consequences.