Advanced Debate: AI

In this format, the audience is informed of the motion ahead of time, allowing for a more strategic and engaging discussion. Eight participants, selected at the start of the evening, will engage in the debate while the remaining attendees act as the audience. Debaters will have the opportunity to state a preference for either side of the motion. The debate will still require 4 speakers on each team regardless of personal preference, however. Each debater will have approximately 45 minutes to prepare an 8-minute speech. At the conclusion of the debate, the organizer will evaluate each team's strategy and declare a winner.

The motion we will debate: This House believes that current investments in AI are a waste of resources.

Earlier this year, a study revealed that CEOs say the word "AI" more often than "earnings" during an earnings call, a regular event when top level executives discuss the financial results for the reporting period to shareholders and other stakeholders of a company. That talk about AI has surpassed talk about money in these types of meetings is an emblematic symbol of our day and age: AI is taking the world by storm, and if the hype is to be believed, we are entering into a revolutionary period that will see society fundamentally shift, probably in the next decade or so. Proponents of AI state that AI will be able to do much of the work that humans currently have to do, essentially replacing human labor at a level equivalent or perhaps even exceeding that of industrialization. The efficiency benefits, the potential for new breakthroughs, and the inherent advantages that computers have over humans (such as requiring much less downtime, for example by not needing to rest or eat), all of this means that the nature of how we work, and by extension, live, would be fundamentally changed. Investors have, for several years now, been putting their money where their mouth is, pouring huge amounts of money into the AI sector in the hope of achieving phenomenal profits.

For all the hope that business has in AI, however, the future is far from certain. Voices have risen up that state that much of the potential of AI is overblown, and that AI is a bubble that will pop sometime in the next few years. They do not believe the hype around the technology reflects the reality of how it works, and that the money being poured in is therefore being misattributed. The AI sector is also very resource-intensive. The amount of energy, water, microchips, and other resources that AI data centers require is very high. If the AI breakthroughs that are promised come to fruition, then perhaps this might be worth it, but if AI is indeed a bubble, we are using up a lot of precious resources at a time of geopolitical and environmental precarity.

Depending on your position, the societal debate around AI leaves a very different impression. While only time will tell where the chips actually land, in the meantime, come join us at Brussels Debaters for a lively discussion on where all of this may be heading.