Ask A Genius 1245: Technological Changes in the Midst of Adversarial Politics
Author(s): Rick Rosner and Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Ask A Genius
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/02/01
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What technological changes are going to supersede all this political and social nonsense in the next four or five years? What technical changes will occur during that time? Technical and scientific advances.
Rick Rosner: So, is AGI—for Artificial General Intelligence—that it? Is it AI that can think? It once seemed like AGI was eight years away, but now it appears to be only four or five years away. If AGI comes close to fruition within the next half-decade, it could supersede much of the current nonsense. That doesn’t mean it will eliminate all problems, but it’s interesting to consider, especially when you compare it to the technological changes during World War II. Back then, significant advancements like rocketry, bomber fleets, and the atomic bombs—which ultimately ended the war in the Pacific—were all part of the conflict.
These technological developments are happening not because of any particular political figure, such as Trump, but as part of an entirely different trend. There is some overlap, however. Social media and smartphones facilitated Trump’s election and reelection. In other words, technological changes enabled his rise, but they are not inherently linked.
Now, AGI is one example. Consider Ozempic: although it represents a small slice of people’s lives, it has the potential to transform the lives of tens of millions of Americans radically. There are about 250 million adult Americans, and roughly 180 million of them are overweight—with half of that number being obese. If just 10% of overweight Americans were to use Ozempic intelligently—complementing disciplined lifestyle changes rather than relying solely on a pill—that would be 18 million people. If 20% used it, that number would double to 36 million. Imagine a man in his 40s weighing 255 pounds who uses Ozempic to reduce his weight to 210 pounds over a year or a woman who drops from 195 to 165 pounds. These changes could add years to their lifespans, improve their overall health, and even enhance cognitive function, as severe metabolic issues can affect brain performance. Additionally, the boost in self-esteem could help them participate more fully in life. While overweight individuals do engage in life, those who are not obese often have a broader range of opportunities.
What other technological advances do you think will have a transformative impact?
Jacobsen: Virtual reality and augmented reality. Distance surgery, mechatronics, autonomous robots in restaurants, and round-the-clock production lines with reduced human intervention. Some of these advances will result in lower costs for the products we buy.
Rosner: Absolutely. They have already begun to make certain things cheaper. If it makes enough stuff cheaper, it messes with capitalism. But when you mentioned personalized entertainment, we haven’t seen it yet. Well, I just saw something—a conversation between Jimmy Kimmel and Donald Trump. Jimmy Kimmel was making fun of Trump, boasting about his greatness, while Kimmel tried to pop Trump’s bloviating balloons. The conversation went back and forth for about seven or eight minutes, and AI entirely generated it. Kimmel was delivering jokes—not his best material, admittedly—but in his voice, and Trump was speaking in his distinct manner. You couldn’t tell those voices were artificial and AI-generated dialogue. That seems to be a huge step forward.
When I think about personalized entertainment—watching a movie that isn’t great, or even one that’s pretty good—I always imagine it could be improved if, at some point, aliens invaded. It doesn’t matter what movie it is, whether it’s Pride and Prejudice or Hot Frosty—a terrible Christmas romance about Frosty the Snowman being transformed into a hot, shirtless guy who doesn’t understand the world because he used to be a snowman—the plot could be enhanced if, just as the leading lady and the protagonist start to fall in love, space aliens suddenly descend upon the town. I believe that with AI, you’ll be able to alter plots and casts at will—even turning things into softcore porn if you want—because we now have the technology to do that. This might mean that people will be even more entertained. But I wonder, do people still care about being entertained?
Anyway, we’ve discussed a ton of things that are going to transform the world. Ideally, the positive transformations will outweigh the negative ones, and Trump will be stifled in some of his badness. Do you think that any of the changes in technology will impact some of the bad things Trump wants to do?
Jacobsen: He’s a wild card. Technology is a slightly controlled, wilder card. In terms of processing power, energy efficiency, and computational output over time, technology has proven that its progress remains consistent even through world wars, epidemics, economic recessions, and housing crises. Despite Trump’s unpredictable, self-centred impulses, technology is significantly changing the landscape.
Rosner: Here’s where the two sides collide—let’s see if you agree. Trump gets what he wants by stirring up fear and anger. He wants to eliminate a large number of undocumented immigrants—11 million immigrants and their families—and he plans to do it at a rate of a million per year, which would cost tens of billions to administer. We can hope—and I think it’s an unlikely hope—that technological advancements transform the economy quickly enough so that Trump’s claims about immigrants wrecking America are overshadowed by good economic news.
Jacobsen: Do you think there’s a chance that his efforts will be blunted because people will be reassured that everything is fine?
Rosner: I kind of doubt it because, although crime has dropped by 50% since the ’90s, Trump and Republicans continue to talk about an explosion in crime—a claim based on isolated incidents, like someone being pushed onto subway tracks or a single immigrant committing a violent act, and then generalizing that these incidents reflect a broader trend. The same pattern makes me think that positive economic news from tech may not be enough to overcome the flood of misinformation from Trump. What do you think?
Jacobsen: The technology could very well be used to increase misinformation. It’s like a hammer. I don’t want to be too pessimistic, but it will be an interesting few years.
Rosner: I think the tide of history will, well, history spares no one—idiots and non-idiots alike. However, I believe technological improvements will eventually sweep aside the current wave of idiocy. I don’t think these changes will occur quickly enough to blunt Trump’s influence. And perhaps they won’t even happen fast enough to stop America from being supplanted by larger, smarter powers. Canada’s in a good position; you have fairly rational leaders, and political movements based on nonsense have less sway in your country, not to mention your tremendous natural resources.
Jacobsen: Even the misinformation we have here is not extremely harmful. There’s more truth in our bullshit than in the American version if we’re being realistic.
Rosner: But you don’t have the same propaganda push that we do. Do you have a Fox News equivalent—a Rupert Murdoch kind of presence?
Jacobsen: We have smaller equivalents, but I consider them medium-sized. Fox News is gargantuan because it is so well-loved and widely watched by Americans.
Rosner: Well, it isn’t that widely watched. Its average viewership is, I think, three or four million—a mere 1% of Americans or 1.5% of adult Americans. Yet, its viewers are the loudest; they spread their message among family, friends, and even in church. Fox News’ influence exceeds its ratings, although relatively few people watch it. I don’t know… Or is there more to discuss?
Jacobsen: I’m good for the night.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
In-Sight Publishing 