“What is AI doing to us?”

Focus on physical, in-person experiences, because that is what people will value.

As technology becomes easier to manipulate through deepfakes, AI-generated content, and misinformation, it will become increasingly difficult to distinguish what is real—and what is not. In that world, Tim Chang, a Venture Partner at Mayfield, argued that human connection may become our most reliable source of truth—and our only form of authentic experience. “Within a year or two, anything digitally created and transmitted will not be fundamentally trustable,” he said. “The only thing I count on is when I see you in person.” In a future where digital content can no longer be taken at face value, people may once again become the most trusted interface.

So, how can these two worlds stop competing and start to enhance one another? Authentic experiences and intelligent technology. Human intimacy and boundless connectivity. The next generation of social networks may not be entirely analog, but neither will they exist solely on our screens.

Why do tech companies get to change the rules?

Speakers like Ed Newton-Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, a non-profit certifying generative AI companies for fairer training data practices, and Amy Karle, an artist and futurist, critiqued the corporate appropriation of artists’ work under the guise of “fair use,” calling out the tech industry’s tendency to shift foundational norms (like copyright protections) without democratic consent. Newton-Rex pointed out that for years, “No AI companies trained their commercial models on copyrighted work without asking permission, because everyone knew it was illegal.” But now that several high-profile companies are doing it anyway, and reaping financial rewards, others are rushing to do the same. “We're doing a very, very bad job of holding those companies to account,” he said.

But we all know tech companies have been undervaluing artists for decades. Spotify pays artists between $0.003 and $0.005 per stream, meaning an artist needs approximately 250 streams to earn just one dollar. In 2015, Google won a 10-year battle with the Authors Guild to display excerpts of works without compensating the creators. The current AI conversation pours gasoline on these precedents. And unless we want to upheave society and consider more radical concepts like universal basic income for artists, as Alvin Wang Graylin posited, tech companies need to change the way they value art and artists; not just because it’s the right thing to do, but because creatives have always helped design the future of technology. We can't have great tech without creatives, and creativity won’t evolve without great tech. There should be mutual benefits for both parties involved in the process.

“Artificial intelligence is not artificial and it’s not intelligent.”

Ovetta Sampson, founder and owner of Right AI, reminded us that AI is only as strong as the people who shape it—and in many cases, they are the marginalized people behind the scenes who are exploited to moderate, clean, and categorize the training data. It’s something we explored back in 2020, when we were working with Mozilla on the consequences of the Surveillance Economy. Back then, we found that “invisible practices enable invisible human exploitation” via the role of mechanical turks. Current LLM practices are similar; that labor is not artificial.

As responsible designers seeking a less biased and more equitable model, we must find ways to shed light on those exploited communities and educate users and organizations on the importance of diversity and transparency in the system.

“Who are the designers?”

Over and over, panelists emphasized that designers must get AI right and create products and systems that meet real human needs while minimizing damaging consequences. Then Rashida Hanif, Founding CEO of RepresentEd, asked a seemingly simple yet fundamental question: “Who are the designers?”

If we consider the scale of impact that “design” will have in this space, then we need to dial up the importance of some of design’s most talked-about shortcomings: diversity, equity, and inclusion. Another interesting moment arose when Chang and Hanif pointed out that too often, the consternation over a lack of female-owned startups overlooks the lack of investment in female founders—not to mention gaps in education and support systems that exist before they even reach that stage. This gender chasm is just the tip of one iceberg. But we need to learn from our past and remember that, “if you invite someone to the table, it’s too late… because you’ve already built the table.” As a design community, we need to do better.

“The revolution has to start, and it has to start with you.”

Sampson reminded us of the most important point of all. It’s easy to say, “the designers need to…” But we all have a say in making this future. “We really need to participate in the AI revolution and not accept the narrative that is given to us by the tech bros,” she said. “We have the resources and the access, and it’s up to us to make the future we’re asking for.”

For us, that’s a future that understands there is no choice between human creativity and technology; and it’s a refrain we’re hearing over and over. We heard it at Figma's AI-heavy Config conference, we've explored it with clients like Ethiqly, and it was clearly resounding in this conversation, for technologists, artists, and business folks alike. AI is going to be able to do a lot, and yes, of course, it will replace jobs and upend entire industries. But its intelligence will only be truly valuable when it’s paired with human creativity to create meaningful human experiences.