In today’s technology-driven world, many have become desensitized to the rapid growth of generative artificial intelligence (AI). While this growth has brought benefits, including improved efficiency and access to information, recent advancements raise concern.
Generative AI has rapidly woven itself into many aspects of daily life.
Beyond the rise of chatbots and image generation, AI is available at users’ fingertips, with a single Google search producing summaries from multiple sources. These advancements have created clear benefits, allowing information to be generated almost instantly.
Since the 1950s, AI has steadily advanced, with the most recent boom from companies like Open AI or Anthropic building on decades of progress.
Before its COVID-19-era boom, AI saw steady growth, from defeating World Chess Champion Gary Kasparov in the late 1990s to being used in the Mars rovers in 2003.
AI also advanced significantly in the past decade as experimentation pushed companies like Google and Facebook toward wider public use. However, these rapid advancements have also brought negative attention and concerns.
AI’s use in journalism was an extensive topic covered throughout April, with strikes taking place and unions discussing its future in the industry. Specifically, generative AI came under scrutiny on April 7, when more than 30 journalists at The Sacramento Bee wrote a letter to management saying they would withhold their bylines from stories generated by a new AI summarization tool.
McClatchy Media, The Sacramento Bee’s parent company, rolled out the AI-powered tool earlier this year. It uses previously-published work to generate repurposed articles aimed at boosting productivity.
Journalists said the tool could betray public trust and undermine credibility, particularly when used on sensitive topics that could harm relationships with sources.
Sacramento Bee staffers refuse bylines over a new AI tool as colleagues at the Miami Herald and Charlotte Observer harbor concerns. https://t.co/eNhYkiiKhT
— TheWrap (@TheWrap) April 7, 2026
While the tool might speed up production, it relies on existing templates and has already made mistakes this year.
In March, The Sacramento Bee published several earthquake warnings generated by the tool that turned out to be false and were later removed. The tool, which pulls from national databases, also mistakenly published a wildfire warning for an incident in New Mexico.
Beyond credibility concerns, the tool could threaten job security and the ability to deliver reliable information.
AI can help entrepreneurs launch entire businesses, but its adoption at large companies has coincided with thousands of layoffs, according to The Guardian.
Other developments have also drawn scrutiny. NVIDIA has introduced a new version of its AI-powered technology that generates photorealistic scenes.
Following the announcement of DLSS 5 in March, CEO Jensen Huang downplayed criticism and emphasized its benefits for graphics performance.
Since launching Deep Learning Super Sampling in 2018, NVIDIA has used AI to enhance graphics and games. The latest version focuses on using generative AI to transform scenes, characters and details into photorealistic sequences. These changes can significantly alter visuals, including characters’ faces through AI-generated, upscaled versions.
Instead of serving as a developer tool, DLSS 5 can alter scenes without developers’ consent. While users can disable the feature, its implementation raises broader concerns.
Announcing NVIDIA DLSS 5, an AI-powered breakthrough in visual fidelity for games, coming this fall.
DLSS 5 infuses pixels with photorealistic lighting and materials, bridging the gap between rendering and reality.
Learn More → https://t.co/yHON3nGyxE pic.twitter.com/UvF9G7tlZs
— NVIDIA GeForce (@NVIDIAGeForce) March 16, 2026
After the announcement and in the days following, several reports featuring critiques from both fans and game developers were released. Many, including myself, have taken issue with this usage of AI as it takes the software beyond frame generation and actually influences the final rendered product.
One developer, James Brady, told Wired, “It devalues an artist’s creativity and intent on a basic level.”
While AI has long been used in gaming with a largely positive perception, this scale of use marks a shift toward more negative headlines.
AI has also drawn national security concerns following Open AI’s deal with the U.S. Department of Defense.
The deal, made in late February and amended March 2, provides Open AI tools to the U.S. government for use in classified systems. The agreement includes limits, with Open AI seeking assurances that its technology would not be used for autonomous weapons or domestic mass surveillance.
Prior to Open AI signing this deal, the topic of AI’s place in a military capacity was already making national headlines. Anthropic presented similar terms to the government when they were approached in January and were deemed a supply chain risk due to their concerns with usage.
Unlike Open AI’s legal framing, Anthropic’s concerns focused on the ethics of using AI for weapons or surveillance. After the deal, Open AI added further protections aimed at preventing domestic mass surveillance.
AI surveillance systems and autonomous weapons may sound like science fiction, or right out of “Terminator,” but they are real concerns in today’s technology-driven society.
By setting these limits, Open AI highlights how widely accessible AI has become. Yet with all the positives that have arisen because of that, so too have negative headlines.
Not all uses of AI are harmful, but risks arise when efficiency turns into encroachment. AI can gather information quickly, but its rapid growth raises concerns as jobs shift, creativity is affected and institutions adopt new policies on its use.
