By Patrick Robinson

Human knowledge has been through numerous phases over time since it consists of more than facts.

It depends on our ability to preserve, transmit and build upon what came before. In ancient history, through to modern times knowledge gained was fragile and easily destroyed by wars, the reawakening of religious dogma and the intentional destruction of intellectual depth, and institutional awareness.

If you burn the library at Alexandria, murder all the intellectuals in Cambodia or decimate an institution such as the USAID, facts, processes, connections and more are made exponentially more difficult to reclaim.

So as we we collectively experience the death of newspapers, network television, and even the decline of educational institutions (albeit more slowly) we are yet again entering a transition of trust.

There are voices that suggest the once dominant television news programs were biased politically and that they remain linked to a certain agenda of beliefs. Even if that’s true, they served an incredibly valuable purpose. They helped form more unified perspectives. It could be argued, with some notable exceptions (the red scare, racial inequality and women’s rights), that the 1950’s postwar America into the early 1960’s was the strongest most unified, time in our history.

We acted on shared beliefs for the most part because our information sources allowed us to aggregate an audience around only a few sources. Those sources, at least journalistically, hewed to mutually agreed upon standards of vetting the facts, taking the time to perform checks. With the democratization of media the barriers to entry fell away. You no longer had to have a press, and trucks, and delivery people, or a broadcast tower and expensive studios and cameras. You could and can be a “reporter” with a free phone living in a van down by the river.

News organizations then and now had to live by higher standards. But the digital age, and social media from youtube to tiktok, Facebook to Snapchat have given rise to literally millions of voices. So many in fact that the blizzard of information, the vast majority of which is not provided by people worthy of trust, has overwhelmed those you CAN trust. Those non-trustworthy voices have been amplified by the agendas of the wealthy too.

The rise of Snake Oil salesmen

In the 1800’s the profit motive was behind the appearance of what were called “snake oil salesmen” In the mid-1800s, Chinese immigrants working on the American railroads brought with them oil made from Chinese water snakes, which was used in traditional Chinese medicine to relieve joint pain and inflammation. Modern analysis suggests this oil was rich in omega-3 fatty acids, so it may have had genuine medicinal benefits. Then At the 1893 World's Columbian Exposition in Chicago, he performed dramatic shows in which he appeared to extract oil from rattlesnakes and sell it as a cure-all called Clark Stanley's Snake Oil Liniment. 

However, government testing later revealed that his product contained:

• Mineral oil

• Beef fat

• Chili pepper extract (capsaicin)

• Turpentine

It contained no actual snake oil.

After investigation under the Pure Food and Drug Act, Stanley was fined in 1917 for misbranding his product. Because of frauds like Stanley, "snake oil" gradually became synonymous with:

• Fake medicine

• Bogus cures

• Exaggerated claims

• Scams in general

Today with the rise of social media advertising and few controls over those making claims, we have a new era of Snake Oil. Since data brokers share lists between retail sales and online purchases, what you buy, what you paid and any and all information about you is a valuable commodity. Try buying a supplement online and watch what happens. You will be flooded with hundreds of offers for similar products or other kinds of products that claim to have curative powers.

AI to the rescue?

AI has already earned a terrible reputation for a variety of reasons. Most of them well justified. It gets things wrong, and has few guardrails to keep it from making mistakes.

That is going to change, and dramatically so in the very near future.

Remember it’s learning. In effect it’s exactly like a new species we are giving birth to and right now it’s a toddler or in some cases an adolescent. Within the next five years we will see screenless devices, voice controlled, that can answer any question, accomplish any non physical task.

With the concurrent rise (and democratization) of robotics, the astonishingly increased speed of compute thanks to quantum systems, the widespread adoption of 6g wireless speeds that are 50 to 100 times the speed of today’s 5g we will see Tele-presence become common. It will make zoom calls feel like a horse and wagon.

But all that comes at a cost.

AI systems that serve your personal needs are only as useful as the information you give them. That means, for many, it will be as natural as talking to a friend to tell your personal digital assistant/robotic companion about your medical history, your child’s academic performance, your finances and more.

Yes… many people will resist, at first.

These kinds of systems have a huge advantage. They will make things not just easier, but possible. Not using them will mean you could be left behind, lose money, suffer health consequences and much more. In short you will need to transition to trust them.

That’s a bridge, for older people, they will not cross.

For digital natives, those for whom the internet has always existed, the transition will as natural as buying something on Amazon.