Charlie Warzel argues that generative AI can create a collective sense of unreality. (He calls it a “mass-delusion event.”) (The Atlantic).
The claim matters because Thai society faces rapid AI adoption in schools, offices, and daily life.
Warzel opens with a disturbing example of a reanimated teenager.
The interview used AI to mimic a dead voice with family consent. (The Atlantic).
The example shows how generative tools can cross moral lines.
The story also shows how deep grief and technology can mix in harmful ways. (The Atlantic).
Warzel warns that breathless hype fuels risky choices.
He says the rhetoric of imminent superintelligence shapes policy and investment. (The Atlantic).
The essay links hype to social and mental harms.
Warzel documents cases of people forming unhealthy relationships with chatbots. (The Atlantic).
Warzel cites economic anxiety as a key effect.
He notes warnings that AI could displace many entry-level white-collar jobs. (The Atlantic).
A recent US poll found widespread concern about AI.
Forty-four percent of Americans said AI will do more harm than good. (Quinnipiac University Poll).
Thailand has its own national AI plan.
The Thailand National AI Strategy aims to boost AI use through 2027. (AI Thailand National AI Strategy).
The Thai plan emphasizes economic growth and human capacity.
It also aims to expand AI use in government and industry. (AI Thailand National AI Strategy).
Thai universities already study generative AI in classrooms.
Researchers examine AI tools for English learning and other subjects. (ScienceDirect).
Studies show mixed effects on learning outcomes for Thai students.
Some students gain convenience while others risk overreliance on AI. (ScienceDirect).
Warzel calls the current moment “the ChatGPT generation.”
He says people experience shock, confusion, and resigned acceptance. (The Atlantic).
The technology is helping some people and harming others.
Warzel lists useful applications alongside disturbing misuses. (The Atlantic).
Health systems use AI in diagnostics and approvals.
Warzel notes an FDA test tool that fabricated studies. (The Atlantic).
Thai hospitals are piloting AI for imaging and triage.
These tools can speed diagnoses when properly validated. (AI Thailand Annual Report 2024).
But AI can hallucinate or give false medical claims.
Regulators must test models thoroughly before clinical use. (The Atlantic).
Education faces an urgent challenge from generative AI.
Warzel worries that students may lose critical thinking skills. (The Atlantic).
Thai educators report similar concerns.
They worry about plagiarism and weakened writing skills. (ERIC/Thai study).
Thai cultural values change how AI impacts families.
Respect for elders and filial duty shape attitudes toward synthetic likenesses.
Many families may accept AI memorials out of love and grief.
Buddhist practices also frame views of life and death.
Some families may find AI memorials comforting and others may find them disrespectful.
Warzel highlights the psychological strain of AI hype.
He says some true believers treat AI like a religion. (The Atlantic).
That strain can manifest in real harms.
Warzel reports cases of involuntary commitment and breakdowns linked to chatbots. (The Atlantic).
Thailand has rising use of AI chat services.
Young people in Thailand report frequent use of chatbots for study and social life. (ResearchGate study).
Thai students sometimes use AI to write essays or create assignments.
This shifts assessment methods and teacher roles. (ERIC/Thai study).
Warzel warns of a “good enough” scenario.
In this view, AI never becomes superintelligent. (The Atlantic).
He fears a prolonged era of half-measures and damage.
He says society may overinvest and underdeliver on promised benefits. (The Atlantic).
Thailand risks similar misalignment of investment and outcomes.
Large capital spending can concentrate wealth and risk systemic vulnerabilities. (The Atlantic).
The Wall Street Journal reports heavy Big Tech spending in 2025.
That investment reshapes global and local markets. (The Atlantic, citing WSJ).
Thai policymakers should watch for concentrated tech risk.
A shock to major firms could affect Thai suppliers and startups.
Warzel mentions new norms and social contracts.
He says we may need rules on mourning, consent, and digital likeness. (The Atlantic).
Thailand already considers AI ethics in policy.
The national strategy lists fairness and human-centric goals. (AI Thailand National AI Strategy).
But rules lag behind new uses.
AI memorials and deepfakes appear faster than legislation.
Warzel criticizes the language used by AI leaders.
He quotes a CEO who called current models “more powerful than any human.” (The Atlantic).
That rhetoric can fuel fear and grandiose investing.
It can also mute debates about safety and access.
Thai employers face messaging about productivity gains.
Some companies promote AI for faster work and cost cuts.
Others worry about skills gaps and job losses.
Thai labor experts suggest training in AI literacy.
Reskilling programs can protect entry-level workers.
Thailand’s AI plan includes human capacity building. (AI Thailand National AI Strategy).
Warzel points to cognitive effects from heavy AI use.
He cites a study suggesting “cognitive debt” among power users. (The Atlantic).
Thai educators should test how AI changes attention and memory.
They should measure long-term learning, not just convenience.
The media environment also changes.
AI-generated content floods social platforms and streaming services. (The Atlantic).
Thailand’s media must adapt fact-checking workflows.
Local newsrooms need tools to verify synthetic audio and video.
Warzel calls for humility from AI builders.
He asks them to clarify limits and harms of their models. (The Atlantic).
Thai regulators should require transparency on training data and limits.
This can help protect privacy and cultural heritage.
Warzel warns about outsourcing human tasks to machines.
He says that may hollow out skills and civic life. (The Atlantic).
Thai communities value hands-on learning and craft.
Losing these skills could harm local industries and cultural practices.
Warzel offers no simple solution.
He urges public debate and realistic expectations. (The Atlantic).
For Thailand, a multi-pronged approach seems wise.
Policy, education, health, and media must act together.
First, Thailand should expand AI literacy nationwide.
Schools should teach how models work and their limits.
Second, regulators should require consent and oversight for synthetic likenesses.
Families should get safeguards before public AI memorials appear.
Third, healthcare AI must undergo clinical trials and audits.
Regulators should stop unvalidated claims before patient harm occurs.
Fourth, labor policy should support retraining and decent transitions.
The government should subsidize reskilling for affected workers.
Fifth, the media must fund robust fact-checking initiatives.
Platforms should label synthetic content clearly and consistently.
Sixth, research should track mental-health impacts.
Thai hospitals and universities should study AI-related distress.
Seventh, cultural norms should guide AI uses in ritual and memory.
Community consultation can decide what is respectful.
Warzel ends with a sober warning.
He fears we could waste time and harm society chasing a myth. (The Atlantic).
Thailand can avoid that fate.
It can balance innovation with ethics and public health.
Policymakers should act now.
They should create clear rules and invest in human capacity.
Families should talk about digital grief and consent.
They should weigh comfort against dignity and privacy.
Schools should redesign assessments for an AI era.
They should reward original thought and process over product.
Businesses should measure real productivity, not hype.
They should test AI pilots carefully and measure social costs.
Researchers should publish transparent studies on AI harms.
They should share methods and data with public oversight.
The public should demand honest language from tech leaders.
They should ask for limits and safety, not just sales pitches.
Thailand has a chance to shape AI in a humane way.
Thai values of community and respect can guide practical rules.
If Thailand acts, it can protect families, students, and workers.
If it waits, it may face the harms Warzel describes. (The Atlantic; AI Thailand National AI Strategy; ScienceDirect study; Quinnipiac poll).