Artificial "Intelligence" will not replace knowledgeable people
We’re told AI will make us obsolete - but is it really that simple? From Star Trek's M5 to real-world blunders like deleting entire databases, one thing is clear: AI lacks human intuition, empathy, and responsibility. It’s a tool, not a replacement. Let’s keep using it—but wisely, and under human supervision.
OPINION
Ever since artificial intelligence gained ground in organisations, trends and marketing have started to wash our thoughts - subtle or direct - that we (regardless of our profession) will be changed by AI agents in the future. Near or not that distant.
I'm a person who works by the principle "if it works, don't change it." It has helped me understand the design industry, the product creation process, and how things work. I've seen websites, platforms, apps (which are all products at the end of the day, that generate revenue for businesses) that look (or looked) outdated - some horrible - by modern standards. One such example is Craigslist, which, by the way, is generating 137 million visits per month and is ranked 104 globally. Users post around 80 million ads per month, and today it generates around 300 million in revenue. The profit margins are insane: 70%–80%. Below is a screenshot of the website.
If it works, don't change it. Progress for the sake of progress is not natural. Just because something is old doesn't mean it's obsolete. At the end of the day it solves a core problem simply and reliable.
Now, getting back to the topic of artificial intelligence taking over our jobs. You know why I don't think it will happen, despite what the trends and marketing are praising?
Because at the end of the day, AI is not reliable. It lacks a human touch, it lacks empathy, it lacks the full neuronal logic of a specialist (whatever that specialist may be). There is an article on PC Mag, from July 22nd, 2025, that tells the story of an AI agent that was allowed to operate in the production side of a product, and it accomplished a very concerning thing: it deleted the whole database.
Yeah sure, they had backups, and it was a matter of minutes to restore it. But that's not the point. The point is: you can't trust AI to do human specialists' jobs.
It's the same as Star Trek’s M5 - The Ultimate Computer episode, where the Federation is testing a new AI: the M5 multitronic unit. It was designed to automate all starship functions, which meant making the crew obsolete.
What did it accomplish?
It attacked ships (even friendly ones) with live weapons - even when ordered to stop. It killed hundreds of personnel during what was supposed to be a mock battle.
The event where an AI agent went rogue and deleted a database is beginning to look a lot like the Star Trek M5 episode what aired in an episode in 1968. Sure, the AI agent didn't kill people - it deleted a database. What's the harm, you may ask? It wasn't supposed to do that.
Let's take another use case: imagine you run your medical facility with AI agents and just one of them goes rogue. It starts to unplug patients from life support machines. It starts injecting drugs that weren't supposed to be administered, resulting in deaths. Just because someone wanted to automate something for the sake of progress - making human specialists "obsolete".
Artificial Intelligence will help us in the long run, there's no doubt. I'm using it. A lot of you are using the tech. But it can't run on its own. It's extremely helpful in finding new materials, new drugs, new concepts - but everything must be maintained under the supervision of human specialists.
Breathe.
We will not remain without a job due to AI. It's just going to be harder - but we're going to make it.