Skip to main content

Respect

Respect is something humans give to each other through personal connection. It’s the bond that forms when we recognize something—or someone—as significant, relatable, or worthy of care. This connection doesn’t have to be limited to people.

There was an article recently that described the differing attitudes towards AI tools such as ChatGPT and Google Gemini (formerly Bard). Some people treat them like a standard search while others form a sort of personal relationship — being courteous, saying “please” and “thank you”. Occasionally, people share extra details unrelated to their question, like, ‘I’m going to a wedding. What flower goes well with a tuxedo?’

Does an AI “care” how you respond to it? Of course not — it reflects the patterns it’s trained on. Yet our interaction shapes how these tools evolve, and that influence is something we should take seriously. Most of us have all expressed frustration when an AI “hallucinates”. Real or not, the larger issue is that we have high expectations of software but with little acknowledgement or awareness of its complexity. AI is becoming closer aligned with how we, as human beings, interact and that is because of software.

Have you ever named a vehicle like a car or boat? Do you regularly maintain your home, be it cleaning, painting or fixing a hole in a wall? Cities are constantly resurfacing roads and sometimes going above and beyond what is really needed to demonstrate the importance of the appearance of the city. When was the last time you said “I love my ——”?

Naming something is often the first step to personalizing it. Once you give it a name, you’ve created a connection, elevating it from a mere object to something that matters to you. It’s why people talk to their cars when they won’t start or lovingly polish their favorite guitar. Respect begins with personalization.


People form emotional connections with a physical object all the time. That connection comes with an inherent, almost subconscious, respect for the object and its care. If a car starts sputtering, we bring it to a mechanic, who also, in their own way, forms a bond with it. This kind of proactivity highlights the connection: we value the machine, so we keep it running in good shape. In short, we respect it.

When was the last time you said “I love my operating system” or “I love Windows”? Software zealots, and each OS have them, aside, most of us do not bond emotionally with their software. Maybe it fails us too often or maybe our expectations surpass what it was originally designed to do? Do we even know (the details of) what it was designed to do in the first place?
Unlike physical objects, software thrives in the realm of the unknown. It can’t predict how end users will interact with it, regardless of the interface. While physical objects may find a use outside of their intended purpose, software is regularly stretched beyond its initial design. Developers are taught to code for unpredictability and when users discover new uses, developers often integrate or adapt their software to accommodate those uses. Even a simple statement of code, “if x = 1”, carries hidden questions:

  • Does x exist?
  • Is it a number?
  • Is it an integer?
  • What if it isn’t 1?

Refactoring is a form of respect that developers show their code, constantly making it more efficient, more adaptable and better performing. It’s like painting a home, replacing the oil or engine in a car. While many developers may form a connection for their creations, that same respect is not considered broadly. It should be – especially now, as we transition into a world with broader use of artificial intelligence.

Software is grounded in logic. And for all its comfortable veneer, AI inherits software’s logical foundation, which is an expression of human reasoning. Its evolution is closer to a living system than static tools. Spellcheck learns from repeated typos; “suggested” templates appear in your documents or a crash might occur when software doesn’t anticipate your hard drive is missing. Software is typically enhanced by the developers who evolve the code; but now, artificial intelligence is starting to learn to evolve itself. It is constantly learning; whether it realizes it or not. What other creation learns based on its own interactions?

Humans are, at their core, logical beings. Their evolution is shaped by binary decisions: fight or flight, live (eat) or die, speak or stay silent. The evolution of software (and AI) should be considered in the same way. As AI learns, it evolves. Microsoft’s Tay chatbot evolved from polite conversation to a profanity-filled tirade, spewing hatred in every direction. What was missing? Respect. It wasn’t just absent from the people interacting with it; it was absent from its original code. Tay wasn’t designed to consider how its words would impact those reading them. Tay’s failure was a lesson. If we want respect, we must offer it, regardless of the source. And if we want AI to evolve in a way that benefits everyone, then Respect (and yes, I capitalize it to signify its importance) must be built into its core.

Have you ever made a mistake? Has your language teacher ever said you used the wrong preposition? Have you ever thought something was one way (the world is flat) when in fact it was another (the world is round)? Mistakes, making and learning from them, are part of the evolution of every species, including humans. 

Software bugs are just the digital equivalent of human mistakes – the initial steps toward improvement. When we respect others, they respect us back. When we maintain our cars, they last longer. When we respect our homes, they stand the test of time. Similarly, when we support developers —financially, morally, or by adopting their tools—they respond in kind. Their respect for us shows new features, acknowledgment of crashes and failings and a commitment to improving software. By extending that respect to software and AI, we embrace its potential to learn from mistakes, gain new knowledge, evolve and create tools that inspire us to become better versions of ourselves. All we have to do is show a little Respect.

This post was originally published on AKSEL.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Elevating Project Specifications with Three Insightful ChatGPT Prompts

For developers and testers, ChatGPT, the freely accessible tool from OpenAI, is game-changing. If you want to learn a new programming language, ask for samples or have it convert your existing code. This can be done in Visual Studio Code (using GitHub CoPilot) or directly in the ChatGPT app or web site.  If you’re a tester, ChatGPT can write a test spec or actual test code (if you use Jest or Cypress) based on existing code, copied and pasted into the input area. But ChatGPT can be of huge value for analysts (whether system or business) who need to validate their needs. There’s often a disconnect between developers and analysts. Analysts complain that developers don’t build what they asked for or ask too many questions. Developers complain that analysts haven’t thought of obvious things. In these situations, ChatGPT can be a great intermediary. At its worst, it forces you to think about and then discount obvious issues. At best, it clarifies the needs into documented requirements. ...

Blogs and RSS come to Microsoft.com

MS has just introduced their portal and it's pretty comprehensive. Nothing quite like learning that some people use AIM instead of MSN messenger, or that there really may be a need for supporting 4 monitors ( Cyrus Complains ) However, it's really a great sign that MS is serious about supporting the blogging community which seems to have um, exploded in size in the past year. Blogs and RSS come to Microsoft.com

I’m Supposed to Know

https://programmingzen.com/im-supposed-to-know/ Great post for developers who are struggling with unrealistic expectations of what they should know and what they shouldn't. Thirty-forty years ago, it was possible to know a lot about a certain environment - that environment was MS-DOS (for non Mac/UNIX systems). . There was pretty much only a handful of ways to get things going. Enter networking. That added a new wrinkle to how systems worked. Networks back then were finicky. One of my first jobs was working on a 3COM + LAN and it then migrated to LAN Manager. Enter Windows or the graphical user interface. The best depiction of the complexity Windows (OS/2, Windows NT, etc) introduced that I recall was by Charles Petzold (if memory serves) at a local user group meeting. He invited a bunch of people on the stage and then acted as the Windows "Colonel", a nice play on kernel. Each person had a role but to complete their job they always had to pass things back to h...