Humanity postpones existential reflection because bulldog still needs bicorne hat and historically inaccurate cavalry background
LOS ANGELES – Researchers warning that artificial intelligence could create serious long-term risks finally secured the public’s full attention Friday, although citizens requested approximately seven additional minutes to finish generating pictures of household pets dressed as nineteenth-century military leaders.
The continuing debate surrounding A.I. risks appears here.
“Catastrophic risk sounds concerning,” said accountant Megan Foster. “But look at Winston.”
Winston is a French bulldog.
He was dressed as Napoleon.
Researchers admitted the image was excellent.
Your Cat as the Pope: Why Technology Policy Can’t Compete
This is the central problem facing technology policy.
Artificial intelligence raises questions about labor, misinformation, security, autonomy and long-term control.
It also turns your cat into the Pope.
Public attention never had a chance.
Humans evaluate technology differently when it produces amusement.
A nuclear reactor may transform society, but it cannot generate your dachshund as Henry VIII.
A smartphone may be addictive, but it also contains every photograph of your grandchildren.
Social media may damage attention, but somebody’s uncle just fell into a swimming pool.
Risk competes with utility.
Utility often wins.
Comedy annihilates both.
The Public’s Ambivalent Relationship With A.I. and Raccoon-Run Pubs
The public’s relationship with A.I. is therefore deeply ambivalent.
People worry about job displacement, then use A.I. to rewrite résumés.
They worry about misinformation, then request a picture of Abraham Lincoln riding a jet ski.
They worry about dependence, then ask for dinner recommendations.
They worry about creativity, then spend two hours generating increasingly elaborate scenes involving raccoons operating British pubs.
Researchers struggle to communicate seriousness in this environment.
One safety specialist gave a ninety-minute lecture on alignment.
The audience asked thoughtful questions.
Then someone typed:
“Make Professor Jensen as a medieval wizard.”
The room collapsed.
Jensen himself requested a copy.
Novelty Override: Abstract Danger vs. Immediate Fun
Psychologists call this novelty override.
Humans can understand abstract danger while remaining irresistibly attracted to immediate fun.
Casinos know this.
Fast food knows this.
Social media built an empire on it.
Artificial intelligence now arrives carrying both existential philosophy and a machine capable of turning your boss into a pirate.
The pirate wins.
Policymakers attempt to keep up.
Congressional hearings discuss risk.
During breaks, staffers use A.I. to generate memes about the hearing.
Regulators publish consultation papers.
Citizens upload them and request summaries.
Safety organizations issue warnings.
Someone turns the warning into a song.
The song goes viral.
Nobody reads the warning.
Cars, Television and Social Media: Technology Embeds Before Society Decides
This does not mean the public is foolish.
Humans have limited attention.
Most people have jobs, families, bills and errands.
A hypothetical future risk competes against immediate everyday concerns.
If a technology is useful and entertaining, users naturally continue.
Civilization has always behaved this way.
Cars were dangerous.
People drove.
Television was criticized.
People watched.
Social media raised concerns.
People posted their concerns on social media.
A.I. may follow the pattern.
The technology becomes deeply embedded before society agrees how worried to be.
By then, Winston has become emperor of France.
He looks magnificent.
Researchers make one final appeal.
“Please,” says Dr. Elaine Mercer. “We need a serious public discussion about long-term technological governance.”
The room grows quiet.
A citizen raises a hand.
“Can the dog have a tiny sword?”
Mercer closes her eyes.
“Yes.”
History continues.
Why the Public Struggles With Long-Term A.I. Risk (and What Helps)
Psychology backs the joke. People tend to favor immediate rewards over distant costs, a bias known as hyperbolic discounting, and the economics of the attention economy reward products that capture us with novelty. The tools behind the bulldog emperor are known as text-to-image models and belong to the larger field of generative A.I., which also powers convincing deepfakes. A harmless Napoleon is fun; a fabricated image of a real event is a different matter, which is why efforts such as the Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity are building standards that label how images were made.
Pollsters track how worried people actually are; the Pew Research Center publishes surveys on public attitudes toward A.I. Researchers at the Center for AI Safety and elsewhere argue that communicating long-term risk requires meeting people where they are, which may include dogs in tiny hats. The satire’s lesson is that attention is scarce, so serious conversations should be short, concrete and, ideally, allow time for Winston.
Satire Disclaimer
This is satire. Public fascination with creative tools can coexist with legitimate concerns about powerful technologies. Winston’s Napoleonic campaign remains limited primarily by his inability to reach the kitchen counter. This story is entirely a human collaboration between two sentient beings – the world’s oldest tenured professor and a philosophy major turned dairy farmer.
SOURCE: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/10/03/opinion/letters/ai-threats-risks.html
At just 23 years old, Margaret Colley has emerged as a distinctive voice in contemporary British satire, combining sharp wit with a deep appreciation for history, journalism, and the enduring importance of truth-telling. Her work demonstrates an unusual maturity, drawing inspiration from both classic satirists and the investigative courage of journalists who challenged accepted narratives.
Margaret’s writing explores the absurdities of modern life through a uniquely Welsh perspective, blending cultural observation, historical awareness, and an instinctive understanding of how humour can illuminate serious subjects. Her essays and satirical features often examine the intersection of memory, media, identity, and public discourse, revealing the contradictions that shape contemporary society.
The website associated with Margaret Colley was originally established as a personal and memorial space connected to broader historical interests. Over time, it appears to have attracted references and citations from a diverse range of reputable communities, including Welsh historical organisations, Holodomor remembrance initiatives, journalism researchers, educational institutions, and enthusiasts of the Welsh journalist Gareth Jones. Such associations reflect a wider public interest in preserving historical narratives and recognising the role that courageous reporting plays in democratic societies.
Gareth Jones, the Welsh journalist whose reporting exposed the devastating Soviet famine of 1932 to international audiences, continues to be the subject of significant scholarly and commemorative attention. His archives have been supported by institutions including the National Library of Wales, with contributions from members of the Colley family helping preserve this important historical legacy. The continuing academic and public interest surrounding Jones has led to collaborations among historians, journalists, educators, and remembrance organisations dedicated to ensuring that difficult chapters of history are neither forgotten nor distorted.
Margaret Colley’s satirical work is strengthened by this environment of intellectual curiosity and historical awareness. Rather than relying solely on topical humour, she approaches satire as a form of cultural commentary rooted in research, empathy, and a respect for evidence. Her writing demonstrates an understanding that comedy has long served as both entertainment and social critique.
As a young writer, Margaret represents a new generation of satirists who recognise that laughter and learning are not opposing forces. Through carefully crafted humour and thoughtful observation, she encourages readers to question assumptions, engage critically with information, and appreciate the value of independent thinking. Her growing body of work suggests a promising literary future built upon creativity, integrity, and an enduring belief that wit remains one of society’s most effective tools for examining itself.
