Nasa explains "terminal velocity":
"An object which is falling through the atmosphere is subjected to two external forces. One force is the gravitational force, expressed as the weight of the object. The other force is the air resistance, or drag of the object. The motion of a falling object can be described by Newton's second law of motion (Force equals mass times acceleration -- F = m a) which can be solved for the acceleration of the object in terms of the net external force and the mass of the object."
That is a great education. But in simpler terms, there is a limit to how fast that object will fall, When the drag equals the weight, the object transitions back to Newton's first; the velocity becomes constant. That speed, whatever it happens to be for your object, remains constant until "acted upon by some external force." In the case of the falling object, it is too often the earth itself that is that external force. When the falling object strikes the earth the fall ends, and the velocity reduces from "terminal" to zero. It is, as they call it, a "full stop."
The same can be true regardless of our direction. The forward velocity of an aircraft is dependent on the same algebra in which the coefficients of thrust and drag are combined to calculate the forward momentum. When the two are equal, then there is terminal velocity and equilibrium. Any movement is limited by the physics and states of equilibrium are extant subject to Newton's first.
The old men in the gallery are getting restless. I can hear them now "Isn't this blog about workers' compensation?" It is. Well, it is until "acted upon by some external force," at which time time equilibrium is disrupted. Thus, we move in a new direction because of the application of that force. Newton (1643-1727) was perhaps no Copernicus (1473-1543), but he was no slouch. In reality, everything is subject to Newtonian analysis, including workers' compensation and the occupations that manage it.
The point is that we get on a course, influenced by the core factors of thrust and resistance (drag). This is true for a person, community, practice, industry, society, and more. We are each subject to the influences of that outside force. It may increase our personal velocity, hinder us with greater resistance, and exert lateral pressure that alters course. It may be positive for us (a tailwind) or negative (job elimination, passing of a colleague, etc.). In a simplified, single-variable example it is reasonably easy to accept.
The challenge is that life is not single-factorial. The world does not stop when a colleague passes. Each life (industry, practice, etc.) is on its trajectory at a given moment. Each is being acted on by a variety of external forces at each moment. Each is in a state of equilibrium, though neither equal nor absolute. And any of those external forces can change in the next moment, to the benefit (thrust) or detriment (drag) or merely change (course).
While we are each organisms of amazing complexity, we are also each part of a variety of greater amalgamations that thus are necessarily even more complex. Those are each part of still greater amalgamations. Each organism and amalgamation affects and is influenced by other organisms and amalgamations, their velocity, gravity, and effect.
There has been so much discussion of artificial intelligence. Make no mistake, it will impact every body in motion (every life progressing today). It will produce extreme effects on some, dragging some people, occupations, and positions to a stop and accelerating others beyond the velocity previously thought possible. It will create thrust, create drag, and alter perceptions and effects of both in various circumstances.
As an "external force," it will be exceptional and noteworthy. How noteworthy? That will depend on the object, and its current state of mass, acceleration, mass, and thus velocity. The wind of change may not be expected to be uniform, consistent, or equal. Those who would make predictions might want to remember Niels Bohr ("it is difficult to make predictions, especially about the future.").
Change is coming. AI has been discussed for years. It broke onto the shores of our collective consciousness about a year ago with Chat GPT. That debut seemingly pushed the rapid availability of a collection of competitors. Suddenly, the world was confronted with the incredible potential of a new, pervasive, and pernicious "external force."
I recently overheard a conversation about human achievement, perhaps "debate" is a better characterization. Essentially, it was about the "greatest" innovation of humankind. What single invention has changed the course of human existence the most?
Good arguments were made for the binary computer, the smartphone, mass production, and the internet. Each has changed us. But a more introspective member of that group advocated for the wheel, domestication of livestock, and pottery (the ability to transport and store liquids for consumption/sustenance). Those are more fundamental, earlier, and are certainly important.
Between those two groups, there is a parade of other great advances. Think of pasteurization, inoculation, refrigeration, internal combustion, nuclear fission, and more. Each of the items named has been a disruptor, an "external force" that has changed the course of each member of the existing population.
Similarly, each has altered the foundation from which the next generation of a population will begin. Those born into a world without computers had to adapt to their changes (external force). Our courses changed. Our children, born into a world of computer ubiquity, set their initial course fully accepting, even assuming, the impacts. The result of that change is part of their course at inception. The change impacts them, but they appreciate or notice it less.
AI will be no different in that regard. The change will be more systemic than some prior innovations. AI will have permeating influence and effect across a spectrum of occupations, operations, and processes. And thus, there will be a cumulative effect. And, regardless of any object's mass (I don't care how big you are) or its velocity (I don't care how determined your direction), AI will impact you, even if only through its effects on those around you, your suppliers, service providers, etc.
The best movie reference that comes to mind? AI is simply Everything, Everywhere, All at Once (A24, 2022).
When? Well, the time is coming. AI is already in use. Many use it every day without recognizing it. It has begun to seep into our lives in ways as innocuous as the grammar checker that reviewed this post (it wanted me to change that to "who reviewed," but really? AI is not a who, at least not yet). But, the impact is growing.
Recently, Yahoo explained the new AI Pin. It is part of the coming revolution. This is like a smartphone in some ways, but it is worn. It is always connected to the net, fed by the many cell towers around us. It can be talked to and will project answers onto your hand (no screen necessary). And it formulates answers using AI.
But it is an infant. the author of the Yahoo article struggled to explain why such a device is worthwhile. She says that she "get(s) so caught up in pointing out its problems" that she is distracted from explaining its abilities. The final outcome of her ownership experience has not been so positive. She cannot be said to be a fan of this new toy. That reminds me of a friend who bought a TRS-80 computer in the 1970s and soon came to realize it was only really good for playing games. Don't judge the trip by the first few miles.
There will be early adopters and early endeavors like this pin. There will be innovations, failures, and successes. All will exert force on your course and velocity.
Change is coming. We will each see a Newtonian effect from AI itself and its impacts on the bodies and institutions that surround, support, and affect us. If you are ready, AI will come. If you are not, AI will come. How fast? How perniciously? How permanently? You can answer that as well as anyone. Sure, the "experts" will hold forth. Remember the president of IBM (one of the early computer innovators) predicted "I think there is a world market for about five computers." Experts can be wrong. Sometimes spectacularly so.
