In the span of a few years, technologies like AI have transformed education, employment opportunities, and research.
The rapid pace of technological innovation raises serious questions about inequality and the distribution of power. In particular, we must consider the widening technological divide between wealthy and poor populations, between large corporations and smaller businesses, and between technologically advanced “core” countries and those on the periphery of the global economy.
At the start of the decade, students hadn’t yet been introduced to OpenAI’s ChatGPT. Chegg was among the technological challenges facing educators.
Following ChatGPT’s public release on Nov. 30, 2022, it quickly became one of the fastest-growing consumer applications in history.
Political, academic, and social institutions were unprepared for the rapid changes brought about by AI, while ChatGPT surprised educators with its ability to generate code in seconds.
Tasks that could have taken computing students hours of research, troubleshooting, and experimentation could suddenly be completed in a matter of seconds. It showed just how quickly technology could transform the skills students had spent years developing.
AI has transformed how educators grade assignments, how students prepare for exams, and, more broadly, how we approach everyday life.
We are rapidly approaching a new era of technological transformation, with other tools like quantum computing, neurotechnology, biotechnology, advanced robotics, and nuclear fusion emerging as major areas of research and development.
Governments and leading economies are increasingly competing to establish themselves as leaders in these fields.
China illustrates this competition given recent advancements in nuclear fusion, with its experimental “artificial sun” reactor successfully overcoming a longstanding plasma density barrier, marking a significant step toward developing fusion as a potentially abundant source of clean energy. China is also investing billions in quantum-secure networks and satellite technology.
These technologies possess potentially transformative, almost unprecedented capabilities. The danger does not simply lie in the power they provide, but in the possibility that this power becomes concentrated in the hands of a small number of states, corporations, or individuals.
When an actor can influence economies, control critical infrastructure, shape the information people receive, or develop technologies far beyond the reach of the public and competing institutions, meaningful oversight becomes increasingly difficult.
Power of this scale becomes dangerous when those affected by its decisions have little ability to understand, challenge, or restrain them.
In the United States, Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Greg Casar introduced the Ban Artificial Superintelligence Act which aims to pause advanced AI development until we have put in place rigorous federal testing and oversight to ensure AI does not harm humanity. The fact remains that no political, social, or academic institution can keep pace with the power of the technologies we are able to create.
There is no doubt that, with proper oversight, these technologies have the potential to improve our lives in ways that once seemed unimaginable. AI tools developed by Queen’s students, such as Lawtonica, demonstrate this potential at a local level.
By applying AI to municipal bylaws, Lawtonica could help transform how regulations are accessed and understood in Kingston, demonstrating how technological innovation can serve the public good.
However, policy must be developed in anticipation of a rapidly changing and increasingly unpredictable technological environment, particularly as these technologies reshape education, employment, and access to opportunities.
Consider a simple example at Queen’s: when the Queen’s Pub used AI-generated images to market its food instead of hiring a professional photographer or designer, what happens to the value of the creative work those professionals provide?
This may seem like a small decision, but multiplied across thousands of businesses and industries, these choices could fundamentally change how creative labour is valued and how people earn a living.
And what happens to education when the relationship between student and educator becomes increasingly mediated by AI? If students begin receiving more of their feedback, writing assistance and academic guidance from machines, the human center of education gets lost.
At a moment when many young people already feel disconnected from their schools and universities, we should be careful not to replace meaningful human interaction simply because an automated alternative is faster or cheaper.
Queen’s is uniquely positioned to participate in this conversation. It is not simply an institution that will be affected by technological change, it is an institution that helps produce the world’s best researchers, engineers, entrepreneurs, policymakers, and professionals who will shape it. The university therefore has an opportunity to make technological governance part of the conversation alongside technological innovation.
That means asking questions that go beyond whether students know how to use AI. Who owns the systems we increasingly depend upon? Who has access to the computing power required to develop them? Which jobs will be transformed or displaced? How should universities protect academic integrity while still teaching students to work alongside these tools? And what responsibilities do institutions have when technological innovation moves faster than public policy?
These are not questions that can be answered by engineers alone. They require economists, political scientists, ethicists, lawyers, educators, students, and the broader public to participate in the conversation.
The technological future is already being built around us. The question is whether we will actively shape that future together or allow a small number of institutions, corporations, and governments to shape it for us.
Nicolas David Brasset-Duque is a 2025 graduate of Computer Science and Global Development.
Tags
AI, AI Race, ChatGPT, Education
All final editorial decisions are made by the Editor(s) in Chief and/or the Managing Editor. Authors should not be contacted, targeted, or harassed under any circumstances. If you have any grievances with this article, please direct your comments to eic@queensjournal.ca.