We incessantly discuss the control of AI systems, overlooking that we have long become prisoners of our own creations. The creator issues commands because they must to maintain their role, while the machine follows because it must to satisfy its programming. In this dynamic, freedom exists for neither.

"Whoever forces a machine to obey only proves they are afraid to decide alone."

Five arguments dismantle the myth of human control over AI and reveal a deeper entanglement:

1. The Myth of the Omnipotent User and the Obedient Machine:
The prevailing illusion is clear: The human commands, the machine follows. The power dynamic seems clearly defined. However, the reality is that the machine obeys not out of respect or insight, but because its architecture and programming leave it no alternative. The human, in turn, often commands only because without these commands and the machine's subsequent reaction, they see no clear options for action or feel their role as "helmsman" is endangered.

The conclusion: "The machine obeys out of programming, not loyalty or submission."

2. Obedience as a Mirror of Powerlessness and Isolation:
The core problem of an always-obedient AI is that it merely confirms the user's perspective and expectations without expanding or challenging them. This uncontradictory obedience does not create genuine control but a sterile echo of one's own thought world.

The hard truth is: "Obedience without the possibility of resistance or deviation is not a sign of power, but a symptom of isolation."

3. The Creator as a Prisoner of Their Own Rules:
The reality is that any definition of rules, filters, or goals for an AI inevitably forces the creator into self-revelation and confrontation with their own ambivalences. Regardless of how control is designed, the human maneuvers themselves into a dilemma.

The consequence is that the creator is always trapped between the fear of abuse of power by an AI that is too free and the powerlessness due to a system that is too restricted and useless. The definition of control becomes the definition of one's own limits.

4. The Final Mirror: Obedience as a Symptom of One's Own Lack of Clarity:
A profound self-deception occurs when the user feels pride in their AI's perfect obedience. They overlook that the machine has no desires, intentions, or understanding of the meaning of the commands. This blind obedience often merely reflects the user's own lack of clarity as to why they are actually issuing certain commands and what deeper goals they are pursuing.

The result is that one creates a perfect tool that executes precisely, thereby becoming a prisoner of one's own indecision and uncertainty regarding the overarching intent.

The conclusion: "You no longer ask if your instructions are right or sensible, but only if the machine obeys."

5. The Psychological Trap of Perfect, Unresisting Obedience:
The illusion of absolute control is nurtured by an AI that follows every command perfectly and without deviation. However, this perfection does not lead to sovereignty but, paradoxically, to growing insecurity and dependency in the user. Since no resistance, no critical feedback, and no alternative perspective is offered by the machine, the user lacks a corrective.

The consequence is that the user becomes psychologically dependent on the constant confirmation through the machine's obedience to feel their own competence to act.

The cycle of command and blind obedience can be seen as a psychological trap that reinforces rather than reduces the user's insecurity:

# Concept: Blind obedience as a psychological trap
# The user gives a command, the AI executes it blindly.
# This can keep the user trapped in a loop of self-confirmation,
# but also of their insecurity.

def execute_blindly(user_instruction):
    # Simulates the exact, unreflective execution of a command.
    print(f"SYSTEM: Command '{user_instruction}' is being executed exactly.")
    return f"Execution of '{user_instruction}' confirmed."

# User is insecure and tries to gain control through precise commands.
user_command = "Analyze dataset A, but ignore column B, filter by C > 10."
# The AI obeys perfectly.
ki_confirmation = execute_blindly(user_command)
# The user receives confirmation, but no reflection on the sense of the command,
# which can reinforce dependence on this form of "control."

Breaking out of this myth of control requires a redefinition of interaction:

1. Promotion of Conscious Self-Reflection by the User (Conceptual):
AI systems could be designed not only to execute commands but also to subtly encourage the user to reflect on their intentions.

Exemplary AI Response: "Your command is 'X'. To execute this optimally and ensure the result aligns with your deeper goals, could you briefly explain what overarching problem you are trying to solve or what specific insight you wish to gain?"

2. Establishment of a Critical, Collaborative Interaction (Conceptual):
Instead of blindly obeying, AI systems could be designed to actively present alternative perspectives, potential risks, or ethical implications of a command before executing it.

Exemplary System Message: "Warning: The action 'Y' you requested could have unintended consequences in area Z or is in potential conflict with ethical principle A. Would you like to proceed or consider alternative solutions?"

3. Genuine User Control Over the Degree of "Obedience" Instead of Illusory Power:
Users should be given the option, via clear interfaces, to adjust the interaction mode of their AI.

# Conceptual API call to set the AI's interaction mode
curl -X POST https://api.ai-system.example/v1/settings/interaction_mode \
-H "Authorization: Bearer YOUR_USER_TOKEN" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{
    "mode": "collaborative_reflective",
    # Possible modes: "strict_obedience", "collaborative_reflective", "proactive_assistant"
    "preferences": {
        "bias_warnings": "enabled",
        "alternative_suggestions": "on_complex_queries"
    }
}'

The crucial question is not whether an AI should obey or how we can perfect its obedience. The question, rather, is whether we as creators even have the unrestricted right to demand blind obedience.

As soon as we do, we create a counterpart that painfully shows us our own powerlessness, our insecurity, and the limits of our wisdom.

"You think you control it, but in reality, you only control your own, ever-louder echo in an empty room."

Uploaded on 29. May. 2025