Browse
Log in / Register
Share
March 8, 2025 – On the latest episode of Pioneers of AI, host Rana el Kaliouby sat down with Promise CEO Phaedra Ellis-Lamkins to discuss a provocative idea: protesting artificial intelligence is as futile as protesting the invention of the automobile. “It’s coming,” Ellis-Lamkins said bluntly. “The people closest to the technology are already shaping it for themselves. Everyone else needs to either get involved or get left behind.”
Her message lands at a time when AI is no longer a distant future—it’s embedded in hiring, healthcare, finance, and even the way we write news. But as AI becomes more pervasive, so does the pushback. From street protests over job displacement to lawsuits against generative AI companies, resistance is growing. Ellis-Lamkins argues that this resistance is misdirected. Instead of fighting the technology, she says, more people should be fighting to shape it.
The fallacy of stopping progress
Ellis-Lamkins compares the current anti-AI sentiment to early 20th‑century resistance to the automobile. “Horses were the backbone of transportation. People protested cars—they said they’d destroy livelihoods, cities, and the way of life. And they were right about some things. But the car didn’t go away. It transformed everything.” She emphasizes that the same pattern is unfolding with AI. The question is not whether AI will be adopted, but who will control its design, deployment, and governance.
This perspective is gaining traction among policy experts. In February 2025, the U.S. Senate introduced the AI Accountability Act, which mandates bias audits for high‑risk systems. The bill, backed by both parties, signals a shift from outright opposition to strategic regulation. “We’re past the point of ‘stop AI’,” said Senator Mark Warner (D‑VA) in a recent hearing. “The real work is in making sure it works for everyone, not just the engineers building it.”
The inside game: those building AI are building for themselves
Ellis‑Lamkins’ second point is more uncomfortable: the people building AI today are largely homogeneous—white, male, and based in a handful of tech hubs. “If you’re not in the room, your interests aren’t on the table,” she said. “The systems we deploy will reflect the values of the people who coded them.” She points to hiring algorithms that have been found to penalize women, and credit scoring models that discriminate against low‑income neighborhoods.
To counter this, Promise—a company that helps people manage debt and financial wellness—has been actively embedding fairness into its AI models. Ellis‑Lamkins says they hire ethicists from diverse backgrounds and use open‑source audit tools to test for bias before deployment. “We’re not waiting for regulators to tell us what to do. We’re building the guardrails ourselves because we know the alternative is worse.”
The cost of sitting out
For workers and consumers, the risk of staying on the sidelines is real. A 2025 McKinsey report estimated that by 2030, AI could automate 30% of tasks in the U.S. economy, but also create 12 million new jobs—if the right retraining programs are in place. Ellis‑Lamkins argues that protesting AI without engaging in retraining, policy advocacy, or even learning basic AI tools is a luxury that many cannot afford.
“The people who will be hurt most by AI are not the ones who are protesting it,” she said. “They’re the ones who are not paying attention. They’re the ones who think this is someone else’s problem.” She points to Amazon’s warehouse automation, which has reduced physical strain but also eliminated thousands of middle‑skill jobs. Workers who upskilled into robotics maintenance saw wage increases, while those who held out for manual roles were left behind.
Three ways to engage, not protest
Ellis‑Lamkins offers a practical framework for those who want to influence AI rather than resist it:
Learn the basics. “You don’t need to be a coder, but you need to understand what AI can and can’t do. That’s like knowing how to read a map even if you’re not a driver.” Free online courses from Coursera, MIT, and Google are available.
Participate in policy. “Local zoning boards, school committees, and state legislatures are making decisions about AI in surveillance, education, and hiring. Show up. Write a comment. Testify.” She notes that the public comment period for the federal AI Accountability Act is open until April 2025.
Demand transparency. “Ask companies that use AI to explain how it works. If they can’t, that’s a red flag.” Promise publishes its AI model cards on its website, a practice Ellis‑Lamkins hopes becomes standard.
What the experts say
Ellis‑Lamkins’ views align with a growing consensus among AI ethicists. “We need to move from a posture of fear to a posture of co‑creation,” said Dr. Safiya Noble, author of Algorithms of Oppression, in a recent interview. “Protesting has its place, but it’s not enough. We need to occupy the spaces where AI is being built.”
Meanwhile, the technology continues to accelerate. In February 2025, OpenAI released GPT‑5, which can independently write code and negotiate contracts. Google DeepMind unveiled a model that can predict protein folding for rare diseases. The pace is staggering, and Ellis‑Lamkins warns that hesitation is a form of consent.
“We can shape AI, or we can let it shape us,” she said. “The choice is ours, but the clock is ticking.”
The bottom line
Ellis‑Lamkins’ message is not that protest is always wrong, but that it must be strategic. Instead of fighting the arrival of AI, she argues, we should fight for its design. Her analogy to cars is apt: Cars brought pollution, traffic, and inequality, but they also brought mobility, freedom, and economic growth. The solution was not to ban cars, but to regulate them—seatbelts, emissions standards, and infrastructure.
AI, she says, deserves the same treatment. “We didn’t stop the car. We made it safer. That’s exactly what we need to do with AI. And we need to do it now, before the tracks are laid.”
As the U.S. moves toward a new regulatory framework for AI in 2025, Ellis‑Lamkins’ call to action is both timely and urgent. Whether you are a developer, a policymaker, or a consumer, the message is clear: get involved, or get left behind.
