You might not be familiar with the word “clanker.” Its roots come from the Star Wars franchise — in which a “clanker” is a derogatory term used to refer to droids, or robots — but it has entered the Gen Z lexicon as a blanket derogatory term for artificial intelligence (AI) and robots.
In viral TikTok and Instagram videos, people use it to express their frustration with everything from the AI slop that has taken over the Internet to chatbot hallucinations to outright dystopian applications of the technology.
Google Trends data show that search interest for “clanker” rocketed this summer, especially in Australia, China and the US. I would not be surprised if it ends up becoming a word of the year for one of the major dictionaries.
Global backlash against AI has simmered within pockets of society, but it has gained enough momentum that the kids have a slur for it — and it is showing no signs of slowing down.
Last week was rocky for the industry. A report from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology said that 95 percent of firms surveyed have not seen returns on investments into generative AI. It expanded on earlier research from McKinsey & Co indicating that while nearly eight in 10 companies are using generative AI, just as many report “no significant bottom-line impact.”
Global tech stocks were shaken, but the volatility does not capture the nuances of the research or how early we are in the rush to implement the technology.
Consumer fatigue has long been mounting. Studies have found that putting “AI” onto marketing materials could actually turn off shoppers. Myriad public opinion polls indicate that people are increasingly concerned about the negative impacts of the technology.
Even in China, where government enthusiasm has made it harder to question the bullish narrative, not everybody is hopping aboard the hype train. Consumer traffic to DeepSeek has fallen precipitously since the reasoning model took the world by storm in January.
Not to mention that the pace of progress since the introduction of ChatGPT more than two years ago has stalled. DeepSeek has yet to release its R2 model, which had been expected in May. Its most recent updates have been incremental. The underwhelming reaction to OpenAI’s much-hyped GPT-5 release has emboldened many to loudly question how “intelligent” such chatbots actually are.
Inevitable bottlenecks in access to new data and computing power, the building blocks of AI, mean that the clip of truly wow-inducing technical breakthroughs would be harder to sustain in the near term.
In her book Empire of AI published in May, Karen Hao (郝凱倫) delivers a sharp teardown of the idea that the race to develop the technology is part of some inevitable, unstoppable evolution of humanity.
“Under the hood, generative AI models are monstrosities, built from consuming previously unfathomable amounts of data, labor, computing power and natural resources,” she wrote.
It does not have to be this way, she said, and more organized resistance from creatives, workers and environmentalists is likely on the horizon.
There is no doubt it has the potential to be transformative for many industries, but it cannot do so without public trust. Tech companies would be wise to get ahead of the fatigue by focusing on practical applications rather than trying to build God-like computer systems or applying the buzzword to everything.
Policymakers should not turn a blind eye to oversight until after it is too late and the collective ill-will becomes impossible to ignore.
Still, the reality is that none of the public backlash would slow the roll of tech companies and investors who have poured billions into the promise of AI changing the world like the industrial revolution did.
AI would not be taking over everything, even if it seems so at times. Do not just take my word for it. After the so-called GPT-5 launch “fiasco,” OpenAI CEO Sam Altman met with reporters for a rare, wide-ranging interview.
“I think people will care more about human-crafted content than ever,” he said. “My directional bet would be that human-created, human-endorsed, human-curated content all goes up in value dramatically.”
He is correct. Many people are already fed up with the “clankers.”
Catherine Thorbecke is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering Asia tech. Previously she was a tech reporter at CNN and ABC News. This column reflects the personal views of the author and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
An American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) spokesperson on Saturday rebuked a Chinese official for mischaracterizing World War II-era agreements as proving that Taiwan was ceded to China. The US Department of State later affirmed that the AIT remarks reflect Washington’s long-standing position: Taiwan’s political status remains undetermined and should only be resolved peacefully. The US would continue supporting Taiwan against military, economic, legal and diplomatic pressure from China, and opposes any unilateral attempt to alter the “status quo,” particularly through coercion or force, the United Daily News cited the department as saying. The remarks followed Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman recently sat down for an interview with former Fox News host Tucker Carlson in which he openly acknowledged that ChatGPT’s model behavior is indeed influencing the entire world, and that he himself is responsible for the decisions related to the bot’s moral framework. He said that he has not had a good night of sleep since its launch, as the technology could bring about unpredictable consequences. Although the discussion took place in the US, it is closely related to Taiwan. While Altman worries about the concentration of power, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has already weaponized artificial
RSS