The danger in Ant\u00f3nio Guterres\u2019s warning that the world must not allow artificial intelligence to \u201cvibe-code\u201d humanity\u2019s future is not the odd phrase. It is the institutional anxiety behind it. The world is watching a technology of enormous consequence move faster than the laws, ethics and public institutions meant to govern it. AI is no longer a clever tool sitting on the margins of life. It is beginning to shape work, elections, classrooms, entertainment, policing, advertising and even childhood. Its spread has been astonishingly fast. But its power remains heavily concentrated. The US and China dominate the computing infrastructure, models, chips, capital and platforms on which the new AI economy rests, while countries like Pakistan are expected to consume, regulate and absorb technologies whose design and profits lie elsewhere. For Pakistan, therefore, the real danger is not being left out of AI. It is being included on unequal terms. Our citizens may become users, data sources, accents, faces, workers, consumers and political targets without ever becoming rule-makers. This is how digital dependence deepens: first through convenience, then through habit, and finally through surrender. That is why the recent alarm in Pakistan\u2019s entertainment industry matters. It is among the first visible labour-rights questions of the AI age in this country amid growing concerns over contract clauses that could allow a performer\u2019s face, voice and likeness to be used for AI replicas. The issue is not nostalgia for old professions. It is ownership. If a person\u2019s image, voice or creative style can be captured once and reused endlessly, then consent cannot be treated as a line buried inside a contract. However, this will not stop with actors. Journalists, anchors, teachers, voice-over artists, translators, lawyers, designers, musicians, students and call-centre workers will all face similar bargains. Their work may train systems. Their voices may be cloned. Their lectures may become automated courses. Their writing may become prompts and templates for others to sell. In a country already struggling with informal work and weak labour protections, AI could easily become another way to cheapen human skill instead of expanding opportunity.
\nThe political risks are just as serious. Deepfakes, synthetic audio, automated propaganda and targeted disinformation can poison public debate before institutions even know how to respond. Courts, election bodies, media houses and schools will need rules for authenticity, disclosure and accountability. Without them, truth itself will become negotiable. Pakistan cannot wait for a perfect global consensus. It needs a clear framework regarding consent; disclosure of AI-generated content; compensation where creative labour trains commercial systems; and enforceable data rights. Public procurement of AI tools should also be transparent, especially in policing, education and welfare delivery. AI will be useful. It may even be necessary in health, education, agriculture and disaster management. But usefulness does not mean surrender. The future should not be coded for Pakistan without Pakistan having a say in it. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The danger in Ant\u00f3nio Guterres\u2019s warning that the world must not allow artificial intelligence to \u201cvibe-code\u201d humanity\u2019s future is not the odd phrase. It is the institutional anxiety behind it. The world is watching a technology of enormous consequence move faster than the laws, ethics and public institutions meant to govern it. AI is no […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-555066","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","category-editorial"],"yoast_head":"\n