A world of extremes

A look at our polarized society, from politics to online privacy and AI

Posted on: 2025-10-08

It feels like we’re living in a world that's increasingly defined by extremes. Nuance has taken a back seat. In public discourse, in media, and in the way we interact online and offline, it often seems that if you're not on one side, people assume you're on the other. There's less space for the in-between, the uncertain, or the evolving.

I think this shift that we've been seeing over the last few years, especially now in 2025, is a very dangerous situation, and it doesn't have to be this way. I'd like to go over 3 specific examples where I see this phenomenon and show an alternative of how else it could be. This is all from my own perspective, my experience, but maybe it could help someone see things from a different view point.


Politics: from issues to identity

Not long ago, political discussions (while still heated) were largely rooted in issues. People would vote for candidates or policies that aligned with their values or addressed the problems they cared about most. Whether that be climate change, guns, immigration, etc. Today, it often feels like political alignment has become a full-blown identity. You're either on the right or on the left, and people expect you to toe party line.

I always considered myself to be center right. I agree with the conservatives on some policies, and with the liberals on others. If it makes sense to me, then I will support it, regardless of where on the political spectrum it is. But if you frequent any online discussion, the instant that you reveal any alignment with the other side, you're automatically dismissed as an undesirable element.

This shift has turned disagreement into personal conflict. Civil discourse has eroded. Attacks, both verbal and virtual, are normalized. Calling people derogatory names in public is now the norm, which still seems crazy to me. Worse, politics has infected so many online forums. Regardless of where you hang out, it seems like anything that can be politicized will be. You can't talk about one issue anymore without laying out your views on every issue, and those views had better match with the majority, or you risk being canceled.

It's toxic, and I think this is one case where banning all political talk is probably the best option we have at the moment. The only forums that still seem civil and devoid of conflict are those that steer clear of the subject altogether. Unfortunately, it's a short-term, imperfect solution, since the rest of the world is just getting more extreme in the mean time.


Artificial intelligence: hype vs doom

AI is another area caught in the crossfire of extremes. On one side, there's the hype: AI is going to revolutionize everything, cure diseases, end wars, and maybe even become fully sentient. On the other side, there's the denial: AI is a bubble, it's useless, it's a fad, it will steal all our jobs and destroy industries, or even the fear of losing control to AI and ending the world.

The most likely outcome? It's somewhere in the middle. AI is a fantastic tool, and it has already started to revolutionize many industries. ChatGPT and other chat bots are being used daily by millions of people to help them compose emails, reports, analyze data, create things for them and even being a counselor or therapist. In the industry, AI has also been very successful in automating various tasks like customer support, automation pipelines and robotics. For example, China is currently testing a fully AI automated hospital.

But AI is also a bubble. There are thousands of new AI startups, many of them being a mere shell around one of the OpenAI models. Hundreds of billions are being spent with little to no regards on what the business models are or how it could affect other sectors. At some point, many executives will realize that the amount of resources they've been pouring in far outpaced the value, and we'll see some kind of pull back. Whether it's a slow deflation or a burst, who can say. And it's true that AI is built on top of unpaid human labor, which it's then proceeding to replace. Artists and writers published their creations online, which were then used to train AI models, and these models are now used by millions to produce cheap copies.

The way I like to compare AI is to the dot-com bubble. Back then, the Internet was brand new and everyone thought it would revolutionize the world. Endless amounts of money was poured in, and anyone who added a .com to their name instantly became worthwhile. We all know the bubble burst, and that's because the hype outgrew the value. But the key element here is that the Internet didn't die. The dot-com burst didn't happen because the Internet was a fad, was useless, or because the Internet would not revolutionize anything. In fact I would argue the Internet is one of the most powerful invention of the last century. But the hype was still too high.

And that's where I would place AI right now. It's a useful tool, but it's also a hype bubble. We're somewhere in the middle of all the doubters, the deniers, and all the big tech CEOs that tell us AI will do everything for us.


Online privacy: freedom or control

The last example I wanted to bring up is online privacy, and how the world is becoming increasingly polarized about the need to control the narrative versus the need for anonymity and free speech. On the one hand, we've seen the UK digital ID law trying to combat illegal immigration and dangerous online content for children, the EU's Chat Control bill aimed at ending online anonymity, Australia's social media ban for kids done through nebulous online ID systems, and even companies like YouTube have started age verification where users may be required to show proof of ID to use their services.

The reasoning tends to always be the same: save the children from dangerous predators, stop disinformation and the spread of harmful information, and prevent criminals from hiding through anonymity. But privacy advocates are quick to point out the flaws. All these companies, gathering photos of ID cards, real names and other PII data, are ripe for fraud and impersonation. We all know how often companies get hacked, and already Discord suffered the first high-profile age-verification hack where real names and photo IDs were hacked and spread through the dark web recently, and it's unlikely to be the last. Then there's the fact that anonymity is a crucial part of any journalist's job, dissidents in authoritarian regimes, and whistleblowers.

Again, we see the different parties take an all or nothing approach. While disinformation and cyber attacks have become massive issues, especially with the help of AI, the current panic at the state level is not serving the public good. Common-sense methods could involve better parenting, better education, or new filtering algorithms but instead we see governments openly talking about banning anonymity, VPNs and even encryption altogether.


A bleak future?

The path may seem bleak in such a future of extremes. We're quickly living in a world where every issue becomes a battlefield, where nuance is dismissed as weakness, and where polarization replaces problem-solving. In a world dominated by binary thinking, we risk more than just unproductive debates. We risk eroding the foundations of trust, collaboration, and shared progress. Political divisions will deepen to the point where governance becomes gridlock. Technological progress, like AI, will be either blindly adopted or prematurely rejected, leaving us unprepared either way. And privacy? It may quietly vanish under the guise of protection, until anonymity and autonomy are relics of the past.

But there are things we can do to combat this future, and contribute to a healthy society:

I don't imagine my single voice will change much of anything, but the future doesn't have to be bleak. I refuse to engage with those who ferment pointless debates, and I still believe in considering every issue on its merits. All I can do is encourage you to do the same.