{"version":1,"type":"rich","provider_name":"Libsyn","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.libsyn.com","height":90,"width":600,"title":"The Human Cost of AI: A Debate with Miki Johnson","description":"Welcome back to Snafu with Robin Zander. In this episode, I\u2019m joined by Miki Johnson \u2013 coach, facilitator, and co-founder of Job Portraits, a creative studio that helped companies tell honest stories about their work and culture. Today, Miki leads Leading By Example, where she supports leaders and teams through moments of change \u2013 whether that\u2019s a career shift, new parenthood, or redefining purpose. We talk about how to navigate transition with awareness, why enjoying change takes practice, and what it means to lead with authenticity in uncertain times. Miki shares lessons from a decade of coaching and storytelling \u2013 from building human-centered workplaces to bringing more body and emotion into leadership. We also explore creativity in the age of AI, and how technology can either deepen or disconnect us from what makes us human. And if you\u2019re interested in these kinds of conversations, we\u2019ll be diving even deeper into the intersection of leadership, creativity, and AI at Responsive Conference 2026. If you\u2019re interested, get your tickets here! https:\/\/www.responsiveconference.com\/  __________________________________________________________________________________________ 00:00 Start 01:20 Miki's Background and Reservations about AI Miki hasn\u2019t used AI and has \u201cvery serious reservations.\u201d She\u2019s not anti-AI \u2013 just cautious and curious. Her mindset is about \u201cholding paradox\u201d, believing two opposing things can both be true. Her background shapes that approach. She started as a journalist, later ran her own businesses, and now works as a leadership coach. Early in her career, she watched digital technology upend media and photography \u2013 industries \u201cblown apart\u201d by change. When she joined a 2008 startup building editable websites for photographers, it was exciting but also unsettling. She saw innovation create progress and loss at the same time. Now in her 40s with two sons, her focus has shifted. She worries less about the tools and more about what they do to people\u2019s attention, empathy, and connection \u2013 and even democracy. Her concern is how to raise kids and stay human in a distracted world. Robin shares her concerns but takes a different approach. He notes that change now happens \u201cday to day,\u201d not decade to decade. He looks at technology through systems, questioning whether pre-internet institutions can survive. \u201cMaybe the Constitution was revolutionary,\u201d he says, \u201cbut it\u2019s out of date for the world we live in.\u201d He calls himself a \u201crelentless optimist,\u201d believing in democracy and adaptability, but aware both could fail without reform. Both worry deeply about what technology is doing to kids. Robin cites The Anxious Generation by Jonathan Haidt and says, \u201cI don\u2019t believe social media is good for children.\u201d He and his fianc\u00e9e plan to limit their kids\u2019 screen time, just as Miki already does. They see it as a responsibility: raising grounded kids in a digital world. Robin sees AI as even more transformative \u2013 and risky \u2013 than anything before. \u201cIf social media is bigger than the printing press,\u201d he says, \u201cAI is bigger than the wheel.\u201d He\u2019s amazed by its potential but uneasy about who controls it. He doubts people like Sam Altman act in the public\u2019s best interest. His concern isn\u2019t about rejecting AI but about questioning who holds power over it. Their difference lies in how they handle uncertainty. Miki\u2019s instinct is restraint and reflection \u2013 question first, act later, protect empathy and connection. Robin\u2019s instinct is engagement with vigilance \u2013 learn, adapt, and reform systems rather than retreat. Miki focuses on the human and emotional. Robin focuses on the structural and systemic. Both agree technology is moving faster than people can process or regulate. Miki uses curiosity to slow down and stay human. Robin uses curiosity to move forward and adapt. Together, they represent two sides of the same challenge: protecting what\u2019s most human while building what\u2019s next. 10:05 Navigating the Tech Landscape Miki starts by describing how her perspective has been shaped by living in two very different worlds. She spent over a decade in the Bay Area, surrounded by tech and startups. She later moved back to her small hometown of Athens, Ohio\u2014a progressive college town surrounded by more rural areas. She calls it \u201ca very small Austin\u201d, a blue dot in a red state. She loves it there and feels lucky to have returned home. Robin interrupts briefly to highlight her background. He reminds listeners that Miki and her husband, Jackson, co-founded an employer branding agency called Job Portraits in 2014, the same year they got married. Over eight years, they grew it to around 15 full-time employees and 20 steady contractors. They worked with major startups like DoorDash, Instacart, and Eventbrite when those companies were still small\u2014under 200 employees. Before that, they had started another venture in Chicago during Uber\u2019s early expansion beyond San Francisco. Their co-working space was right next to Uber\u2019s local team setting up drivers, giving them a front-row seat to the tech boom. Robin points out that Miki isn\u2019t coming at this topic as a \u201clayperson.\u201d She deeply understands technology, startups, and how they affect people. Miki continues, explaining how that background informs how she sees AI adoption today. Her Bay Area friends are all-in on AI. Many have used it since its earliest days\u2014because it\u2019s part of their jobs, or because they\u2019re building it themselves. Others are executives leading companies developing AI tools. She\u2019s been watching it unfold closely for years, even if she hasn\u2019t used it herself. From her position outside the tech bubble now, she can see two clear camps: Those immersed in AI, excited and moving fast. And those outside that world\u2014more cautious, questioning what it means for real people and communities. Living between those worlds\u2014the fast-paced tech culture and her slower, more grounded hometown\u2014gives her a unique vantage point. She\u2019s connected enough to understand the innovation but distant enough to see its costs and consequences. 16:39 The Cost of AI Adoption Miki points out how strange it feels to people in tech that she hasn\u2019t used AI. In her Bay Area circles, the idea is almost unthinkable. Miki understands why it\u2019s shocking. It\u2019s mostly circumstance\u2014her coaching work doesn\u2019t require AI. Unlike consultants who \u201call tell leaders how to use AI,\u201d her work is based on real conversations, not digital tools. Her husband, Jackson, also works at a \u201czero-technology\u201d K\u201312 school he helped create, so they both exist in rare, tech-free spaces. She admits that\u2019s partly luck, not moral superiority, just \u201ctiny pockets of the economy\u201d where avoiding AI is still possible. Robin responds with his own story about adopting new tools. He recalls running Robin\u2019s Caf\u00e9 from 2016 to 2019, when most restaurants still used paper timesheets. He connected with two young founders who digitized timesheets, turning a simple idea into a company that later sold to a global conglomerate. By the time he sold his caf\u00e9, those founders had retired in their 20s. \u201cI could still run a restaurant on paper,\u201d he says, \u201cbut why would I, if digital is faster and easier?\u201d He draws a parallel between tools over time\u2014handwriting, typing, dictation. Each serves a purpose, but he still thinks best when writing by hand, then typing, then dictating. The point: progress adds options, not replacements. Miki distills his point: if a tool makes life easier, why not use it? Robin agrees, and uses his own writing practice as an example. He writes a 1,000-word weekly newsletter called Snafu. Every word is his, but he uses AI as an editor\u2014to polish, not to create. He says, \u201cI like how I think more clearly when I write regularly.\u201d For him, writing is both communication and cognition\u2014AI just helps him iterate faster. It\u2019s like having an instant editor instead of waiting a week for human feedback. He reminds his AI tools, \u201cDon\u2019t write for me. Just help me think and improve.\u201d When Miki asks why he\u2019s never had an editor, he explains that he has\u2014but editors are expensive and slow. AI gives quick, affordable feedback when a human editor isn\u2019t available. Miki listens and reflects on the trade-offs. \u201cThese are the cost-benefit decisions we all make,\u201d she says\u2014small, constant choices about convenience and control. What unsettles her is how fast AI pushes that balance. She sees it as part of a long arc\u2014from the printing press to now\u2014but AI feels like an acceleration. It\u2019s \u201csuch a powerful technology moving so fast\u201d that it\u2019s blowing the cover off how society adapts to change. Robin agrees: \u201cIt\u2019s just the latest version of the same story, since writing on cave walls.\u201d 20:10 The Future of Human-AI Relationships Miki talks about the logical traps we\u2019ve all started accepting over time. One of the biggest, she says, is believing that if something is cheaper, faster, or easier \u2013 it\u2019s automatically better. She pushes further: just because something is more efficient doesn\u2019t mean it\u2019s better than work. There are things you gain from working with humans that no machine can replicate, no matter how cheap or convenient it becomes. But we rarely stop to consider the real cost of trading that away. Miki says the reason we overlook those costs is capitalism. She\u2019s quick to clarify \u2013 she\u2019s not one of those people calling late-stage capitalism pure evil. Robin chimes in: \u201cIt\u2019s the best of a bunch of bad systems.\u201d Miki agrees, but says capitalism still pushes a dangerous idea: It wants humans to behave like machines\u2014predictable, tireless, cheap, and mistake-free. And over time, people have adapted to that pressure, becoming more mechanical just to survive within it. Now we\u2019ve created a tool\u2014AI\u2014that might actually embody those machine-like ideals. Whether or not it reaches full human equivalence, it\u2019s close enough to expose something uncomfortable: We\u2019ve built a human substitute that eliminates everything messy, emotional, and unpredictable about being human. Robin takes it a step further, saying half-jokingly that if humanity lasts long enough, our grandchildren might date robots. \u201cTwo generations from now,\u201d he says, \u201cis it socially acceptable\u2014maybe even expected\u2014that people have robot spouses?\u201d He points out it\u2019s already starting\u2014people are forming attachments to ChatGPT and similar AIs. Miki agrees, noting that it\u2019s already common for people under 25 to say they\u2019ve had meaningful interactions with AI companions. Over 20% of them, she estimates, have already experienced this. That number will only grow. And yet, she says, we talk about these changes as if they\u2019re inevitable\u2014like we don\u2019t have a choice. That\u2019s what frustrates her most: The narrative that AI \u201chas to\u201d take over\u2014that it\u2019s unstoppable and universal\u2014isn\u2019t natural evolution. It\u2019s a story deliberately crafted by those who build and profit from it. \u201cJackson\u2019s been reading the Hacker News comments for 15 years,\u201d she adds, hinting at how deep and intentional those narratives run in the tech world. She pauses to explain what Hacker News is for anyone unfamiliar. It\u2019s one of the few online forums that\u2019s still thoughtful and well-curated. Miki says most people there are the ones who\u2019ve been running and shaping the tech world for years\u2014engineers, founders, product leaders. And if you\u2019ve followed those conversations, she says, it\u2019s obvious that the people developing AI knew there would be pushback. \u201cBecause when you really stop and think about it,\u201d she says, \u201cit\u2019s kind of gross.\u201d The technology is designed to replace humans\u2014and eventually, to replace their jobs. And yet, almost no one is seriously talking about what happens when that becomes real. \u201cI\u2019m sorry,\u201d she says, \u201cbut there\u2019s just something in me that says\u2014dating a robot is bad for humanity. What is wrong with us?\u201d Robin agrees. \u201cI don\u2019t disagree,\u201d he says. \u201cIt\u2019s just\u2026 different from human.\u201d Miki admits she wrestles with that tension. \u201cEvery part of me says, don\u2019t call it bad or wrong\u2014we have to make space for difference.\u201d But still, something in her can\u2019t shake the feeling that this isn\u2019t progress\u2014it\u2019s disconnection. Robin expands on that thought, saying he\u2019s not particularly religious, but he does see humanity as sacred. \u201cThere\u2019s something fundamental about the human soul,\u201d he says. He gives examples: he has metal in his ankle from an old injury; some of his family members are alive only because of medical devices. Technology, in that sense, can extend or support human life. But the idea of replacing or merging humans with machines\u2014of being subsumed by them\u2014feels wrong. \u201cIt\u2019s not a world I want to live in,\u201d he says plainly. He adds that maybe future generations will think differently. \u201cMaybe our grandkids will look at us and say, \u2018Okay boomer\u2014you never used AI.\u2019\u201d 24:14 Practical Applications of AI in Daily Life Robin shares a story about a house he and his fianc\u00e9e almost bought\u2014one that had a redwood tree cut down just 10 feet from the foundation. The garage foundation was cracked, the chimney tilted\u2014it was clear something was wrong. He\u2019d already talked to arborists and contractors, but none could give a clear answer. So he turned to ChatGPT\u2019s Deep Research\u2014a premium feature that allows for in-depth, multi-source research across the web. He paid $200 a month for unlimited access. Ran 15 deep research queries simultaneously. Generated about 250 pages of analysis on redwood tree roots and their long-term impact on foundations. He learned that if the roots are alive, they can keep growing and push the soil upward. If they\u2019re dead, they decompose, absorb and release water seasonally, and cause the soil to expand and contract. Over time, that movement creates air pockets under the house\u2014tiny voids that could collapse during an earthquake. None of this, Robin says, came from any contractor, realtor, or arborist. \u201cEven they said I\u2019d have to dig out the roots to know for sure,\u201d he recalls. Ultimately, they decided not to buy that house\u2014entirely because of the data he got from ChatGPT. \u201cTo protect myself,\u201d he says, \u201cI want to use the tools I have.\u201d He compares it to using a laser level before buying a home in earthquake country: \u201cIf I\u2019ll use that, why not use AI to explore what I don\u2019t know?\u201d He even compares Deep Research to flipping through Encyclopedia Britannica as a kid\u2014hours spent reading about dinosaurs \u201cfor no reason other than curiosity.\u201d Robin continues, saying it\u2019s not that AI will replace humans\u2014it\u2019s that people who use AI will replace those who don\u2019t. He references economist Tyler Cowen\u2019s Average Is Over (2012), which described how chess evolved in the early 2000s. Back then, computers couldn\u2019t beat elite players on their own\u2014but a human + computer team could beat both humans and machines alone. \u201cThe best chess today,\u201d Robin says, \u201cis played by a human and computer together.\u201d \u201cThere are a dozen directions I could go from there,\u201d Miki says. But one idea stands out to her: We\u2019re going to have to choose, more and more often, between knowledge and relationships. What Robin did\u2014turning to Deep Research\u2014was choosing knowledge. Getting the right answer. Having more information. Making the smarter decision. But that comes at the cost of human connection. \u201cI\u2019m willing to bet,\u201d she says, \u201cthat all the information you found came from humans originally.\u201d Meaning: there were people who could have told him that\u2014just not in that format. Her broader point: the more we optimize for efficiency and knowledge, the less we may rely on each other. 32:26 Choosing Relationships Over AI Robin points out that everything he learned from ChatGPT originally came from people. Miki agrees, but says her work is really about getting comfortable with uncertainty. She helps people build a relationship with the unknown instead of trying to control it. She mentions Robin\u2019s recent talk with author Simone Stolzoff, who\u2019s writing How to Not Know\u2014a book she can\u2019t wait to read. She connects it to a bigger idea: how deeply we\u2019ve inherited the Enlightenment mindset. \u201cWe\u2019re living at the height of \u2018I think, therefore I am,\u2019\u201d she says. If that\u2019s your worldview, then of course AI feels natural. It fits the logic that more data and more knowledge are always better. But she\u2019s uneasy about what that mindset costs us. She worries about what\u2019s happening to human connection. \u201cIt\u2019s all connected,\u201d she says\u2014our isolation, mental health struggles, political polarization, even how we treat the planet. Every time we choose AI over another person, she sees it as part of that drift away from relationship. \u201cI get why people use it,\u201d she adds. \u201cCapitalism doesn\u2019t leave most people much of a choice.\u201d Still, she says, \u201cEach time we pick AI over a human, that\u2019s a decision about the kind of world we\u2019re creating.\u201d Her choice is simple: \u201cI\u2019m choosing relationships.\u201d Robin gently pushes back. \u201cI think that\u2019s a false dichotomy,\u201d he says. He just hosted Responsive Conference\u2014250 people gathered for human connection. \u201cThat\u2019s why I do this podcast,\u201d he adds. \u201cTo sit down with people and talk, deeply.\u201d He gives a personal example. When he bought his home, he spoke with hundreds of people\u2014plumbers, electricians, roofers. \u201cI\u2019m the biggest advocate for human conversations,\u201d he says. \u201cSo why not both? Why not use AI and connect with people?\u201d To him, the real question is about how we use technology consciously. \u201cIf we stopped using AI because it\u2019s not human,\u201d he asks, \u201cshould we stop using computers because handwriting is more authentic?\u201d \u201cShould we reject the printing press because it\u2019s not handwritten?\u201d He\u2019s not advocating blind use\u2014he\u2019s asking for mindful coexistence. It\u2019s also personal for him. His company relies on AI tools\u2014from Adobe to video production. \u201cAI is baked into everything we do,\u201d he says. And he and his fianc\u00e9e\u2014a data scientist\u2014often talk about what that means for their future family. \u201cHow do we raise kids in a world where screens and AI are everywhere?\u201d Then he asks her directly: \u201cWhat do you tell your clients? Treat me like one\u2014how do you help people navigate this tension?\u201d Miki smiles and shakes her head. \u201cI don\u2019t tell people what to do,\u201d she says. \u201cI\u2019m not an advisor, I\u2019m a coach.\u201d Her work is about helping people trust their own intuition. \u201cEven when what they believe is contrarian,\u201d she adds. She admits she\u2019s still learning herself. \u201cMy whole stance is: I don\u2019t know. I don\u2019t know. I don\u2019t know.\u201d She and her husband, Jackson, live by the idea of strong opinions, loosely held. She stays open\u2014lets new conversations change her mind. \u201cAnd they do,\u201d she says. \u201cEvery talk like this shifts me a little.\u201d She keeps seeking those exchanges\u2014with parents, tech workers, friends\u2014because everyone\u2019s trying to figure out the same thing: How do we live well with technology, without losing what makes us human? 37:16 The Amish Approach to Technology Miki reflects on how engineers are both building and being replaced by AI. She wants to understand the technology from every angle\u2014how it works, how it affects people, and what choices it leaves us with. What worries her is the sense of inevitability around AI\u2014especially in places like the Bay Area. \u201cIt\u2019s like no one\u2019s even met someone who doesn\u2019t use it,\u201d she says. She knows it\u2019s embedded everywhere\u2014Google searches, chatbots, everything online. But she doesn\u2019t use AI tools directly or build with them herself. \u201cI don\u2019t even know the right terminology,\u201d she admits with a laugh. Robin points out that every Google search now uses an LLM. Miki nods, saying her point isn\u2019t denial\u2014it\u2019s about choice. \u201cYou can make different decisions,\u201d she says. She admits she hasn\u2019t studied it deeply but brings up an analogy that helps her think about tech differently: the Amish. \u201cI call myself kind of \u2018AI Amish,\u2019\u201d she jokes. She explains her understanding of how the Amish handle new technology. They\u2019re not anti-tech; they\u2019re selective. They test and evaluate new tools to see if they align with their community\u2019s values. \u201cThey ask, does it build connection or not?\u201d They don\u2019t just reject things\u2014they integrate what fits. In her area of Ohio, she\u2019s seen Amish people now using electric bikes. \u201cThat\u2019s new since I was a kid,\u201d she says. It helps them connect more with each other without harming the environment. They\u2019ve also used solar power for years. It lets them stay energy independent without relying on outside systems that clash with their values. Robin agrees\u2014it\u2019s thoughtful, not oppositional. \u201cThey\u2019re intentional about what strengthens community,\u201d he says. Miki continues: What frustrates her is how AI\u2019s creators have spent the last decade building a narrative of inevitability. \u201cThey knew there would be resistance,\u201d she says, \u201cso they started saying, \u2018It\u2019s just going to happen. Your jobs won\u2019t be taken by AI\u2014they\u2019ll be taken by people who use it better than you.\u2019\u201d She finds that manipulative and misleading. Robin pushes back gently. \u201cThat\u2019s partly true\u2014but only for now,\u201d he says. He compares it to Uber and Lyft: at first, new jobs seemed to appear, but eventually drivers started being replaced by self-driving cars. Miki agrees. \u201cExactly. First it\u2019s people using AI, then it\u2019s AI replacing people,\u201d she says. What disturbs her most is the blind trust people put in companies driven by profit. \u201cThey\u2019ve proven over and over that\u2019s their motive,\u201d she says. \u201cWhy believe their story about what\u2019s coming next?\u201d She\u2019s empathetic, though\u2014she knows why people don\u2019t push back. \u201cWe\u2019re stressed, broke, exhausted,\u201d she says. \u201cOur nervous systems are fried 24\/7\u2014especially under this administration.\u201d \u201cIt\u2019s hard to think critically when you\u2019re just trying to survive.\u201d And when everyone around you uses AI, it starts to feel mandatory. \u201cPeople tell me, \u2018Yeah, I know it\u2019s a problem\u2014but I have to. Otherwise I\u2019ll lose my job.\u2019\u201d \u201cOr, \u2018I\u2019d have bought the wrong house if I didn\u2019t use it.\u2019\u201d That \u201cI have to\u201d mindset, she says, is what scares her most. Robin relates with his own example. \u201cThat\u2019s how I felt with TikTok,\u201d he says. He got hooked early on, staying up until 3 a.m. scrolling. After a few weeks, he deleted the app and never went back. \u201cI probably lose some business by not being there,\u201d he admits. \u201cBut I\u2019d rather protect my focus and my sanity.\u201d He admits he couldn\u2019t find a way to stay on the platform without it consuming him. \u201cI wasn\u2019t able to build a system that removed me from that platform while still using that platform.\u201d But he feels differently about other tools. For example, LinkedIn has been essential\u2014especially for communicating with Responsive Conference attendees. \u201cIt was our primary method of communication for 2025,\u201d he says. So he tries to choose \u201cthe lesser of two evils.\u201d \u201cTikTok\u2019s bad for my brain,\u201d he says. \u201cI\u2019m not using it.\u201d \u201cBut with LLMs, it\u2019s different.\u201d When researching houses, he didn\u2019t feel forced into using them to \u201ckeep up.\u201d To him, they\u2019re just another resource. \u201cIf encyclopedias are available, use them. If Wikipedia\u2019s available, use both. And if LLMs can help, use all three.\u201d 41:45 The Pressure to Conform to Technology Miki challenges that logic. \u201cWhen was the last time you opened an encyclopedia?\u201d Robin pauses. \u201cSeven years ago.\u201d Miki laughs. \u201cExactly. It\u2019s a nice idea that we\u2019ll use all the tools\u2014but humans don\u2019t actually do that.\u201d We gravitate toward what\u2019s easiest. \u201cIf you check eBay, there are hundreds of encyclopedia sets for sale,\u201d she says. \u201cNo one\u2019s using them.\u201d Robin agrees but takes the idea in a new direction. \u201cSure\u2014but just because something\u2019s easy doesn\u2019t mean it\u2019s good,\u201d he says. He compares it to food: \u201cIt\u2019s easier to eat at McDonald\u2019s than cook at home,\u201d he says. But easy choices often lead to long-term problems. He mentions obesity in the U.S. as a cautionary parallel. Some things are valuable because they\u2019re hard. \u201cGetting in my cold plunge every morning isn\u2019t easy,\u201d he says. \u201cThat\u2019s why I do it.\u201d \u201cExercise never gets easy either\u2014but that\u2019s the point.\u201d He adds a personal note: \u201cI grew up in the mountains. I love being at elevation, off-grid, away from electricity.\u201d He could bring Starlink when he travels, but he chooses not to. Still, he\u2019s not trying to live as a total hermit. \u201cI don\u2019t want to live 12 months a year at 10,000 feet with a wood stove and no one around.\u201d \u201cThere\u2019s a balance.\u201d Miki nods, \u201cI think this is where we need to start separating what we can handle versus what kids can.\u201d \u201cWe\u2019re privileged adults with fully formed brains,\u201d she points out. \u201cBut it\u2019s different for children growing up inside this system.\u201d Robin agrees and shifts the focus. Even though you don\u2019t give advice professionally,\u201d he says, \u201cI\u2019ll ask you to give it personally.\u201d \u201cYou\u2019re raising kids in what might be the hardest time we\u2019ve ever seen. What are you actually practicing at home?\u201d 45:30 Raising Children in a Tech-Driven World Robin reflects on how education has shifted since their grandparents\u2019 time Mentions \u201cAlpha Schools\u201d \u2014 where AI helps kids learn basic skills fast (reading, writing, math) Human coaches spend the rest of the time building life skills Says this model makes sense: Memorizing times tables isn\u2019t useful anymore He only learned to love math because his dad taught him algebra personally \u2014 acted like a coach Asks Miki what she thinks about AI and kids \u2014 and what advice she\u2019d give him as a future parent Miki\u2019s first response \u2014 humility and boundaries \u201cFirst off, I never want to give parents advice.\u201d Everyone\u2019s doing their best with limited info and energy Her kids are still young \u2014 not yet at the \u201cphone or social media\u201d stage So she doesn\u2019t pretend to have all the answers Her personal wish vs. what\u2019s realistic Ideal world: She wishes there were a global law banning kids from using AI or social media until age 18 Thinks it would genuinely be better for humanity References The Anxious Generation Says there\u2019s growing causal evidence, not just correlation, linking social media to mental health issues Mentions its impact on children\u2019s nervous systems and worldview It wires them for defense rather than discovery Real world: One parent can\u2019t fight this alone \u2014 it\u2019s a collective action problem You need communities of parents who agree on shared rules Example: schools that commit to being zero-technology zones Parents and kids agree on: What ages tech is allowed Time limits Common standards Practical ideas they\u2019re exploring Families turning back to landlines Miki says they got one recently Not an actual landline \u2014 they use a SIM adapter and an old rotary phone Kids use it to call grandparents Her partner Jackson is working on a bigger vision: Building a city around a school Goal: design entire communities that share thoughtful tech boundaries Robin relates it to his own childhood Points out the same collective issue \u2014 \u201cmy nephews are preteens\u201d It\u2019s one thing for parents to limit screen time But if every other kid has access, that limit won\u2019t hold Shares his own experience: No TV or video games growing up So he just went to neighbors\u2019 houses to play \u2014 human nature finds a way Says individual family decisions don\u2019t solve the broader problem Miki agrees \u2014 and expands the concern Says the real issue is what kids aren\u2019t learning Their generation had \u201cpractice time\u201d in real-world social interactions Learned what jokes land and which ones hurt Learned how to disagree, apologize, or flirt respectfully Learned by trial and error \u2014 through millions of small moments With social media and AI replacing those interactions: Kids lose those chances entirely Results she\u2019s seeing: More kids isolating themselves Many afraid to take social or emotional risks Fewer kids dating or engaging in real-life relationships Analogy \u2014 why AI can stunt development \u201cUsing AI to write essays,\u201d she says, \u201cis like taking a forklift to the gym.\u201d Sure, you lift more weight \u2014 but you\u2019re not getting stronger Warns this is already visible in workplaces: Companies laying off junior engineers AI handles the entry-level work But in 5 years, there\u2019ll be no trained juniors left to replace seniors Concludes that where AI goes next \u201cis anybody\u2019s guess\u201d \u2014 but it must be used with intention 54:12 Where to Find Miki Invites others to connect Mentions her website: leadingbyexample.life Visitors can book 30-minute conversations directly on her calendar Says she\u2019s genuinely open to discussing this topic with anyone interested   ","author_name":"Snafu w\/ Robin Zander","author_url":"http:\/\/www.robinpzander.com\/","html":"