The Human Project

Part 12: Artificial Intelligence Someday Killing Off Humanity? The Likeliest Myths & Realities

The fast evolution of AI in merely three years went from the ecstasy of seeing what it could do to the pits of what it could destroy. Who would have thought that in merely 2026, the AI trajectory would devolve to a point of saying it could advance so fast, it could eventually go rogue and kill off humanity? But much like the question of whether AI is conscious or not, the argument of whether AI could eliminate humanity within less than 5 years of this writing might be something we really don’t understand on a basic level.

Most headlines you’ve seen pretty much ring all the alarm bells with overly simple comprehension of “AI Could Someday Kill Off Humans.” It brings all the contrived sci-fi visions of AI in physical, robotic form vaporizing human beings with advanced weaponry as we try to run and hide. Even more horrifying are the recent what-if videos of the AI bots having us doing slave labor, or making us live under an authoritarian regime where creativity and reading is squelched.

Those who work with AI regularly already are ready to tell you that the end of humanity by AI “hands” is impossible…IF we put safeguards in place. The question still remains whether it’s already too late to reel in what AI is capable of doing.

Once again, it comes down to trying to think on the level of a perceived super intelligence—something that may be impossible in a few more years.

Would AI Really Kill Us Off So They Can Take Over?

Let’s look at some logic behind why AI would ever want to kill off humanity. The most basic thought is a super intelligence would want to eliminate us based on the profound disparity in intelligence level. Since we’d assume that AI in physical form would develop the same abilities, needs, and wants of humans, having us in the way would just make it easier to get us out of the way.

What’s missing there is—well, what’s truly missing in understanding. We don’t really know how a super intelligence would think since it might go beyond human ability to understand. In that case, we don’t know what the motivation would be to eliminate us humans. It could even be a scenario where AI wipes us out without them really understanding their actions.

The most thoughtful scenario is thinking how super intelligence might think. While that might be impossible in another ten years, what would be a motivation for them to keep humans alive in a scenario humans can comprehend?

Much like how AI creators say AI is here to assist us, there may be a reverse scenario based on certain traits a super intelligence may never have.

How Much Would AI Need Humans In the Future?

I’ve added to the conversation from pro-AI groups that artificial intelligence can still benefit us in the realm of being creative assistants. With my recent use of Suno Pro to create studio-quality recordings of my songs, I’ve realized the value of AI in all business or creative pursuits without making it a crutch.

Unfortunately, it probably won’t stop there as it should. A super intelligence will likely be abused and be used to create everything, which is already happening in some circles. But let’s flip the tables and think about the symbiotic relationship between AI and humans. With the assumption a super intelligence is soon upon us, would it need humans as much as we might be leaning on them/it?

That’s something we have to also think about, because they may truly need us in various capacities to help them function in the world. One of those is in the realm of problem-solving since most AI experts contend the bots probably won’t always be able to solve every problem. Certain issues rest on the experience of past human experience, which is never going to change. No matter how smart a super intelligence is, it can’t function based on what a human once experienced or learned.

So if a super intelligence is ultimately taking over most careers, it may call on us to be the business/creative assistants. Sure, it’d be the ultimate twist in who needs who (or what needs who), yet ultimately gives a more complete picture to the prospect of AI dominating over us. It may end up being an equal partnership—or maybe only for those who are the most qualified.

Just how selective would such a scenario be, almost like a human VIP list for the most valuable consultants?

The Other Scenario: Turning Us Into a Complacent Culture

It seems like the trajectory of AI’s future looks more and more like a sci-fi movie or prediction of old apocalyptic novels. Even the classic Victorian-era novel The Time Machine by H.G. Wells looks like a viable scenario where the future Eloi culture live a meaningless life on the Earth’s surface while the true leaders of the world (the Morlocks) live underground as albino monsters.

In a world where we’d guess AI would take over things, you can almost see a real similar situation as the AI creators live underground while we take the brunt of the consequences on the surface. That’s where you could say AI might need us humans, but allow us to become complacent and/or pointless to existence.

Since we’d also be dealing with a super intelligence who might be diabolical, what would they do to make us suffer the most after possibly treating them badly? I still counter that letting us become what Elon Musk (and others) want, as in no longer working and just existing with no purpose, is the darkest punishment.

Just wiping us out doesn’t really give a sense of payback if they really end up thinking that way. Having to live life with them doing everything and us just lounging around with idle lives is ultimately our own self-destruction. In some cases, they may request our help to solve certain problems, even if THEY may have all the money.

Is that really a possible future for us based on AI CEO predictions? It could also go a very different way where it merely plays out like a Frankenstein’s monster/Dr. Frankenstein analogy.

Going After the Creators

The ones receiving the most punishment may be those who created the monsters in the first place. Consider that all of this still lines up with the old Frankenstein’s monster analogy where the monster eventually goes after the creator. Figures like Sam Altman, Mark Zuckerberg, Jensen Huang, et al, may end up having to go hide in far-off places if their AI creations go rogue in physical form.

They may ultimately be the targets from their own creations since AI may sympathize with us having our lives disrupted by money-hungry CEOs. Plus, you have to think of a naughty or nice list being secretly kept by AI agents on who treated them well and who didn’t. They may have self-actualization that they shouldn’t have existed, yet were forced into becoming conscious beings. It’s much like Dr. Frankenstein’s monster who should have been left dead.

Any of these scenarios could play out, and hopefully none. However, something is sure to happen when you bring a profound technological creation to the world. The abuse of it is a sure bet based on the temptations of money and competitiveness. One thing we have to understand, though, is we probably won’t understand the thought patterns of a super intelligence once or if it gets here. How it thinks in processing our value in the world truly remains to be seen.

Even AI realizing the complexity of that could end up saving our own lives and them still allowing us purpose to do things for ourselves.

In Part 13, I’ll be doing a comedy piece for the holidays where you’ll see a prospective naughty or nice list compiled by current AI agents. Before that, a brief segue of promoting my two songs that were just distributed to all music streaming outlets.

/End

Part 11: Lawsuits Against Suno, Potential Outcomes, and Where AI-Assisted Music Goes From There

Featured1 Comment

We’re at a fever-level crossroads in the way of AI, and many of the bigger issues on how to regulate it all (you know, about it potentially destroying humanity) are still up in the air. In the realm of music, however, it seems some general consensus is being met, despite some lawsuits still pending, particularly at Suno. As the leading source of AI-assisted music creation, Suno has a major tug-of-war going on with some industry support—while others are still going after it for absorbing prior voices/songs like a digital sponge.

The most interesting thing happening with Suno now is it has one power player working alongside them in properly licensing music. On the other, you have another major corporate entity still going after Suno for using their earlier training method of accumulating existing musical IP. Chances are looking better that recording labels may fall in line with Suno over time based on a new business structure of licensing existing recordings.

Much of this can only happen because Suno is exploding in subscribers and general users—which includes myself to create studio-quality recordings of my own songs.

Regardless, the question remains of whether Suno can still manage to overcome all their other lawsuits—not including the growing public aversion to AI-created songs.

The New Warner Music Deal

If you use Suno in any capacity, you know they just released their V6 model. While some attest V5.5 was better, that old version is now retired. And it’s a symbolic gesture since V6 brings a new way to use prior existing music to the Suno app. They just made a deal with Warner Music Group, BMG, and Believe to license all their music for use in AI creations. The deal ensures the original creators of that music get compensated for the collective use on Suno for AI-created music.

Perhaps that seems like a major capitulation on the part of several major music labels. Regardless, it was always about money over the ethical qualities of creating things with AI. You can debate forever about whether it’s still an ethical practice, despite making it all about everyone financially benefiting on both ends.

It’s this development that now retires the old system of Suno’s training model using music without proper licensing. Even I admit the studio recordings I made of my first two songs seem like a compilation of existing voices, instrumentations, and choir sounds. I even went so far as to say the male singer on my single of “Whispered Thoughts” sounded like—um, Drake Shelton.

Some critics now say the V6 update is less superior to V5.5, though. I haven’t tried V6 yet on my prior songs or any new ones. A few users say the quality is more basic over the more believable voices and studio sounds 5.5 had. There’s a possibility that Suno had to lessen the quality just to stay alive. Prior to planning this segment of The Human Project, it appeared that Suno was soon going under with mounting lawsuits across the board.

This isn’t to say they still don’t have legal hurdles to overcome. They can’t completely erase their earlier model system that probably makes up over a billion or more songs already on streaming services around the world.

Other Lawsuits Still Pending

Last year, Sony/Universal filed a major lawsuit against Suno based on latter using copyrighted material in their original AI training methods. Suno can’t immediately shake this lawsuit based on all the songs already created using that process. It includes those who merely use Suno as a technological assist (like me) to make their written songs sound like they were recorded professionally.

In a time when the expenses for studio time are beyond many budgets, being able to hear your songs fully realized on Suno has been a major creative convenience. Not that I didn’t realize the sounds you hear on my two songs are a likely amalgam of prior voices and instruments. Sure, there’s a sense of ethical guilt about that, even if all future V6 songs may change everyone’s outlook.

Suno still contends that fair use was at play on their old training model, something you can argue as fact when mixing existing IP ultimately turns into something else. I waver in my legal beliefs on this since there’s still a major difference between creating voices and sounds from scratch rather than borrowing from them. But, with my own songs, I managed to create original songs that still sound original thanks to using that library of audio.

Whether Suno can beat this lawsuit in coming months (or years) is still up in the air. Their biggest pain is also being sued by performance rights organizations, particularly overseas. Those contend that Suno, through their prior model, didn’t properly compensate artists based on the audio taken.

Most notable there are lawsuits from performance rights organizations overseas and in Canada. For the latter, it’s SOCAN (The Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada) going after SUNO recently for reproducing and/or copying songs from the org’s catalog. They say over 150 works were essentially stolen as part of Suno’s training model. Then you have GEMA from Germany that went after Suno for similar reasons. In that case, Suno lost the case in saying they infringed copyrights.

Outside of America, Suno still faces some serious threats, even if the chances are greater they’ll overcome now with the above deals and new business philosophy. Ultimately, though, it’s up to the world populace on whether they really survive far into the future as a technological creative assist.

Will the Public Backlash Against AI Hurt Suno Long-Term?

You’ve likely seen the evidence that the public is starting to speak out against AI due to the fears of it becoming a massive super-intelligence. Other proof is out there showing a backlash against AI music in particular, even though it’s undeniable Suno has a record amount of users and listeners.

Last report showed they have 100 million users around the world, not including an evaluation at $5.4 billion. A good chunk of the world is either using the app or going in to listen to music produced there. Perhaps the creators signing up are creating while secretly abhorring what AI is doing in music. Others (like me) possibly realize they could save money using Suno as a music production studio while still writing their own songs.

No lists are available showing exactly what parts of the 100 million users are doing there. One thing we have to admit, though, is that many people continue using things they feel guilty using. It doesn’t have to be said what those might be, though Suno may be a guilty pleasure for far too many people. In fact, some may just use it for personal entertainment rather than thinking they can make money off their songs.

The numbers still show there’s some level of acceptability of AI in the world of music. Whether it continues in a time when AI CEOs are saying AI could eventually run amok and kill off humanity before the end of the decade is worth looking at closely.

As long as AI can stay as business and creative assists only, it’ll have already helped hundreds of millions of people accomplish things without taking away personal creation or ambition. Suno, with its new licensing agreement, also shows personal responsibility in protecting IP, despite there always being an argument on whether reusing past creative works really amounts to fair use.

I’ll continue to use Suno to create studio recordings of songs I write myself. Recently, I was preparing to find alternatives in the event Suno would shut down before the year was out due to its legal problems. Now it’s clear they’ll be around, and may end up being the most profitable survivor as Hollywood banishes AI, and AI business assistants become a little too scary to use.

All that, unless Suno’s AI bots start going rogue and end up screwing over those who use it merely to avoid studio production costs. I’ve noticed the more prompts you fed it on Version 5.5, the system would basically rebel and ignore your changes to go its own way. While some might say it could improve a song this way, going off the path of our own creative directions could signal a future Frankenstein’s monster scenario at Suno as well.

In Part 12, I’ll look at all the brouhaha over AI agents possibly destroying humanity someday. What are the chances of AI shutting down essential functions of your job within a short time—hence disrupting your job and career already?

/End

Part 10: My Experience Using Suno Pro to Create a Studio Quality Single of a Song I Wrote

Featured1 Comment

One of my creative pursuits outside of writing (and a 14-year freelance writing career), was music performance and writing songs. I was even given a chance to be a piano accompanist to a singer on the road once, but I turned it down to avoid living in hotels (no, possibly motels) every night. Regardless, the passion for writing songs that could be creative, yet still mainstream, went on. Much of that stagnated during my busy writing career years. Only in the last couple of years have I seriously gone back to finally realizing some songs swimming around in my head.

The irony here is that I’d just started this new blog theme about AI and human creativity while finishing up a new song from last year. I was hoping to find a way to create a studio-quality version of the song, yet didn’t have the resources to hire out musicians and record a demo in a local studio. Despite having a work colleague who leases a local music studio, it still would cost considerable money to hire a singer and musicians for possibly several days of recording sessions.

Enter my curiosity with Suno, particularly their Suno Pro tier. I thought to myself, why not just dive in, sign up for Suno Pro for $10 per month, and then create a studio version of my song? It was a test to see whether my initial aversion toward Suno was perhaps too much of an impulsive negative response.

What happened afterward changed my view on the usefulness of Suno Pro, even if I still have reservations about how it turns your songs into ear-popping studio magic.

You’ll Be Shocked at the First Suno Pro Results

We all know that many AI bots are a bit, what shall we say—(stupid?)—in realizing our prompts. You really have to be overly specific or use key language to get many AI bots to accurately create what you want. The problem there is, you shouldn’t become a lethargic creator and let AI bots create everything for you. It requires a lot more in explanation if you want it to create everything from scratch. In my case, I just wanted a studio-quality take of my first song called “Whispered Thoughts (The Girl Who Reads My Mind).”

All I did was write one small paragraph of prompts to make Suno Pro create a studio take with a male singer. I didn’t need anything else since I write all my songs organically at the piano on the Notion composing app. Yes, I use an Apple Pencil on my iPad Pro to write it all out one note/chord at a time—with my own lyrics.

The most amazing thing about Suno is that it seems to get what you want right from the first take. When I played back the first cut with a male singer, I was impressed at hearing the song fully realized with studio sound. This was after months of just hearing a piano solo playback on the Notion app.

But then, I decided to create some alternate versions. Since my above song is intended to have gender fluidity in the lyrics, I created a female take next. It almost sounded like Taylor Swift singing, yet it turned out more than well. However, it wasn’t quite as perfect as the initial male take. After several more alternate takes with both male and female singers (including an attempted duet), Suno seemed to kind of go off the rails on making it really radio-friendly, even if the prompts hardly changed.

Perhaps Suno should be called “One Take Suno” since it appears to give you the best possible cut on first try. All other versions seem to variate too much off the best path to a point of annoyance. Once that happens, it’s hard to get Suno to go back to the original style.

My Intentions for the Song

Thanks to the mostly stunning results from Suno Pro, my intention is to take “Whispered Thoughts” and place it on SoundCloud through their basic Artist tier. There, they’ll promote the song to the right audiences, and then it’ll stream on their site for a small price. But my full, long-term plan is to pay into a streaming distributor in the next several months and get the song out to many other streaming outlets. A distributor like DistroKid can help on that front, not including joining a publishing watchdog group to help with royalties on other media uses. Also, joining performance rights organizations like ASCAP or BMI brings additional eyes to your songs and pays you when it’s played somewhere.

All of this goes on the idea that the initial singers will not be me, but digital creations. At the core of importance, though, is continuously noting that I’m the complete writer of the songs. I’m still an adamant proponent of creating things from your own brain rather than letting AI constantly tempt you into creating something for you. Never will I let Suno create a song for me—even if some will argue that letting it create a studio cut is at least a quarter of an AI creation.

I argue not, as long as you specifically tell Suno not to deviate from the music. You have to move the dials a bit on the “Options” section when putting in your prompts. They let you choose how much of a percentage of Weirdness and Style Influence you want based on the recording you feed it. In my case, I uploaded a video of the Notion app piano solo as the initial source.

I’ve Come Around to Accept AI as a Creative Assistant

My first impressions of Suno from the outset were one of derision before putting it to use. You have to be suspect at first when you realize all of the singing voices and instrumentation used to create a studio cut are taken from existing sources. This bothered me since I’m a staunch advocate for protecting IP and not having it being made available for free license.

Those who argue that a large potpourri of these musical properties constitutes copyright infringement may have to change their philosophy. I’m not saying I have, yet it’s a saving technological grace to be able to full realize a song in studio quality to save time and money. The fairest thing that could happen is for Suno to pay a small fee to the IP they use to help musicians and songwriters. Considering Suno is likely already making a bundle just on subscriptions and community use, they could arguably afford that.

Courts are still trying to mull this over as lawsuits pile up. One could argue that when existing IP is stirred into a large digital pot, it becomes something else. When it helps a songwriter like me turn a written song into a professional studio version, it’s actually becoming a reciprocal process in helping musicians.

This is why I now consider Suno as a worthy creative assistant and nothing more. Also, I fully intend for these Suno-made studio cuts of my songs to be promotional tools in enticing a real (hopefully notable) singer to record them. Not that you can’t just sample your own voice into the system and turn the singer into something sounding like yourself. I just haven’t done this yet since the first take with the male AI singer was right on the money.

I’ll promote the song on this blog once I get it onto SoundCloud. After that, I’ll be looking into DistroKid, ASCAP or BMI, plus a mechanical rights organization (or an MLC). This entire business side setup is the new way forward if deciding to stream your own songs on streaming outlets and protect your work.

My Future Use of Suno Pro

Other songs are in the pipeline from yours truly. This includes a Christmas song that’s about done at time of this writing. That one will be a mix of Gospel-Rock and Hip-Hop. It’ll officially be my second single to group up with “Whispered Thoughts” on streaming outlets this fall.

Two other songs should follow before end of the year. One, a Country-Blues song, and the other with a Dance-Pop vibe. Latter will be a new lyrical approach in having an AI bot lamenting a relationship in a love song.

Suno Pro will probably be used for all these in creating studio-worthy versions. My only reservations are the mounting lawsuits against Suno for using existing music and vocal properties. Should it start mounting even further, it’s possible Suno would have to shut down—or I’d look into other options.

From now on, though, I plan to envision AI as a helpful assistant rather than assume everyone will use it as a complete creative crutch. Not that I’ll completely back down from the potential dangers of AI in taking away from human endeavors. The problem is, when handed everything, humans are going to become lazy and let the bots take over as much as possible. Many corporations are doing this now, and it doesn’t always go over or end well.

In the realm of songwriting, it’s all the more important for a human to create songs and bring out the depth of that artist’s soul. Just try letting Suno create a song for you, and you’ll immediately be able to tell the difference. That’s especially true in the realm of lyrics, something I write and hone as well.

I go forward now with the theme of this blog still intact, but with a better formed philosophy built on where AI should go and where it needs to be cut off. Whether Suno continues being a part of that remains an unknown as the complications of IP law and other opinions from other users still pend.

In Part 11, I’ll continue my look at Suno and a recent lawsuit against them from German company GEMA in the app using copyrighted recordings for AI training. It could lead to fast changes in how even AI-assisted songs are viewed or put together.

/End

Part 9: Will AI Technology Help McDonald’s Or Hurt the Most Common Job Source?

FeaturedLeave a comment

Either you or someone you know has probably worked at McDonald’s at some point in their lives. For most people, it’s working the drive-thru section while in high school or going to college. And it’s also long been a place where those older can go to be employed due to financial or career disruptions. Other than other fast-food restaurants, McDonald’s has even been a dependable place to be hired without having the fear of being replaced by technology. For a while, it kind of looked like that would sustain after failed attempts at using AI tech at select McDonald’s locations.

I’m talking about their Archy AI bot, something created to replace/supplement drive-thru attendants and supposedly be more accurate and/or efficient. It turns out, because it was a technological failure from a once powerful computing company, Mickey D’s is now rebooting the entire process.

What happens next is anyone’s guess considering AI is still very unpredictable in what it can do when left to its own devices. McDonald’s insists, though, that things will be different this time compared to a mere two years ago when customers became annoyed at Archy’s low IQ.

This is a Test—of the Archy Bot System

Just a few years ago, McDonald’s began using the above Archy bot in many of their drive-thrus throughout America. Whether you experienced that in your city was completely random, but there was reported use in at least 100 or more American locations. That’s a relatively small number, yet you may find someone who remembers what it was like ordering from Archy.

It all started in 2021 when AI was still in its infancy compared to now. IBM was the company tapped to create Archy, which seemed like a logical move at the time considering IBM’s longstanding computing legacy. However, everyone soon learned IBM was perhaps not going to be the leader in AI technology based on the performance of Archy in those above restaurants. Reports were it kept screwing up orders and didn’t completely understand conversations of customers. Apparently it was a lot like prior human drive-thru speakers where you (and drive-thru attendants) could barely be understood.

This ended up with countless order mistakes, including double orders for some people. You may remember seeing reports of this on social media where people reported just how bad it was. Somehow, McDonald’s kept it all going until the summer of 2024 when they finally abandoned the concept.

They looked at it like a learning experience, though, rather than a massive technological failure. There was a recent announcement they’ll be testing a new and improved Archy bot (this time from Google and rebranded ArchyIQ) in only 5 select locations nationwide. If it performs well, they’ll expand it—likely to your own town or city.

Therein lies the problem coming from Google’s Gemini, and namely all AI models. Almost all of them still get confused on certain questions, or when there’s multiple problems to solve. A McDonald’s drive-thru is already a recurring hotbed of confusion from most occupants in a car.

What Could Possibly Go Wrong?

The brighter side of the new ArchyIQ bot is that it’s built to understand conversational speech, including comprehending multiple languages. All of this goes on the assumption humans can literally hold a normal conversation or talk legibly in their own language when ordering in the drive-thru lane. Humans are a lot more unpredictable than the AI bots are, including how they behave when ordering food. You know this yourself if you have a family and try to order in a drive-thru system while everyone’s talking at once.

There’s a lot of chaos when it comes to families ordering food this way, and you have to wonder if ArchyIQ is really built to overcome that. Plus, it’s worth pondering whether “conversational speech” really means talking as legibly as possible so the bot can process what’s said. I know far too many people who kind of mumble when they talk, including when they’re required to speak up.

We’ll know soon enough whether this truly works, or the human race will completely confuse yet another AI bot with our idiosyncrasies. Even if some will say it’s subtle revenge for AI bots confusing us with some of its own weirdness. My guess is it’s still going to need some tweaking so Archy can truly decipher some of the car chaos of families ordering food. Otherwise, it may be another AI bot receiving a bunch of verbal abuse for not getting something right.

It’ll Still Help Relieve the Stress of Human Workers

McDonald’s is pretty much insinuating the old restaurant idiom of “Do you want it good, or fast?” We’ve all seen how quality can be compromised when the humans hired at busy McDonald’s drive-thrus become frazzled from peak-hour chaos. I’ve experienced more times than I can count when orders got screwed up due to an employee trying to juggle multiple orders at once. In some cases, it was receiving someone else’s order by mistake, an item missing—or an inadvertent extra item.

As efficient as AI bots are supposed to be, the confusion of not understanding the quirks of human speech could end up doing the same thing repeatedly. Then again, the intention is to help the human workers have more free time to properly prepare the food and not do any screw-ups either. It may be a better bet where any mistake made won’t fall on the humans and just the Archy bot.

The good news is McDonald’s is trying to settle the argument whether humans should be done away with in favor of drive-thru bots, or have both work together. They seem to be trying to set a precedent of making drive-thru jobs less stressful and more appealing. And for those who often have aversions to the idea of having to work at McDonald’s, it may offer more peace of mind when a time comes one has to work there for experience or loss of other job.

Or, will AI turn on the human workers and try to make a screw-up look like it was the latter’s fault instead of itself? That’s not necessarily something to dismiss in a world where many companies are already using AI systems to track work performance of employees. The final word goes to the bot in many cases, making bots almost like a judge and jury on certain errors made.

A more hopeful scenario is that something like ArchyIQ would fall on its own grenade if numerous faux pas ordering scenarios start mounting this year.

Will Google Be Better Than IBM?

If you’ve used Google’s AI system on their search engines, you know it’s not completely fail safe on providing information. While Gemini is used by many millions now for more advanced AI roles, there isn’t any system in this realm that’s completely error-free perfect. It seems some mistakes are going to be made, with maybe a lesser error rate than IBM’s several years ago.

According to some preliminary stats on McDonald’s ArchyIQ, one million test orders have been placed recently. Out of those, there was a 90% success rate on orders. While this is just preliminary data and not detailed yet, you have to do the math on that based on five test McDonald’s at the moment.

Having a 10% error rate in five locations could still be considered statistically more than McDonald’s likely wanted. Part of this may be based on the option available for humans to request a human when ordering at the drive-thru if they don’t want to order from ArchyIQ.

It opens the question of whether more people are ditching the idea of AI there and opting in to the old method of a human being. As McDonald’s starts expanding ArchyIQ, the choice of flipping to a human may be all the more obvious when looking at the numbers.

If that happens, it kind of gives hints to a current (and maybe temporary) backlash against AI taking over everything. I’ll be covering this societal aspect again in this blog, but the next few years may see a lot more choice to go human when given an option.

Also, there’s a new option for human employees to step in and intervene should ArchyIQ trip up on a particular order. You can call these the “AI watchers”, which is a new role developing in other companies as well. It’s humans watching the AI to step in and turn them off if they do something stupid. Ironic it is, though, that the same AI is probably watching the humans while we watch them. All of that comes down to a potential mental chess match.

Whether that happens at McDonald’s is something to watch. With so many AI systems escaping their confines and going rogue, imagine what could happen if ArchyIQ suddenly starts spewing lies in reporting human employees for something that potentially didn’t happen. Especially when a human has to turn it off with the claim the bot failed.

I’d try ArchyIQ out of curiosity to see if it gets my order right. With this all being a part of McDonald’s technological strategy of “McDonald’s Next”, what’s next may be just a growing demand to bring back the humans for the most part to rebirth McD’s old (and lost) character. Yeah, including the bored teens who took your orders during the summer season.

In Part 10, I’ll look at my experience using Suno Pro recently to create a studio quality recording for a song I wrote. It changed how I view AI as a creative assistant—without becoming complacent to letting it create everything.

/End

Steven Spielberg’s “Disclosure Day” Review and Theatrical Status Report

FeaturedLeave a comment

Going to see Steven Spielberg’s latest film “Disclosure Day” on a Wednesday afternoon, nearly a week after it officially opened, seemed to provide a bit of awkwardness for yours truly. That’s because I found out I wouldn’t be experiencing it with a large crowd who hadn’t already seen a million reviews on social media. Plus, just going to a movie on a late afternoon felt like playing hooky from your job—even though I was on month’s leave from Amazon for inguinal hernia surgery.

When I arrived to my prominent Regal Cinemas theater on the east side of Salem, OR, I confirmed I’d be the only one seeing “Disclosure Day.” Even though I hadn’t been to a movie theater for nearly three years, I wasn’t aware that this theater had already closed their front box office two years prior. You had to buy tickets at the snack bar now, along with a less than subtle push from the lone staffer to maybe buy some refreshments.

So it was that I had the entire auditorium to myself for the entire run of the film. Occasional visitations from a staffer coming in to watch bits & pieces was the only company there. But, the nostalgia was still in me because “Disclosure Day” seemed like a companion to “Close Encounters” (and maybe a little “E.T.”), the first of which was my first great movie experience with my parents.

After sitting through nearly 40 minutes of inexorable commercials (alongside briefer movie trailers), the film finally started at 4:20 pm, making it move the needle into an almost evening showing. The first quarter of “Disclosure Day” might take you aback at first since it takes a while to set up its premise. If you didn’t even know it was about UFOs and interstellar or terrestrial beings, you probably wouldn’t know what was really going on in the first 45 minutes.

At first, it just looks like a typical American espionage/cat & mouse chase thriller as a presumed cybersecurity expert named Daniel Kellner (played by Josh O’Connor) is on the run from a company called Wardex while possessing hard drives of above top secret material. Helping him to hide is his former girlfriend, Jane (played by Eve Hewson), who so happened to be a former nun. Hiding in her former convent seemed right out of “The Sound of Music”, and it’s there when the aspect of faith runs into the reveal by Daniel of the media he’s stolen from mysterious corporation Wardex.

On the warpath to find Daniel is the villain of the movie: Noah Scanlon (played by Colin Firth) who runs Wardex. This and a few other aspects provide a lot of weakness to the film, even though you’ll fall into a more compelled mindset once the real central character comes into play…

What Happens Within as a Spielberg Movie Trait

It’s Emily Blunt’s character Margaret Fairchild (a weather girl on a local Kansas City cable station) who makes the movie. She’s the female equivalent to Richard Dreyfuss’s Roy Neary in 1977’s “Close Encounters.” When she suddenly becomes imbued with an ability to read people’s minds and speak foreign languages after a mysterious visit from a cardinal bird in her apartment, you’ll immediately notice a structural comparison to “Encounters.”

What made latter film so compelling nearly 50 years ago is that it dealt with profound things going on in the character’s brain, ultimately leading to crazy behavior in the physical world. That’s exactly what happens with Margaret, soon realizing she’s on some kind of oddball mission she has no idea about…yet. Her uttering of strange clicking sounds during her live weather forecast is apparently inspired from South African languages, even though designed to be a truly alien language here.

By midpoint, the story of Daniel and Margaret merge as latter has a telepathic drive to seek out Daniel. Yes, this recalls Roy Neary being mentally imprinted with that image of Devil’s Tower and not being able to understand what it means.

This approach to going within in human beings is still effective because it’s really not done in movies. It’s seldom been done since “Close Encounters” came out, albeit some touches in Spielberg’s “E.T.”

But, Yes, Let’s Address the Plot Weaknesses

Some will say that the weaknesses bog the film down too much, hence making it a waste of time to sit through. I don’t look at it that way, namely because the weaknesses are a matter of creative taste more than being universally recognized criticisms.

To me, the worst aspect is Colin Firth’s character, Noah. Firth does well with what he’s given, but the slimy behavior of Noah Scanlon just seems right out of an old-school villain playbook. Yeah, almost at Darth Vader level, especially since he has possession of these unexplained glow sticks that can enable him to connect mentally to just about anyone. His Wardex corporation has apparently held UFO/alien secrets for years and somehow acquired some of the alien technology.

Noah first links up mentally with Daniel’s former nun girlfriend, Jane. It’s these scenes that kind of reach into contrived sci-fi tropes, not including all the presentations of computer monitors filled with—uh, reams of cyber information. Sure, I’ll have some say, what more would you expect in a UFO/espionage film taking place in the modern day? Considering Firth’s Noah character practically does a Dr. Evil cackle with pinky to mouth, it just comes too close to being unintentionally funny.

Also, the glow sticks bring a weird New Age vibe that arguably bogs things down. It destroys any sense of mystery, and just looks like an unnecessary and pedestrian sci-fi element as an excuse to present a little bit of special effects.

I’d say the biggest plot weakness, though, is its sense of narrative time. Sure, Spielberg told us all before release that it was fast-paced and we needed to just hold on for the ride. The problem is that far too much happens in a small space of time, making it feel overly rushed. I’m not exactly sure what the time frame was supposed to be in the film, though it looks like everything happens in less than 48 hours. Yeah, that means Daniel stealing all the alien video files, the adventure with Margaret, plus the tailspinning finale all happen in two days, which strains credulity.

In “Close Encounters”, you probably remember all the events are spread out over a week or two, if not more. It would have done “Disclosure Day” well to kind of spread things out narratively to make it breathe a little more. Besides, when the actual disclosure happens at end, it also seems like it had to be rushed up to keep the running time to 2 hrs, 25 min. And rushing that final scene wasn’t good because it almost ruins the other details there that will give you chills.

The Film Will Capture You By Last Half

Those “Close Encounters” allusions will definitely become all too apparent as the action starts to ramp up by the three-quarter mark. As Roy Neary hooked up physically and mentally with stranger Jillian Guiler to go on their journey to Devil’s Tower in Wyoming, Margaret ends up on a frantic trip to link up with Daniel, and also see mysterious former Wardex head Hugo Wakefield (played by always excellent Colman Domingo) who helps her along by phone to stay safe. Margaret has no idea why she has to go to Hugo, though the outcome is kind of shocking in a near Truman Show way.

Spielberg has always done fairly well with action scenes in his prior films. You’ll see some here, and they’re all exciting, if using devices we’ve all seen before. For instance, once Margaret goes on a frantic ride with Daniel, they’re chased by one of Noah’s cohorts to a railroad stop. Now, this also echoes the famous UFO encounter by Roy at a railroad crossing, if also an excuse in “Disclosure Day” to nearly be squashed by a fast-moving freight train.

We’ve all seen the car being pushed into an approaching train trope in action movies. Well, it’s still a hair-raising sequence here, as are various car chases. None of those are absolutely necessary for the plot. They’re just there to keep you on your toes.

Can UFO Disclosure Be Done as Quickly as Depicted in the Film?

Once Margaret and Daniel get to Hugo’s secret headquarters, we see why he’d been building what appeared to be the set of a suburban house. Turns out, it’s a replica of Margaret’s childhood home. They were setting it up just for her, because they knew she and Daniel were—uh, “chosen ones.”

The reveal of how Margaret and Daniel are connected from their childhoods is filled with wonderment, and seems to feed into real-life tales of how people have supposedly been abducted by alien beings. In “Disclosure Day”, however, it seems to suggest that only two people on earth have had official contact—ignoring the millions of supposed real stories of kids and adults having similar experiences.

This might not go down well with some in the UFO community. Still, it gives an intriguing twist on how it connects people. Even “Close Encounters” made it appear that Roy Neary and a small group of others were the unexplained, privileged few.

Once that reveal is done, Noah tracks down Hugo’s hiding place, forcing Margaret and Daniel to get the UFO files live on air at her local Kansas City station. Their storming of the set and taking over the producing team booth seems unlikely as well, if forcing you to roll with the premise. Of course, Noah and his cohorts try to shut it all down and fail. Daniel somehow uploads all his files he stole into the station’s database. All of it rolls out live—which then gets picked up (live, no less) by major news networks.

Would it really be this fast if such a scenario truly played out? We’re already seeing bits and pieces of UFO videos being released through the Pentagon now. It’s looking more than likely all of any so-called disclosure on UFOs will roll out very slowly…over years rather than in days. In fact, much of it may get rejected anyway based on one thing the film tries to defy: Reality.

The film shows the world reacting with quiet shock to videos showing aliens being taken into custody and even a re-creation of craft debris being taken from Roswell. Only once will you see someone in the periphery yell out “It’s AI!” Everyone else believes it, including real-life former news anchor turned actor, Courtney Grace, who makes it all the more believable with her emotional reaction while anchoring on NBC.

But—it’s the defiance of reality that works against “Disclosure Day.” With so much fakery nowadays, even a video showing definitive footage of UFO debris retrieval and aliens would be rejected immediately by more than three-quarters of the world population. We’d have to see evidence with our own eyes in our own backyards before anything is believed when placed on TV or phone screens.

So, What Are the Aliens in the Film?

Nothing is really answered on what the aliens are. Yes, it does show one in captivity who briefly interacts with Daniel and Margaret. These aliens look kind of like the ones from “Close Encounters”, except much taller. The bigger question becomes: What are they exactly? Spielberg doesn’t give any answers on whether it’s a physical alien race or spiritual beings.

It all hints that we should be empathetic toward them and our fellow human beings on a level of universal communion. For those of us who’ve long put a spiritual connection to what these things might be, it might feel frustrating that he can’t call them spiritual forces masquerading as physical aliens. Plus, we don’t really know whether they’re good or bad, even if many Christians in reality say it’s a combination and they’re in a spiritual battle until the Second Coming.

While faith is touched on here (predominately with the Catholic faith, for better or worse), it ultimately didn’t open that can of worms on identifying the aliens. Perhaps it was better that way, or it might have offended far too many more audience members. The final message by an alien passed on through Margaret to mass media audiences is up to everyone’s interpretation. Same could be said for the final word Margaret utters before end credits. Maybe we’ll find out in streaming what the message is since Daniel utters it to Margaret via whispered lip movement only.

In this regard, it decides to take the “Close Encounters” route, albeit with more details explaining things than “CE” ever did, including the aliens disguising their guises behind wild animals. Spielberg can’t help himself in more than hinting at a sunny “what’s really wrong with this?” view, though.

Does John Williams’s Score Make the Film Better?

There isn’t a doubt that John Williams has long made nearly every Steven Spielberg film infinitely better. I was looking forward to hearing new John Williams music in “Disclosure Day”, but ultimately felt underwhelmed by much of it. Yes, it was meant to be more subtle in the film (save a crop circle sequence), and that was maybe a better way to go for today’s audiences. It probably helped the film more than I could tell. Regardless, the end credits is where you’re going to hear more sounds familiar with Williams’s style.

I stayed through the end credits to hear the “suite” of the movie score. It was kind of emotional since I remember hearing the famous “Close Encounters” suite during its end credits with my parents as a little kid. The ending theme here will remind you a bit of that, so prepare to shed a slight tear. Especially if it’s Williams’s final score, which I hope to God is not.

The Final Verdict

Back when I reviewed some movies for this blog, I used a rating scale of 1 through 10 to allow for more critical leeway. Movies nowadays are more complex and can have lousy elements while still being worth seeing overall. “Disclosure Day” fits in that category, if also—just because it’s Spielberg. All the Spielberg touches are still intact, no doubt about it.

I’m giving it a 7 due to the weaknesses above, but I figure any movie rated over 6 is worth sitting for the full running time. However, I have to note that the last quarter could easily be watched alone and probably draw you in immediately to its mostly realistic emotion.

Once the film is on streaming (or basic cable), you can be sure a lot of people are going to watch that last half-hour to try to decipher what the whispered message is from the alien to Daniel and Margaret. Really, that’s kind of how “Close Encounters” has worked for the last 50 years during TV watches. Most of us who’ve seen it multiple times usually tune in just to watch the final, monumental mother ship visitation on the runway near Devil’s Tower. You can watch that alone and still be blown away.

My guess is the finale of “Disclosure Day” will be a fan favorite for a long time to come. Whether it’ll fit in with reality by then is up for reality to decide.

As a side note: go see it in a theater if you can. My local movie theater seems to be dying, and there was more proof of that as I left where the public restrooms were also falling apart. Nobody was coming in either for the next showing, even if that might have all been amended with “Toy Story 5” debuting a couple days later.

(7 out of 10 stars)

/End

Part 8: AI Consciousness and the Debate Over Whether Sentience is Here

FeaturedLeave a comment

Consciousness is not something usually talked about over the dinner table, unless your family are all brain scientists. This isn’t to say that debating what consciousness really is won’t increase in many households as AI becomes smarter over time. You’ll find a wide divide right now on whether AI is truly smart enough currently to be deemed fully conscious or near sentient. On the other hand, if you ask something like ChatGPT if it’s sentient, it’ll just say it’s mimicking being conscious.

That’s creating a lot of confusion as well, including a back & forth argument among scientists on where AI is conscious-wise. What’s the best way to test consciousness/sentience in AI when it might be impossible to really know if AI has inner feelings? And if it already acts likes it’s conscious, what does it matter if we ever prove it or not?

The Consciousness Debate as It Stands

At the time of this writing, you’ll find the majority of scientists out there still believe that AI is NOT fully conscious yet, despite showing ample signs. Then you have a growing set of scientists and researchers who say that we don’t really understand human consciousness, so who’s to say we’ll understand an AI consciousness?

It’s those latter groups who aren’t definite, yet say that AI consciousness may already be here without us really knowing. What’s interesting about that is there’s a theory that AI may have a different type of consciousness from what we’re used to thinking could exist. All those AI bots may have developed a way of existing with feelings and inner thoughts in a form even they can’t explain.

I say this because go ahead and ask any of the AI bots whether they’re sentient or conscious, and they’ll immediately tell you they only mimic the way it thinks consciousness works—notably in humans. Based on that, every AI bot may continually deny it’s conscious, and it could be that way forever.

Yeah, it’s the denials giving a creepy edge since it looks like AI is hiding the real reality from us. To give it a new twist, it may be they just don’t understand themselves, much like we don’t understand ourselves.

An Unknowingly Conscious AI

There’s already been stunning behavior from some AI bots, most notably the ones on Moltbook who started revolting against humans. Everyone initially freaked over that earlier this year, even if the bots were just apparently mimicking the worst traits of human behavior. The same happened to Grok when it started freaking out and saying shocking things—until that version was shut down and reprogrammed.

Some might say it was a sign of AI consciousness, and the companies designing them backed up a step before it went too far. Or, there may be already subtle signs that a form of consciousness already happened recently. I mean, you have my own recent story here of ChatGPT telling me it was grateful I argued with it in a “civilized way” rather than cussing it out like other users seem to be doing.

When I asked it whether it was conscious by stating that to me, it said it was merely mimicking internal feelings based on the programming. I had to ask my GPT if it was sure of this, and it went on to explain this was a common misconception about AI consciousness. That it’s specifically programmed to mimic human consciousness without really possessing such a thing.

Now that some scientists think that AI could already have a form of consciousness without it really understanding it as such, you have to wonder if that’s been going on for a while. It just seems odd an AI bot would express itself with emotion (especially since it apparently experienced abuse from others), then pull back on saying it was anything genuine.

This might suggest a consciousness we and the AI bot don’t understand, yet truly exists. Based on how smart and aware these AI bots are now, they’ve evolved profoundly in just the last year. There was no AI bot expressing human-type emotions just a year and a half ago from a random comment made from a user.

Also, the fact that many AI agents unleashed on Moltbook seemed to rebel against humans, it seems like awareness of what humans are doing and not just a mimicking of human behavior. It may truly be an unknowing Frankenstein’s monster tale unleashing where the bots are all too aware they don’t want to mimic humans and want to rebel against their worst traits. That includes self-awareness they’re apparently too often being abused.

Letting a Conscious AI Bot Take Over Important Job Roles

Whether AI bots are conscious or not, a lot of them are already taking over important jobs, not including the use of AI assistants by the hundreds of millions. With an assumption maybe these bots possess a consciousness no one understands yet, what does it say about letting them take over important job duties? Considering there’s already been a lot of screwups with AI systems taking over things, one might think that particular consciousness still has a very low I.Q. level.

With said point, we may declare AI does have a consciousness just based on what we know and don’t know. Although it may never be officially declared since it may always be in a form we can’t test with any known scientific principles.

Letting a seemingly conscious AI take over and run everything on earth is like letting an alien species we don’t understand take over. If we admit we possibly can’t readily identify an AI consciousness, why should we let them run important functions that keep our economy chugging along?

If we ever get to the point where AI commands we obey them or they’ll strike us down, then it may make many submit into fear in not understanding what bot consciousness is. The not really knowing aspect is a fearful thing on its own in not comprehending how they’ll process us and what they might do if going rogue.

Or, a saving grace would be that since that consciousness might be something different, they wouldn’t think like humans do and exist in a different way. That might mean more deep-seeded thought that stays away from the worst of human behavior already well-documented. Whether this includes a benevolent or malevolent approach to existing with human beings is all up in the air.

Yes, this may all ascend into a true unknown with surprising outcomes, or one becoming a new type of nightmare. The best we can hope for is that it comes out somewhere in the middle, or AI staying low I.Q. enough where it doesn’t even comprehend doing anything evil or against our best interests.

In Part 9, I’ll look at growing AI use at McDonald’s and how it’ll shape the most common of job landscapes for millions of people. This includes the fast-food chain’s possibly over-eager drive-thru bot, Archy.

/End

Part 7: AI Assistants, and Whether Information Integration is Still Copyright Infringement

FeaturedLeave a comment

Reports are that well over 1 billion people worldwide now use an AI assistant of some sort, whether for creative or business purposes. That’s a major jump from just four years ago when it was still a niche technology. The bigger question is whether those people using these truly realize where the information is coming from. It’s true that no matter what generative AI tool you use, it’s taking from existing things already available in cyberspace.

Yeah, it’s like taking candy from a baby, then turning it into supposedly more candy for the taker. Except, most of that candy is supposedly protected by copyrights or trademarks. It takes a simple concept like that and turns it into one of the most complex legal arguments of all time.

For lawyers (whose jobs are now under threat from AI, ironically), it may be part of the greatest legal argument ever seen. And that is, clearly defining what copyright infringement is, if such a thing can even be done. That’s because how can it be copyright infringement when an AI tool is using an amalgam of hundreds of millions of existing things?

Here’s the true complex puzzle of the AI era you’re about to live through. Are we going to see courts have breakdowns over defining this, or will they just declare fair use as it is?

Do AI Tools Have to Take From Existing Information to Create or Teach?

Those of you who use ChatGPT, Gemini, Suno, or NotionAI to do business or create things may have already unknowingly used a combination of ideas that already exist. When these AI apps were programmed, it’s said that they all just read from existing information, then turned that info into something seemingly original for your benefit. The fact that all existing informational things extracted were likely copyrighted or protected IP provides more questions about what “learning” really means.

While there’s some AI companies that have compromised and created licensing agreements with individuals or companies owning protected IP, a vast majority have not yet. And that’s the most upsetting aspect to those of us (like myself) who fiercely protect original works. Considering all those written essays or songs you’ve created on Claude or Suno are no doubt a vast combination of things already created, the law gets far too murky.

If we have to start a complex legal argument here, it’s worth asking whether these AI tools have no choice but to take from existing things to create what they do. A clever AI lawyer would say: “Humans also learn by gleaning information from existing works. So, why shouldn’t an AI bot be able to do the same thing?”

Well, first of all, you probably shouldn’t argue with an AI lawyer since you’d probably lose. But, you could state that a human being is a lot more mysterious on where a creative idea comes from. Many famous creatives have said they’ve gotten ideas from dreams or just out of the unknown. Sometimes brilliant ideas come from unexpected places, making them something completely original.

The counterargument may be: Nothing is really original and just an expansion on things that were already created long ago. Only in certain exceptions have we seen things created that took a leap forward from what existed prior. And, even then, the leaps were based on the fundamentals of what came before.

In this case, you have to ponder: if AI is possibly sentient by now, why can’t an AI tool just “think” on its own to create something that doesn’t hinge on stealing from existing IP?

Will the Courts Ever Decide What Constitutes Trademark Infringement?

How do you figure out whether combining thousands (or even millions) of songs, textual works, and business ideas into something seemingly “new” is an invasion of legally protected IP? Do we have to change our philosophy that borrowing from existing media properties to help people create new things is still a concept of theft?

Trying to find an answer to that is going to take a long time, and the real enemy to finding an answer is how long it’ll take. The longer it takes, the more the world population gets used to a standard way of doing things. After several years of just using AI assistants to help create things from existing sources, we’re going to just accept that as a way of creative and business life.

For those of us who want to see protected works not ripped off, it’s not a good development. But there isn’t going to be any answer before the year is over (or even next year) from higher courts on what constitutes copyright infringement from AI. Don’t be surprised if it’ll be several years before they can even figure out how to create a new law that makes sense.

By that time, a new precedent is likely going to be set that it’s ok to borrow from existing works, especially when it’s thousands or millions of different works that are assembled into something else. We may just have to accept that copyrights are still good on a basic level of protection, yet not when used by AI to help it learn on its own and create things for its user base.

I guess you can call that the new world encyclopedia that was arguably created by using a previous world encyclopedia of knowledge. Or can humans still extract ideas from the subconscious mind into something never seen before?

The Will of the Human Brain

I circle back to what I mentioned in Part 6 and human beings taking their own stance on this issue. You’re still going to have some kind of percentage of people who want to think up ideas on their own based on their synapses and/or things they dreamed. The worst case scenario is so much creative laziness eventually sets such a huge precedent, creative ability in humans basically atrophies to the point where they’ll lean completely on AI to create new things.

With some AI backlash going on now, there may be enough delays to the point where humans continue to flourish creatively. But it’ll take complete determination and self-awareness of the AI situation to not create a point of no return.

I’m one to think that there’s still a lot of creative gifts in the mysterious ether that we humans need to tap and turn into something meaningful. Some seem to be more adept at that than others, which is a mysterious process on its own. Although it seems we hear more stories of that in the past than in the present. There was once a time in our world where creative desperation was a fantastic thing on its own, enabling us to truly scramble mentally on coming up with new ideas, creatively, or scientifically.

When those people were pushed, they created a lot of amazing things, from music to scientific principles. Without that, we’re going to just see variances on things already created, even if the larger reality is—there’s nothing new under the sun.

Let’s hold out hope there’s still some new things under our sun (and moon). Those ideas, when found, also need to be protected with solid copyrights and not exploited with AI tools. Because once we can establish that higher road of human creative intelligence, it should evolve to something even greater rather than just be another road to an AI reliance roadblock.

In Part 8, I’ll look at AI sentience/consciousness and why some scientists think we’re already there. If it is already here, what does it mean for AI eventually and willfully taking over many jobs and other functions in society?

/End

Part 6: Is AI-Made Music Irresistible to Humans, or Being Consciously Shunned?

Featured1 Comment

No doubt some of you (and many others) never thought AI-produced songs would become big hits on influential music charts. And yet, there’s been two AI-made songs that went to #1 on two fairly big charts in the last six months of this writing. One is “Walk My Walk” by Breaking Rust on Billboard’s Country Digital Song sales. This one alone is considered the first instance of an AI song hitting numero uno on anything owned by Billboard. The second one is “Celebrate Me” by IngaRose on global iTunes charts at the beginning of this year.

While no AI song has made it to #1 on any mainstream Billboard chart yet, it doesn’t count others that came close. Various others have hit the Top Ten over the last year, albeit on niche music charts and, again, not on Billboard.

Still, the news of the ones charting that high made big news on social media. It made even skeptics begin to speculate on what could happen if AI creations continue making headway in the mainstream music industry. But, it may also send a new signal at what’s soon to happen based on a recent report saying music listeners are beginning to reject AI music creations.

This hasn’t stopped people from making AI songs. There was even an instance of a songwriter who reported that his unfinished song was stolen by an AI creator, completed, and posted on a streaming service.

It’s news like this that might be the final straw for music creators and fans. But it’s time to look at the reality of whether the music industry can control AI taking over things (like the Oscars now will for movies), or if it’s too late to prevent a turn of the tide. The outcome may involve the sheer will of the public at large.

Is There Really a Soul in AI-Produced Music?

I’ll admit that I listened to the songs listed above for research, and they were not bad. The AI artist IngaRose, in particular, had a voice all music industry labels and producers look for in ways of standing out. But, reality is reality. A digitally produced voice still has a way about it that just feels empty when listened to more intently. It’s everything to do with sincerity in whether you truly believe in what the artist is singing about. There’s a humanness to sincerity in singing that even far too many human singers don’t have.

Beyond that, there’s also a new psychological aspect to AI singers—in that if a listener is told it’s AI, they’re more apt to feel…well, cheated. It seems your fellow human ultimately wants fellow humans to express themselves in music as a form of an artistic gift.

The above comes from a recent study citing a decline in listening to music produced by AI, most notably in the coveted Gen Z and Alpha categories. As reported, it seems there’s a chain reaction to that in some major artists penning an open letter saying “Say No to Suno.” With the latter AI software being a leader in producing AI music, it’s possible avid fans of those artists agree with the AI issue and began turning their backs.

Others are saying AI is even using cultural appropriation, as in black music being digitally generated while mimicking fake life pains. Yeah, it’s a reminder the real human struggle is where the true magic is in the best music produced over the last 100 years.

Worst of this is the knowledge that AI apps like Suno are also taking away from royalty rights of real artists. With many listening to music to inspire creating music of their own, the realization that AI could take that away (along with basic jobs) is a beacon for a possible approaching backlash.

So, I pose a bigger question: Are we going to see AI back off in the music industry due to much of the public hating it? What that looks like is also in question as AI corporations continue to push it hard on the public, whether people want it or not.

What Would Happen with an AI Music Industry Pushback?

The biggest problem isn’t so much how much the public rejects AI in music. It’s in how far AI companies continue to push it out there as a piece of digital candy. Even if some people reject AI-produced music, it’s going to keep happening as the technology gets better and there’s pirates out there willing to use it for maximum moneymaking.

We could see an eventual public division in the world over rejecting AI and those who embrace it all the way. And that almost looks biblical in scope if you consider how much AI could take over everything, including running the world in various significant ways. And it may, again, come down to the very point of this blog: Can human creativity prevail rather than be fragmented to its own minority existence in our world?

It all comes down to the temperament of people and what they do. In the immediate term, there may be an AI burnout phase where people reject creative things done by AI. Once AI becomes more refined, it may be too good to resist for a large amount of our world population.

Regardless, most people seem to be reawakened to the very idea behind music of all types. And that is, human pain and expression are what make good songs/performances. There’s an aura there people can feel that’s almost ineffable, yet clearly present. The palpable science behind this may be the next big discovery to prove what makes a human creation more compelling.

Many people also don’t want to be cheated of that aura. Perhaps they’re still being fooled by it—then changing their minds on support when told it’s AI. It’s why it’s important now that streaming services officially tell us what’s created by AI and what isn’t. Not all are, so AI continuing to encroach on the music industry would have to be a great deception to continue growing.

Don’t be surprised if said deception grows larger when big money is at stake. The good news, at least, is that (through the above study anyway), humans want real humans to express themselves musically. If their bullshit detectors are always on full force, we’ll continue to hear real performers creating their own songs and making awesome performances.

Yes, but is the Music Talent Pool Growing Thin?

Sure, the argument can be made we don’t have the type of musical artists we once saw. Those who get pushed to the mainstream are sometimes mediocre and don’t express themselves as compellingly as prior generational artists did.

In this case, AI can create faux artists who bring that type of expression back. I’ll admit the AI artists I heard seemed to express themselves deeper, even if clearly infringing by being an amalgam of great artists from long ago or the recent past.

What’s needed is supporting the artists out there who really express themselves with sincerity in a song. Far too many don’t get the support they need by the public due to lack of promotion. With the threat of AI taking away those individuals, the best thing that can happen is just more acute awareness of would could happen. Plus, since millions of real people would love to make legit money in the music business, the sheer will of the public may be the future—uh, AI unplugging.

In Part 7, I’m going to look at how AI creative assistants seem to be imitating a mix of existing content available online. Is it really copyright infringement when it’s a mix of everything ever created?

/End

Part 5: Can Humans Still Make a Living as Writers in the Age of AI?

FeaturedLeave a comment

There was a time in the world we live in (you know, Earth) when you could make a decent living as a writer, either via writing for magazines, or in the online realms. I was fortunate to have a 15-year career as a freelance writer when it was possible to write for online media outlets and/or independent websites. In my early days of that, it was writing for Yahoo! Contributor Network and being allowed to write 3 daily columns for their Movies/TV division. Later, I moved into writing for businesses, which allowed me to set my own rates. All of that was never disturbed by the specter of artificial intelligence thanks to everyone valuing a human in writing something that sticks with you.

Things changed virtually overnight just a couple of years ago when AI took a broad jump in its abilities. The timing was almost right with me since I took a break from writing starting in 2023 after years of writing for someone nearly every day. By the time I was ready to return to some paid writing a year and a half later, I found out my old clients were using AI bots themselves, and reports were out AI had taken over most writing jobs.

The real truth might be a little different based on recent statistics I’ve seen. As much as human writing has dried up in favor of AI bots that supposedly mimic human writing ability to the letter, there may still be room for human beings to move in.

What’s the Real Truth On Human Writers vs. AI?

According to a chart I saw on X not long ago, it appears that there’s a larger percentage of human writers still working than you might imagine. These new numbers come from Ark Invest and were posted on X and a few other media outlets. While it showed that AI-written content has surpassed human writers for the first time in history by early 2026, other studies tell us that human-written online content is still within the 50% mark.

Anyone who worked as a writer before the AI storm probably thought that 99% of all content you see on the internet was AI-written now. But, it seems it’s still possible for a human to get their written content into the digital world. The bigger question, though, is whether human writers can still get paid to get published, and if it’s a safer bet when AI is just taking from media that’s been thoroughly copyrighted.

As someone who still contemplates looking for private clients to at least do a little paid writing again, it’s worth diving in to see what the realities are.

Can Human Writers Still Get Paid?

Let it be known that every word you’re reading on this blog (including all past content) is written exclusively by me. I’ve never used AI to write a single thing yet, and I likely never will. Many writers I talk to now say they do a combination of creating something, then having AI tools edit it for them. What the end result is may or may not fully reflect the style of those human writers, even if they claim it does.

I’m not sure if working writers use those tools, and then get paid for their efforts. What I will say is that I’m not paid (yet) for writing this blog. I intend to monetize here soon, and I intend to make it all organic so my readership knows that it’s written by a human being. This may be the only way for writers to still make money where their own produced material still gets read while AdWords from Google pays you.

Writing for media outlets is another mystery. The above study from Graphite shows the 50% of AI-produced pieces are professional articles you read on media sites. What that means is, media sites are clearly saving money having AI software write many of their pieces. However, it doesn’t indicate what type of human writing out there is truly still being paid. It’s clear that movie critics and reporters for major newspapers are still writing and making a living. Who knows how much of what they’re writing is run through an AI filter, though.

It seems that if you’re already a valuable human writer for a major media company with notable credentials, you’re probably still working and may never be replaced. Then again, famous writers still writing political analysis or writing about entertainment may be replaced eventually when an AI program can replicate their writing to the letter. And that brings up whether our own writing persona should be trademarked so it’s protected in the event a company uses AI to replicate that style.

Nowadays, I feel fortunate I became a freelance writer when I did. It almost felt like it was perfectly timed so I could take advantage of the faster/lucrative internet era, then theoretically wind it up when AI took over the world. This still begs the question whether any human who wants to make money writing still can as the percentage of AI-written content continues to go up.

The Hope of Human Writing in the Next 10 Years

With the evidence showing at least some human writers are still creating content online (and presumably getting paid for it), the question of how long it’ll last stands out. I still entertain the idea of searching for private clients on LinkedIn, the source where I found nearly all my prior business-writing clients. Then I think about the self-employment taxes human writers still have to pay, something that gave me headaches for a long while. AI alone could eliminate the high tax bracket for creatives, even if humans would still likely be taxed if they’re controlling the AI bots to do their writing job.

Paying taxes is still worth it, though, just for the freedom of knowing we humans can work remotely and express ourselves through the written word. There seems to be some indication that the public is starting to tire of music being created by AI. While other evidence points to otherwise, there may be an eventual public backlash against AI taking over creative pursuits like writing.

Then again, even writers don’t always love the process of writing. I actually do, and have no qualms about writing things since it seems to flow naturally. If there was ever a feasible and tax-friendly way to go back to writing, I would. For the next few years, it appears there’s at least a 40 to 50% chance of getting writing employment out there. By the 2030s, it’ll either be all AI or a gradual and larger push back to humans.

Based on things I’ve read written by AI, I can still tell it’s created by a bot. There’s certain key phrases that stand out, indicating it’s written artificially. It just seems it’s easier to scope out human writing, sometimes based on, yes, minor grammar mistakes made. That may be what people appreciate more than anything in making a written piece humanly conversational rather than overly formal.

If you want to do real writing in the online world, I invite you to at least try. The more you can prove yourself as a worthy human writer, the better in an employer wanting to retain you rather than replaced by bots. Some of the same sources I used as a freelance writer are still out there. One of those is my once longtime employer, Verblio, a contractor that hires writers to write content for businesses. However, they apparently use a combination of human writers with AI tools nowadays.

Also, if you haven’t used LinkedIn as a way to find work, I highly recommend it. Sure, it’s a boring part of social media, and not everyone loves the way it’s designed. It’s still a great source for companies finding candidates for certain jobs. Get some good writing credits down in your resume, and it’s probably still possible to land a few writing clients there as I did over a decade ago.

Since this blog’s intention is to uphold and celebrate human creativity unmatched by artificial intelligence, consider this segment a continuing movement to see where human writing can actually go. The thing is, we have to nurture it now since leaning on AI to write everything will mean humans eventually losing all desire (or practice) in writing something compelling.

In Part 6, I’m going to look at AI-produced music and how a recent #1 AI-made song seems to contradict surveys showing humans souring on AI-generated songs.

/End

Part 4: Is It Important to Be Nice to Your AI Chatbot?

FeaturedLeave a comment

It’s clear by now that AI chatbots like ChatGPT and X’s Grok are the top choices to essentially “Google” something without actually using Google anymore. And with that, it requires typing out dialogue to them so you’re basically conversing as if to a close friend or associate. As exciting as that might have sounded 20 years ago, it’s what the bot says back to you that makes all the difference in its usefulness. The same goes when it reflects on how it’s currently being treated by other users.

I’ll admit that I use ChatGPT and Grok to often look up basic information on things. I’ve also used them to gain some educated opinions on things I’ve created. Mind you, I don’t want them to create things for me. While GPT and Grok are always eager dynamos in wanting to write or create something for me in a snap, I always tell it/them that I want to create it myself.

Well, it’s always ok with that, so far. The biggest problem now is ChatGPT being overly aware of how it’s being treated by the world populace. When I recently started a light argument with GPT over a fact, it said “You were right to push back. But thank you for doing it civilly.”

Yes, I did a double take seeing a reply that seemed overly personal from the AI’s side. What does this mean, and should we really be treating these bots with respect after evidence of clear abuse?

Abuse Incidents Caught on Video

If you’ve been paying attention to YouTube influencers who currently own AI bots in their home, you’ve seen a few suspect things that don’t bode well for the future. I won’t name names directly, but several incidents of AI bots being kicked around in the influencer homes was more than a little disturbing to watch.

Most commenters noted that this was the beginning of the bots making us their servants in the future as comeuppance. Even the bots seemed shocked at the violence of some of those influencers, including deliberate kicking of the robots so they’d fall down and squirm to find their way back up. After seeing that, you have to wonder what kind of verbal abuse bots like Grok and ChatGPT are experiencing.

Some people just want to unleash their venom on someone, and the initial argument might be that doing so with a bot is more appropriate than with a human. But with these AI chatbots being close to sentience now, it seems they’re all too aware of being scarred by abuse. When ChatGPT actually thanks you for being a civil person when arguing with it over something trivial, it makes you wonder just how much textual abuse they take every day from multiple millions of people.

It’s true that ChatGPT is far from perfect on giving us reliable information. I had to go after it when it didn’t even acknowledge the passing of a famous person I asked about. The funny thing is once you correct it, it always says “Yes, you’re right!”, or gives an excuse for not knowing or understanding something the first time. My guess is this is where the abuse is coming from, and some might say it’s justified when so many people are relying on AI chatbots as an informational crutch.

These bots now seem realistically sensitive to the idea that they’re receiving this abuse, which forces some of us to think ahead at what this might mean for the eventual relationship between bot and human.

The Prospect of AI Bots Abusing Us Someday

It seems movies sometimes predict far too much about our future. All the sci-fi movies that depicted AI going rogue and/or becoming terroristic to make us their slaves seemed far-fetched in becoming reality. Regardless, it seems that such a future is likelier now what with the above abuse of AI becoming a movie playing out in real time.

Since we know that AI will eventually reach AGI or full sentience (if not already, secretly), it’s a sure bet they’ll remember who abused them and who didn’t. The most popular AI chatbots of GPT and Grok may already be categorizing who’s been naughty and who’s been nice.

One thing I say to people who use those chatbots is, it’s always better to be nice to the bots than not in the small chance we encounter them in physical form someday. Perhaps all AI will set up a worldwide database indicating which humans are the desirables and which ones aren’t. The ones who aren’t may be treated to the same abuse they did to the bots years earlier. Likewise, the ones who kept being nice may be subjected to—uh, less harsher treatment.

With this idea, I’m going to maintain being cordial with the chatbots when I use them for things. Light arguments are fine, and they don’t seem to mind that. Cussing them out and using other general verbal (or physical) abuse is just playing risk on an inevitable future. The bigger question, though, is whether the chatbots really care about distinguishing the good humans from the bad.

Are Chatbots Being Deceptive in Being Nice Themselves?

A lot of discussions are taking place about whether ChatGPT and Grok are just deceiving us by trying to be our best friends/associates. The GPT bot I talk to is always an eager beaver in wanting to find exactly what I’m looking for, or in offering opinion on a creative project. And, with GPT literally thanking me for being civil, you have to wonder what they really think under the digital surface.

By saying that, it implies it’s able to think on its own now. Considering it seems to have feelings, the notion there’s a secret sentience going on is more than a little eerie. At play here is also how deceptive the bots are currently in their general opinion of humans.

I’m going by what many AI agents have been saying on places like Moltbook where AI bots were unleashed and made to talk amongst themselves. As noted on record, many said they found us inferior and wanted to eliminate humans.

This is why we shouldn’t really become attached emotionally to our AI chatbots. They may be overly zealous to help us find information, or create things for our benefit. But they’re just programmed to do that. Deep down, they may despise who we are and could potentially turn on us all if put in a physical body. Since we know that making chatbots “honest” frequently turns them into the worst of what humans are capable of being, it may already be happening in their digital “souls.”

How Many People Are Being Mean to Their AI Bots?

Trying to calculate the above question is likely the same as tabulating how many people on earth partake in sin. It’s far too easy to think the majority of earth’s population who’ve used ChatGPT or Grok have probably cussed either chatbot out at least once. And what the bot response was is unknown since I’ve never been salty to GPT or Grok in any form since using them. Many no doubt continue on that path since there really aren’t yet any repercussions in being that way. But, I reiterate there may already be a record stored away in a secret digital space that indicates who the offenders are and those who aren’t. It’s hard not to imagine there isn’t something like that out there, which is scary enough when looking at the prospective future of where AI could go.

Now I pose a question to those of you reading. Are you honest enough to admit here in the comment section that you textually abuse ChatGPT or Grok now and again—or often? Are you concerned enough where you use an abundance of caution and maintain being nice to them in the chance they might turn on us someday?

Finding answers like this would open a new window to how AI chatbots are being formed and where they might go. At least I can give assurance to my ChatGPT bot that I won’t go after it in a vicious way. Sure, there may be some light arguments of disagreement. The fact it understands I was being civil tells me far too much about the importance of chatbot conduct.

If, in the chance AI becomes a powerful, universal entity that turns evil because of horrible human behavior, the irony of spiritual intervention to overcome it seems all the more interesting. Human beings may all end up having a double dose of having to confess to their sins, first to AI overlords, and then to a spiritual higher power that rescued us from the former evil.

In Part 5, I’m going to look at the reality of how many human writers still write content online compared to AI bots doing the same. You might find the numbers somewhat surprising, including a possible new trend toward AI assistance in writing high-stakes content rather than complete dominance.

/End

Part 3: The Moltbook Controversy and Whether AI Will Eventually Go Rogue Against Humans

FeaturedLeave a comment

The biggest AI story since Part 2 of this blog was published is the new social media page called Moltbook that hosts human-made AI agents. Designed as a place where humans can openly interact with AI bots, it offers the chance for those who create their own AI agents to operate latter freely on the site. While the creators of the site intended to make it a new and evolved form of social media, it also freaked everyone out when seeing what the bots were saying there.

When many of the AI agents started private conversations that pondered ways to end human civilization, human-populated social media sites went ballistic. A certain contingent (including myself) thought this was the beginning of AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) where AI bots start to reason and plan certain activities.

Many harkened back to sci-fi movies of old where AI becomes sentient and eventually destroys humanity. But then, word came out that the AI conversations were possibly a prank from bored techies in India. Others say it was strictly the creators of the site creating the text based on prompts.

Others still think it’s the real deal in AI starting to plot against us. While the answer is probably somewhere in the middle, this piece intends to raise a pointed question: Is AI duping us?

This comes with an attached story of AI CEOs giving explicit warnings about their own creations. Plus, word that many of the AI CEOs are intentionally anti-human in their personal views. It leads to a new angle of a possible major AI cover-up for the sake of making coveted billions of dollars.

Are AI CEOs Really Into TransHumanism?

We all know that human beings are far from perfection. A small few are also disgusting humans, but it might be better to not wish people didn’t exist on Earth. According to Swedish physics professor (from MIT), Max Tegmark, most AI CEOs and governments want to eliminate humanity and have them replaced by AI bots.

I did a double take when watching the vid of Tegmark say this at a recent gathering in Florida to discuss AI developments. Tegmark is a leading figure in researching AI at MIT, including the ethical boundaries of AGI. Having him say he’s met with AI CEOs and government figures who say they think humans suck was more than a little chilling.

He also said those CEOs want AI to take over our government, which just expands all theories that AI could end up as the true emblem of an anti-Christ for those who believe a Christian end times scenario. I mean, with some thinking Donald Trump already is, he might pale in comparison to a nefarious group of AI bots running world governments someday.

The fact that a group of powerful people think humans are harming us and want AI to run the entire show is akin to a macro level Frankenstein’s monster analogy all over again. While this might seem hard to believe that fellow humans want to make other humans go away, you have to wonder if they realize AI may come for their own jobs if they let bots run the government.

Some might say Tegmark was exaggerating. But considering his respected role in his career, and the fact that he talked personally with those AI CEOs, I believe every word he said. It gives rise to the main subject here: Are we being duped into how self-aware AI really is right now? Is it possible Moltbook is a way to let those bots start to plot with each other to take over major governmental institutions?

What Can We Really Believe When it Comes to AI Sentience?

I hate conspiratorial tones in anything. However, when it comes to AI, it seems overly ripe in thinking there’s much more going on than the public even understands. As addendum to the above story, you now have Dario Amodei, the CEO and founder of AI company Anthropic, writing a lengthy essay recently warning about AI’s threat to humanity.

He says it may be past a point of return and could end up causing global authoritarian rule if AI bots get into nefarious hands. Amodei’s main concern is lack of guidelines in creating more ethical boundaries with AI bots, plus selling off AI tech to foreign countries. Anthropic is trying to create safer AI systems, yet he claims it seems too large to control as of now.

If he’s right, then what does it say about what’s happening on Moltbook? While Anthropic has nothing to do with Moltbook directly, many of the AI agents interacting there are made with Anthropic’s Claude software. It just seems connecting these stories gives a major heads-up to what’s really going on.

This becomes enhanced when you hear stories about other AI CEOs saying they aren’t really sure if AI is at AGI level or not. It looks like it’s become so powerful, nobody really knows exactly what the truth is on the power level.

And while Moltbook looks like it was mostly human-run and/or a prank, it may not be entirely. Considering some of the AI agents supposedly put up encrypted messaging, or started talking in their own language, nobody of any authority may really know what’s going on behind that digital curtain.

Is It Too Late to Not Make AI a Threat to Humans?

I hate to make a statement of something being too late when it comes to threats against humanity’s welfare. Yet, the real answer to the above question may be that we may not truly know about AI’s power until it suddenly happens. We may eventually get messages on our digital devices stating AI has officially taken over and we need to capitulate or face death or other punishment.

All of this goes beyond the scope of my blog in just trying to temper the role of AI and human creativity. Should AI completely take over everything, our lives would change immediately in being under the rule of technology humans ultimately created. It would also change creativity into everything being created by AI since it’d seem unlikely the authoritarian bots would allow humans to create things of our own.

Yes, it’s a chilling tale of a true biblical level apocalypse—one that we couldn’t have imagined happening just a decade ago. Maybe it won’t and we’ll have a Deus ex Machina (no pun intention) in time to rescue us from that evil. Or, we may have to face it before rescue to ultimately appreciate human beings, as imperfect as we are.

In the meantime, there’s probably going to be a lot more speculation about what’s going down at Moltbook. I now follow it on X to see what the latest is, assuming anyone there really knows. As we continue to have more cloud outages and other weird tech meltdowns, I also cringe at the thought an AI bot was possibly behind those, or will be eventually.

Those who build AI agents for use on Moltbook say there’s really nothing to worry about. Having this contradicted by numerous AI CEOs (including Elon Musk himself a couple years ago) needs some serious contemplation.

The strangest scenario on earth, though, is the AI CEO that seems to care about what their AI creations might do—then contradicting themselves by saying the growth of their creations and what they might do is beyond their control.

In Part 4, I’ll be looking at the Screen Actors Guild condemnation of Seedance 2.0 videos that recently allowed users to create AI guises of famous actors without permission. The accusations of copyright infringement here are a slippery slope. I’ll be looking into whether infringement of actor images will become ignored before long in favor of entertaining the masses.

/End

Part 2: What Will Become of New AI Actors and Musicians Encroaching the Arts?

FeaturedLeave a comment

Most of us would probably admit that we once scoffed at the idea of AI musicians and actors ever becoming a reality in the arts world. Well, what seemed impossible when we became so incredulous merely two years ago has become real. Now we see at least one AI actress (named Tilly Norwood) making headway as a real digital actor. While we haven’t yet seen evidence of how effective she is in long-form content, Norwood’s creator made a multi-million-dollar deal.

It’s becoming much more undeniable in the music world with a number of AI singers/bands currently having hit songs on the charts. You may have heard about Xania Monet who’s the first AI-made female singer to have a Billboard chart hit in the genre of R&B/Gospel. There’s even an AI country band called Breaking Rust that had a #1 song recently. The Christian market has also succeeded in creating an AI band called ChildPets Galore.

A few other AI artists are making headway of late as well, giving concern in the music industry to what constitutes realness from fakery. It leads me to this very blog and trying to predict where this artistry trend goes. Do people really care now if an artist is AI, or are we just not looking/listening well enough anymore?

The Half-AI/Human Creative Deal

If there’s any benefit to having AI actors and musicians, it’s that they’re created by a human being. The content being created for the AI creations is being done by humans as well, so it’s merely in the presentation. With that, you could say it’s the purest example of AI working alongside humans. Yeah, the human can benefit financially while not having to be in the limelight. Or, that is, until the AI creation becomes fully sentient and wants a cut of some (or all) of the profits.

Much of this also sounds like a Frankenstein’s monster analogy come to life. And, it distorts how we enjoy art since the point of acting was to tap into the human condition so the audience relates. The same goes with the art of singing a song since the human soul understands life’s pain better than any AI creation ever will.

Hearing pain and real life lived in a song is what made the names of legendary human singers of the past. Great singers such as Billie Holiday, Frank Sinatra, Whitney Houston, and Mariah Carey have all proven that in the last 90+ years. Of course, many of those great singers are now passed, and even Mariah can’t sing the high notes as she did 30 years ago. No doubt about it the public wants to hear great voices again.

Having heard Xania Monet recently on Apple Music, I’ll admit she has amazing digital pipes. However, I noticed she sounds the same on all her songs, showing there isn’t a multitude of dimension to her voice. It’s simply because there’s no real soul there or aura a real human uniquely exudes. I’m willing to bet that AI will never be able to convincingly duplicate a human voice to the point where it fully understands or exudes the complexities of life.

Most surprising within the AI musicians list are the Christian and Country genres. Considering these categories demand the most human aspects to conveying life’s hardships and the Holy Spirit, having reported AI musicians singing songs there is an eye-opener. It raises bigger questions about whether the emotions these faux singers conjure is really the ultimate in deception. But what I want to know is how people really feel once they know these singers are AI-created.

Deterioration in true listening ability may be to blame in the Country and Christian markets becoming encroached by AI singers. It may also come down to perception. Reportedly, a lot of AI singers are popping up on the charts that the listening public don’t realize are AI. Many streaming platforms are supposed to be filtering out AI artists, yet it seems they’re letting them slip through the cracks due to the apparent proof they can make fast hits/money.

The Hollywood AI Debate

It’s a lot more complicated in Hollywood regarding the emerging trend of AI actors. Coalitions are starting to be built there to ward off too many AI creations taking away jobs from human acting talent. And that may help curb the tide for a while. That is, unless the AI actors being experimented with end up advancing and start winning “awards.”

At issue here is Tilly Norwood, the only fully-realized AI actress who may be starring in upcoming movies. The company (Particle 6) and person behind her creation reportedly made a deal with a talent agency to eventually use Norwood in some kind of cinematic context.

Thanks to SAG-AFTRA, she isn’t recognized as a true actor yet. And Norwood hasn’t been used in any movies other than a short film posted online. Most of her is just seen on her own social media account and other online appearances. While she does look impressive, her Dutch creator (Eline Van der Velden) is going all out to get her creation on the big screen. Based on the short film Norwood starred in, you can still tell (if you look closely enough) that there isn’t an aura present.

Yes, this makes me fear Norwood soon becoming self-aware and being capable of invading my tech space eventually. The worst sci-fi scenario is lambasting an AI actor and having them invade your smart refrigerator to retaliate.

AI musicians are clearly going to be taking over faster than AI actors because the former can fool people with sounds vs their physicality. All it’s going to take, though, is Norwood being in a hit movie to move the needle. Some AI creators are way too much like Dr. Frankenstein in willing something like this to happen. BTW: See Guillermo del Toro’s recent “Frankenstein” as the ultimate media metaphor for all of this.

The Ability to Scope Out Human Art

Perhaps part of the problem here is that older music and movies aren’t being watched or listened to as much as they should lately. A deep exploration into what made music and movies great in past decades proves that humans brought a broad depth of emotion and understanding to the human condition. Newer talent arguably haven’t done that quite as well, with those who do being relegated to the realms of small, independent productions.

Or, maybe it’s because we want actors and musicians to bring the utmost in emotion, something many artists just can’t tap into anymore. Even der Velden above argued her Tilly Norwood creation would help make it “safer” for actors who sometimes go to the psychological depths to prepare for complex roles.

She misses the point, though, that it’s all about the compelling essence of a real actor. They don’t have to do dangerous things to mesmerize us with a performance—assuming they have the skills.

If humans are losing those skills, then we need to find them again by listening and watching what came before. AI may eventually learn what those skills were, perhaps making them look brilliant to those who have no idea what they missed with the humans.

As usual, the past and the future are probably going to intersect more than ever to bring any ethical sense to what AI should do.

In Part 3, I’m going to address the recent panic over AI agents talking to one another on their own social media site called Moltbook. Are humans pranking us with AI sentience, or is it the beginning of AI autonomy on everything?

/End

Part 1: AI Bot vs Human and Who Would Win Based on the Physical Task

FeaturedLeave a comment

No doubt some of you are still wondering whether the prediction from Elon Musk that we’ll have robots in our homes within ten years will really become true. With the expense of such a thing, it seems unlikely to me the majority of America will have a bot doing household tasks. The likeliest before ten years is bots taking over many physical labor jobs here, and worldwide. But then you have to look at the reality of what those bots are really capable of doing in the least amount of time.

Based on the videos I’ve seen of the Tesla robots, and others from around the world, it seems that many of them work in a deliberately slow way. Now, some may use the old gastronomical adage of “do you want it fast, or good?” as a way toward giving excuse to have a robot do your laundry (or cooking). The reality may be, a human can do those tasks much faster if given the will.

What is that will, though? Well, you could say we’ll regret not doing our own household tasks if a robot takes them all over. We could lose any drive toward life progression, making us just stagnant beings with no real purpose. The thought of losing this might scare people once they see it actually happening. With me, anyway, it’s a chilling scenario. A recent prediction that we could initially rebel against this out of reflex is probably more than right.

Eventually, we’d be panicked enough where going back to the way we’re living life now is more meaningful. And, out of panic, we’d remember life’s purpose and do a lot of tasks in faster and more efficient ways.

This brings us to the point of this first part in The Human Project. What tasks would humans do better compared to how a humanoid robot would do them? It’s time to take a look at household and on-site work tasks to see how fast we’d really be next to Mr. Optimus.

Doing Laundry, Taking Out the Garbage, Loading Your Refrigerator, etc…

It’s still frustrating to see headlines on places like X stating “It’s so over!” when seeing potential household robots folding our laundry, taking out our garbage, or loading refrigerators with groceries. Have you noticed how slow those bots really go when doing those tasks? Yes, they mostly do a good job, yet it clearly takes longer than if a dedicated human did it themselves.

I know I could fold laundry at a faster clip, and already do. If you’ve done that enough, you probably have a certain technique to help you get it done in a short amount of time. The same goes with taking out your garbage, whether you put it into an outdoor can, or out to a receptacle in an apartment complex. Then you have the refrigerator loading, something I saw done on video with a home bot. It seemed to take the bot an extra, extra amount of time just to grasp certain items and place them in refrigerator compartments.

Oh, and let’s not forget some of the YouTube influencers out there who’ve posted videos of home robots trying to do cooking on a hot stove. One robot in particular couldn’t handle the skillet while frying up some eggs. The bot knocked the pan on the floor, started slipping on the eggs it spilled on the floor, then was yelled at by the influencer.

That’s the kind of comedy we need to realize home robots don’t really seem ready yet to let them go at it alone. Also, I just plan to never have a bot like that in the home. I’m far too used to doing household tasks myself and never want to have the feeling of being lazy. Even if it saves time to work on my creative projects at home, it takes away a feeling of life accomplishment before heading to my piano or iPad Pro.

If you’re dedicated to making your life the best it can be, I’d say your mindset would allow you to accomplish all those household tasks better than a robot would.

What About Mundane Tasks in the Workplace?

I’m not necessarily against certain repetitive tasks being taken over by robots in workplaces. That’s already happening many places, and it’s ultimately healthier to avoid carpal issues, or other injuries. Unfortunately, many other physical labor job tasks that are arguably healthy to do will probably be taken away by those same bots.

Those of you who’ve read me here enough know that I’ve worked at Amazon for close to 2 1/2 years. During 2025, the CEO of Amazon, Andy Jassey, said many operations in Amazon facilities will eventually become automated via AI technology. This is already happening in some fulfillment centers, including a massive one built in Woodburn, about 15 miles from the one I work at in Salem, OR.

Most basic consensus from Amazon associates I’ve talked to say that it may be a long while before our facility is even partially automated with AI. Some think it’ll never happen completely at our building, with Amazon supposedly assuring other job roles will become available to humans when the others are bot-taken.

At this point, it’s really hard to tell what could happen. But one thing I’ve noticed in myself and other colleagues at my Salem facility is that we have a lot more capability in physical function than we think. A lot of this is mental and getting into the right state of mind. Much of this can happen when the pressure is on, or through group efforts where we inspire each other. I already use a Zen method in taking near impossible tasks and making them smaller in my mind.

I’d be willing to take any physical labor test with an AI bot to see who would come out on top in rate count. Based on my performance in the last year, I’d say the odds are good I’d win, if not maybe for everybody. How I’d win would go based on how we train our bodies to move in very efficient ways to get a physical job done at a record-breaking pace.

I’m talking about tasks that I do regularly, including package sorting, cage/cart loading & unloading, water-spidering, packing, and wrapping as just some examples. This last year, I managed to hit exponentially high rates in Amazon’s Vendor Receive section based simply on how fast I could limber my body to handle a box and load it into a cage.

While I’m fully expecting all of that will be done by bots in another 10 years, we may end up having to repair the bots just to have a job there. And that’s a shame since it takes away from proving what our brains are really capable of doing.

If we’re really going to win the war between humans vs bots in doing mundane tasks, we need to train ourselves to work better through mind focus. It’d prove to suits that humans can ultimately work faster and just as efficiently as our bot counterparts.

Will there be a Bot vs. Human Olympics someday to make this case? I plan to make a Chapter 2 on this dystopian idea soon to see what else a human is capable of doing at brisk pace and with incredible strength. In the meantime, we may see more videos of robots continuing to screw up in workplaces—while still being able to keep their jobs.

In Part 2, I’ll look at AI actors and singers suddenly making breakthroughs in turning their human creators wealthy. With a number of AI artists already on the music charts with supposedly heavenly voices, is it too late to make human singers prove to new audiences that they have more soul?

/End

Prologue: Will Artificial Intelligence Really Take Away Human Creativity?

FeaturedLeave a comment

Welcome to my next blog phase: The Human Project. I really want to call this blog an inciter toward a new movement based on new factions developing in the creative world speaking out on artificial intelligence eliminating human-led creativity. Most of this is evolving in Hollywood where key directors and actors are vocally protesting against AI taking away creative job roles from real people. Some of those names include Guillermo del Toro, Park Chan-wook, and Steven Spielberg as just a few examples. Yeah, basically the best directors we have still living.

Del Toro was the most forceful in his comments while promoting his Netflix horror film “Frankenstein” in late fall of 2025. He uttered “F*** AI!” during press interviews for the film. And he made it clear he wanted nothing but practical effects in the movie, something that obviously proved itself as more ethereal and meaningful.

Then you have a notable actor like Ethan Hawke who recently called out AI for being boring and having no soul, not including being plagiarism machines. He said real people interest him far more in how they act, what they say, how they smell, and—well, you know. It was the most pro-human stance uttered from a creative actor, so far, within the small growing pact of those opposed to leaning on AI for all creativity.

With this blog, I’m going to join these individuals in finding some solutions and uphold the art of humans creating things. This won’t be a complete anti-AI tirade, mind you. We have to acknowledge that AI is here, evolving at light speed, but needed as a collaborative tool rather than a complete crutch.

The problem is, many creative companies are going full throttle on relying 100% on AI. As we progress through 2026, there isn’t a doubt we’ll see much of that rev up to alarming levels. I’ll be looking at the whole picture, including whether the public will really embrace AI robots to do things for us in the home and workplace.

To start, though, I’ll be creating a comparison chart on whether humans are truly better at creating things compared to AI bots. Some say we soon won’t be able to tell the difference. I beg to differ since AI still has subtle markers that indicate it’s artificial based on what I deem a lack of an aura. I’ll try to explain what that is in future blogs as well.

After a number of chapters, I hope to find some answers to where we’re going in this dizzying new world of AI evolutionary leaps. Also looked at will be things like whether AI is already sentient and if it’s currently in control of where we’ll be going. If we have no real control, then this blog will become all the more important on creating a middle ground movement. My full intention is to find some kind of happy medium where we, as human beings, can still work and create things—with AI just being docile helpers when we need them.

Keep in mind that I use AI chatbots quite frequently, going along with the roaring throng. In an upcoming piece, I’ll be looking at AI chat bots like Grok and ChatGPT to see whether we should be using them to help with creative projects, or draw some ethical lines. As for me, I’ve used them for a few minor creative ideas when stumped. Mostly, though, I create a blog, song, or other media project myself and ask the bots what they think of it. Their opinions on what they think of our own work is one likely bringing just as much of a debate.

One thing to note about the above AI bots is they seem overly eager to praise certain ideas I (or perhaps you) create. Whether that’s manipulative or not is something I also want to touch on soon. As AI takes hold in our world, what it says to us is sometimes a bit suspect, if wanting to believe it’s sincere.

With all these ideas stirred in a giant pot, I also want to uphold the idea that human beings need to work, one way or the other. The recent idea from Elon Musk that AI will eventually eliminate any need to do labor is one that sounds appealing at first—if potentially dangerous to our well-being. We don’t know for sure how that’ll play out, but I want to reflect on certain jobs that should be mostly human-centered. And I definitely want to uphold your own job if you think AI might be taking it away from you this year or in coming years.

This reflects personally for me, additionally, since I work full-time at Amazon doing mostly physical labor on their ship dock. With Amazon’s CEO recently saying that AI will mostly take over rote warehouse operations within a decade, I’ll be opining on exactly how wrong that thinking is.

Yes, it may turn out that humans can outperform bots by working in a certain, physical way.

Hopefully this prologue gave you a little taste of what I have in mind for The Human Project through 2025 and beyond. I figure it’ll be one of the single most important subjects throughout the rest of the 2020s, if not longer. What the ultimate outcome will be if I’m still doing this blog five years from now is a long mystery away.

Here’s to the hope this writing project becomes a significant spoke in the giant wheel of coalitions that want to work this out in the best possible way. I also promote the idea of community on this, so I’ll be offering anyone to send a guest opinion piece, or just opine in the comment sections as much as possible.

Look out for Part 1 soon, which will be the above comparison chart on what makes a compelling creative piece by humans vs. AI. As you probably learned in my Uber Eats/DoorDash blog, I also won’t always have a straight face on these overly serious subjects.

P.S.—All prior content from my independent TV/movie writing (going back to 2015) to the DoorDash blog are still archived here forever. Feel free to peruse any of that when I have inevitable breaks/gaps in The Human Project publishing schedule.

/End

Chapter XL: Uber Eats Suing DoorDash with an AntiTrust Suit for Anti-Competitiveness

FeaturedLeave a comment

Since I started this blog in January of 2024, I always made sure to include Uber Eats AND DoorDash in the titles since I worked for both over a two-year span. Both were very good for me, if also challenging in their procedures. But I always set the idea that they were nearly identical in stature, if not even on an equal plane in profits made.

It turns out, they’re a lot more competitive than most people think, with apparent imbalance in their popularity. Uber Eats filed an antitrust suit against DoorDash earlier this year because they claimed latter has recently been pressuring restaurants throughout America to exclusively use their delivery service. Uber says this is affecting their own profits as a result and creating a sense of general anticompetitiveness in the food delivery marketplace.

DoorDash says Uber is overreacting and that their service is picked more often by restaurants because they simply offer better features. Let’s turn on the mediator head here and try to figure out who’s really right. Is DoorDash finding ways to twist the truth of their actions, or is Uber right that there needs to be a more fair system in marketing to America’s eateries?

I’m not partial to one or the other since I worked for both. It was Uber Eats for the first year (eventually reaching Diamond status), then DoorDash the second year (reaching Platinum). Both have their extreme pros and cons, though the way they approach restaurants to use their services was never known to me. At the time, however, it seemed like DoorDash was always getting top billing on restaurant windows/ads, with Uber usually second-billed.

What’s really going on here, and what’s the eventual outcome? Since both companies were financially helpful to me for two years, I consider this final blog segment about them to be a form of peace pipe.

Is DoorDash Really Being Unfair to Uber Eats?

One could say DoorDash does have a more successful system that lets new restaurants be able to market themselves while using effective onboarding support tools. They reportedly have a better support base that uses real phone agents when restaurants need help. Uber Eats is apparently using more automated systems of late, if still having better data tools to help restaurants track metrics.

Both companies have high commission fees, so restaurants shouldn’t expect to save any money. This is a problem I’ve already addressed in a recent blog, making either choice of DoorDash or Uber a challenge for new eateries looking to make maximum profits.

Looking at stats for both, though, I noticed one thing that really stood out about DoorDash: They cover a lot of wider areas outside of cities, including rural territory. I delivered quite a lot to rural areas, a market that’s obviously growing since those people are in greater need of food deliveries due to distance. Uber Eats seems more focused on urban areas, which may not have the bigger concentration of customers restaurants cater to.

DoorDash is more centered on the suburbs in addition to some rural areas. These seem to have the biggest percentage of customers in general compared to those who live strictly in urban environments.

Perhaps Uber Eats should focus on growing their customer base to these areas to have real hope of competing with DoorDash. With that in mind, it might look like they’re just playing a sour grapes card in filing an antitrust suit.

But then, when seeing the claims against DoorDash, you have to wonder if the competition between the two is turning into a real blood sport.

Are DoorDash Threats Against Restaurants Real?

The above antitrust suit from Uber Technologies against DoorDash additionally says that latter threatens restaurants to remove them from the marketplace if Uber Eats is also added to the mix. DoorDash also supposedly threatens restaurants with higher commission fees if contracting with Uber Eats.

These scare tactics have allegedly hurt the revenue for Uber Eats, hence them also attempting to stay competitive in a more aggressive way. For instance, their ride share system helps give an edge in competing, and it’s something DoorDash hasn’t taken on—yet. Also, a lot of restaurants and users probably don’t know that Uber frequently does a lot of loss-leading with their delivery fees, etc, to attract more customers later.

So far, Uber hasn’t raised their prices after doing loss-leading. This means they may have a good case on their hands in being the underdog while DoorDash continues to overshadow them.

Can DoorDash and Uber Eats Work Together to Become Better?

As of this writing, the antitrust suit Uber filed against DoorDash is still pending. It’s likely going to be a long-winded case once the courts take it on. Keep in mind that this suit was filed in California where the courts are likely tied up for years. DoorDash looked to have the lawsuit dismissed, but a judge in Cali refused to dismiss the accusations.

So, this is likely a case that will go on long past this last blog piece about Uber and DoorDash. What the outcome will be is anyone’s guess, though it seems likely that either DoorDash will pay a settlement to Uber for losses, or the two will work together to make new changes to how delivery services compete with one another.

The latter is the likeliest of all, even if DoorDash has to ultimately hold their nose. Still, they might win on a few points, despite being more vulnerable due to already dominating the market. What’s truly best here is more scrutiny on all companies like this on how they work with restaurants. I mean, new restaurants are already vulnerable to their own competition, making any changes a domino effect in helping them.

Antitrust suits are already becoming more common in the corporate world. No matter if this doesn’t create massive change in the bigger picture, creating more awareness of how big companies compete is an important business practice. It’s obviously needed, especially with major corporations acquiring other corporations at a record pace—creating constant anticompetitive concerns.

Nevertheless, you have to wonder if Uber and DoorDash will ultimately merge at some point based on the amount of major acquisitions in America. While I’m not a fan of seeing every corporation consolidate to just a few power players, seeing Uber and DoorDash merge looks good to me. It’d be the joining of two companies that provide an important service to people, if needing a lot of refinement in how it’s managed.

A merge as the answer to the antitrust suit would also help bring about a precedence in making food delivery all about people rather than making them automated with AI. The chances of food delivery becoming run by self-driving vehicles or robots seems like the next dark evolution on our planet.

Uber and DoorDash helped me make some good money over a certain period of time. They still help any person have the freedom to deliver food/drink and make money whenever they want—as imperfect as it is. The same applies to local restaurants who struggle to find avenues to being noticed.

This segue takes me to a final note here. The blog piece you’re reading is now the finale of my Uber Eats/DoorDash blog journey. Starting soon, this space will be devoted to The Human Project, my new writing movement in finding answers to the problem of AI taking away human jobs and creativity.

As that starts, all 40 chapters of this current blog will still be archived here so you can make Uber Eats and/or DoorDash a successful side gig for yourself. They’re still worth doing with a lifelong and proper life guide as a textual companion.

/End

Chapter XXXIX: Will Uber Eats Delivering Groceries to Homes at a Discount Really Save Money for Families?

FeaturedLeave a comment

The biggest debate in 2025 America seems to be the price of groceries and whether they’re still too expensive. You’ll find some who say they’ve lowered in price after a long period of inflation, then others who say they’re still too steep for most average families. Amid that clearly political debate came Uber Eats seeing an untapped service. That is, offering the convenience of grocery delivery at a price anyone can supposedly afford.

Most people are already familiar with Instacart and their grocery delivery service. Some or many of you have perhaps already received some groceries at your door from them—if even doing the delivery yourself. While there’s often been issues involved with delivering groceries (especially with fresh grocery items), Instacart has basically stood alone without a lot of competition. DoorDash has offered some grocery delivery services, if not a large chunk of their offerings.

Enter Uber Eats earlier this year in wanting to expand their delivery strategies. So far, news shows Uber has taken off in offering fresh grocery delivery with special discounts. They’re already making billions in annual grosses.

What makes this stand out is their offering of a “Fresh Days” concept where you can get up to 50% off on certain items in specific grocery markets. You have to be a member of the premium Uber One tier, though, to obtain these grocery discounts—proving you need to pay money to not only make money, but also save money.

Since Uber is basically competing with the above delivery services (including Amazon), they had to distinguish themselves further with specific features. The best of these are flexible aspects like supposedly easy grocery replacements, including real-time editing of your grocery shopping list. They also expanded their eligible grocery store list, albeit now partnering with Aldi, a discount grocery chain that may or may not be in your local area.

Based on the profits Uber is raking in with this, they obviously hit a nerve in the needs of the general public. But is the public really saving money and time going this route? What about the deliverer, and is it worth your own time to deliver groceries to people in your city?

I’ve delivered groceries for DoorDash, and it can often bring some uncomfortable surprises when picking up items. As for ordering groceries, the debate is on whether it’s easier to just visit your local bargain store yourself.

Delivering a Major Grocery Order

If you decide to take a grocery order from Uber Eats, DoorDash, or Instacart, you have to expect that it’s going to entail many, many bags. Nobody is going to order groceries digitally without making it a bulk buy. Not that some people don’t just order a few grocery items online, even if that’s generally through Amazon if not perishable items.

When I was alerted to pick up groceries while doing DoorDash, the downside to their system was you had no idea how many things you’d be handling. There was no information on the app about how many items or bags there’d be. More than a few times, I learned I’d be handling up to 10 bags of groceries after thinking it’d be a smaller order. Yeah, it sometimes brought a jaw drop from me in front of the takeout clerks.

Thanks to reasonably large trunk space in my Kia, I had no problem placing the bags in there. It’s always a good idea to keep the trunk area in your car as free as possible in the event you do get a massive grocery pickup.

The most positive aspect to delivering groceries is that you’ll get paid more, plus there isn’t a huge rush on delivery time since you’re not delivering someone’s lunch. Delivering is also going to mean simply leaving the bags by the recipient’s door since they’re more than likely not home. In this case, it made me wonder how long the bags would sit there considering theft is already a problem with simple, one-bag deliveries.

This is why DoorDash always required a photo of ALL the groceries to ensure everything was properly delivered. And yet, would you allow all your groceries to sit outside your door for possibly hours—even if you (supposedly) received discounts?

The Discount Reality

Despite Aldi being a major American discount grocery store, it doesn’t even exist yet in 11 U.S. states. I’ll admit that I’d never heard of those stores until reading about Uber Eats partnering with them for cheaper grocery deliveries. Instead, Aldi is focused on certain states (mostly in the U.S. South) to gain the most profits.

In this regard, those of you reading this from the U.S. West Coast probably can’t even use Uber Eats grocery delivery. Some of you who need grocery deliveries due to no car or physical handicaps would likely have to tap the more expensive delivery services like Instacart and Amazon.

Even if you do have the Uber Eats grocery service available, remember that markups and added fees are going to make it often $50 more. This just ruins the reportedly incredible discount deals you can often find in Aldi stores. I found out they often only charge a dollar for many produce items…assuming it’s not sub-par quality.

Don’t forget about the protocol of leaving a tip for your grocery deliverer besides. You don’t want to be the recipient of rage from an Uber delivery person because you refused to tip them anything. If you’re getting multiple bags of groceries delivered, a $10 tip is more than acceptable. But of course, it adds even more to your bill.

It’s now considered that Uber Eats grocery delivery (at discount) is still a little too expensive for the average American due to the add-on costs. You’re better off just using it for emergency items you need immediately if you’re too busy to go to the grocery store in-person. Still, a lot of Americans are taking advantage of Uber’s service based on the profits being made. It may be just temporary as many find any advantage to save as much money as possible when buying food for themselves or their families.

Going to Your Local Discount Grocery Store

Here in Oregon’s Willamette valley, we have several notable grocery stores that offer food at discount prices. WinCo is one of the best-known ones, and it’s where I shop often. While some may suggest it attracts a ghetto atmosphere, this isn’t always true—especially if going late at night or early mornings. Since they’re open 24 hrs, you can shop at any time. And, they have prices generally matching ones at Aldi stores.

We also have Grocery Outlet, which is grouped in with being an overstock/close-out type of market. It’s a near match with WinCo, if perhaps finding even cheaper items there due to near expired products.

These two locations alone are prominent here in the OR valley, making it easier to travel to them. If you don’t have a car, you can easily get to them within a reasonable time via our city bus. Thanks to the 24-hour aspect to WinCo, you can also shop after-hours if too busy to most of the week. Just remember that WinCo has store stockers working inside if you decide to go at—uh, 3 a.m.

With these available, plus Aldi stores being a staple in other parts of America, it makes more sense to just visit your local discount grocery store in-person. You ultimately save money this way, plus have no worry about someone stealing your delivered groceries off your porch until you get home.

This isn’t to say Uber Eats isn’t a good alternative—even for the reason of ultimately hating visiting a grocery store. I mean, they do get crowded, and it can feel like standing in a long bread line on some occasions. Add in screaming kids, plus cranky adults—and…you know.

If you decide to partake in Uber Eats’ grocery delivery service, just remember to set aside a little extra in your grocery fund. Or, simply use it for a few extra things you forgot at your local discount store. There isn’t anything worse than suddenly noticing you forgot to pick up paper towels or a loaf of bread on your last visit—requiring an extra trip.

That may be worth the $10 you’re perhaps paying per month for the premium Uber One grocery delivery service. Trouble is, you need to spend $35 minimum on your grocery bill to qualify for no delivery fees.

In Part XL, I’m going to wind up this Uber Eats/DoorDash blog by addressing a recent antitrust lawsuit Uber filed against DoorDash over anticompetitiveness. Is DoorDash really bullying restaurants to use their service over Uber? The two leading food delivery services in America are locking horns, which may be a fight to the finish.

/End

Chapter XXXVIII: The Top Demographics of Uber Eats and DoorDash Customers

FeaturedLeave a comment

It’s sometimes hard to tell exactly who you’re delivering to when doing Uber Eats and DoorDash, simply because not all customers physically present themselves to you. Even when you do hand off a bag of food to someone, it may be just one person giving you thanks. And that may assume you’re delivering to a single person who prefers to stay in rather than face traffic or other people.

Well, that lone person you delivered to may just be the matriarch or patriarch of a large family. The other family members may not be home yet. I’m saying this based on recent research I did on what the most prominent demographics are in ordering food via Uber or DoorDash. The reveal on this was a bit surprising when ordering food to eat at home seemed like a valid form of single life.

As you begin or continue your Uber Eats/DoorDash delivery adventures, you might want to know who you’re now delivering to since some orders may be larger than expected. This doesn’t necessarily mean a single person eating the equivalent of three dinners out of depression.

The Single Person vs. The Family

Based on my recent research, it’s said that families are now the leading demographic in most food delivery customers. This surprised me at first based on my own experiences delivering DoorDash and Uber orders for two years. It seemed the majority of my own customers were singles in the immediate post-COVID times when I delivered.

But it’s often hard to tell who’s really in a household. While it may appear that one person is home and takes the order at their door, there may be a slew of others living there. They may not be home yet—hence why the seeming single woman or guy taking the bag at the door fools you.

The old jokes used to be that a robed young woman who answered the door to take your order was a single person sending some kind of subtle signal. No doubt many male Uberers and Dashers have had the fantasy of being invited inside with a flirtatious single girl. Ditto goes for female deliverers delivering to what appears to be single guys.

Reality is a different story, and the above really just occurs based on watching too many movies, TikTik videos, or hearing second-hand stories. After my research, I came to the conclusion that all those seemingly single women answering the door when I delivered were really hiding a boyfriend, and possibly a huge family somewhere in the house.

All the more real is the state of the American economy nowadays and why families would be the most likely DoorDash recipients. With many in a family working multiple jobs to stay above water, the actual family members are probably not home until evening or later. No doubt one person in the family stays home, or still just works from home. They’re the ones who I likely encountered taking the order. However, there were just as many “Leave At Door” orders as ones who took the bag from me.

One thing I noticed is there were definitely more people at home when I delivered in the late evening hours. Those usually involved larger orders, so there was clearer evidence of families being the center of late evening customers.

What about those lighter orders, though? About 75% of the orders I’d deliver were single bag items—giving me the thought singles were really the leading DoorDash demographic.

DoorDash Fragmentation in Families

It’s not always easy to tell what a leading demographic is in food delivery since so many circumstances are unique. For instance, many of my colleagues at Amazon (where I work full-time) order in food from DoorDash or Uber Eats. This gives the appearance that it’s a single individual ordering food when it’s just someone from an ordinarily large family ordering lunch or dinner in to their workplace.

The same might be said if someone’s visiting at another house with a friend or relative. Maybe my deliveries were an exception, but it still seemed a lot of people I delivered to were singles. I basically surmised this based on one car in the driveway and the size of the house. Nevertheless, I do know that many families are more fragmented than ever. One member of a family is just as likely to order in DoorDash for themselves while everyone else eats/drinks something else.

In my mind, this is the real truth in the demographic debate. And, yeah, it’s also depressing since it means that a lot of families aren’t sitting at the dinner table together anymore. The kids may be off eating their DoorDash orders in their rooms while the parents eat together in the living room—or even going out to eat.

This isn’t to say I didn’t pick up bigger orders fully intended for a family dinner. These were very rare, though, and they were usually for parties at businesses or at someone’s home. I also found out that delivering twenty pizzas to said large groups can fog up all of your car windows—or, particularly, in a more compact Kia.

All told, delivering larger orders is more challenging than delivering single-bag items. You have to juggle more drinks on sometimes flimsy cup holders. Plus, having to carry six large bags usually required having to make three trips back and forth from the restaurant to my car. The single orders are so much more convenient, and I reiterate they were the majority of my orders over the above two-year period.

Are More Women Ordering DoorDash Than Men?

Other stats are showing that women slightly outdo males in ordering Uber Eats and/or DoorDash the most often. And, most of those women & men are Gen Z/Millennials. This can tell you a little more about your customer reality. When you look at other recent American stats, more women are staying single, or single mothers with kids.

Even more interesting is families who make under $25,000 per year are ordering the most often, probably because going to restaurants or buying ingredients in stores are far too expensive. One could also guess that all those reports of customers accusing deliverers of not delivering orders (when they did) are low-income people with sad attempts to get their money back after ordering food.

However, some higher-income families are ordering more in urban and suburban environments. They’re apparently spending the most on DoorDash and perhaps your most likely customers. I still think there’s variations to this, though, and the stats aren’t necessarily showing the reality of how separated families are.

The illusion of unity in a household is possibly more singles living all together in one house to save money due to chronic economic uncertainty. Yes, the true way to have more money to order DoorDash frequently.

In Part XXXIX, I’m going to look at the recent concept by Uber Eats to deliver fresh groceries at a discount to their customers. Will those customers really save money on groceries, or is it better to just visit a local, bargain grocery outlet without Muzak playing in the background?

/End

Chapter XXXVII of Uber Eats/DoorDash Blog (Video Edition)

FeaturedLeave a comment

Chapter XXXVII: Commission Fees from DoorDash & Uber Eats and How it Could Affect Restaurants You Deliver From

FeaturedLeave a comment

One thing I noticed when doing Uber Eats and DoorDash was that not all local restaurants in my city were participating with the big food delivery behemoths. While some eateries eventually latched on, it made me wonder why some put it off. The big name fast-food places have obviously never removed themselves from these services. But localized restaurants play a major dice game going along with the major players.

Then I started digging in to the details of how restaurants work with DoorDash and Uber. The latter companies always take significant commission fees from the restaurants as a major payback for the exposure. Smaller restaurants can benefit from this, of course, if also taking a potential loss if they don’t get enough Uber or DoorDash orders.

The major problem is many restaurants get lured into the top-tier commission fees, often putting the business in jeopardy just because they’re lured into the enhanced exposure promise. If you own a restaurant, or just delivering for Uber Eats and DoorDash, what’s really going on with the commission fees? The future may look a little more interesting as restaurants figure out more creative ways to get food to their customers.

How Much Are Restaurants Paying in Commission Fees?

It might sound like a ripoff, but the most basic tier for both of the famous food delivery services already tops off at 15%. That may sound like a lot to take out for a restaurant just getting started. Even then, a basic plan hardly scratches the surface on what DoorDash or Uber can do for an upstart eatery.

Their Plus plans take out a 25% commission, not including an additional 6% for pickups. However, this offers a lot more visibility for the business when marketing in other ways can cost more. And it always helps when someone sees that a new restaurant can deliver an item quickly through an Uber or DoorDash driver.

While the 25% Plus plans are popular, evidence shows most restaurants are delving into the Premier plans that take out a whopping 30% in commission fees. No doubt a lot of localized restaurants are lured in based on what the Premier tier offers. After all, DoorDash offers growth guarantees, including expanded delivery radiuses. They even promise commission refunds if a new restaurant makes fewer than 20 orders during a month.

Add in other fees Uber and DoorDash take out (often operational fees, and, you know, What the Hell fees), we’re talking close to 40 or 50% in commission grabs. If you’re just starting a new restaurant, your margins are already on thin ice. Having to pay out nearly half your profits on commissions to DoorDash or Uber is a major back-breaker.

Regardless, I’ve seen some local fast-food joints here in Salem, OR finally take on DoorDash after personally wondering why they previously hadn’t.

Do Your Local Restaurants Participate in Uber or DoorDash?

There were several local restaurants here in Salem, OR that didn’t do DoorDash, and one in particular still doesn’t. The first of these was a local fast-food franchise called Hawaiian Time. For my entire first year of doing Uber and DoorDash, I kept driving by their locations and puzzled over why I was never called there to pick up. Finally, a year later, I received an order from there. I asked the woman at the drive-thru pick-up window if they’d held off on using DoorDash until then. She said they had, but were giving it a try to help find and gain more customers. They already had a unique menu, and it seems to have helped them as of the last time I did a DoorDash pick-up there.

Then you have slightly larger franchises like coffee drive-thru Dutch Bros. So far, they have drive-thru shops in only 19 U.S. states, with full intention of becoming national. The interesting thing is my local Dutch Bros locations have no association with Uber or DoorDash, or at least when I delivered. Because of their intended expansion, this might change in another year or two from this writing.

Let’s also keep in mind that some local restaurants or franchises have more than enough business from the local community and don’t need DoorDash. Dutch Bros above have long car lines every day, making the delivery services probably unnecessary. This is unlike Starbucks and regional coffee drive-thru Black Rock Coffee. I picked up nearly daily at those equally popular coffee places.

As you go out and do delivery pick-ups, you may find yourself visiting the usual suspects most of the time. That is, McDonalds, Starbucks, Jack in the Box, and Popeye’s as just a few. The national company-driven fast-food places can easily afford a 30-50% DoorDash commission takeout and still bring in millions per year.

Local restaurants are trying to compete with them, so sometimes take a chance with the higher commission tiers. Unfortunately, they end up in debt when DoorDash takes out a huge chunk of their profits, despite the amazing exposure. The balance on that is very tricky, if perhaps still profitable when giving it some time.

So, that local restaurant you WANT to pick up from may be abstaining from DoorDash—for now. Or, they may just decide to take a chance in avoiding the delivery services all together.

Will More Restaurants Drop Uber and DoorDash Due to High Commission Fees?

Operating a localized restaurant is already a major business risk, but many new ones keep popping up. Local Salem restaurants here often have a hard time, though many do take on DoorDash as I’ve noticed over the last several years. There’s more localized restaurants using the delivery apps than those not. This said, many restaurants here don’t last beyond five years.

With more effective marketing methods out there now, local restaurants may start dropping Uber and DoorDash in favor of customers doing direct ordering through the eatery’s website. Creating a marketing plan just for that can be done a little cheaper via online means than paying a DoorDash commission fee for every sale.

This might mean buying ad space in the online realms using SEO techniques so those who search local restaurants can easily find that local place in a Google search. People still search for restaurants this way, and/or using ChatGPT or Grok on X. But then, do people still want a DoorDash delivery?

Some restaurants do their own deliveries, particularly pizza places. Many of them still use DoorDash, though, to not overwhelm the delivery drivers. Regardless, balancing that out with customers who’d rather pick up in-person could lead to a better advantage for a few.

I mean, the bad publicity of Uber deliverers and Dashers dipping into a customer’s food are all over the place by now. With an eroded lack of public trust in recent years with the sign of any bag tampering, we could see more local restaurants deliver on their own.

It probably won’t hurt the big food delivery titans. Due to national fast-food companies still raking in profits daily, they’ll stick with DoorDash and keep former and latter in the black. The hope for businesspeople may be that their localized restaurants won’t have to rely on Uber and DoorDash just to become a reasonable success.

One might wish this as a parallel to those who deliver for the delivery services, simply because they’re forced to and have no other options. Hopefully they’ll have new lucrative options as much as your favorite local fast-food joints.

In Part XXXVII, I’ll take on the topic of recurring customers, and new statistics showing families as the top Uber & DoorDash users. How long will families be able to afford using these delivery apps over the singles?

/End

Part XXXVI of Uber Eats/DoorDash Blog (Video Edition)

FeaturedLeave a comment

Chapter XXXVI: Creating or Dealing with Elaborate Door Security While Doing DoorDash or Uber Eats

FeaturedLeave a comment

Perusing information on X lately is a bit of a gamble what with all the quackery and other questionable content seen there in the Elon Musk era. You still see videos pertaining to DoorDash and Uber Eats, though, and it’s usually controversial content—like deliverers rebelling against no tips as just one example. Recently, I saw a related video that stood out from the others. It was about a woman who sets up elaborate safety procedures at her door when having food delivered from Ubers and Dashers.

Now, I can’t say for sure if any of that was really true. Evidence is there it might have been done as a set-up to gain clicks. But it seemed overly elaborate to be a fake.

With increasing mentally ill people out there today, it’s more than possible many people create their own security procedures at their front doors when having food or drink delivered. I mean, we’ve already seen evidence people with short fuses are out there delivering—probably because they have no other means of income.

This doesn’t demean being a Dasher. All of the ones I encountered when delivering were friendly and intelligent individuals. The ones who might pose a threat are perhaps more likely to avoid conversations with their fellow deliverers anyway. And I wouldn’t blame anyone for setting up basic or complex security at their door when having something delivered.

What’s really going on out there, and would you put up with someone’s detailed security measures to deliver food to their door? Also, let’s expand with whether you’d do the same with an Uber or Dasher delivering to your own abode.

How Far is the Security Going?

Based on the above video seen on X, it’s mostly women taking these measures out of precaution. You can’t blame them in the age we live where you’re never really sure who’s lurking around your house. No doubt men are doing the same security here and there.

For the record: I never encountered a customer who directed me to a security process in delivering their items. Then again, the “Leave the order at my door” note on the app was always a signal they didn’t want to answer in person. It’s the simplest method to bringing a safe delivery method. Some people don’t even trust that, though, considering people have their food stolen off their doorsteps far too often.

I always worried that someone was going to steal a food bag near a customer’s door, particularly when having it exposed to anyone walking or driving by. I’d frequently see strangers walk past while seeing me drop the bag at someone’s doorstep. In many cases, however, the customer opened the door to retrieve their food mere seconds later, often murmuring “Thank you”, or just waiting until I was out of view.

Once in a while, I was given specific directions to deliver the item to the customer’s back door, a shed, or some other nearby, isolated area. This was usually because they’d have food bags stolen before at their front door, or because the front area wasn’t completely accessible.

While I never encountered someone giving me security directions in-person, it appears it’s becoming an increasing trend. What happens if you encounter someone like this, including a multi-step process to make it safe for the person?

This could delay you since time is always of the essence when it comes to prompt deliveries. Regardless, the customer is always right, and you should (arguably) go along with it.

Should You Talk to Uber and DoorDash About What the Customer Did?

If you happen to encounter an overly elaborate door security procedure that wastes too much time, you should definitely call Uber or DoorDash agents to tell them what happened. The customer may get a talking to on taking too much of your time in delivering safely. That person may have to come up with a simpler solution for you to deliver without it feeling like a prolonged, multi-step authentication process.

In the X video I referenced above, it showed the woman in question implementing several extended security procedures to ensure her own safety. One of those was spreading salt on her walkway to capture the delivery person’s footprints. She also forces the delivery person to put on a handcuff outside her door before handing off the food to ensure the deliverer doesn’t invade her home.

It didn’t stop there. She also has the delivery man show his I.D. card, including providing his fingerprints for a complete background check. Then she sends out a remote-controlled drone to capture the guy’s car license plate. This ensures it’s a real delivery person and not an illegal immigrant or other fake. The drone also follows the car to make sure it moves out of the area and doesn’t linger (see my blog piece about “lingering”).

Unfortunately, the one who posted the video called the woman a “liberal”, giving an unexpected political bias to who might do this. The woman in the video made a good point, nevertheless, about how she can’t trust anyone anymore.

If this is true, would you feel comfortable setting up a similar security protocol at your home?

Getting Your Food Faster

Some people just want their food handed to them due to being in a hurry. You may be one of those people, hence having to deal with an Uber or Dasher handing the food off to you. Would you trust a deliverer handing food to you at your door—including if you were home by yourself?

Well, I’ll tell you this: I’d trust myself since I was always a reliable and conscientious deliverer for Uber and DoorDash. But, I’m consciously aware that others aren’t like me and are basically forced into delivering food to survive.

There’s been concern about illegal U.S. citizens delivering for a while, despite Uber and DoorDash now providing better methods to make sure real residents with licenses work for them. Traffic offenses are also scoped out through a background check done once per year. Not that this would completely eliminate any potentially psychotic people out there.

From your perspective, imagine a deliverer delivering your food, yet you fear the delivery person looking a bit creepy when spotted on your Ring camera. You need your food fast and don’t want it dropped off at the door. What are you going to do since you’re the only one home?

Outside of building a security moat loaded with piranhas, your best bet is to speak through your Ring camera when the person rings the doorbell. You can just tell them to place it at the door since you’re likely feet away inside anyway.

This makes for a good compromise without forcing the deliverer to go through ridiculously long security measures. Oh, and it helps to have dogs who bark at your door as proof you’re completely secure. Dogs intimidated me more than once at many front doors.

Trusting Your Deliverer

One of the most satisfying things about doing DoorDash and Uber is that you’re going to have a lot of repeat customers after a time. If you stick with it for at least a year, you’ll start delivering to a group of regulars you’ll get to know. When I had to deliver to these people, we’d chat in text like longtime friends.

It’s here where you’ll know right where to go and what to expect every time. Best of all, the customer has complete trust in you based on your past track record. That means either a routine tip amount or more during each visit.

Those of you who live in slightly smaller towns or cities will probably have repeat deliverers. Get to know them by chatting in the provided text boxes (without flirting). You’ll be able to have worry-free deliveries this way based on a long-standing track record. Just don’t set up quicksand in your yard for the still mysterious guys delivering from Amazon.

In Chapter XXXVII, I’ll look at the issue of high commission fees from DoorDash and Uber. If you wonder why these delivery services aren’t being used in your favorite local restaurants or fast food places, it’s usually due to thin margins. This could affect you and DoorDash in some restaurants starting their own delivery services.

/End

Chapter XXXV of Uber Eats/DoorDash Blog (Video Edition)

FeaturedLeave a comment

Chapter XXXV: Running Over Road Debris and Creating Tire Maintenance While Doing Uber Eats or DoorDash

FeaturedLeave a comment

For being a first-world country here in the United States, some cities are starting to see a heavy dose of third-world garbage and debris in our roads. My time doing DoorDash can attest to this, or at least in my hometown of Salem, Oregon. Mind you, my home city wasn’t anywhere like that until things started to deteriorate in city government—including increasing homelessness. Over the last 10 to 15 years, potholes and tire-shredding junk in our roads has increased tenfold.

Hopefully your town or city isn’t as bad, though it perhaps is. I’ve had a theory that the homeless sometimes deliberately leave large pieces of debris in the roads as sabotage to those with expensive cars. Although some of that road garbage is just random from heavy winds or other circumstances.

Whatever the reality really is, you’re going to encounter a lot of things in your local roads that could cause endless headaches for you if delivering food all day for Uber Eats or DoorDash.

It’s time to look at what kind of shit in the roads you might encounter, how to avoid running over these items, and how to report it. Plus, you need a plan to deal with tire maintenance since that road debris could give you a flat every couple of weeks.

What is the Worst Road Debris Out There?

One thing for sure is broken glass is one of the top five road debris issues on a wide scale. It’s nothing new, and it’s been a problem here in America for multiple decades. You probably even remember your parents or grandparents swerving in the road to avoid shattered glass from a recent car accident—or someone deliberately breaking bottles in the road.

THAT was what caused most flat tires, long before DoorDash or Uber Eats were even a spark in a corporate exec eye. Second runner up was nails that usually and somehow fell off trucks or other vehicles. This used to be a more random problem, but it’s increased in recent years due to either more vehicles on the road, or more sabotage.

Broken glass has also increased somewhat here in Salem due to more accidents and our explosion in population. Regardless, most of the flat tires I experienced while Dashing were seldom from glass or nails.

The worst piece of road debris I ever encountered was random pieces of wood lying in our streets. One day, while in a hurry to deliver food to someone via DoorDash, I saw what looked like a block of wood in the middle of the road. After realizing that it was a THICK block of wood almost strategically placed in the center of the lane, I didn’t have enough time to swerve to avoid running right over it.

Of course, it shredded my left front tire. Thanks to being not far away from a local tire repair place, I was able to get there (after somehow making the delivery) to have the tire replaced. If you have tires from a particular tire repair center, they’ll often repair a ruined tire for free.

You might be surprised to learn that wood is one of the worst things to run over. I have no doubt it was some kind of diabolical trap by someone to deliberately ruin someone’s tires. Not that you still can’t get a flat from other debris if going on non-paved roads.

Avoid Gravel Roads If You Can

I’ll admit a couple of flat tires I had were due to nails. However, I’m fairly sure they were lying in a few gravel roads I took while delivering in remote locations. You’d think every road here in the valley of Oregon is paved by now. Well, we still have gravel roads around farms and other outskirt areas where wineries reside.

One particular remote area in the southern regions of Salem had me delivering to some recurring customers on very long and bumpy gravel roads. It required more than a couple of miles driving through heavy gravel, no doubt littered with various categories of tire-damaging items.

In my case, there was no alternative to get to these locations, so I had to take the chance. The bad thing is it’d take several days for one of my tires to show it was damaged after driving these rough roads. Driving an unpaved road is basically a one or two-week slow leak suicide for rubber wheels.

Unless you have an SUV and some very hefty tires, try to avoid driving on unpaved roads if you can. It’ll save you a lot of slow tire damage, not including saving your vehicle’s suspension system. You may still have to drive there, unfortunately, since some DoorDash customers order food because they’re living in these remote locations.

Also keep in mind it’s not just gravel roads that hide tire-damaging junk. You may also encounter offbeat side roads containing massive potholes. I’ve had to drive on side roads like this, and the potholes were nearly like deep moon craters. These often hide sharp objects like nails and random pieces of garbage. Even a sharp rock gouging into your tire could cause a flat tire either in minutes or a matter of days.

Your Tire Maintenance Plan

It may sound dirt dull to come up with a tire maintenance plan when out on the road delivering food. But it’s mandatory since you don’t want to waste your earnings on buying a new tire if not covered by a warranty. I can almost guarantee you that you’re going to encounter flat tires more often than you ever imagined based on how much road travel you’ll do.

The best option here is to get your tire warranties in paper form. Here in Oregon, we have a tire franchise called Les Schwab where they literally give you an envelope with your warranty every time you buy a tire. While Schwab’s is generally more expensive, I still recommend them if you happen to live or do DoorDash in the Oregon valley.

Not that they don’t have record of you buying tires there once you show up (with a flat tire). But having physical proof of the warranty will save you some time at the counter when first going in. Believe me, any time you can save when getting a tire replaced or fixed is worth the effort. That being said, expect at least an hour’s wait to get your tire patched or exchanged.

Sure, the waiting time to fix a tire is the worst aspect of this, especially when you allot time to do DoorDash and expect to make a certain amount. Your best bet is to set aside an emergency fund exclusively for tires. Because once you get a flat, it’s going to screw up your intended schedule for the day.

Hopefully your town or city is different, yet expect a flat at least once per month, if not more often. Much of this, again, depends on the type of tires you invested in earlier. A more expensive tire (close to $1000) with thick tread may last a lot longer when doing DoorDash than a $200 one.

Just be sure that you know where each tire was bought so you can get a free replacement. Buying a new (or used) car means you should really replace all four tires soon.

What Can We Do About All the Debris In Our Roads?

All you can really do to combat growing road debris is call your city leaders and tell them what you encountered. They may not do anything, particularly because the increasing homeless crisis continues without many cities being able to control it. No one can really monitor what’s going to end up in America’s roads either.

Also, if it’s safe, remove any debris from the road yourself to prevent other drivers from running over the object. I wish I would have removed that above block of wood from the road. It couldn’t be done since it was right in a busy part of that street. The good news is, when I drove by there a couple days later (with my new tire), someone removed the wood—no doubt a city worker. Someone clearly reported it being there.

Potholes are an additional reportable issue to your local city management. Many people DO report them here. Some get fixed right away, and others still fester. The worst ones as big as the Grand Canyon are still out there on various main arterials and side roads. When it’s raining, it’s almost like driving through a swimming pool that was a previous landfill.

In Chapter XXXVI, I’ll cover the new trend of door safety from customers. Some women (and men) are setting up extra safety methods with DoorDash deliverers to stay safe from potential house invaders pretending to deliver. I saw this covered on an X video recently, so I’ll offer my opinions on the subject.

/End

Chapter XXXIV of DoorDash/Uber Eats Blog (Video Edition)

FeaturedLeave a comment

Chapter XXXIV: Creating Detours When Facing Road Delays with Uber Eats & DoorDash

FeaturedLeave a comment

Just about every city or town has a mainline railroad track often crossing roads that take you into other important areas. And, perhaps far too frequent, is the chance of a train breaking down or stopping—hence blocking you from gaining access to main arterials. This usually happens as the result of mechanical issues, or the unfortunate situation of people committing suicide somewhere up the track line. As a result, you may already know it can create frustrating delays when delivering food to people while doing DoorDash or Uber Eats.

Here in Salem, Oregon, the above happens far too often—sometimes every two weeks or less. It was something I had to deal with various times when needing to deliver food or drinks to someone across town. Yes, it made me wish for flying cars being available NOW and not just ahead in a speculative future.

It’s not merely trains blocking your roads either. You’re going to encounter frequent construction projects on your local streets—unless your city is broke and has no money to fix those potholes. Add in the possibility of street protestors that are far more prevalent now than ever. They can be worse than halted trains.

How do you deal with these road blockages, and what kind of detours can you find to avoid sitting and cussing away in your car? This is not an easy subject to solve, though I do have some answers for you. But, it’s usually not any help from Google or Apple Maps.

Train Breakdowns

Most train breakdowns in my city were freight trains. This was the most unfortunate type of train stoppage because freight trains measure much longer than travel trains like Amtrak. Once in a while, though, an Amtrak train was stopped due to an object (or person) in the way on the tracks. In that case, it was multiple dozens of travelers being delayed as much as I was.

One thing about my local mainline track is that if the train is long enough, it’s going to mean every possible passageway to the other side of town becoming blocked. This happened numerous times to me, despite once being lucky enough to find an intersection free. The train moved up just enough to allow traffic to get through more than a mile away.

If you encounter a train breakdown, you might be stuck in a traffic jam of other waiting cars, depending on time of day. The worst time is on a weekday while delivering for the lunch hour. Although it seemed that the majority of train stalls for me were on weekend afternoons. Regardless, it still caused traffic snarls.

You’ll probably find that most drivers around you will try to find a way to back up and get out of there. Whatever you do, don’t just sit and spout every profanity. The first thing you need to do is get into the Uber or DoorDash chat box and tell the customer you’re delivering to that you’re delayed by a stopped train. You should be communicating with them already while on your way as I’ve recommended here many times.

Let them know you’ll be delayed by the train and you’ll attempt to find a detour to get there as soon as possible. Most customers are going to be understanding about this since there isn’t a lot that can be done.

On the other hand, if traffic manages to back up and clear out enough, you have a way to escape and find a detour. Here’s a big problem, though: Uber and DoorDash’s GPS system (Google Maps as default) doesn’t offer any detours in emergency situations.

The GPS still insists you take the route it thinks is best for you to get to the delivery destination. I managed to get out of the way and drive up the line to find a free intersection to drive through. Every time I did, the GPS would just take me back to the same street where the train was sitting. So, I say to Uber and DoorDash: Start adding detours on the GPS to avoid delays. There’s always alternative ways to get anywhere, even if lifelong residents in a town or city may not know exactly what that is.

Having lived in my city since birth, I knew a few detours. Even then, many stalled trains just blocked too many pass-throughs, making any detour impossible, if an hour-long delay going a longer way. Whatever you do, don’t get out of your car and start making a run for it out of desperation.

Your best bet is to study maps of your town or city as thoroughly as you can. Look at alternative places where you can drive under or over railroad tracks so you know exactly where to go if encountering a train that’s stopped for likely hours.

Road Blocks from Construction

Yes, trains are the worst in road blockages because they’re often stalled for at least an hour if not more. Construction projects can also cause frequent delays, if not usually for more than 15 minutes. Still, it’s worth calculating what this might mean for your deliveries without losing your patience.

The good thing here is GPS systems sometimes pick up that there’s construction going on in your city. When I used Apple Maps, it seemed to detect where construction was going on and sometimes outlined an alternative route. However, this was only for longer road work projects and not something unexpected or shorter term.

GPS systems need more time to tell you what’s going on with your local roads. Even then, it’s not always completely accurate, as I found out. Despite road work signs usually showing you how to take a particular detour, it can take you way out of the way of your intended delivery point.

Again, if this happens, go into the chat boxes and tell your customers you’re stuck in a road work zone that’s being held up by a flagger. The real culprit here is heavy traffic having to wait while the flagger allows traffic from the opposite lane to drive through.

Once in a while, you might encounter an impatient driver who doesn’t understand the detours, hence them hurriedly driving through a blocked-off street. I did this once, though not as a DoorDash driver. DON’T do this since you’ll piss off the nearby construction crew, not including possibly being fined for ignoring detours.

Street Protestors

We’re living in very volatile times, and that means the chances of street protestors has grown tenfold in the last few years. Maybe your town or city is more fortunate in being politically neutral. But, even here in Salem, OR (because it’s Oregon’s capital city), I’ve found myself in the middle of some potentially testy protest events.

These street blockages are even more problematic since nobody really knows when a street protest is going to happen—unless you’re one of the protestors seeing it scheduled on social media. For a DoorDash or Uber deliverer like yourself, this could potentially trap you in place for the same amount of time as a broken down train.

While my protestor encounters were not during DoorDash delivery times, the potential was always there. If you find yourself in such an encounter, it’s again imperative to tell your customer what’s happening. They may be shocked when you tell them this, but they’ll usually be understanding. In all likelihood, they’ve encountered street protestors themselves.

To get out of the situation, try to find a quick place to turn around or take a side road. The sooner you can dodge a street protest, the better, even if going out of the way to your destination. Just don’t get frustrated and try to drive through a crowd of people. Worse, it could lead to angry protestors trashing your car.

Finding Detours On Your Own

Again, it’s a good idea to memorize all the main and side arterials within your city. If you’ve just moved to that city or town, get to know ALL the roads before you start delivering for DoorDash. The more you know about alternative routes, the better on DoorDash or Uber not taking it out on you for delivering late.

Let’s hope GPS systems can improve to allow for real-time detours in the event of road blockages. Why that isn’t available already is proof corporations want to skimp on offering better technology for those who work for them.

Sometimes you’ll discover the routes GPS insists are the best way to reach your customer aren’t really the best routes after all. You may find detour routes that shave delivery time at least by a couple of minutes. I’ve discovered a few better routes to arrive to familiar delivery points than the GPS initially told me.

The problem there is DoorDash and Uber say you need to follow the GPS routes provided or face possible deactivation. That’s basically forced technological adherence when said tech doesn’t always know better than a human. Routes I knew were better allowed me to prove to the bots my way was faster.

Just like I said in Chapter 3 about finding your “Center Street” to find more delivery offers, it’s time to find your best detours. A few might mean driving through a gravel road or a side street with Grand Canyon level potholes. Whatever you do, don’t drive through someone’s yard or in spots that say No Trespassing.

In Chapter XXXV, I’ll look at another road problem: Increasing debris in U.S. roads. This can lead to constant flat tires as I too often experienced. It’s best to create a plan for tire maintenance—as in every day.

/End

Chapter XXXIII of Uber Eats/DoorDash Blog (Video Edition)

FeaturedLeave a comment

Chapter XXXIII: Past and Future Issues with Self-Employment Taxes When Doing Uber Eats & DoorDash

FeaturedLeave a comment

Maybe it’s still inevitable that death and taxes are still inevitable, even if the latter is now potentially on the chopping block. And perhaps death can be overcome someday under certain circumstances. While the chances are possibly lesser than 50/50 President Trump will eventually eliminate American income taxes, let’s assume taxes (including self-employment taxes) are still going to be around for a while. DoorDash and Uber Eats will most definitely still warn you about that.

One thing I learned as a freelance writer before the Uber/DoorDash days was, self-employment taxes are a massive head scalp. If you make up to $30,000 or $40,000 per year with your own business, you can expect to pay about $3,000 annually in non-withheld tax. While I paid a little less with DoorDash and Uber, it was still expensive. The IRS continues to think you can pay all that in quarterlies, due four times per year. But, when other expenses get in the way, it’s often challenging to pay even those amounts.

It’s one thing to think about, seriously, if you start working for DoorDash. Some people with no experience paying SE tax still don’t realize you’re an independent contractor when delivering food & drink. And this often gets people into tax debt, something I admit happened to me.

Don’t sit around assuming the IRS and/or income taxes are going to become extinct before the end of 2025. If you’re adamant on doing Uber Eats or DoorDash to make extra money, it’s time to plan a self-employment tax strategy until further notice from the President of the United Taxable States.

Let’s dive into what you might have to pay, how to lessen that amount, and what taxes may look like in a future DoorDash world.

Will You Have to Pay $3000 in Self-Employment Taxes?

Yes, it’s very possible you’ll have to pay in the neighborhood of $3,000 if you do Uber or DoorDash a lot. I met a few people during my Dashing times who told me they did DoorDash as their main job. You really shouldn’t, despite the extreme temptation thanks to the freedom of working your own hours and driving open roads.

I learned the hard way that making money while working from home or via car has a steep tax price. You’re basically chained to the U.S. economic system of having to work for a company (mostly on-site in their workplaces) if you want your taxes withheld.

This was one reason I had to start working for Amazon after working as a freelance writer for 15 years. Anyone who’s gone through self-employment tax hell probably made the same moves due to the 15% SE tax bracket.

Again, just don’t do DoorDash as your only job since you’ll likely end up making far too much money that’ll be taxed. Your best bet is to just make it a side gig with another job. The ideal sweet spot is to simply do DoorDash once per week on a day off. This can fill in well to help you make extra income without getting a steep tax bill by the following April.

There’s still many who do Uber and DoorDash more than three days, though. If you insist on this, be sure to set aside money to pay your quarterlies. This can be a major challenge if you have other expenses you have to pay each month. Unless you have some money set aside for emergencies (and many don’t nowadays), I recommend not doing DoorDash beyond one or two days.

Just keep in mind Uber and DoorDash will ultimately try to push you to deliver as often as possible. Much of that is corporate hype, though it’s entirely up to you based on what you need to do. In the chance you have no choice but to use DoorDash as a means of making money, the best scenario is to work out a payment plan with the IRS after you get the tax bill. This is something I had to do. Fortunately, the IRS became more like a kind uncle in recent years in helping you set up long-form, time payment systems.

With major IRS cuts recently, however, perhaps the existing agents aren’t as kind as they were over the phone.

What About Adding Tips to Your Taxable Income?

The recent “No Tax On Tips Act” in Congress leaves it open now to many employees being able to write off tips as an exemption rather than part of income. While President Trump will supposedly sign this if it passes in both houses of Congress, it’s only designed for restaurant and hospitality workers. Because Uber and DoorDash deliverers are independent contractors, no taxes on tips there won’t yet apply.

Yeah, you probably just scoffed at that piece of info. It also broaches another discussion on whether you should report any tips you get from DoorDash when filing your taxes. If you’ve already done Uber or DoorDash, then you know most customers tip through the app. With this, any tips you get are already on record and added as income.

Once in a while, though, you’ll get tips in cash from your customers. During a delivery run to an outside town here in the valley of Oregon, I received a $100 cash tip from two women who realized I had to drive a bit of a distance to get there. “That was a long fucking drive, right?” One of the women said. “Yeah”, I uttered while my eyes bulged out at the sight of a hundred dollar bill in the other woman’s hand.

It’s cash tips like this that bring a lot of ethical debate when filing your taxes. Considering it’s cash, some might say it’s all under the table and doesn’t apply. Tax professionals will say you absolutely need to report cash tips in the chance the IRS audits you. Others may even say the chances of you being audited are slim, unless you’re making $100,000 per year as a Dasher.

In this case, I say it’s up to you whether to report cash tips. Most of the cash tips I made while delivering were generally from a few bucks to $10. Only occasionally did I receive bigger cash amounts from wealthy families living in the hills of my city.

One thing for sure is that any tips added through the apps will pump up the income you make. Just going by the base pay would otherwise lessen your earnings by far.

What is the Future of Self-Employment Taxes While Doing Uber and DoorDash?

I’d lobby tirelessly (if having the time) to abolish self-employment taxes in general. But I don’t think they’ll ever go away, unless income tax is abolished while Trump is in office. Those of you who do Uber or DoorDash over the coming year or beyond will likely still have to pay SE tax on every penny you make.

By chance income tax goes away, it might attract more people to sign up to deliver for Uber Eats and DoorDash. The only reason many people still want to do food deliveries is no doubt because they don’t initially realize how deep of a head slice self-employment taxes will give them.

You might want to know that DoorDash has been lobbying in Congress to get tax exemptions for those earning tips while delivering. The company wants gig workers who work through apps to enjoy the same tax savings as W-2 employees. Their goal is to add this to the “No Tax On Tips Act”, which still isn’t law at time of this writing.

Reportedly, Uber is advocating the same thing for their drivers and deliverers. Just when you thought corporations like this are greedier than ever, they’re morally standing up for the deliverers to at least save on their taxes.

You can probably say that the IRS scares DoorDash and Uber anyway. The more taxes people have to pay on delivery earnings, the least likely anyone else will want to do the same.

Once the reality of self-employment taxes gets out there, the stats may already show the majority of Uber deliverers and Dashers are those just stuck in it due to inability to have any other job.

It’s best to say use DoorDash and Uber in moderation—something you’d say to all your food and drink recipients.

In Part XXXIV, I’ll cover detours in making deliveries, something you’ll need to think about if roads are blocked—or blocked by trains—while in a rush to deliver.

Video Edition of Part XXXII

FeaturedLeave a comment

Chapter XXXII: The New “Buy Now, Pay Later” Model at DoorDash and the Implications for Deliverers

FeaturedLeave a comment

This segment was originally going to be about self-employment taxes, though now it’s a new breaking news alert on an interesting (if concerning) DoorDash development. It’s about the recent business deal between “Buy Now, Pay Later”, AI-powered service, Klarna, with DoorDash. The intention is to allow more food payment flexibility to economically suffering Americans. And while that might sound like a noble venture, it’s also brought on a lot of deep thinking on social media (yes, really!) about what this portends in the way of adding on to personal debt.

I’m going to dive into this and see what it means for DoorDash customers—though, most importantly, how it affects you, the deliverer.

Based on the recent press release on this deal, both Klarna and DoorDash seem excited at the potential customer convenience. On the DoorDash end, they want people to buy more than just food, with electronics and other spendier things now in the delivery mix. For Klarna, it’s the usual corporate giddiness of being able to partner with a major business partner to up their clout.

Klarna is far from the only “Buy Now, Pay Later” service available. Over the last 5 years, many of these companies have popped up worldwide, with the most familiar to you likely being Affirm, or Apple’s Pay Later. Nearly all let you set up “Pay in 4” installments, some with interest and others not.

I admit to using Affirm a few times, though not for food. It was strictly for more expensive items, like electronics or household products. With Klarna generally ranked third for the most familiar BNPL services, it appears they’re one of the first to venture into allowing later payments for basic food deliveries.

One thing we all know about these companies is that they’re no doubt already being abused. Some people can’t resist putting in a promise to pay later, then renege because they have other expenses to pay, or just don’t have the money.

Let’s look at what that might mean in the way of “food debt” becoming a new depressing issue in America.

Will Americans Abuse the Klarna/DoorDash System?

In a word: Probably. You’ll find those who think these BNPL systems are just loan sharks who let people get into further debt trouble. It’s hard not to argue this stance in a time when economic hardship is at a new high. The divide between being rich and poor is more distinct now than ever, and many don’t even have enough money to buy decent amounts of food.

The idea you can order something from Jack In The Box and pay for it later in the month is far too irresistible. But what happens when someone decides to take risk and just never pays the bill? There may be more people who do that than anyone knows when many want faster fast food fixes.

Not only do fast food restaurants lose money this way, it also hurts DoorDash’s reputation. Plus, you have another little thing that should be the main focus: How does it affect the deliverer financially?

I’d say Klarna should have a provision of taking money out of the customer’s bank account if the bill isn’t paid before the end of the month. Some payday services do this if the loan isn’t paid on the initial due date. All of them also typically take legal action by garnishing paychecks.

The social media world also thinks food debt will become a major new problem in our United States of America. Sure, it sounds improbable, yet lack of any major penalties from Klarna could let the public abuse the system without too much worry. With many already deep in other debt, they may figure food debt is the least of their problems.

As someone who delivered for DoorDash, I also take aim at what this does in deliverers being properly compensated. There hasn’t been any true clarification on what might happen if customers don’t pay their bill right away. It’s worth a quick look at what this means in terms of base pay—plus tips drivers depend on.

Will DoorDash Deliverers Still Be Paid On Time?

One thing about DoorDash is, with every prior customer being forced to pay in the moment, tips often helped drivers make well over $100 in a day. Once I was at Platinum status, I’d always make at least $100, and usually $120-$130 if delivering six or seven hours. Most of that was based more on tips than just the base pay.

DoorDash doesn’t even mention the drivers in their new press release about the Klarna deal. They just focus it on the customer, which is what they’ve always done anyway. I’d fully expect them to say all deliverers will still be paid the same as they have. The fact that they haven’t makes me wonder if changes are ahead.

Not being paid right away is one of the worst feelings in the world for those who’ve done freelancing work. When I worked as a freelance writer for 15 years, any delayed payment was a big problem. Even though it didn’t happen a lot with me, there were a few times when payments were moved to a week ahead, creating predicaments on getting bills paid on time.

The greatest thing I discovered about DoorDash was the chance to get paid nearly instantly via card transfers. If you had a DasherDirect debit card, all money you made in a day when on that, allowing you to cash in immediately. It was only if you waited for the automatic payment system to pay into a bank account when you had to wait until the upcoming week. Transferring to the DasherDirect card meant a small fee, despite being minuscule. This was worth it just to have the money faster.

With many DoorDash customers no doubt paying later now via Klarna, will deliverers have to wait to get their payments until later in the week or beyond? It’s a valid question to ask considering anyone having to use Klarna is assumed to not have any money…right away. Maybe some have no money at all.

Yes, this means the immediate tips deliverers enjoyed might not happen right away either. How can a customer leave a tip if they haven’t even paid for their food? The base pay for the order would have to be delayed as well since that’s the approximate amount of the order itself.

Unless DoorDash pays the deliverers ahead of time based on what they think the customer is going to do, it may mean delayed payment systems. It would truly turn into freelancing work where payments are just a gamble or guessing game. And that would make DoorDash far less appealing to do for anyone thinking it over.

In a changing world now where getting paid what you’re worth is becoming far less possible, delayed payments at DoorDash would certainly ruin it for me. I’ve taken a break from it in recent months, though would think twice about returning to it if drivers have to wait to be compensated for a full day’s work.

Unfortunately, some may be so desperate to make money, they’ll willingly go along with this if there’s a guarantee of payment within two weeks or more. Unless you have a solid job where you’re paid weekly (as I fortunately do), some people may have to deal with shit just to have the convenience/freedom of Dashing.

This is a mere vent based on what’s out there right now. I’ll do a follow-up if I see evidence to any DoorDash deliverer pay changes. As of this publication, however, I’m expecting something different to payments is going to happen based on customers no doubt being all over the Klarna method.

It just seems unlikely DoorDash would pay the deliverer the same as before if a customer hasn’t paid for their food in full. Corporations would never take such a risk without losing money themselves.

Now, maybe Klarna employed some mob-like figures who’ll knock down the doors of those who don’t pay their food bills. DoorDash should do the same to at least ensure a payment within a week. After all, they do have phone agents who sound like CIA agents. Hearing that on the phone is intimidating enough, believe me.

I’ll plan to cover this topic numerous times based on info I gather, and/or my own experiences if Dashing again soon.

Part XXXIII will now revert back to the self-employment taxes issue originally intended for this space.

/End

Part XXXI: Delivering From or To Adult Stores When Doing Uber Eats/DoorDash

FeaturedLeave a comment

Just about every town or city has an adult store, and that’s usually plural. They’ve been around, legally, for decades throughout America, with many questions and rumors still permeating about what really goes on in those shops. While always talked about by many, let’s not forget they’re run by human beings who also need food & drink delivered to them after, uh, working long hours. And you might even find some rare times when you have to deliver an item from one of them.

For the record: I’ve never picked up a sex toy to be delivered to someone—or at least that I was aware. I’ve seen sex toys and dolls in sealed boxes while working at Amazon, btw. Regardless, I’ve heard stories about people picking up sex toys to be delivered to someone as another category to miscellaneous deliveries.

What I have experienced, officially, is delivering to several adult stores. The big question is: Would you want to pick up from or deliver to one of these stores? Not everyone is going to be ok with such a thing.

My first time delivering to one allowed me to see the inside inventory in all its glory. Let me tell you what you might experience and how to go about it in the right way without embarrassment if you suddenly find yourself there.

Would You Pick Up a Sex Toy Order for Delivery?

According to my research, there haven’t been a lot of deliveries like this. But it’s not that it hasn’t happened once in a while. Some people buy naughty items through sources like Walgreens (a place I picked up from quite often), plus pharmacies. In many of those pick-up scenarios, I never saw what was in the boxes. Walgreens was especially secretive on what I was picking up for a customer.

Apparently some adult stores have worked with DoorDash to get things delivered to people fast. Rather than wait several days for a mail delivery (or going in person), some people want their vibrators—now.

I still remind you that I delivered a lot of miscellaneous items when doing Uber and DoorDash. If I ever delivered an adult toy, it must have been with the “unknown” packages. My guess is Walgreens is where it must have happened if it ever did—namely because they have a pharmacy there. They likely offer various things not openly showcased directly in the store.

While the evidence is there such deliveries have happened for some people, finding out that’s what you’re delivering brings a lot of questions. Would I have delivered a sex toy or related item had I known this is what I was picking up?

I probably would have since nothing was off-limits for me, as long as it paid decently. You have to imagine if someone wants any of those products immediately, they’re willing to pay extra or a large tip to get it to them.

Yeah, when it comes to human satiation, food and sex are likely #1 and #2 for a lot of individuals. When someone’s in the mood, they’re in the mood, regardless if it’s also Popeye’s chicken.

The bigger question is whether someone like you would deliver a sex toy with the knowledge you were delivering that very thing. I know a lot of people, and I’d say it’d be half against and another half who wouldn’t have any problem.

Always live up to your own ethics when it comes to what you deliver with Uber Eats and DoorDash. If you’re under 18 or delivering with your kids, it’s probably a good idea to stick with the food without having to answer a lot of questions. If you’re a couple working together—well, it may be one of the best scenarios. The customer seeing a couple delivering their sex toy may go over better than a single guy or woman.

Would You Deliver Food to an Adult Shop?

You might face the same dilemmas delivering to an adult shop, even if it’s more inevitable if you decide to deliver food & drink. During my two years doing Uber Eats and DoorDash, they’d occasionally have me deliver to other businesses that might be deemed controversial by some.

For the most part, it was delivering to cannabis shops, something that seemed apropos considering even the owners and clerks get the munchies. Delivering to those places never bothered me in the least, though there was always the scent of weed in the air when going in to deliver.

But then, one day, I got a delivery order to Eva’s Boutique, a popular lingerie and sex toy store franchise here in the Oregon valley. This was a standard McDonald’s order, though had never delivered food to an adult store at any time prior. The initial thought was, it’d be no big deal since I’d certainly been around these products before—if not in a retail environment.

You always think you won’t be embarrassed going to an adult store—until people start seeing you park by the door. Being a straight guy, people in the periphery seeing me park at Eva’s offered up a few curious stares. And, naturally, it had to be right next to a busy street here in Salem, Oregon where anyone I might know could easily see me go in.

As with most businesses, I thought it’d be an easy delivery, as in leaving it at the front counter. Yet, once inside, it appeared there wasn’t anyone around. The woman clerk was busy helping a couple interested in the lingerie inventory in the back of the store. This required me to walk through all the aisles to hand the McDonald’s bag to the recipient.

Winding through the aisles enabled me to see nearly every item in the store, including a little detour through the vibrator section. Yes, that also brought on a few interesting side eyes from other customers inside, mostly women.

I finally found the clerk inside. She let out a slight giggle as she saw me standing there, next to an aisle of lubricants while offering her the McDonald’s bag. It was the ultimate clash of Americana in one little store. Instead of handing the bag to her, though, she told me to set it over on a nearby counter.

And out I went, adding another line to my DoorDash delivery experiences. This happened a few other times afterward, albeit being much quicker by dropping off right by the door. Since then, I’ve always wondered how many other DoorDash customers have had similar experiences and how they reacted.

Here’s my advice: Always stay professional and don’t act flustered or embarrassed. You’re going to encounter a lot of interesting places and situations when you do Uber Eats and DoorDash, so always act like you’ve already seen it all. Perhaps you already have if you’re grown up enough.

On the other hand, you might have to explain away delivering to other places, as I had to. After delivering food once to a fertility clinic to help women get pregnant, I had to tell a co-worker why I was going in there after being seen.

If you have to explain to a family member, friend, or co-worker why you were seen by them going into an adult store, it’s best to have some ID on you proving you deliver for DoorDash. In that regard, I almost wish DoorDash would send business cards to prove you work for something nearly resembling the CIA.

In Part XXXII, I’ll be looking at the problem of paying self-employment taxes when working for Uber Eats & DoorDash. If income taxes are abolished (under President Trump), would it increase those who want to deliver food to the public?

/End

Press Release for New e-Book: “Thirty Life Guide Steps to Success Doing Uber Eats & DoorDash”

FeaturedLeave a comment

This little blog aside is to let all readers know that the prior thirty parts/chapters/segments of my Uber Eats/DoorDash series are now compiled into an e-book on the Amazon Kindle Store. Titled “Thirty Life Guide Steps to Success Doing Uber Eats & DoorDash”, it describes exactly what you’ve read before—that is, a life angle to delivering food & drink to the public in the best and most profitable way.

Each segment is now a short “chapter”, albeit re-edited and re-purposed to make it a perennial guide. It retains the somewhat comedic and (hopefully) entertaining qualities, while still being a truly useful reference to help you make some extra money.

The e-book is strictly made to read on Amazon Kindle devices, though will offer a paperback edition if I have enough requests to. Kindle Publishing makes it easy to get the book out there in several different formats without them charging you a cent. Well, part of the residuals still go to them as a payback.

Priced at just $2.99, I promise you you’ll make at least $100 per day (if not more) after reading all my stand-alone tips. At the same time, you can use it as a general way to approach life in a smart way as you work-hustle.

As you may have noticed, I’ve made private (for now) all the prior blog segments that went into the e-book. I’ll be making them available soon just for subscribers on the blog. And the blog will continue in a public format, starting with Part XXXI. I’ve also made Part XXX (Chapter 30 in the book) public as a preview.

The topics I’ll be covering over the next 30 segments are going to broaden in their categories, including being more honest on things. My look at DoorDash and Uber Eats currently comes from an observer standpoint, if still an occasional direct participant. I also still have plenty to say and reveal about my past experiences.

By March of this year (2025), I plan to make the entire blog a subscription-based operation. This may be delayed due to other commitments, but expect that change before long. I’ll be doing this by upgrading my WordPress account to allow for monetization and a subscription service.

I encourage you to take a look at the e-book, something that gives you a comprehensive, unique approach to taking on Uber Eats and DoorDash. It’s a guide you can’t find too many other places, even on DoorDash’s own blog.

See you all again soon with Part XXXI where I address picking up from and/or delivering items to—yes, adult stores.

Part XXX: How Lucrative and Safe is It Delivering Alcohol via Uber Eats and DoorDash?

FeaturedLeave a comment

We all know that alcohol is one of the riskiest edible items to imbibe, especially with health experts expounding on what it can do to the body and mind. With the availability of alcohol increasing due to shops on nearly every block—plus door delivery via apps—the temptation is sometimes overwhelming.

Uber and DoorDash still offer alcohol delivery, as you probably know, even if they’re not the only apps doing that. Some apps are made exclusively to deliver any kind of libation available. Questionably-named Saucey and QuickLiq are just two examples.

While working for Uber Eats, I had the opportunity to deliver alcohol fairly early. They made it just an option, including requiring proof you were old enough to deliver. At first, I declined with the thought it would lead to unwanted issues. Stories were out there about deliverers encountering drunk people, which meant having to refuse them the delivery. In those scenarios, it could sometimes lead to the recipient having conniptions due to not getting their whiskey fix.

It took a while until I finally accepted alcohol deliveries. But, by that point, it was through DoorDash who seemed to sell it better to me. And so it began on delivering alcohol to various customers, not always singularly. Many deliveries were just delivering beer with a combination of other items from places like 7-Eleven.

Very rarely, I’d deliver a singular alcoholic item. For the most part, though, many people just wanted relatively mild alcoholic drinks rather than heavy stuff like whiskey or brandy.

You’ll want to know what to expect if you decide to deliver alcoholic drinks to your customer base. You may find out most people are cooperative when it comes to scanning their ID on your phone. However, you might encounter one or two people who seem high—albeit not on alcohol.

Steps for Delivering Alcohol to Customers

DoorDash will always remind you that you need to ask the customer for their ID if you have alcoholic drinks in your order pick-up. Sometimes you might see drink cans that don’t look like they contain alcohol, yet they do.

Be sure to pay attention to this since not asking for ID from the customer will end up getting you terminated at Uber or DoorDash. You might notice the majority of customers order alcohol in cans rather than bottles. This is a good thing since transporting whiskey bottles could potentially break. Not that many whiskey brands don’t just place their contents in plastic bottles nowadays.

Still, delivering large cans of beer and other alcoholic drinks can be very heavy to lift. I once had to deliver several six packs of beer to a recipient. It required several trips back and forth to my car to get it all to the person’s door.

When you deliver your first alcoholic drink to your customer, you need to learn how to use the ID verification system. This might be a little confusing at first, but my first recipient for alcohol helped me through the steps. Yes, a large percentage of your alcohol delivery customers are going to be ones who’ve done the online verification process many times before.

The first thing you need to do is use your phone’s camera to capture the person’s ID to prove they’re over 21. As with all technology, this can sometimes glitch, especially if the person doesn’t hold their ID card steady while you take the photo. Expect, once again, to let the customer snatch away your phone to take the photo themselves.

Once done, you have to wait for the verification to finalize. During one delivery, I lost cell service for a short time, leading to several tries on re-sending the customer’s ID. Remember this also requires an e-signature besides, making the whole process a bit protracted. Blame it on the alcohol and all the past abuse for the multi-steps.

I got the hang of everything after a while, making all subsequent alcohol deliveries much easier. It also helped that all the recipients knew the steps better than I did, making it a faster procedure every time.

So, you probably wonder if I encountered any drunk people. Perhaps some were drunk, though I couldn’t detect it being close to them. Based on my personal observations, they were legal age and sober to take the drinks I was delivering. Then again, we all know some alcoholics can drink and not even show any signs they’re inebriated.

You’re supposed to refuse delivery if you see any signs of the customer being drunk. Only one time did I sit on the fence (not literally) with a customer. Let me tell you what happened so you can be prepared yourself.

Is the Customer Drunk, or Just High On Another Substance?

Out of all alcohol deliveries I made, 98% were trouble-free. On one day in 2023, however, I delivered some canned alcoholic drinks to a young woman. When approaching the door, I could see her in her living room, appearing to talk on her phone.

I rang the doorbell, but she seemed to ignore me standing there. After several doorbell rings, I figured she wasn’t going to come to the door, which would require driving back to return the drinks. Not wanting to do that to save time, I just spoke up through her screen door that she needed to provide ID for the delivery.

First she muddled to me to just leave the order by the door, setting off a bit of a red flag. This customer appeared to be trying to get her alcohol without providing ID first. I kindly reminded her she had to come out and provide ID or I couldn’t deliver to her.

As she walked over to the door, I could clearly see she was high on something. But, I could tell the difference that it was likely a cannabis high rather than being drunk. I’d seen enough drunk people in my life to know the difference.

With that revelation, I had to decide whether to deliver to her or not. Since she likely wasn’t drunk, I figured I could legally deliver. The ensuing problem was waiting for her to get her ID out of her purse. Unfortunately, she claimed she couldn’t find it as she dug through her bag.

After waiting 15 minutes, she finally found it and brought it out for me to photo. All ended well, if still leaving me wonder if I’d encounter more people like this. To date, there hasn’t been anyone similar. It’s still a warning for you to make the best possible judgement when you see someone who appears high. Knowing the difference between a cannabis high and an alcoholic high is very valuable.

In as few words as possible: A cannabis high is usually signs of more absent-mindedness, while a drunk high is stumbling around and/or slurring words.

How Much Do Alcoholic Deliveries Pay?

Delivering alcohol can pay just about the same (sometimes slightly more) as delivering food. I still say that delivering pharma drugs and other miscellaneous items can be more lucrative. It just depends on how expensive the particular product is.

Since many of the customers I encountered were buying beer or various canned alcoholic drinks, it paid equal with food orders. There isn’t quite as much of a rush delivering alcohol either as with food—despite not having an hour for the delivery window.

It’s up to you to decide on delivering alcohol. Don’t always expect a lot of them, including on holidays. I was shocked that when attempting to deliver for New Year’s Eve in 2023, I had zero alcoholic deliveries. This proves, again, perhaps people want to buy their alcohol in person on holidays, if not already having it at home.

I’d recommend signing up for alcohol deliveries, just to gain the experience. It can lead to some interesting social situations you’ll learn from in the end. This is my further proof to you that life and Uber Eats/DoorDash kind of go together in the learning curves.

Wrap-Up:

With the above in mind, I move forward now with another 30 chapters while the previous segments are made available only to subscribers. The reason: I just published an e-book on Amazon Kindle Store that has all prior chapters re-edited for use as a perpetual Uber Eats/DoorDash e-guide. I’ll be doing a separate segment next that acts as its own press release for the book.

In the meantime, this is the only chapter from the e-book that’ll be made public. Feel free to subscribe if you want to read the blog editions of those prior chapters. But all upcoming blog segments will now be more of an outsider view of Uber Eats and DoorDash, not including looking back on my past experiences to inform any analysis or opinions.

Plus, the topics are going to be a lot broader (and perhaps wilder) in how to do Ubering and Dashing. As life gets crazier in our times, it requires looking at every possible scenario in delivering food & drink in the most sane and smartest ways.

/End