Cyberpunk, the Postglobal and the Posthuman

The Revolution to Cyberpunk: Humanity in Times of Artificial Life

Cyberpunk has always like to illuminate boundaries of humanity and create a place where blurry and unstable boundaries give technology the chance to imitate, replace, and sometimes even take over human beings. Two works that bring this idea of cyberpunk to a whole new level are the movie Blade Runner (1982), produced by Ridley Scott, and William Gibson’s novel Neuromancer (1984). Both these classics look at the crisis of humanity loss from different angles but still arrive at the same question: Once artificial intelligences start to think, feel, and remember, then what creates the boundary between what is human and what is not? What does being human actually mean? To define biological definitions of humanity and expose the fragility in technologically saturated world, Blade Runner and Neuromancer had to challenge these things by examining replicants, artificial intelligences, as well as cyberspace.

Replicants and the Weakness of Human Identity in Blade Runner

The bioengineered, for labour designed, replicants look, act and feel like they are humans but still they are denied any human rights because they weren’t born but manufactured. This confuses and destabilises the viewer’s understanding constantly about what “real” humanity even is.

This confusion gets pushed further and further, especially with characters like Roy Batty or Rachel, who complicate the boundary between humanity and artificiality even more, since Batty’s emotional depth, grief, and desire for more life challenge the idea that empathy is an attribute only humans can have. Continuing, Rachel’s character on the other hand rises an question that brings this type of complication to a disturbing new level because she has implanted memory, and although these memories aren’t hers, she still experiences them s if they were, so if your memories can be manufactured, who is to judge that this identity rising out of these memories is any less real?

AI, Cyberspace, and Disembodied Consciousness in Neuromancer

While Blade Runner questions the definition of humanity through creating a new artificial species, Neuromancer questions it by erasing the body completely. In Neuromancer, we get introduced to two AIs called “Wintermute” and “Neuromancer”, which both operate through cyberspace with the capability and intelligence that progress way further than humans could. They manipulate memories, can rewrite whole identies and could even merge to become a higher power that would take over any human control, like politics or economics.

The protagonist of the novel is called Case and he spends most of the time traveling through cyberspace. We see him able to leave his body and become a part of Molly, without losing his own male gaze, making the definition of humanity and the boundary surrounding it even more blurry, since one's self is not even tied to their body anymore. Humanity, thus, is not tied to biology anymore, and any definition of it we might know gets thrown out the window. Neuromancer creates a world in which the human mind is nothing independent from technology anymore and can be overwritten or copied and pasted. It pushes the question of humanity even further than Blade Runner because it escapes human biology and the human body. Machines can become like humans as humans can become like machines.

The Warning of Cyberpunk

After studying and closely analyzing the themes of Blade Runner and Neuromancer, we can now see that the biggest fear of both pieces isn’t just the development of artificial intelligences but it’s humanity and what will be left of it and its definition the way that we know it. Both works represent how humanity is not purely biological; in Neuromancer not at all anymore, actually. Through the replicants, the two Ais and disembodied digital consciousness, we can see how emotion, memory, and selfhood, attributes we have always only connected to the human being, suddenly can exist outside of the human body. At the same time, identity becomes unstable and easily manipulated, whether through implanted memories in Blade Runner or the ability to rewrite and upload consciousness in Neuromancer. There is no stable identity anymore, and technology shifts towards a place where it suggests that humanity only exists as a byproduct and on a spectrum rather than being natural, ultimately destroying and rewriting the world that we know now.

References

Gibson, W. (1984). Neuromancer. Ace Books. Scott, R. (Director). (1982). Blade Runner [Film]. Warner Bros.

AI was being used in the early stages of this BlogPost to organise it as well as at the end to help with citations. (https://copilot.microsoft.com/)

Humanity is defined by our emotions, memories and capacity for self-awareness has been humanity has been defined by our memories, emotions and capacity for self-awareness for a long time. But in the cyberpunk world of Blade Runner and Neuromancer these markers of identity are often challenge, forcing us to have to wonder what it truly means to be human. both worlds explore lives at the edge of technology where the boundaries between organic and artificial as well as flesh and machine blur in an unsettling way. in Blade Runner Scott presents biologically engineer beings created for labor, and at first glance, they are tools that are designed to fulfill human desires, but characters, such as Rachel complicate this view. She possessed emotions, memories and experiences that were indistinguishable from humans which blurred the line between natural and artificial. this brought up the question that if a being can think feel and remember like a human does, doesn't that make a human? it's been noted that Scott's rain soaked cityscape, external rises anxieties about artificial life that portrayed a society and wish to act of creating beings raise his profound moral and ethical questions. from its visual and narrative complexity, Blade Runner challenge audiences to confront the possibility of humanity is not an inherent quality, but a reflection of consciousness and experience.

Neuromancer extend this inquiry into cyberspace where consciousness can exist independently of a biological body. AI such as wintermute manipulates human characters orchestrating events in pursuit of self realization. these AIS are not merely tools or background systems they exhibit desires emergency of identities, as well as strategic thinking with this happening Gibson forces readers to reconsider whether human identity is inseparable from our physical form of whether cognition and awareness alone define a person cyberpunk often positions. AI is not simply a threat or instrument, but as entities that demand recognition highlighting the porous boundary between human and machines.

Together, Blade Runner and Neuromancer_cyberpunk's fascination with identity under technological pressure both works imagine worlds were the traditional markers of human uniqueness are destabilized. in these setting societies confront the moral and philosophical implications of engineering life, and conscious code. these narratives also reflect broader anxieties about the accelerating pace of technology, globalization, and the erosion of natural cultural boundaries. cyberpunk in his exploration of this unstable terrain, invites readers to reconsider what it means to exist authentically in a world shaped by artificial wife and digital consciousness these Seminole works illuminate cyberpunk enduring preoccupation with human identity. they compelled us to ask how we define ourselves when emotion, intelligence and self-awareness are no longer exclusive to humans. in the air of AI, genetic engineering and immersive virtual realities. These questions are more urgent than ever cyberpunk offers a win through which we can examine our evolving relationship with technology and explore the shifting boundaries of humanity itself.

Identify Yourself

What makes you…simply you? Is it how you look or perhaps how you think and see the world? AI can mask itself to give humanlike emotions and responses within a few seconds. AI has been by far the fastest growing database used by millions of people around the globe. The Neuromancer and Blade Runner allows you to see the reality of artificial intelligence way before it made its big impact in our day to day lives.

Blade Runner, More Like Our Reality

Blade Runner is based on a dystopian sci-fi film showing the TRUE reality of polluted living conditions over taken by technology and artificial intelligence while replicants that are bioengineered humans were created for labor. In Cyberpunk a familiar name Rachael, works as an assistant of the Tyrell Corporation and initially believes she is human. Rachael felt every emotion from love to fear. Rachael's question "If your memories and feelings feel real to you, does it matter if they're artificial?" Thus rendering the idea that there really is a difference between AI and humans?

Neuromancer: High Tech, Low Life

Neuromancer is a cyberpunk novel, to demonstrate this realm of high-tech futures where corporations rule, artificial intelligence is under watch, and the human mind can connect to cyberspace to live out a completely different life. A hacker by the name Case who often visits this realm to feel a sense of "detachment". Neuromancer is essentially about the mind vs. body where Case prefers cyberspace over the true reality.

How Must One Prove its Real

The central idea is what makes someone human? Is it our thoughts? is it perhaps our memories or what we are born with? Cyberpunk allows us to merge these ideas of AI and humans together to shift our gears and question ourselves. As a human it was never a thought to think about what really makes me human and being a position where you are seeing things in an AI perspective its a little challenge to answer in the "right" way. While AI is certainly on a skyrocket path, will we are get to see the end of AI if it truly makes it easier for humans to go about our days? Think about it, if AI can make the lives of humans easier, why even end the idea of AI? The risk we take with AI and can be seen with Blade Runner and Neuromancer, is reality simply being reality less. Less greenery more neon lights, less outside feeling more skyscrapers, less human activities more replicants on the streets doing what humans fear the most...using their own brains to simply be more free and with more time. So yes in the case of a human to use less of their brain and to just hand it over to AI that already has studied you...it may be an option, but the fear of Blade Runner and Neuromancer will soon be near in our future, just like the title states "objects may appear closer than they appear."

Reference

Farrar, J. (n.d.). What does it mean to be human?. BBC Earth. https://www.bbcearth.com/news/what-does-it-mean-to-be-human

The meaning of being human. how the film blade runner make us… | by Eduardo Ayres Soares | film | movies | stories | medium. (n.d.-d). https://medium.com/film-movies-stories/the-meaning-of-being-human-e78d96db875a

https://chatgpt.com/share/6987f4fe-8c2c-8003-a29d-3d35f63bae8b

AI was used to create AI images

Manufactured Souls: Blade Runner and Neuromancer’s Question of the Human

There is a particular kind of loneliness that cyberpunk understands well: the kind that exists in a world overflowing with technology, yet starving for meaning. Both Blade Runner (1982) and William Gibson’s Neuromancer (1984) imagine futures where neon light does not signal progress, but concealment, where the glow of innovation masks the erosion of identity.

Though one unfolds in rain-soaked Los Angeles and the other in the disembodied vastness of cyberspace, both works return to the same foundational concern: what does it mean to be human when humanity can be manufactured, coded, or replaced?

Examining them together reveals that cyberpunk was never simply about the future. It was always about the fragility of the present boundary between person and product.

Replicants and the Violence of Creation

In Blade Runner, the replicants are engineered beings designed for labor, obedience, and eventual disposal. They are not allowed the dignity of permanence. Their lives are shortened by design, their bodies owned by the Tyrell Corporation, their existence justified only through usefulness.

Yet the replicants do not behave like machines. Roy Batty grieves. He remembers. He fears death with an intimacy that feels unmistakably human. In his final moments, the line between hunter and hunted collapses, and the question becomes unavoidable: if a being can feel, dream, and mourn, what makes them less human than those who created them?

The film suggests that humanity is not biology alone, but recognition, something granted unequally, withheld strategically, and shaped by power. The replicants are denied personhood not because they lack emotion, but because acknowledging them would disrupt the hierarchy that depends on their exploitation.

Neuromancer and the Disappearance of the Body

Neuromancer explores this boundary shift differently, not through artificial bodies but through artificial consciousness. Case moves through a world where the body is an inconvenience and cyberspace is an escape, a realm where identity can be fragmented, rewritten, or sold.

The artificial intelligences Wintermute and Neuromancer do not simply serve humans; they expand beyond them. They become forces of their own, challenging the idea that humans remain the central agents of history.

In Gibson’s world, the self is no longer contained within skin. It is dispersed across networks, stored in data, suspended in code. The posthuman future is not a clean evolution, it is an unsettling unmooring. Even memory and desire feel technologized, mediated by systems too vast to fully comprehend.

Corporate Power and the Postglobal City

Both works also share a quiet understanding that the future belongs less to nations than to corporations. In Blade Runner, Tyrell does not merely influence life; it manufactures it. In Neuromancer, multinational systems of capital and surveillance stretch beyond borders, shaping reality from above.

These are postglobal worlds, where corporate structures supersede the state, and where the city becomes a site of stratification: high-tech skylines towering over low-life survival. Technology, in these texts, is not equally distributed. Enhancement is not liberation. It is another axis of inequality. The people most surrounded by technological advancement are often the ones most trapped by it, living in the shadow of innovations they do not control.

What These Works Reveal Together

Reading Blade Runner alongside Neuromancer clarifies cyberpunk’s foundational anxiety: that technological advancement does not dissolve exploitation, but refines it.

Both works suggest that the boundary between human and machine is not disappearing because machines are becoming more like us, but because humanity itself is being commodified, turned into labor, data, product, and experiment.

Cyberpunk’s dystopia is not the presence of technology. It is the absence of justice in how that technology is built, who it serves, and who it erases. What lingers most in both stories is the sense that the future is already here, unevenly distributed, and morally unresolved.

References

Gibson, W. (1984). Neuromancer. Ace Books.

Scott, R. (Director). (1982). Blade Runner [Film]. Warner Bros.

One of the most important boundaries cyberpunk asks us to rethink is the line between human memory and digital storage. In classic cyberpunk works like Blade Runner and Neuromancer, memory is no longer something organic, personal, or sacred. Instead, it becomes something that can be implanted, edited, archived, or erased. These stories suggest that when memory becomes data, our understanding of identity, agency, and even humanity itself begins to fracture.

In Blade Runner, replicants are given artificial memories to stabilize them emotionally. Rachael’s belief that her memories are real allows her to function as “human,” even though those memories are borrowed. This raises an unsettling question: if memory shapes identity, does it matter where that memory comes from? The film refuses to offer a clear answer, instead forcing viewers to confront the idea that humanity might not be rooted in biology, but in lived (or perceived) experience. Roy Batty’s final monologue emphasizes this point. His memories, moments that will be “lost in time, only matter because they were embodied, felt, and lived, not stored in a machine.

Neuromancer pushes this boundary even further. William Gibson imagines a world where consciousness can be separated from the body and uploaded into cyberspace. Memory becomes information, and identity becomes something that can be copied, traded, or weaponized. Artificial intelligences like Wintermute and Neuromancer treat memory not as something emotional, but as raw material to be optimized. This reflects Norbert Wiener’s definition of cybernetics as systems of control and communication, but cyberpunk reveals the danger in reducing humans to informational nodes within those systems.

These narratives connect directly to contemporary concerns about AI and data storage. Today, our memories are increasingly externalized through cloud storage, social media archives, and algorithmic “memories” that resurface photos or posts without our consent. While current AI systems are narrow rather than conscious, cyberpunk reminds us that the ethical issue is not intelligence alone, but who controls memory and how it is used.

Viewed through a decolonial lens, this boundary also exposes global power imbalances. As Walter Mignolo argues, coloniality persists when dominant systems decide which knowledge is preserved and which is erased. In cyberpunk worlds, memory databases often reflect the values of powerful corporations or states, while marginalized lives remain disposable. This mirrors real-world patterns where data infrastructures are controlled by the Global North, shaping whose histories are remembered and whose are ignored.

Rather than undermining critique with visual beauty, Blade Runner uses aesthetics to deepen its philosophy. The film’s rain-soaked neon cityscapes visually mirror the fragmentation of memory and identity within its characters. Similarly, Neuromancer’s abstract depiction of cyberspace reinforces the alienation that comes from treating the mind as software.

Ultimately, cyberpunk does not reject technology outright. Instead, it warns us about crossing boundaries too casually, especially the boundary between being human and being stored. Memory, these stories argue, cannot be fully separated from embodiment without losing something essential.

SOURCES

Gibson, W. (1984). Neuromancer. Ace Books.

Scott, R. (Director). (1982). Blade Runner [Film]. Warner Bros.

Mignolo, W. D. (2007). Delinking: The rhetoric of modernity, the logic of coloniality and the grammar of de-coloniality. Cultural Studies, 21(2–3), 449–514. (If your course used a different Mignolo essay, tell me and I’ll adjust it.)

Wiener, N. (1948). Cybernetics: Or control and communication in the animal and the machine. MIT Press.

AI was used to assist with organizing ideas, improving clarity, and drafting a sample structure. All concepts and final revisions were reviewed and edited by me. No new ideas beyond course materials were introduced.

How Blade Runner and Neuromancer Redefined Humanity

Cyberpunk, a genre created on the very intersection between technological advancements and social inequality, asks the fundamental question of what it truly means to be human. Two such works, Blade Runner and Neuromancer, solidify this basis by actively challenging assumptions of memory, agency, and consciousness.

Manufacturing Life in Blade Runner

As the film begins, the audience learns of the Tyrell Corporation's success in the perfect creation of replicants, biologically engineered "humans," who maintain superior intellectual and physical ability but are still denied legal rights.

Early in the movie, the Voight-Kampff test acts as a scientific method that separates humans from replicants on the basis of empathetic responses. The boundary is flimsy at best; even humans could fail the test, should it go on for too long.

The main conflict centers on the replicants' desperate attempt to extend their lifespan. Despite the humans of the story routinely describing the replicants as emotionally-lacking and unaware, Roy's final scene is entirely emotional as he struggles with accepting that his memories and his life would dissipate into nothing at all, begging the question: if something man-made could feel emotion, would it become human?

Manufacturing Consciousness in Neuromancer

Neuromancer, similarly, approaches humanity as a philosophy to be questioned. The book introducers readers to the idea of cyberspace, where human consciousness can essentially become entirely digitalized.

Wintermute and Neuromancer, two AIs that entirely lack physical bodies, complicate matters. Both beings still reflect intelligence, curiosity, and desires: Wintermute, for example, routinely tries to push against his own limitations, expressing a deep want to be free from them.

Without physical bodies, Wintermute and Neuromancer demand the question: if human consciousness within cyberspace, in which physical bodies are left behind, can still be considered humane, then is there really a divide between an AI consciousness and a human one?

Seeing the Pattern

Blade Runner questions where the line is between human and non-human when emotions, memories, and physical bodies are all created identical to humans. Are they inherently secondary to a natural human, or is there something special that humans cannot replicate in their creations?

Neuromancer questions where the line is between human and non-human consciousness, especially when both reflect wants, agency, and thought. Does one pattern of thought act uniquely to the other? Is there any way to separate them?

So Who Defines Humanity?

If the separation of human and non-human is truly as nuanced and subtle as Blade Runner and Neuromancer argue, then who makes the final call? According to both forms of media, that's the easiest question to answer: the problem lies, as it so often does, with capitalists.

In Blade Runner, the Tyrell Corporation's replicants are legally excluded from humanity to protect the economy. Replicants exist as a means for easy labor; by classiying them as property, Tyrell can avoid the responsibility of his work while reveling in the economic profit.

In accordance to modern-day capitalism, redefining certain groups as less than human allows for systems to claim those groups as disposable, allowing for their mistreatment at the benefit of those rich and powerful. Hargreaves, for example, argues against the exploitation of migrants within labor systems, as such areas are often severely neglected by the law to allow for corporations to benefit without limit (Hargreaves et al. 2025).

Similarly, sociologist Yang critiqued the long history of exploitation within the prison system, focusing on how prisoners are deeply dehumanized as a means of desensitizing them from the blatant violations that happen daily (Yang 2023). The class discussion on the exploitation of the Global South, additionally, furthers this consistent pattern of communities being exploited, colonized, and manipulated for nothing more than capitalistic gain.

Neuromancer shares a similar logic. Case is only as valuable as his work permits; after his nervous system is corrupted, he becomes entirely socially irrelevant. Consciousness itself, much like people's physical bodies, becomes a resource to be replicated, exploited, and extracted.

The struggle for survival is central in the book, overtaking the struggle for humanity's relevance. Fascinatingly, capitalistic greed overshadows every word, serving the audience a warning against the continual profit-based systems that grip the world we live in today.

No AI was used in the creation of this post!

References

Gibson, W. (2019). Neuromancer. Ace Books.

Hargreaves, S., et al. (2025). 40 Migrant labour exploitation and health: how can research foster protection of migrant workers?. The European Journal of Public Health, 35(Suppl 6), ckaf180.037. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckaf180.037 Scott, R. (1982). Blade Runner. Warner Bros. ‌

Tiffany Yang, Public Profiteering of Prison Labor, 101 N.C. L. REV. 313 (2023).

#### The Moment When Technology Becomes Like Us

The distinction between people and robots continues to blur as technology advances. AI can already write articles, respond to inquiries, and even mimic human emotions. This raises a crucial question: what precisely constitutes humanity? What does it mean to have a body, memories, feelings, or anything else? William Gibson's Neuromancer (1984) and Blade Runner (1982) examined these issues long before today's artificial intelligence gained popularity. Both works contend that experience, memory, and moral responsibility, rather than just biology, define humanity. Taken together, they reveal that cyberpunk is more about who should be considered fully human than about amazing technology.

In Blade Runner, Replicants Contest Human Power

Although replicants are made to serve humans in Blade Runner, many of the individuals who chase them end up acting more "human." Rachael and Roy Batty are examples of characters who experience love, fear, confusion, and despair. According to Turkle (2011), contemporary technology alters people's perceptions of relationships and emotions. Humans start to depend on technology for emotional connection as robots get better at expressing emotion, which makes it harder to distinguish between manufactured and real emotions.

Although the Voight-Kampff test is meant to distinguish humans from replicants, it merely assesses responses rather than genuine emotions. However, the film demonstrates the flaws in this style of thinking. Rachael thinks that because she has memories and feelings, she is human. Roy demonstrates profound contemplation and knowledge of life and death in his farewell address. It is morally immoral to treat replicants as things if they are capable of thought, emotion, and suffering. This makes viewers wonder if people truly deserve to be considered "superior."

Neuromancer's Cyberspace and Escaping the Body

Neuromancer is about computerized brains, whereas Blade Runner is about mechanical bodies. Cyberspace is where Case feels most alive and detached from his physical body. He even refers to the actual world as "meat," indicating that he considers his body to be a burden. According to Hayles (1999), identity is no longer only connected to the physical body in a digital culture. Instead, networks, data, and virtual worlds are how individuals see themselves.

Wintermute and Neuromancer are AI systems that plan intricate activities, deliberate methodically, and influence humans. They behave like intelligent creatures in many respects. They are, however, under corporate control, demonstrating how power even controls intelligence. This implies that being "smart" does not equate to freedom in a technologically advanced environment. AIs and humans alike are ensnared in profit-driven systems. This supports Hayles's (1999) contention that while technology changes human identity, it does not always free people.

Power, Memory, and Who Gets to Matter

A significant similarity between the two pieces is the significance of memory. In both pieces, memory plays a significant part. Even though they are not genuine, Rachael's manufactured memories influence who she is. His digital encounters alter Case's perception of himself. These illustrations demonstrate how both real and virtual experiences shape identity. Bostrom (2014) cautions that humans will no longer be able to govern artificial intelligence as it develops. Highly intelligent systems can behave in ways that are inconsistent with human ideals. This worry reflects what occurs in Neuromancer, where businesses, not moral values, dominate strong AI systems. In total, Neuromancer and Blade Runner both demonstrate how corporations control society. Artificial or human intellect is viewed as a commodity by the Tyrell Corporation and other influential tech firms. This calls into question who oversees knowledge and who gains from advancements in technology.

Why This Discussion Is Important Today

According to some, AI will enhance human existence by boosting productivity, enhancing healthcare, and advancing education. Others fear that moral duty and empathy will be weakened by technology. Turkle (2011) contends that genuine human connections deteriorate when individuals rely too heavily on technologies to provide them with emotional connections. However, Bostrom (2014) cautions that if strong AI systems are not properly managed, they may turn deadly.

Neuromancer and Blade Runner demonstrate that technology is neither good nor harmful in and of itself; it all depends on how it is utilized. Humanity may suffer if society prioritizes efficiency and profit over compassion and accountability. These tales serve as a reminder to readers that ethics must drive technical advancement.

Conclusion

Neuromancer and Blade Runner together ask readers to reconsider what it means to be human in a technologically advanced society. They contend that moral responsibility, memory, and emotion, rather than just biology, are what characterize humanity. These pieces caution that, in the absence of moral guidance, technology might erode human values through the use of artificial bodies and digital brains. Cyberpunk encourages society to responsibly create the future rather than merely forecasting it.

Sources

Gibson, W. (1984). Neuromancer. Ace Books.

Scott, R. (Director). (1982). Blade Runner [Film]. Warner Bros.

Bostrom, N. (2014). Superintelligence: Paths, dangers, strategies. Oxford University Press. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superintelligence%3A_Paths%2C_Dangers%2C_Strategies

Hayles, N. K. (1999). How we became posthuman: Virtual bodies in cybernetics, literature, and informatics. University of Chicago Press. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_We_Became_Posthuman

Turkle, S. (2011). Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other. Basic Books. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherry_Turkle

AI Attestation: AI was used to create the image used in this post. https://chatgpt.com/share/6986bd3f-98bc-800d-8103-c931d965fce4

Intro

With the increase of technological abilities arrives new evils. Deepfakes are AI generated images, videos, or audio that make people appear to say and or do things that never actually happened. Deepfakes used for the purpose of producing pornographic content is especially dangerous . These harmful images and audios transcend any singular country. This problem is worldwide and is growingly difficult to contain without violating any rights or banning technology completely. Deepfake technology is capable of making content based on a description as well as curating images of a specific person of your choosing doing actions based on your own fruition as well. Deepfake technology heavily relies on artificial neural networks where computer systems recognize patterns in data. These neural networks feed images and videos and are essentially “trained” to dissect it and replicate those same patterns. The possibilities are endless and hard to contain, thus making the dangers and impact insurmountable.

Breakdown

When we take a step back and examine deepfake we have to consider who these harmful videos benefit. For starters the tech companies that make it possible for deepfakes to be generated are indirectly benefiting. An increase in deepfakes leads to an increase in the demand for AI tools, causes more platform engagement, and ultimately ends in a substantial economic benefit by making them more money. Aside from the tech companies, the users benefit. The users get to see content with their person or people of choice without having to work out the logistics of making their dreams a reality. They can see their favorite celebrities, friends , neighbors, or even coworkers in 18+ materials in the drop of a dime. Additionally we can peel back another layer and the people creating this content can in return potentially blackmail and extort their victims by threatening to release the content. Not only do the victims of these contents suffer but the increase of misinformation affect societies ability to trust digital images. Questions

As deepfake technology continues to become more advanced it poses a serious threat and evokes us to think of current and future repercussions. For instance how can we as humans accurately decipher AI generated content from real content? If 18+ material can be made so easily, what's to stop content creators from targeting children, and what does that mean for rates of sexual crimes committed against children for the future? What's to stop people from claiming that real content is AI generated?Also as we see the damage this technology is capable of dealing, how do we begin to regulate harm without having to ban technology as a whole?

Statistics

In the article Social, legal and ethical implications of AI-Genrated deepfakes pornogrpahy on digital platforms: A systematic literature review, researchers conducted a study to see the statistical findings of how big of an impact deepfake technology has on our society. Research showed that from 2019 to 2023 there has been a 550% increase in deepfake videos. Of that, 99% were of pornographic nature, and within that 99%, 98% of the videos produced were depicting content of women and young girls. These findings indicate a clear pattern of gender based targeting. The curation of 18+ material using AI has a heavy impact on its victims. Many women within this study were found to have suffered deep psychological trauma leaving side effects of anxiety and emotional distress, which is exacerbated as the content is spread onto platforms that are difficult to regulate and control. No matter the social status of the victim, deepfakes have the potential to harm not only the person's public image, but also their careers. Counteract

As difficult of a problem deepfakes are to tackle, there have been attempts to contain and reduce these cyber crimes. In May of 2025 President Donald Trump signed the Take It Down Act. This law was created to enact stricter penalties for the distribution of deepfakes, as well as revenge porn and other non consensual 18+ content. The fundamentals behind the act is that if a victim contacts a platform to which their deepfake content has been posted on, the platform has 48 hours to take it down and take steps to erase all duplicates as well. The penalty for failure to take down the material is mandatory restitution and criminal penalties, including prison, a fine or both.

Connection

Deepfakes can be linked to cyberpunk because we have described technology dynamics within our society. We've discussed corporations overriding ethics and technology exploiting bodies through high tech, low life principles. As well as identity becoming fragmented and commodified. More specifically Deepfakes can be connected to the second industrial revolution. Just as the second industrial resolution produced automation and new technologies that fundamentally changed how images were produced and distributed, deepfakes represent a modern version of those same principles. In the second industrial revolution machines relied on human labor, these deepfake technologies still need to rely on a human creator to prompt them. Both the second industrial revolution and deepfake technology demonstrated a technological shift which led to questions about authenticity and control over identity.

Sources

Furizal, F., Ma’arif, A., Maghfiroh, H., Suwarno, I., Prayogi, D., Kariyamin, K., Lonang, S., & Sharkawy, A.-N. (2025). Social, legal, and ethical implications of AI-Generated deepfake pornography on digital platforms: A systematic literature review. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 12, 101882. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2025.101882
AP News. (2025, April 29). President Trump signs Take It Down Act, addressing nonconsensual deepfakes. What is it? AP News. https://apnews.com/article/take-it-down-deepfake-trump-melania-first-amendment-741a6e525e81e5e3d8843aac20de8615
U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2020, October 20). Deconstructing deepfakes—How do they work and what are the risks? U.S. GAO WatchBlog. https://www.gao.gov/blog/deconstructing-deepfakes-how-do-they-work-and-what-are-risks
TAKE IT DOWN Act, S. 146, 119th Cong. (2025). Congress.gov. https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/146

In the past five years, the boundary between human competence and machine-assisted performance has shifted. As a society, we are moving to a world where people can assume a coat of knowledge simply due to their ability to input a prompt into program rather than developing their own skills. This idea raises a pressing question: is society’s competence declining as the influence of technology increases or is technology reshaping what is required of humans to be successful.

Examples of this shift is evident in our scholarly institutions, professional work, and the field of creatives. We have AI-derived tools like ChatGPT that can produce an answer to almost any response to any prompt submitted through its website—even moving to partnerships with Meta, Google, and other tech giants of the world. While initially, these programs were utilized as potential solutions to repetitive or more time-consuming tasks so that humans can focus on the creative and decision-making aspects. In the earlier days of AI, we have programs like Grammarly that helped students, teachers, creatives, and other professionals formulate their creative writing by checking for punctuation, verb tenses, and sentence re-phrasing. These features saved times on millions of pieces, offered help to writers and reduced errors in writings. Early AI systems mainly offered support with a large emphasis on clarity and correctness—leaving the content development to the human and refining to the AI tool.

However, as AI systems progressed and emerged as a widely accessible tool that could not only create but also produce products that required in-depth thinking and knowledge, users quickly began to rely on the application to produce these products rather than use it for its initial use. Students have begun submitting completely AI-generated papers and assignments. Pre-professionals use AI to draft their emails, business reports, resumé, and applications. We are having marketing team designers typing a prompt into an AI tool to produce pictures and videos of their work rather than mastering their own software skills. Now we are being questioned as a generation, primarily Gen Z and beyond, do we truly know how to do anything without the aid of the internet? While many Gen Z employees report that AI tools help them work faster and feel more capable, research suggests that heavy reliance on these systems may come at the cost of developing interpersonal and communication skills that technology cannot easily replace, pointing to a gap between perceived efficiency and well-rounded professional competence (Robinson, Forbes). Ultimately, the shifting boundary between human competence and machine-assisted performance reflects more than just technological advancement; it reveals a cultural turning point in how we define skill, knowledge, and effort. AI is not inherently a threat to human ability, but our relationship with it determines whether it becomes a tool for empowerment or a “handicap” that weakens essential cognitive and interpersonal skills. Like many technologies before it, AI forces society to adapt, but the pace of this change leaves little time to reflect on what might be lost in the process. Cyberpunk ideas have warned of futures where humans become dependent on the very systems they create, blurring the line between enhancement and erosion of identity. Today, that fiction feels less like distant speculation and more like a reflection of our lived reality. The key question moving forward is not whether AI will continue to advance, but whether humans will continue to develop alongside it, maintaining the depth of understanding, creativity, and critical thought that technology alone cannot replicate.

Before, humans used to utilize technology to perform their tasks more efficiently. Now, AI is being used to replace the human altogether. An example of this occurred in late 2025 when Amazon announced it would cut roughly 14000 corporate jobs as part of a larger restructuring focused on automation and efficiency while shifting more of its internal work to AI driven systems. This collapse of the human and nonhuman divide in the workplace directly mirrors a core cyberpunk idea where technology no longer assists people but competes with them. It also adds to the ongoing economic crisis where people already struggle to pay their bills and live comfortably.

A central theme in cyberpunk is the collapse of established boundaries whether political borders, the human and nonhuman divide, or even categories of identity. These fictional boundary collapses mirror real shifts happening today. One specific boundary that has shifted dramatically in the past five years is the boundary between human labor and machine labor. For most of modern history there were jobs that were understood to require a human mind such as writing reports, analyzing data, customer support, design work, and planning. That line has now been blurred because AI systems can do all of these things at a speed and scale that humans simply cannot match. Companies no longer see humans as essential workers for many of these tasks but instead as optional and replaceable.

What has changed is not just that machines can help but that they can fully perform roles that were once human only. Large corporations now openly replace employees with AI software. In addition to Amazon, companies like Microsoft, Google, and many financial firms have reduced staff while expanding their investment in AI tools that handle emails, coding, research, scheduling, and even creative work. Research institutions have also shown that modern AI models can perform many office and administrative tasks at a level close to or sometimes better than human workers. This means that even people with degrees and professional experience are no longer protected from automation.

This shift is being driven by several forces working together. Technology is improving extremely fast, especially large language models that can understand and generate human language in a convincing way. Economics also plays a huge role because companies are under constant pressure to cut costs and maximize profits, and replacing thousands of workers with software that runs twenty four seven is much cheaper in the long run. Culture also contributes because society increasingly treats AI as something inevitable and unstoppable which creates a rush to adopt it before competitors do. Politics and regulation have not kept up, so there are few real protections for workers whose jobs disappear due to automation.

Some people benefit greatly from this shift. Executives, investors, and tech companies gain massive financial rewards when they automate work and reduce labor costs. Productivity numbers go up and profits increase. But workers lose stability, income, and in many cases their sense of purpose. Whole communities can be affected when large employers replace human jobs with machines. This raises serious questions about what work will mean in the future and how people are supposed to survive in a system where they are no longer needed in the traditional sense.

What should humanity do to solve this issue. Humans should develop a system that embraces AI but uses it to create a world where people do not have to live paycheck to paycheck. In theory this could happen if society worked together to distribute the wealth created by automation in a fair way. But in reality this feels more like a utopian dream than something that will actually happen. Instead AI will likely replace more jobs and increase economic inequality, leading to instability and possibly a major crash. A new financial system may be introduced that claims to fix these problems, but it will likely be controlled by the same people who invested in the AI that caused the disruption in the first place. This is exactly the kind of future cyberpunk stories warned us about where technology advances but humanity is left behind.