About
This is not a quiz. It is a scenario-based Speculative Friction game. There is no answer key, no score, and no verdict on what is right or wrong. This is an interactive fiction experience designed to help players explore contested assumptions about AI development and governance.
Rather than asking players to debate an abstract proposition once, the game asks them to take an initial position and revisit it as a fictional scenario unfolds and new information becomes available.
The experience is designed around structured uncertainty. At each stage, the player encounters additional facts, perspectives, consequences, or tradeoffs and is invited to reconsider their previous reasoning.
The purpose is to reveal what information changes a person's position, which uncertainties actually matter to them, and what kinds of friction they believe should exist around how AI is developed, accessed, and used. A simple proposition becomes far more complicated once it is placed inside concrete social and institutional situations.
You pick a starting premise and record where you stand before seeing any detail. A short scenario then unfolds one turn at a time, each turn adding new context and asking you to take a position — Agree, Disagree, Neutral, or It Depends — and to write a claim in your own words. At the end you return to the original premise and place yourself again. The recap shows what moved between your first reading and your last.
The distance between your opening position and your closing one is the interesting part. It is a record of the specific detail that changed your mind, or the reason you held firm despite it. Nothing here is saved beyond your session.
How do we make pro-social outcomes easier (removing friction) and harmful or high-risk outcomes harder (adding friction)? There’s urgency to explore the full spectrum of practical frictional realities, interventions, and possibilities in AI design and governance.
This thought experiment is part of a broader AI educational initiative and creative community of practice. It is a community exploring how productive or frustrating frictions shape our interactions with AI systems. Instead of assuming technology should always be seamless, the project asks what kinds of frictions help people think critically, make better decisions, and maintain agency in increasingly automated environments. Through essays, interviews, and experiments in speculative design, we examine the dynamic relationship between form, function, fiction, and friction in AI systems and the institutions that govern them.
How do we make pro-social outcomes easier (removing friction) and harmful or high-risk outcomes harder (adding friction)? There’s urgency to explore the full spectrum of practical frictional realities, interventions, and possibilities in AI design and governance.
This thought experiment is part of a broader AI educational initiative and creative community of practice. It is a community exploring how productive or frustrating frictions shape our interactions with AI systems. Instead of assuming technology should always be seamless, the project asks what kinds of frictions help people think critically, make better decisions, and maintain agency in increasingly automated environments. Through essays, interviews, and experiments in speculative design, we examine the dynamic relationship between form, function, fiction, and friction in AI systems and the institutions that govern them.