More often than not, technology serves as an extension or amplification of varied human capabilities — the capability to calculate, to speak, to hear, to walk, to write, to run and whatnot. In this context, comprehending the other person’s articulations and registering a suitable response has been a capability that has found little parallel to date beyond the human world. OpenAI’s ChatGPT and other similar tools are an effort towards replicating and amplifying the same capability. OpenAI has floated multiple language models in order to reproduce natural-sounding texts and carry out functions such as judging intent, summarising material, classifying data, translating text, converting language to code etc. ChatGPT is basically an AI-driven chatbot that “talks” with the users and creates volumes of text in response to the conversation with a particular human. Practically speaking, the chatbot, following command/request by the user, can create intelligent texts of high quality. There can be different subjective perceptions regarding ChatGPT but there is a certain degree of objectivity as well, not necessarily positive. Emergent technologies are usually disruptive in nature. They come into existence with an unsettling force and gradually consolidate over time with a set of pros and cons. It is in this process of consolidation that the proportion and nature of pros and cons get ascertained; and the process depends upon the general mass perception about the product. The current perception about a bunch of AI-generated chatbots is largely market-driven. Leading global tech giants appear to be in a rat race to tap new dimensions of Internet search. While AI-generated chatbots came into being last year itself, the increasing fuss around them is due to the emerging competitive sentiment between two leading search engine providers — Alphabet and Microsoft. The functioning of both Microsoft-promoted ChatGPT and Google’s Bard are akin to search engines; the major difference is that the results are minus links and SEO hassles. And the race is not just between Google and Bing. Meta — the parent company of Facebook, WhatsApp and Instagram — rolled out its AI-generated Blenderbot in the US. China’s tech giant Baidu also plans to enter the fray, saying that an advanced version of its chatbot Ernie will roll out in March 2023. Market being a driver of innovation is not a bad thing per se but it cannot be allowed to blindfold the larger interest of society. Market, as a motivating factor, has the tendency to drive reckless growth. AI-generated chatbots, ChatGPT in particular, are fraught with multiple risks that demand preemptive planning. The technology is still in its nascent stage. Apart from the opportunities, there is a lot of scope for negative elements. In the first place, there is an increasing risk of misinformation. It will become increasingly easy for nefarious elements to create fabricated content. Furthermore, it is also possible that they will negatively impact the communication and art spaces. It is true that AI-generated chatbots cannot usurp the art industry, because it lacks the ability to create novelty. At best, it can reorganise elements from the vast pool of existing information to bring forth something that is unarticulated hitherto. In that sense, AI-driven chatbots are capable of originality, but not of novelty. Furthermore, there is a lot of scope for improvement in the system, which will eventually come in the longer run. But till then, it will be interesting to see if stakeholders will invest time and energy into something that is not very up to the mark and lacks instant utility, even for a small margin. Despite its limitations and the high certainty that human agency will prevail over the mechanical system in the long run, major disruptions in the communication space and the risk of job losses, at least in the initial phase, cannot be ruled out. One cannot take an optimistic refuge by placing a blind faith in technology. There is a need to be suspicious of technology because, over the centuries, it has come out with problems that could have been avoided by pre-emptive planning.