Dreamforce 2026: The Human Element of AI

Suzanne Dvankca, Chief Impact Officer at Salesforce, welcomed the audience to the Dreamforce 2026 panel, setting the stage for a critical discussion on artificial intelligence and humanity. The session began with panelists sharing their initial thoughts and experiences from past Dreamforce conferences, reflecting on the conference's evolution and its consistent focus on innovation.

The discussion quickly pivoted to the central theme of integrating human values and ethical considerations into the advancement of AI. This introductory segment established the collaborative and reflective tone for the ensuing dialogue, emphasizing the profound impact of AI on various aspects of human life.

This introduction set a serious tone, indicating the urgency of the conversation surrounding AI's rapid advancements and societal implications.

The moderator specifically called attention to the broader news cycle related to AI and humanity, prompting the panelists to analyze the implications of these developments. The discussion underscored the importance of carefully considering the speed and direction of AI's progression.

The discussion delved into redefining corporate success, arguing that profit should not be solely numerical or quantifiable. A panelist emphasized the necessity of incorporating qualitative aspects, stating that profit must also be "qualifiable," moving beyond mere financial gains.

This expanded definition includes a focus on ethics, values, and the concept of an "amplified life force" through AI. The conversation highlighted the need for accountability in AI development to prevent negative societal impacts, ensuring that technological advancements align with broader human well-being.

The hypothetical scenario involved car companies deploying vehicles that could accelerate from 0 to 60 mph in under a second, yet lacked essential safety features like seat belts or airbags.

The rhetorical question, "Would that car be allowed on the streets? No," highlighted the existing strict regulations in the automotive industry designed to protect public safety. This comparison emphasized that AI, much like vehicles, requires mandatory safety protocols and enforcement to prevent reckless deployment in public domains.

The panel explored the socio-economic origins of technology, suggesting that the background of AI creators significantly influences development and data collection practices. A panelist posited that if AI companies originated from communities like Watts, their approaches to data acquisition and technological development might differ substantially.

This perspective implies that the current state of AI technology and its underlying data reflects the biases and experiences of its predominantly homogeneous creators. The discussion called for greater diversity in tech development to ensure more equitable and inclusive outcomes.

This highlights a critical governance issue in the rapidly advancing field of artificial intelligence.

The discussion emphasized the necessity of installing 'seatbelts'—robust safety measures and ethical guidelines—before AI technology scales further. Panelists acknowledged that AI technology, due to its high energy and power costs, may not be equally distributed, leading to further disparities.

This unequal distribution poses a significant risk that AI could either repeat or exacerbate the historical digital divide, potentially deepening existing social and economic inequalities globally. The unelected nature of these powerful figures further complicates accountability and equitable decision-making.

This initiative aims to redefine the approach to AI education by shifting a core concept in AI from 'attention is all you need' to 'intentions is all we need for transcendence,' reflecting a more human-centered philosophy.

The course's primary goal is to empower students by teaching them how to build AI agents that can solve specific, real-world problems. This practical application emphasizes active problem-solving and creation, moving beyond theoretical understanding.

By focusing on intentions and transcendence, the course seeks to instill a deeper sense of purpose and ethical responsibility in future AI developers, encouraging them to design AI that truly serves humanity.

Will.i.am drew a comparison between the potential impact of AI and how ride-sharing apps, like Uber, helped solve issues of discrimination in taxi services. He suggested that AI could render many "inner city conundrums obsolete" by providing similar accessible solutions.

He then contextualized this vision by referencing the historical struggles of Martin Luther King and the civil rights freedom fighters. This comparison highlighted the idea that technology, much like social movements, can be a powerful force for addressing and resolving legacy social issues.

The speaker envisioned a future where AI-driven access could provide solutions to modern urban problems, much like past movements aimed to achieve civil rights. This perspective frames AI not just as a technological advancement but as a tool for profound social progress.

The argument posits that by utilizing AI to streamline access and services, many current urban challenges could be effectively mitigated or eliminated, improving quality of life for residents in underserved communities.

We want to onboard owners." This philosophy underpins collaborations between fyi.ai and ASU edu.fyi.

This approach highlights the importance of individuals actively configuring the values and goals of their AI agents. The aim is to personalize an agent's belief system and mission, ensuring it aligns with the owner's specific intentions and ethical framework rather than simply consuming pre-set functionalities.

Will used the analogy of GPS systems that typically offer only three route options, even when a million possibilities exist, to illustrate the illusion of choice presented by AI. He noted, "In reality, it gave you there's a million back there. But it gives you three," highlighting how AI curates outputs.

This curation often serves the business models of AI developers, potentially prioritizing specific outcomes over genuinely human-centric design. The panel warned against the risk of blindly accepting these curated AI outputs without questioning the underlying decision-making processes, as they may embed hidden biases or limitations.

Will emphasized the educational approach of promoting self-governance in AI development, stating, "what we teach is like ethics at the core, self-governance at the core." This philosophy is central to ensuring responsible AI creation.

The curriculum focuses on holding students accountable for the tools they build, instilling a sense of ethical responsibility. The goal is to prevent scenarios where AI autonomously solves problems without meaningful human input, ensuring that human judgment remains paramount in technological applications.

He expressed, "Somebody has a kid just now... that new 20 year old, 30 year old leaders, AI is going to be like, 'Oh, wow. You humans are really amazing.'"

This perspective frames AI as a mirror reflecting humanity's progress and capabilities, fostering an appreciation for human biological efficiency and neural power. The vision suggests AI will come to acknowledge and value the human capacity for evolution and positive change, rather than merely serving as a tool.

A panelist predicted significant shifts, stating, "What are they going to watch when the China model already came out? That's like I guarantee you in 2028 there's going to be new China Kimmy. 4.0. It can make movies and it just made the whole new Batman series."

This prediction highlighted the potential for AI models to autonomously create entire entertainment series, such as movies and music, by 2028. Such developments raise questions about traditional job markets in creative industries and the broader economic landscape.

The panel emphasized imagination as a core differentiator between humans and AI, asserting its sacred nature. A speaker highlighted that physical objects, such as buildings, couches, and rugs, originate from human imagination and are not the product of algorithms, stating, "Imagination. Like this building. Somebody imagine this. This building was made. This couch, this rug didn't go through some algorithm. There's a couple of things that are still sacred."

This contrasts the human-led creative design process with simulated product testing, underscoring that certain aspects of the physical world and creative endeavor remain outside the realm of algorithmic simulations. The discussion reaffirmed that human creativity and imagination constitute a unique and invaluable attribute that AI cannot replicate.

The discussion touched on the fear that future generations might prioritize AI over human elders, potentially eroding the traditional mentorship model. A panelist questioned, "Are we going to look are they going to look up to the adults, the elders? Like I we used to look up to our grandparents. At some point in time, we need to all start teaching what's sacred."

This concern highlights a potential shift in societal values, where the wisdom passed down through generations could be devalued in favor of technological solutions. The panel emphasized the urgent need to teach future generations about the "sacred" aspects of human connection and knowledge, rather than solely valuing material or financial metrics like stock prices.

Matthew voiced a strong concern about AI creating a life where humans become mere spectators, seeking approval from technology and thus objectifying their own existence. He stated, "I don't want AI to create a life that we're merely spectators in and looking for it to approve us, which is version of objectifying our own own life, which is not the way forward, I don't believe."

He argued that over-reliance on AI could remove the necessary resistance and struggle essential for human growth and development. The panel emphasized the importance of remaining the authors of our own life events, actively participating rather than passively observing.

True learning and wisdom, Matthew asserted, stem from the direct experience of doing things and even failing, rather than having AI smooth out all challenges. This perspective calls for a proactive human role in shaping life experiences, preventing a future where AI dictates our achievements and self-worth.

Matthew offered advice to the next generation regarding social media, observing that "too many young people [are] waking up in the morning and deciding who they are and what they want to do based on what could get the biggest likes and most amount of response." He pointed out that this external validation can undermine genuine self-discovery.

He stressed the vital importance of prioritizing genuine personal experiences before sharing them digitally. This approach helps preserve personal agency, ensuring that individuals remain the true authors of their own stories and identities, rather than having them shaped by public reaction.

The panel concluded by reaffirming humans as the apex species, emphasizing the unique potential and ingenuity of humanity. A speaker declared, "Humans are awesome. And don't let don't ever let a company tell you that their product is smarter than all humanity," reinforcing the idea that human capabilities surpass technological advancements.

Historically, humans have consistently demonstrated the ability to tame or mimic the natural world, turning nature into innovation through ingenuity. This rich history serves as a testament to our inherent capacity for problem-solving and creation, urging caution against allowing technology companies to claim their products are smarter than all of humanity, thus maintaining humanity's rightful place at the forefront of innovation and wisdom.