machines won’t replace us
exploring this theme broadly. for now, collecting raw material.
machines won’t replace us
I think we’ll realize that the early text-to-image “prompt-based” era of GenAI undermined creativity while the “controls” era unleashed human creativity in unimaginable ways. the tools evolve, but creative vision, precision, taste, and skills will be more vital than ever before.
AI generated content will answer a question until now was impossible to answer:
How much of our enjoyment of art is about the art itself, and how much is it about a connection to the artist?
100% the latter
Art is defined by intentionality, and we ought to view “AI art” as an interaction between humans and machines versus ascribing to a computer agency that does not exist.
None of this is to imply that human beings should repudiate the technologies that make us more efficient. We just have to recognize which needs greater quantity can meet, and which it cannot. For example, AI chatbots cannot meet the need for intimacy. LLMs cannot meet the need for creativity. AI-generated art cannot meet the need for aesthetic nour... See more
via Charles Eisenstein
Right now, people totally misunderstand what AI is. They see it as a tiger. A tiger is dangerous. It might eat me. It’s an adversary. And there’s danger in water, too — you can drown in it — but the danger of a flowing river of water is very different to the danger of a tiger. Water is dangerous, yes, but you can also swim in it, you can make boats
... See moreThe Verge • “An engine for the imagination”: an interview with David Holz, CEO of AI image generator Midjourney
When you don’t experience reality like most people do, it’s hard to make things that connect with most people.
AI, completely detached from reality, will have a hard time making things that connect with people.
Billy Oppenheimer • The Cup of Coffee Theory of AI
It’s very exciting to see all the progress with agents. But we shouldn’t get swept away by the hype just yet. In most cases there will be a human in the loop for a while. Compounding errors are real and agents continue to need human guidance. Also inference costs are still high.
After AI beat them, professional go players got better and more creative
Henrik Karlssonopen.substack.com
the flourishing of creativity and skills tells us something about what might happen at the tail end of the human skill distribution when more AI systems come online. As humans learn from AIs, they might push through blockages that have kept them stalled and reach higher.
I want to see more tools and fewer operated machines - we should be embracing our humanity instead of blindly improving efficiency. And that involves using our new AI technology in more deft ways than generating more content for humans to evaluate. I believe the real game changers are going to have very little to do with plain content generation. L
... See more