AI: A Response

#HI

Beep boop; this was written by a real human boy.

I am number one million to have thoughts of AI creations, so I won't bore you with the background details. You know that AI generation in the fields reserved for human creativity (literature, art, coding, etc.) has taken a massive leap forward, with the effects already being felt as artists see their work stolen, signature and all, and news outlets are openly saying "a human didn't write this".

I'm not here to decry AI creations. Like how an axe is still good for chopping wood even if it can be misused as a weapon, AI can be helpful and innocent. I myself had to create pitch decks for shows I am pitching with my managers; I used Midjourney on some mood boards. I made three pitch decks but only used AI on one, since the final one was more comedic and needed a certain level of exaggeration. Though the results were far from perfect, it was still a great way to convey style and mise-en-scene. It's a profitless endeavour to support an original work which may lead to a human artist being hired in the future for storyboarding or art direction.

Sadly, my sample case is a rarity.

The most prevalent targets of scorn are AI Artists and Writers, who insist on being taken seriously. It's hard to properly judge the labour and time these AI Creatives really need to muster. However, while I do have an interest and some experience in artistic mediums, by no stretch of the imagination does this make me an AI artist, no more than phone filters make me a photographer, nor microwaving makes me a chef. The tool doesn't make the art nor the artist. If anyone can do it, then you can't say you did it.

My issue isn't even with the panic elicited. As with the printing press, television, and computers, there will be chaos but ultimately the dust will settle. It always does. No, my gripe is with the fact AI creations are trying to be presented as if a human made them, or at least as if they are on par with a human. How AI can be used to aid the creative process is a topic in of itself. The crux of my concern is unless otherwise stated, it's natural to assume a piece presented to you was created by a human. Your assumption right now is this piece is made by a human (albeit a short little Irish leprechaun of a human). I would love to whip back the curtain and laugh, but no; sadly, I'm a person. Your assumption comes from a place of tradition, basic life experience, and maybe some naivete.

Even news publications, entrusted to be factual and investigative, are being found to have used AI to generate news articles, maybe placing a disclaimer that says as much at the bottom of the page. What's the point since they got the clicks and views? They act like this is a noble undertaking, but if they wanted it to be really known that the article wasn't created by a person, they'd put it at the beginning where everyone can see. It's the same reason why corrections appear at the bottom; no one but sexy people read this part (hello).

A simple solution would be what we see with paid endorsements online now, where either the sponsored is explicitly stated or marked with #AD. In the internet's infancy, influencers and advertisers took advantage of the lack of oversight and attention to this media space, thinking they're too new to be associated with traditional media and its rules.

We are in the same infancy with AI. Apologists will justify art theft and rampant data collection as "revolutionary", expecting to be unencumbered by the legislature. They're so proud to show off what AI can do like a human, but they're awfully shy about being treated like humans. It's a digital placebo effect; AI is only impressive until you realise what it is.

It'll be some time before there is anything to ensure AI art is declared as such plainly and openly, but we don't need to wait for them to make the first move.

I started this article with #HI. For the foreseeable future I will mark my work on Medium and Vocal with it, to signify that this was created without Artificial Intelligence, but instead Human Intelligence (HI). I do not expect it to take off, nor gain traction, but I owe it to reassure readers that a person they are supporting, even just by reading, liking, or following (HINT! HINT!), is using their real life skill, intelligence, style, and experience. I am making a promise that I see a future in original work available to people. I will continue until I feel the discourse and perception of AI creations has settled and we're all in less predatory waters. It's unlikely to get noticed besides the five of you who bother, but much like human expression, the outcome isn't the goal. The act itself is the goal. The process of creation is the goal. Seeing yourself reflected in something external is the art.