George FreemanThought Leader | Author | Architect| Florida, United States
In a couple of years, we may find that half the content we consume is AI-generated, with a large percentage of the other content we consume being ai-augmented.
Does that motivate you or make you disillusioned?
For me, it has a demotivating effect. As “everywhere I turn,” I see content (words, art, music, scripting, etc.) generated or augmented by AI tooling. Although I appreciate its novelty and efficiency characteristics, I’m left wanting.
What say you and where is this trajectory leading us?
Saving Changes...
Those that are creative will continue to be so and may in fact be able to release more interesting, unique content than they might have previously. AI will make creative more prolific if not more creative.
Of course, the volume of noise will increase, which just ups the ante for us from a duration perspective.
I would liken it to the ubiquitous coverage of opinions, updates, rumors and outright fake news about US politics. Each of us needs to pick a handful of sources we trust out of the hundreds of thousands screaming into the void.
Kiron Saving Changes...
George FreemanThought Leader | Author | Architect| Florida, United States
Hi Kiron,
Thanks for the response. I’ve been delayed in responding to this thread thanks to Hurricane Helene, which caused us to evacuate and recuperate.
Now, I would like to believe the “creative will become more prolific, if not more creative.”
However, although my entire career has been based on leveraging bleeding-edge technologies, my front-row seat has inclined me to recognize the unfortunate reality that technology is often the adversary of human progress, especially from life-cycle perspectives.
Every week, I have engagements with colleagues and friends who, in their engagements with AI tooling, represent “AI as a panacea” for creativity. And I get it, as they can now do things they perceived were beyond their skillset. And although I’m concerned, I encourage them in their endeavors.
That said, creativity requires elements of:
- Adversity of thought
- The challenging of knowledge
- The application of ideas
Why “in the long term” have adversity of thought when the collective challenge-based knowledge of mankind is seemingly at my fingertips? And why disprove/prove a thought “through application” when I can interrogate AI as to whether that thought has a basis in reality?
Why are we inclined to “believe technology for the best” and forego challenging it and safeguarding its feasible conclusions?
George Saving Changes...
Thomas WalentaGlobal Project Economy ExpertHackenheim, Germany
George
AI gives me additional perspectives and data if I ask appropriately, enhancing my wisdom and broadening my knowledge. It also challenges my previous thinking and increases my critical thinking skills by allowing me to cope with new ideas/information presented.
...
1 reply by George Freeman
Oct 08, 2024 1:56 PM
George Freeman
...
Hi Thomas,
Let me rephrase my concern:
We, the generation that learned a creativity-based skillset without the assistance of AI, necessarily faced “adversity of thought” and were forced to “challenge the knowledge” before us and then put those thoughts into the framework of a “functional application.”
I am concerned that a generation that grows up on AI will yield “adversity of thought” and the “challenging of knowledge” to their AI partner, affecting novel creativity. I’m not saying that it will, but that it could—and if it could, should we not be concerned?
Stated differently, AI in the polished hands of a creative thinker is jet fuel for advancements. Conversely, AI in the non-polished hand of an individual who yields adversity and challenge to their AI partner “mitigates opportunity.”
Do you view this as a risk?
Saving Changes...
George FreemanThought Leader | Author | Architect| Florida, United States
Oct 07, 2024 5:13 AM
Replying to Thomas Walenta
...
George
AI gives me additional perspectives and data if I ask appropriately, enhancing my wisdom and broadening my knowledge. It also challenges my previous thinking and increases my critical thinking skills by allowing me to cope with new ideas/information presented.
Hi Thomas,
Let me rephrase my concern:
We, the generation that learned a creativity-based skillset without the assistance of AI, necessarily faced “adversity of thought” and were forced to “challenge the knowledge” before us and then put those thoughts into the framework of a “functional application.”
I am concerned that a generation that grows up on AI will yield “adversity of thought” and the “challenging of knowledge” to their AI partner, affecting novel creativity. I’m not saying that it will, but that it could—and if it could, should we not be concerned?
Stated differently, AI in the polished hands of a creative thinker is jet fuel for advancements. Conversely, AI in the non-polished hand of an individual who yields adversity and challenge to their AI partner “mitigates opportunity.”
Do you view this as a risk? Saving Changes...
Sergio Luis ConteHelping to create solutions for everyone| Worldwide based OrganizationsBuenos Aires, Argentina
First of all, you are talking about generative AI. AI is a board term. Generative AI is just a model inside the whole universe of AI. Second, talking about Generative AI, the key thing is to understand what it does mean "generated". Generative Ai is just "predictive text with steroids". So, if it the same than if you need to create a paper and you spend lot of time searching in all sources needed to get information to create the paper. Generative Ai helps on that. Somebody can argue: but it will create the paper too. Sure, but you have to spend time to make the research about being sure the content is correct. If not, you are lost. So, nothing new behind the sun. Just right now we have a "big brain" assistant but just to collect information. Saving Changes...
Regarding text articles about various topics, I think the information generated by AI is too academic and lacks the touch of experience that a text written by a human would have. I generally distinguish articles generated by AI, which, although they provide a lot of useful information, make me miss the unique reasoning of a human being. Saving Changes...
I feel more engaged when creators are open about how they use AI. If I know there’s still a human voice or intent behind the work, I’m much more interested in it. Saving Changes...
