The first as an individual that enjoys art and nature: I don't enjoy AI-generated paintings or sculptures. I am very sensitive to anything that is not real BUT, do not become annoyed by Picasso, Modigliani, or Rodin art. I am also sensitive to colors, and color combinations, and find disgusting the color choices of all AI-generated art that I have seen so far. I look forward to more human art.
The second is as a writer and tool creator, I want to assist myself and other writers through Machine Learning (ML). Is ML going to replace me as a writer? No, but it is going to assist me like a good apprentice.
I have been already through one AI wave, the second one in the late 80s. The way that I am wandering through this third AI wave is to test the "AIs", create my own ML, run my own experiments, and be a sounding board to both artists and technologists that I talk to.
From my own experiments, we do not have to worry and I will be glad to chat to people that are anxious about this third AI wave.
Raul thank you for the thoughtful comment. Yours always are :) I especially appreciate your long-term perspective on this AI wave, having lived and worked through two others. Never forget your history...
Did you know that there are more AI images online now after a year than photographs taken since the invention of the camera?
This tech is in its infancy and improving by the day. If you decrease your time paying attention to this, you are just sticking your head in the sand. If you use this tech before is regulated, you are helping to train it. AI companies not only want to steal our data, they need people to interact with it to improve it. After it is regulated and people are compensated fairly, then the comparison to Warhol is an equal one. And make no mistake, it needs to be regulated. If you are disappointed by social media companies, having created the digital town square, telling elected governments to change their laws or they will shut the town square down like in Canada where they no longer can get news on Facebook or information about wildfires because the Canadian government simply wants them to pay for news media, well that's a small taste of the power that will be wielded by corporations with unregulated AI.
Take back your art and career should be the first thing you recommend, it has useful tips. Because the question isn't whether creativity will always exist. It's whether artists will be able to compete in the market place against AI. And without regulations around our data, that most likely is a no. It might be a hobby, but hobbies don't pay bills, pay for goods or services or pay taxes. And that's good for no one in society.
One of the deeper problems is that our art is now considered 'data' which strips it of its soul. Art is so much more than the pixels and flecks of paint it's expressed with. Story is so much more than arrangements of words. Music is so much more than frequencies and patterns. This is what the no holds barred gen AI proponents fail to comprehend.
Snarky answer: crytpo was going to kill money once too.
Sincere answer: new technologies are always disruptive and scary and create new problems and unintended consequences. And yet, we resilient little humans keep slogging along.
Good conversation! I can say for sure that working with other writers here has made me feel really good about the human connection aspect, and playing around and becoming familiar with the tools has utterly demystified them (well, not quite demystified.... they still seem like magic sometimes). We're living though incredibly interesting and important times.
It’s definitely interesting times and moving so quickly. I love that you mentioned the connection and community here specifically. It’s helping me too. 💙
Yes, ai anxiety does have a negative effect on me. It interferes with my writing. The worst thing: my day job is in web3 industry and now it’s plagued with ai hype. I have to deal with everyday ai-related hustle and hype of founders of the company I work in.
But! There is something positive in here: ai anxiety pushed me to go on with a project which was brewing in my mind for some time. It’s strongly anti-ai and it’s about my favorite thing: writing.
Thank you for this post! Even though I’m confronted with aggressive ai shill daily, I’ll try to switch this noise off using techniques from this post.
PS: the ultimate emotion >> I won’t let ai hype ruin what brings me the genuine joy.
So glad to hear that the silver lining that came out of this anxiety is that it's encouraged you to move into your writing in a new way. Keep us posted!
This was a very good post. I do like the connection to the historic anxieties of artists over the years (photography is definitly a close parallel with painting) but I wish Kathryn had defended this statement better.
"Of course, it’s not the same; the scale and speed of the technology today is different and therefore the impact is different."
I can't find any evidence to support it yet I hear it so often on so many topics. It's like we almost got to the point where we can look at historic analogies and then quickly step back and justify why this time is different. Yet this is ironically one of the most consistent arguments in the Art world against technology throughout time.
So it's always new and different (literally the definition of emerging tech) and yet when it's past, hindsight is 20/20 and we see that the world moved on. I'm just curious what makes this time so uniquely unique unlike any other time?
I also enjoyed this post, especially as the daughter and mother of artists. I've witnessed first hand the trials and challenges of brilliant artists unable to break through on a wider stage, as well as the pressures of nascent fame when you're too young.
As for the question of technology and how it's "different this time." It's very simple—on a fundamental, existential level, there is no comparison between a technology that serves as a tool for artists (photography, digital tools, 3D modeling, etc) and one that ingests, digests, and creates new art on its own. Yes, gen AI is also a tool, but it's also a "creator" in the technical sense of the word. All of the previous technologies do not, and cannot, replace the artist. Yes, the argument was made a century ago that photography would replace painting, but that is not the same argument as that which says gen AI could replace artists. Cameras didn't train on the work of millions of artists (living or not). Even the digital tools prior to gen AI were not able to produce new works at the flick of a switch (er, prompt). They were simply new technologies, new tools. The trouble with gen AI is that it's both that new tool but also a fundamentally unprecedented threat. In many ways, the evidence you seek is everywhere.
I should also iterate, again, it's not the tech itself that so many artists are so bothered about. It's the deeply unethical way in which this tech was trained and developed. It's the massive, wholesale intake of works produced by humans without their knowledge, consent, credit, or compensation, and the deployment of a tool that could not merely effectively wipe out entire careers and livelihoods, but appropriate artist names, brands, and styles as well. Let's keep that very clear.
So the key to understanding the debate that's going on in art circles, be it art, publishing, music or others, is this fundamental distinction between generative AI and the technologies that came before it.
Actually, I just quitted my web3 job. I want to be useful and take part in initiatives related to ethical ai. I’d appreciate your advice on how I can proceed 😊
Agree on the “deeply unethical” part. As someone who works in web3 I see on a daily basis how investors and vc funds are shilling and hype ai projects (including those creating deep fakes!) without asking any ethical question, without even caring to think about the consequences of it all. This is the most frightening part. The technology is in hands of people whose sole interest is quick roi.
I have two perspectives.
The first as an individual that enjoys art and nature: I don't enjoy AI-generated paintings or sculptures. I am very sensitive to anything that is not real BUT, do not become annoyed by Picasso, Modigliani, or Rodin art. I am also sensitive to colors, and color combinations, and find disgusting the color choices of all AI-generated art that I have seen so far. I look forward to more human art.
The second is as a writer and tool creator, I want to assist myself and other writers through Machine Learning (ML). Is ML going to replace me as a writer? No, but it is going to assist me like a good apprentice.
I have been already through one AI wave, the second one in the late 80s. The way that I am wandering through this third AI wave is to test the "AIs", create my own ML, run my own experiments, and be a sounding board to both artists and technologists that I talk to.
From my own experiments, we do not have to worry and I will be glad to chat to people that are anxious about this third AI wave.
Raul thank you for the thoughtful comment. Yours always are :) I especially appreciate your long-term perspective on this AI wave, having lived and worked through two others. Never forget your history...
Did you know that there are more AI images online now after a year than photographs taken since the invention of the camera?
This tech is in its infancy and improving by the day. If you decrease your time paying attention to this, you are just sticking your head in the sand. If you use this tech before is regulated, you are helping to train it. AI companies not only want to steal our data, they need people to interact with it to improve it. After it is regulated and people are compensated fairly, then the comparison to Warhol is an equal one. And make no mistake, it needs to be regulated. If you are disappointed by social media companies, having created the digital town square, telling elected governments to change their laws or they will shut the town square down like in Canada where they no longer can get news on Facebook or information about wildfires because the Canadian government simply wants them to pay for news media, well that's a small taste of the power that will be wielded by corporations with unregulated AI.
Take back your art and career should be the first thing you recommend, it has useful tips. Because the question isn't whether creativity will always exist. It's whether artists will be able to compete in the market place against AI. And without regulations around our data, that most likely is a no. It might be a hobby, but hobbies don't pay bills, pay for goods or services or pay taxes. And that's good for no one in society.
One of the deeper problems is that our art is now considered 'data' which strips it of its soul. Art is so much more than the pixels and flecks of paint it's expressed with. Story is so much more than arrangements of words. Music is so much more than frequencies and patterns. This is what the no holds barred gen AI proponents fail to comprehend.
Snarky answer: crytpo was going to kill money once too.
Sincere answer: new technologies are always disruptive and scary and create new problems and unintended consequences. And yet, we resilient little humans keep slogging along.
Ha, some new technologies are more disruptive (and snarkier) than others. But yes, resilience is the name of the game when it comes to Homo sapiens!
Good conversation! I can say for sure that working with other writers here has made me feel really good about the human connection aspect, and playing around and becoming familiar with the tools has utterly demystified them (well, not quite demystified.... they still seem like magic sometimes). We're living though incredibly interesting and important times.
It’s definitely interesting times and moving so quickly. I love that you mentioned the connection and community here specifically. It’s helping me too. 💙
Small wins add up!
Yes, ai anxiety does have a negative effect on me. It interferes with my writing. The worst thing: my day job is in web3 industry and now it’s plagued with ai hype. I have to deal with everyday ai-related hustle and hype of founders of the company I work in.
But! There is something positive in here: ai anxiety pushed me to go on with a project which was brewing in my mind for some time. It’s strongly anti-ai and it’s about my favorite thing: writing.
Thank you for this post! Even though I’m confronted with aggressive ai shill daily, I’ll try to switch this noise off using techniques from this post.
PS: the ultimate emotion >> I won’t let ai hype ruin what brings me the genuine joy.
As I said earlier in the comment, I'd love to be involved in ai ethics initiatives. I'd really appreciate any advice on how to proceed. Thank you )
Victoria, email me at themuse@substack.com and I'll be happy to give you more info.
Done 😊
Hmm haven't seen it come through
Sent again )
So glad to hear that the silver lining that came out of this anxiety is that it's encouraged you to move into your writing in a new way. Keep us posted!
Thank you! Will do as recording my progress on Substack is part of this idea 😊
Most likely for many.
But AI anxiety is not a solution, AI knowledge and education more likely is a solution…
This was a very good post. I do like the connection to the historic anxieties of artists over the years (photography is definitly a close parallel with painting) but I wish Kathryn had defended this statement better.
"Of course, it’s not the same; the scale and speed of the technology today is different and therefore the impact is different."
I can't find any evidence to support it yet I hear it so often on so many topics. It's like we almost got to the point where we can look at historic analogies and then quickly step back and justify why this time is different. Yet this is ironically one of the most consistent arguments in the Art world against technology throughout time.
So it's always new and different (literally the definition of emerging tech) and yet when it's past, hindsight is 20/20 and we see that the world moved on. I'm just curious what makes this time so uniquely unique unlike any other time?
I also enjoyed this post, especially as the daughter and mother of artists. I've witnessed first hand the trials and challenges of brilliant artists unable to break through on a wider stage, as well as the pressures of nascent fame when you're too young.
As for the question of technology and how it's "different this time." It's very simple—on a fundamental, existential level, there is no comparison between a technology that serves as a tool for artists (photography, digital tools, 3D modeling, etc) and one that ingests, digests, and creates new art on its own. Yes, gen AI is also a tool, but it's also a "creator" in the technical sense of the word. All of the previous technologies do not, and cannot, replace the artist. Yes, the argument was made a century ago that photography would replace painting, but that is not the same argument as that which says gen AI could replace artists. Cameras didn't train on the work of millions of artists (living or not). Even the digital tools prior to gen AI were not able to produce new works at the flick of a switch (er, prompt). They were simply new technologies, new tools. The trouble with gen AI is that it's both that new tool but also a fundamentally unprecedented threat. In many ways, the evidence you seek is everywhere.
I should also iterate, again, it's not the tech itself that so many artists are so bothered about. It's the deeply unethical way in which this tech was trained and developed. It's the massive, wholesale intake of works produced by humans without their knowledge, consent, credit, or compensation, and the deployment of a tool that could not merely effectively wipe out entire careers and livelihoods, but appropriate artist names, brands, and styles as well. Let's keep that very clear.
So the key to understanding the debate that's going on in art circles, be it art, publishing, music or others, is this fundamental distinction between generative AI and the technologies that came before it.
Here's an Atlantic article that I find helpful on better understanding the ethical issue:
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2023/08/books3-ai-meta-llama-pirated-books/675063/
Love all these resources, thank you so much!
Actually, I just quitted my web3 job. I want to be useful and take part in initiatives related to ethical ai. I’d appreciate your advice on how I can proceed 😊
Congrats on that. It sounds like the right move for you. <3
Birgitte might be a better one to ask for that advice here ... she's doing some cool work in this area.
Yes just asked Victoria to email me, there's a lot to explore in the ethics segment of AI. In fact I'm speaking at an online conference on generative AI next week, specifically about ethics and other concerns... it's a free event: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/can-a-robot-run-your-marketing-ai-in-climate-tech-marketing-tickets-691289023077?aff=TofuSlack
I am so glad that this opportunity to share writing in your space might lead more people to new opportunities. <3
Agree on the “deeply unethical” part. As someone who works in web3 I see on a daily basis how investors and vc funds are shilling and hype ai projects (including those creating deep fakes!) without asking any ethical question, without even caring to think about the consequences of it all. This is the most frightening part. The technology is in hands of people whose sole interest is quick roi.