Of all the ways to approach something new, denial is undoubtedly the worst. It is far better to inform oneself in order to weigh the facts and clarify a situation that might otherwise elude us.
These reflections examine the phenomenon of artificial intelligence from a creative standpoint, using writing as an example. With some nuances, they equally apply to the creation of music, visual arts, or architecture — wherever an author’s touch remains a tangible value.
- Banning artificial intelligence is pure fantasy — much like trying to ban airplanes. However, I believe it is essential for governments to regulate it, backed by hefty fines. That money could then be reinvested into research or education, for the common good.
- As an author, I want to retain full authorship of my work. I will never ask a machine to provide me with ideas, nor the narrative structure, nor the tone of a text. However, I can leverage its immense research capabilities — to locate sources, for instance, or to seek advice much like submitting an essay to a university professor. I might not agree with everything that professor says, but their outside perspective would reveal new angles, ultimately enriching my work.
- If the use of artificial intelligence directly takes away the work of a human creator, then I am opposed to it.
- We don’t usually mention using a grammar-checking tool. But if artificial intelligence writes a paragraph for you and you merely change a few words or tweak a phrase, you are essentially the copy editor of a text authored by the ai. In that case, failing to acknowledge its contribution is dishonest.
- The emergence of artificial intelligence represents a genuine paradigm shift in human history, comparable to the invention of the light bulb. The danger is a fundamental one: if we stop having ideas because the machine does it for us in such a diligent manner, then it is human thought itself that vanishes. ◼︎