The End of Creativity

One of my favorite family photos is us standing in front of a big banner we made with dot matrix printer celebrating my grandparents 50th (this must have been in the mid-late 90s).

It was so incredible to me at the time as a very young man, there was even fonts! I think it was Print Shop Deluxe for Windows 3.1/95.

I remember the day when my dad gave me $100 in an envelope. One of the worst days of my life.

I think the creative outlets will just go into different directions. For example when the camera was invented it caused a crisis in painting since now you could accurately capture reality. So then you had impressionism and all the other -isms. People deride a lot of this art now ("my kid could paint that"), but I think it genuinely was creative at the time since it hadn't been done before. And more recently artists have been returning to a more realistic style but with an emphasis on capturing things that camera can't (for example David Hockney's exploration of very large scale landscape painting or paintings where the objects although painted more or less realistically are not all presented from the same perspective).

LLMs/generative AI make a lot of things that previously required lots of skill to do well easy and accessible to more people. This creates a lot of garbage, and devalues that technical skill but it also opens up new avenues for people to explore.

Even in software engineering I think we're seeing a lot of creativity now, but it has shifted from creating frameworks like Ruby on Rails or Django or systems like Linux and Postgres and towards models for how to program with agents. Although people talk about how LLMs will replace all programmers from what I see the role of the programmer has changed into something more like management. This is of course sad. It made me depressed for a bit since I'm someone who previously prided himself on his technical skill and understanding of hardware minutia, which the LLMs now understand quite well and often better than me, but it has also allowed me to work on larger problems than I could before and to build things that I previously couldn't because I didn't have the front-end knowledge to implement in timely way or the monetary resources to pay someone to do it for me.

I don't think this is the death of creativity. It is just a new kind of non-creativity. He is comparing to a baseline of zero (or perhaps negative) creativity before AI.

Without AI, it's likely that neither of these videos would have been made, right? Five years ago, was it a normal thing for even one, much less two, groups of wedding guests to produce a video to show at a wedding, and if so, would the video even have been good? I mean actually good, not "it's the thought that counts, A-for-effort" good.

Isn't this like saying, "I decided to write a song for my friend's wedding, and I used AI to help me, and I played it and everyone liked it, and then someone else played the song that they had AI write for them, and it sounded just like mine, and everyone loved that too!"

Writing songs is something that's been around long enough, that if guests had made a habit of performing their original songs at weddings, even a graybeard like me would have experienced it. The baseline to compare to is no original songs were performed.

As it happens, in the weddings I've attended, I've heard exactly one such wedding song, and it was awful.

No, it's built-in. Some people just have it. Take a room full of people, give them the same training, a few might stand out and get better, most will hit a ceiling, some will clearly have no ability at all.

People who have native abilities and persistence are the ones who get labelled talented.

You may be right that AI gen doesn't count as persistence. It's too early to tell on that. But I'm fairly sure that there's a difference between people who click regen robotically and people who review, steer, criticise, think, and then hit regen, with a very deliberate aim in mind.