Another AI company wrote us and here’s our response

This feels like back in the day when photo editing and publishing software started getting big. "True artists" would shun anyone using those tools as amateurs. And for the most part they were right. It was mostly used by amateurs to create stuff that didn't look very good.

That is where we are with AI art right now. Most of it is garbage created by people who don't know what good art is.

But just like back in the day, a few professionals decided to adopt the new tools instead of complain about them. And all of a sudden they were creating good art much faster than their competitors. And then those tools simply became the tools of the trade.

This is where AI art is going. It will be a tool in the artists toolbox, just like Photoshop is. A great artist will use AI to do most of the work, and then add their professional taste and talent to make it great.

The smart artist is learning how to integrate AI into their workflows.

* And I'm including software engineers here as well. The smart engineer is incorporating copilots into their software development workflows.

I appreciate the post (for what it's worth). I suspect that we are probably considered "anachronisms," in today's culture.

I am retired. I didn't want to be retired, but I was told that I'm too old (I was 55, when I retired in 2017) to be playing at programmer; that it's a young man's game, and I should just go and carve decoy ducks in my garage or something.

Fortunately, I had enough set aside, that I was able to just accept that no one wants to play in my sandbox, and work on my own. The scope is more humble, but I am absolutely thrilled with the work that I do, and so are the folks that benefit from it (I tend to write stuff for people that can't afford the kind of stuff I write).

Money isn't everything, but I suspect a lot of folks don't realize that, until it's way too late.

> Imagine how many more video games and movies can be made when we don't need anywhere near as many artists as before. How many more diagrams in textbooks. How many extra illustrations for Wikipedia.

With the possible exception of Wikipedia illustrations, I wasn't aware we had a meaningful shortage of any of those things. On the contrary, there are more great video games and movies (and books, and TV shows, etc., etc.) already available than I could ever hope to get through in my lifetime.

GenAI in anything resembling its current form can only dilute these markets with worthless slop and make it harder for consumers to find actual worthwhile media made by and for humans. This problem will be compounded if it also makes creative careers less viable for humans.

The problem isn't that people are luddites and hate technology, it's that it has been built on the backs of peoples artistic work, and they haven't been asked or compensated for it.

The counterargument is that AI lets those without the skills take part too.

AI can help someone bring their musical ideas to fruition, draw pictures, or write stories.

There is still creative direction from a human - and now, rather than having to be a highly skilled human, it can now be almost anyone. In a way, AI brings creativity to the masses who aren't lucky enough to have the time to hone skills that would take thousands of hours to learn any other way.