What I have learned about AI and creativity this year
And why I'm optimistic and pessimistic about the future
I’m taking the remainder of the year off to eat turkey and drink wine and wrap presents badly. Explainable will return first week of January. Thanks to everyone for your support this year.
I launched Explainable back in July because it felt like we were entering a scary new era with AI and I wasn’t reading much that focused on humans over tech. I had also been made redundant at the start of the year, and a desire not to experience the feeling of being made redundant again (0/10, would not recommend) definitely drove a need to get to grips with AI.
So far I’m enjoying it and the early feedback has been lovely, it’s nice to know there are lots of people out there who want to understand AI while finding the whole thing a bit annoying and offputting.
Anyway, these are my biggest takeaways from year one.
Generative AI is incredible and incredibly crap
This has been the hardest thing to convey over the past months. AI is transforming everything about how we work and live and the hype is real. Also, quick reminder, it’s all a bit shit and every day something laughably bad will come from the AI tools you use.
But lots of the discourse around AI is determined to pick a lane, The World Changer versus The Emperor’s New Clothes. That’s mainly a fault of social media, nuance rarely gets reshared. Even in my headlines, I’ve tended towards definitive statements because Um It’s Quite Complicated, Actually tends to not go viral. But it is nuanced. It’s OK to believe we’re experiencing a revolution while simultaneously thinking the main tools are often a bit rubbish. So far, the best description I have heard is that AI is ‘your super-fast, sloppy assistant’ and that’s something that will likely hold true next year.
We are nowhere close to being prepared for the jobs market upheaval that is coming
Recently I read a viral LinkedIn post where someone was gushing in their praise for the ‘classy’ way a major tech firm laid off hundreds of staff. The comments were on a similar theme. A standing ovation for the lovely manner in which a company told people they would not have a job at Christmas. That’s a tough climate in which to advocate for better labor laws.
The economist Richard Baldwin said in May, “AI won't take your job, It is somebody using AI that will take your job”. Variations of that quote have been triumphantly shared on social all year. It is, in fairness, a selling point for this newsletter, that it’s a good idea to stay on top of AI trends.
But it discourages thinking about the collective. Once you push to be first through the door you will be fine, who cares about who you pushed past? And even if you’re comfortable with such a zero-sum outlook, and feel prepared for it, it won’t necessarily save you.
A stock photographer (stock photographers are my favorite current creative example) could learn AI techniques to supplement their career-long dedication to the craft of photography. It could even keep them in employment. But if an unfeeling market decides there’s no added value in the real thing, that an AI image is generally fine for a banking brochure, then that person’s earnings will plummet, with or without AI knowledge. These changes are happening already and more will come. And we are not prepared.
Creatives need to be compensated by AI companies
This is a slight fudge, I knew this at the outset of Explainable. But it has been a shock just how little traction this concept is getting within companies themselves (I would again advise everyone to follow composer Ed Newton-Rex, who quit Stability AI over this and is my dream interviewee for next year). A few landmark legal cases are coming down the line next year and beyond. My best guess is that after some lengthy legal battles, AI companies will be dragged, kicking and screaming into creating some sort of industry slush fund that pays independent artists a paltry amount for allowing people to create facsimiles of their artistic work. And that’s my most optimistic take on what will happen for artists, it’s that grim.
Creativity will have added value, for some creators
There is, however, some cause for optimism. There is absolutely nothing coming via current generative AI tools that suggests true creativity can be automated. Anything really interesting that I have seen from AI tools this year has been interesting because it was made by creatively talented people putting in a lot of hours with a new tool. And even those examples have been few and far between. AI tools have been good for speeding up parts of the creative process, AI has made storyboarding a little different, AI has changed how non-creative people create stuff or how they consider what is worth paying for.
But talented designers or filmmakers or musicians or writers or artists can very easily demonstrate why their work is vastly superior to anything produced using AI. And nothing about the upgrades coming down the line suggests that will change any time soon.
But, but, but... Not all designers or filmmakers or musicians or writers or artists get the opportunity to make life-affirming art. Most creatives do whatever work that can pay the bills and keep them at least in the same orbit as their craft. And lots of that technically-creative-but-not-exactly-inspiring work is under threat. That, in turn, threatens the ability of those same creatives to make transcendent art. Art has always been an easier thing for the wealthy to pursue, but that grim reality is going to get more and more pronounced over the coming years… Happy Christmas! 😬
See you next year for more how-tos, creative highlights, expert interviews, and warm-to-lukewarm takes.