We must not let AI’S threat to artists, writers limit its potential
In 2022, a momentous event occurred that forever changed the trajectory of human history. Openai unveiled DALL-E and CHATGPT — two powerful artificial intelligence tools that give anyone with an internet connection the gift of artistic expression and storytelling. But as with any revolutionary technology, there is a dark side: the possibility that these tools and those yet to come will replace human creativity altogether.
These AI applications harness the power of machine learning to create stunning works that were once thought impossible for a machine.
As AI continues to evolve and permeate the world of art and writing, many artists and writers are understandably apprehensive about its impact on their livelihoods — so much so that lawsuits have been filed against AI apps for copyright infringement.
I find it difficult to support efforts to ban or severely limit technology, as it will likely come at the cost of the enrichment of future generations.
I empathize with artists and writers who may soon be out of a job. However, more dangerous than AI is the fact that there are groups of people willing to stifle innovation to protect their livelihoods. They certainly will not be remembered fondly for their attempts to roll back change; history has shown us that innovation has always brought benefits to society, even if it meant displacement for some.
The car replaced the coachman, the machine replaced the blacksmith, and computers replaced, well, a lot of people.
Artists and writers need not despair, for there is one aspect of AI that will forever elude it: the very essence of what makes us human. Every piece of art and writing is a reflection of the individual artist or writer, and their unique experiences, emotions and worldview. To believe that AI could ever fully replace human creators is to misunderstand the very essence of artistic and literary creation.
Would Van Gogh’s iconic “Self-portrait with Bandaged Ear” hold the same emotional power if it were meticulously replicated by an AI? I think not. Even better, AI empowers those who have great ideas and stories but lack the artistic capability or financial means to make them a reality.
CHATGPT has proven that it can pass professional exams such as those for medical licensing and MBAS. GPTZERO is a recently developed tool that aims to fight back against the widespread use of AI in schools.
The intention behind the development of GPTZERO is admirable, but it’s proven to be ineffective and potentially more harmful than AI itself, with the consequences of false positives too great for academics and professionals. One mistake could end a career.
For schools, in-person exams remain the most effective means of preventing cheating. But the mass hysteria over AI use for homework misses the point. Homework should not be a “gotcha” moment to catch cheaters.
Teachers: All of your students, rich and poor, were just handed a free tool that can teach them your material in their preferred format at any time.
That’s powerful. That’s democratized education.
So why not encourage students to learn from it? Here are two solutions: One is that the teacher assigns a topic and requires students to ask CHATGPT at least five questions about it. Students would be required to discuss them, with random students called on to ensure that everyone is engaging with the material.
The second solution is that the teacher administer a brief exam in class containing a single, randomly selected question covering the material, which would comprise 50% of the homework’s overall grade.
Change can be daunting, and I understand the fears that many of us share about the impact of AI. But it’s important to remember that we are small players in the grand narrative of humanity, with new chapters being written every day.
Our current concerns about AI may seem significant now, but they will eventually be insignificant. There will be conflicts and controversies, but one thing is for certain: AI can be good or bad; it’s only a matter of perspective.