I have a client (whom I love!) who uses AI images to illustrate every story I wrote for them. I have wondered if I should say something about it because it made me uncomfortable: Your post galvanizes me to bring it up. Thank you.
I'm tired of AI images, their gauziness, which I assume is there to sidestep copyright on the photographs and images they use, just looks like a crapy artist trying to cover up poor technique.
And writers, AI is being used in your jobs. A colleague recently lost a position working in marketing to AI. She's had decades of experience and been part of editorial teams working on bestselling books.
I review books on my Substack, and publishers send me their wares for review. Some of these books are produced, in part, with AI. The first chapter reads just fine, then, starting with the second chapter, I can tell that AI was used for much of the rest of the book. Sure signs are a slight change in tone, the overuse and misuse of the rule of three, and a sameness of paragraph construction. I won't review these books.
I totally share your abhorrence of the AI generated image with every post. Personally, on my blog website if I don't have a relevant image of my own and use an image from my photo library of a beautiful place that I've been.
There is always something very creepy about these AI images
I love love loved this post, Lloyd. You put into words an ineffable feeling I've been having more and more lately, as my various feeds drown in versions of the message "if you're not using AI, you're doing it wrong."
I believe "I would rather take a photo of a pile of garbage than use an AI image" is a quote for the ages (and would make a nice alternate title for the piece!
I worked in the CAD/CAM industry in the 80s and 90s and thought we were developing high tech solutions that increased productivity. Looking back, I’m not sure if it was worth the loss of jobs. You might argue that the increased accuracy of the computer makes better products but unless you’re designing for the aerospace industry, extreme accuracy isn’t needed. Even so, they can still find ways to mess things up, just look at Boeing. So I look back at my career and wonder how it worked out for all the draftsman and machinists who were eventually let go. Or, all the potential skilled tech workers who never had a chance.
Automation is no different than outsourcing when it comes to jobs—the belief is that it allows a company to be more lean and efficient, i.e. higher profit margins for the investor class. A.I. and robotics are the next iteration in this evolution but one has to ask what the ultimate goal of all this is—if human labor is rendered superfluous, what kind of job will they have to afford the products that automation, robotics, and A.I. are making? UBI (universal basic income) will NOT be enough, nor is it sustainable. And what would happen if an entire region that's dependent on a single source of manufacturing—say Bangladesh, the way it's reliant on the textile industry—suddenly loses its ability to economically compete against a factory full of robots? What does an entire country do when its population has been made obsolete? What's going to be the socioeconomic fallout? No one discusses the potential answers, and that's too bad.
Boeing - It started down that slippery slope when it swallowed McDonald-Douglas and moved from being an engineering company to "biz oriented" one (think bean counters). Similar thing happened at DEC (I was there at the time - they refused to realize that they were no longer a hardware company but a software company and paid the price for it).
Thanks for writing this. I work in communications for a nonprofit and find myself feeling queasy at the pace with which “AI” is being added to every tool I use and pushed in so many workshops, with little thought to the repercussions and ethics of these tools. After reading your work for years, I also wonder at the massive amounts energy and infrastructure needed to power generative AI tools at a time when we need to be consuming much less.
I am a very strong opponent to AI for the reasons you mention as well as the unfortunate path it leads supposed 'artists' down. Just like having a copy of AutoCAD, Revit, etc. software doesn't make anyone an architect, AI doesn't make anyone an artist, writer, etc. Enough with these terribly vacuous attempts at creativity!
"Frustrated, I went for a run, and happened upon some garbage thrown out of a truck window into the gutter, and used a photo of it instead. And I decided that from now on I would rather take a photo of a pile of garbage than use an AI image."
With a single purpose built camera, Lloyd? Or with a radio masquerading as a multi-purpose computerized assistant? Look what cell phones did to the nascent "personal digital assistant" marketplace (yes, I had both a Palm PDA and an Apple Newton), what the Wang computer (and I worked for Wang Labs) did to the typing pool, and "workstation" manufacturers (like Apollo) did to the typesetting marketplace.
Rail if you wish - but that genie has now gone AWOL. As a software engineer (albeit, retired), AI is now eating MY lunch as well at far as lower level coding is concerned. HOWEVER, as I have done many times in the past (change has been an ever accelerating entity in my field), I will be re-skilling. In this case. learning how "guide" an AI LLM in spec'ing out the requirements and telling it what needs to be done by its code. I already have a set of pet projects in mind to "play" with.
You can complain or learn to adapt. I choose the latter.
Did you think, given the gist of your post of machines replacing "professionals", that you just took away a job from a professional photographer that could have supplied your post's adornment image?
I used my computerized assistant, which is way better than my Palm Treo or Blackberry, but does essentially the same thing. I am not even saying that they are not useful, your application sounds interesting. I am in a business where people are losing their jobs to AI and I do not see why we should aid and abet the process.
"I am in a business where people are losing their jobs to AI and I do not see why we should aid and abet the process."
You blog about sustainability. I blog about Culture and philosophical and operational Politics. AI impacts both of us but I'm not whining about it. Like the US Marines maxim: "Improvise, Adapt, Overcome". You can either do that or go sit in a corner.
And you ARE better than just sitting in a corner - buckup, bucko. It's merely another Disruption in the Marketplace like the Information Era before AI and the Industrial Revolution before that. Agriculture, bronze, iron, steel...advances changed what was the status quo. Creative Destruction. I've lived through it just in my industries. Learn to learn anew is the best advice I can give you.
Be brave - DO something!
Seek and find out the opportunities that your entire life experiences have prepared you for, Lloyd - and then LAUNCH yourself at them. Well, at least one.
"I am in a business where people are losing their jobs to AI and I do not see why we should aid and abet the process."
So what of the millions of jobs you're actively hoping to axe by ridding the world of fossil fuel extraction, refinement, and delivery industries? Or of the ICE auto manufacturing, maintenance, and repair industries? Or monoculture farmers and cattle ranchers? There are a myriad of industries facing annihilation each and every day by gullible climate "crisis" blowhards who think nothing of the people's livelihoods that are at stake should all those industries go away. (It's like Biden saying West Virginia coal miners should "learn how to code" instead as a way to feed and support their families—totally out of touch with reality.)
I find it deliciously ironic that only *NOW* after A.I. has begun impacting your *OWN* personal industry you're expressing concern of the perceived perils of what A.I. can render obsolete, wanting its use/impact limited or banned. Why not afford that same freedom and equality to those people who's livelihoods are dependent on things you don't like, such as fossil fuels and large-scale agriculture? Why is your industry the one needing protection but not those who provide 86% of the world's energy use and feed billions of people around the world?
Ok so we are climate crisis blowhards trying to kill those fine jobs in the fossil fuel industry and gasoline cars, oh and cows, you don’t believe a word that I write. Why are you here? I like having a “loyal opposition” as GraniteGrok calls it, but it seems like you are wasting your time.
VB makes great points on the hypocrisy front. "Sustainability" requires that millions are out of jobs, either directly or by death.
Doubt me? Look at the "sustainability" strictures that the EU and national bureaucrats have tried to place on farmers by a myriad of ways. THEY lose their jobs - the food that they are not allowed to provide means death to others.
You rail about "progress" in the computer field - I rail about the actual harms from "progressive" (re: socialists and de-growthers) all too willing to accept the broken eggs from their Utopian omelet.
At least with AI, people can re- or up-skill themselves and move on from the current "buggy-whip" computer industry. To the second, people just die.
Which is more evil, Lloyd? The first still allows choice - the second removes ALL choices (in the name of sustainability).
On the flip side....I have been thinking about what skills might survive this revolution. I think there will continue to be a need for skilled trades- carpenters, plumbers, electricians, plasterers, etc. What do you think?
When do people find out they are more creative than computers or A1?
Can't find the science fiction story of a pilot who finds they are in a drawn with their opponents. That is until, he recalculates his machine (so to speak) with his own thoughts and finds his opponents are not prepared for his approach.
The human mind is a marvelous being within you that has the ability and creativity to think beyond what A1 or computers do. We are not locked in so to speak and are allowed to think beyond the confines.
I have a client (whom I love!) who uses AI images to illustrate every story I wrote for them. I have wondered if I should say something about it because it made me uncomfortable: Your post galvanizes me to bring it up. Thank you.
I'm tired of AI images, their gauziness, which I assume is there to sidestep copyright on the photographs and images they use, just looks like a crapy artist trying to cover up poor technique.
And writers, AI is being used in your jobs. A colleague recently lost a position working in marketing to AI. She's had decades of experience and been part of editorial teams working on bestselling books.
I review books on my Substack, and publishers send me their wares for review. Some of these books are produced, in part, with AI. The first chapter reads just fine, then, starting with the second chapter, I can tell that AI was used for much of the rest of the book. Sure signs are a slight change in tone, the overuse and misuse of the rule of three, and a sameness of paragraph construction. I won't review these books.
I totally share your abhorrence of the AI generated image with every post. Personally, on my blog website if I don't have a relevant image of my own and use an image from my photo library of a beautiful place that I've been.
There is always something very creepy about these AI images
I love love loved this post, Lloyd. You put into words an ineffable feeling I've been having more and more lately, as my various feeds drown in versions of the message "if you're not using AI, you're doing it wrong."
I believe "I would rather take a photo of a pile of garbage than use an AI image" is a quote for the ages (and would make a nice alternate title for the piece!
Thank you for this.
I worked in the CAD/CAM industry in the 80s and 90s and thought we were developing high tech solutions that increased productivity. Looking back, I’m not sure if it was worth the loss of jobs. You might argue that the increased accuracy of the computer makes better products but unless you’re designing for the aerospace industry, extreme accuracy isn’t needed. Even so, they can still find ways to mess things up, just look at Boeing. So I look back at my career and wonder how it worked out for all the draftsman and machinists who were eventually let go. Or, all the potential skilled tech workers who never had a chance.
Automation is no different than outsourcing when it comes to jobs—the belief is that it allows a company to be more lean and efficient, i.e. higher profit margins for the investor class. A.I. and robotics are the next iteration in this evolution but one has to ask what the ultimate goal of all this is—if human labor is rendered superfluous, what kind of job will they have to afford the products that automation, robotics, and A.I. are making? UBI (universal basic income) will NOT be enough, nor is it sustainable. And what would happen if an entire region that's dependent on a single source of manufacturing—say Bangladesh, the way it's reliant on the textile industry—suddenly loses its ability to economically compete against a factory full of robots? What does an entire country do when its population has been made obsolete? What's going to be the socioeconomic fallout? No one discusses the potential answers, and that's too bad.
Boeing - It started down that slippery slope when it swallowed McDonald-Douglas and moved from being an engineering company to "biz oriented" one (think bean counters). Similar thing happened at DEC (I was there at the time - they refused to realize that they were no longer a hardware company but a software company and paid the price for it).
Thanks for writing this. I work in communications for a nonprofit and find myself feeling queasy at the pace with which “AI” is being added to every tool I use and pushed in so many workshops, with little thought to the repercussions and ethics of these tools. After reading your work for years, I also wonder at the massive amounts energy and infrastructure needed to power generative AI tools at a time when we need to be consuming much less.
i know some website provide i think completely base on fresh ai generated images rank on google
positive think is situational images make sense better rank user engagement osm
https://www.vecteezy.com/
https://sadgirldp.com/
https://pixlr.com/image-generator/
I am a very strong opponent to AI for the reasons you mention as well as the unfortunate path it leads supposed 'artists' down. Just like having a copy of AutoCAD, Revit, etc. software doesn't make anyone an architect, AI doesn't make anyone an artist, writer, etc. Enough with these terribly vacuous attempts at creativity!
“Alt intelligence” is about right.
Heh!
"Frustrated, I went for a run, and happened upon some garbage thrown out of a truck window into the gutter, and used a photo of it instead. And I decided that from now on I would rather take a photo of a pile of garbage than use an AI image."
With a single purpose built camera, Lloyd? Or with a radio masquerading as a multi-purpose computerized assistant? Look what cell phones did to the nascent "personal digital assistant" marketplace (yes, I had both a Palm PDA and an Apple Newton), what the Wang computer (and I worked for Wang Labs) did to the typing pool, and "workstation" manufacturers (like Apollo) did to the typesetting marketplace.
Rail if you wish - but that genie has now gone AWOL. As a software engineer (albeit, retired), AI is now eating MY lunch as well at far as lower level coding is concerned. HOWEVER, as I have done many times in the past (change has been an ever accelerating entity in my field), I will be re-skilling. In this case. learning how "guide" an AI LLM in spec'ing out the requirements and telling it what needs to be done by its code. I already have a set of pet projects in mind to "play" with.
You can complain or learn to adapt. I choose the latter.
Did you think, given the gist of your post of machines replacing "professionals", that you just took away a job from a professional photographer that could have supplied your post's adornment image?
I used my computerized assistant, which is way better than my Palm Treo or Blackberry, but does essentially the same thing. I am not even saying that they are not useful, your application sounds interesting. I am in a business where people are losing their jobs to AI and I do not see why we should aid and abet the process.
"I am in a business where people are losing their jobs to AI and I do not see why we should aid and abet the process."
You blog about sustainability. I blog about Culture and philosophical and operational Politics. AI impacts both of us but I'm not whining about it. Like the US Marines maxim: "Improvise, Adapt, Overcome". You can either do that or go sit in a corner.
And you ARE better than just sitting in a corner - buckup, bucko. It's merely another Disruption in the Marketplace like the Information Era before AI and the Industrial Revolution before that. Agriculture, bronze, iron, steel...advances changed what was the status quo. Creative Destruction. I've lived through it just in my industries. Learn to learn anew is the best advice I can give you.
Be brave - DO something!
Seek and find out the opportunities that your entire life experiences have prepared you for, Lloyd - and then LAUNCH yourself at them. Well, at least one.
"I am in a business where people are losing their jobs to AI and I do not see why we should aid and abet the process."
So what of the millions of jobs you're actively hoping to axe by ridding the world of fossil fuel extraction, refinement, and delivery industries? Or of the ICE auto manufacturing, maintenance, and repair industries? Or monoculture farmers and cattle ranchers? There are a myriad of industries facing annihilation each and every day by gullible climate "crisis" blowhards who think nothing of the people's livelihoods that are at stake should all those industries go away. (It's like Biden saying West Virginia coal miners should "learn how to code" instead as a way to feed and support their families—totally out of touch with reality.)
I find it deliciously ironic that only *NOW* after A.I. has begun impacting your *OWN* personal industry you're expressing concern of the perceived perils of what A.I. can render obsolete, wanting its use/impact limited or banned. Why not afford that same freedom and equality to those people who's livelihoods are dependent on things you don't like, such as fossil fuels and large-scale agriculture? Why is your industry the one needing protection but not those who provide 86% of the world's energy use and feed billions of people around the world?
Ok so we are climate crisis blowhards trying to kill those fine jobs in the fossil fuel industry and gasoline cars, oh and cows, you don’t believe a word that I write. Why are you here? I like having a “loyal opposition” as GraniteGrok calls it, but it seems like you are wasting your time.
It is always good to know what your "opposition" is doing. We must know what is coming around the pike so we are not blindsided.
VB makes great points on the hypocrisy front. "Sustainability" requires that millions are out of jobs, either directly or by death.
Doubt me? Look at the "sustainability" strictures that the EU and national bureaucrats have tried to place on farmers by a myriad of ways. THEY lose their jobs - the food that they are not allowed to provide means death to others.
You rail about "progress" in the computer field - I rail about the actual harms from "progressive" (re: socialists and de-growthers) all too willing to accept the broken eggs from their Utopian omelet.
At least with AI, people can re- or up-skill themselves and move on from the current "buggy-whip" computer industry. To the second, people just die.
Which is more evil, Lloyd? The first still allows choice - the second removes ALL choices (in the name of sustainability).
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2024/02/10/green-activists-menace-humanity/
On the flip side....I have been thinking about what skills might survive this revolution. I think there will continue to be a need for skilled trades- carpenters, plumbers, electricians, plasterers, etc. What do you think?
Lloyd:
When do people find out they are more creative than computers or A1?
Can't find the science fiction story of a pilot who finds they are in a drawn with their opponents. That is until, he recalculates his machine (so to speak) with his own thoughts and finds his opponents are not prepared for his approach.
The human mind is a marvelous being within you that has the ability and creativity to think beyond what A1 or computers do. We are not locked in so to speak and are allowed to think beyond the confines.
You are on the right track.