AI’s Foray into HumanDriven Spaces
Artificial intelligence has great potential for revolutionizing our world However the direction that artificial intelligence seems to be trending in is questionable Instead of increasing efficiency and recognizing patterns new technology seems to be focused on intruding into human-driven spaces The term human-driven is used a bit loosely here but it generally includes any online site where individual human creativity or other qualities unique to a human are essential to meaningfully contributing to the site
One prime example of AI intruding into human-driven spaces is image generation A computer can generate images at a rate that human artists simply cannot match AI art has been thriving on Pinterest and in Google search results The interspersing of AI generated images amidst real pictures without any clear distinctions can be misleading and deceptive Take for example my research for a science project We had been assigned to create a presentation on various sources of clean energy I had chosen algal biofuels, however, there were not many images of labs that process those biofuels As I was scrolling through Google images I came across a handful of images that looked interesting When I clicked on one I first noticed a strange glossy finish on the picture before locating a blurb at the bottom stating that it was generated by AI Even stranger was the fact that the image was copyrighted by a user Not the generative engine but the user that simply typed in a prompt
As of today the only requirement to apply for a copyright is some form of human input ₁ This would include typing new text or selecting and arranging the AI generated images According to the copyright alliance
If a work contains both AI-generated elements and elements of human authorship protectable by copyright law such as humanauthored text or a human s minimally creative arrangement selection and coordination of various parts of the work the elements of the work that are protected by copyright would be owned by the human author
Additionally AI is diluting platforms made to foster a human connection through the addition of bots Take for instance a condensed Google review of Wicked by user Alexa Bunzo
Overall Wicked is a triumph It delivers the magic of the stage production while also offering a cinematic experience that will leave audiences mesmerized With its stunning performances dazzling visuals and unforgettable music Wicked is a must-see for fans of the musical and those new to the world of Oz alike It s a heartwarming spellbinding j y th t p
If you felt that something about this passage was a bit off it may be because (according to ZeroGPT) 92% of this passage has been flagged as likely to be computer generated These human-driven platforms were originally championed by their proponents as a way for people to come together and share information faster If you had yet to watch a movie there would be hundreds of other people discussing their opinions on it If you needed help with a personal problem there would be forums with people who had either already figured out a solution or were willing to help you No matter how good the response was, it was important to the people utilizing the platforms that they were engaging with an actual human because it allowed them to form relationships with people they may not have met The human connection fostered among random strangers was and still is one of the most celebrated aspects of the internet The people who have added computer-generated accounts and responses on these platforms have completely and utterly missed this point
There is also the idea that it is not important how a work is generated because what is important is how it makes the observer feel Those who hold this opinion believe that the feelings they bestow upon a piece of art are separate from how it is made Take for example an impressionist painting Paintings of the impressionist style were made to capture the essence of a subject according to a certain painter letting the observer fill in the gaps to determine further meaning This style underscores the importance of individual perspective on art and other works So why can’t this train of thought be applied to AI generated art? If a person believes a piece of work is good and can ascribe a meaning to it then it could be viewed as real or meaningful art Even so, there are a number of problems with this perspective
First it does not appropriately value the experience of individual artists Each piece of art is created by a person who was inspired by something and wants to inspire others No matter how trivial the inspiration is it is still an important aspect of the piece Second a significant part of what makes art valuable is the time the artist invests in creating the piece Even if a piece of art can be made relatively quickly that artist has likely spent years perfecting their skills and developing their unique style Neither of these things can be replicated by a computer Computers do not have exposure to the real world These engines use previously existing art pieces without any critical thought towards the deeper meaning of a piece They cannot create anything groundbreaking in the field of art because everything that they devise is an imitation of something that already exists Likewise though it could be argued that the programmers of a particular computer have spent time cultivating skills in order for the AI to output images this is not directly related to the output of artwork Computers cannot be programmed to seek inspiration or to have the desire to inspire others
These points culminate in one fundamental issue: computers are not human The content they create is different from the content created by humans No matter how similar AI generated work may be perceived in relation to human work there will always be a philosophical difference If you displayed a scientific image in an academic presentation but later informed the teacher it was generated by a computer, they would feel deceived If you told a person that the raving review of a movie that influenced their opinion was generated by a computer they would feel betrayed If you presented a painting to an artist but later informed them it was generated by a computer they would feel duped The instinctual reactions in these situations evidences the (sometimes subconscious) recognition of the difference between the value of AI generated work and human-derived work
However not all hope is lost Take the player piano The once popular cultural fad that showed off the technological advancements of its time has since been disregarded The demand for these instruments slowed as consumers began to revert to valuing the skill and artistry of a real pianist A human pianist can understand and interpret a piece of music in a way that is not possible for a computer Each pianist has their own style playing each note with nuances that may or may not be repeated in subsequent performances People with a deep respect for music often watch the expressions of the performer with just as much attention as they give to listening to the piece Player pianos are not a common fixture today by any measure There is not much incentive to decrease prices or to create new innovations in this sphere of technology because the market does not want it This too will likely be the fate of AI s foray into human-driven spaces The market wants something with humanity a principle that will be conceded by big business and tech startups in the near future It is just a matter of when