Trying to stop A.I. from affecting human creativity is like trying to stop the ocean with a broom.
The thing is A.I. isn’t one simple thing. The way it can be used varies wildly, and that’s what makes the debate so hard to weigh in on.. For those who are completely against it, my question is: where do you draw the line? Who draws the line? Where is the line exactly?
What if a story is fully created and imagined by a human being, but that person uses A.I. to solve his writer’s block? What if A.I. is used to brainstorm ideas, maje dialogue better, or help structure /plot? What if it’s only used to help visualize storyboards or concept art?
At that point, it becomes extremely hard to prove what is “real” human creativity and what is A.I. assisted. And if you can’t prove it, what can really be dione?
Unless you have some kind of undeniable evidence almost like DNA-level proof - that A.I. was used, then realistically, society will just have to accept it. You kinda almost have to say “Go ahead and use A.I., just don’t get caught or make it obvious.”
Now, in my opinion, A.I. can be detrimental to creativity, but I do not think we’re going to see a massive amount of jobs being lost. Some careers may disappear or shrink, just like they have with every major technological advancement in history.
But I don’t see a total mass exodus of creators. I don’t believe content creators are just going to vanish overnight. People will still want to write, animate, draw, act, and tell stories. I think we may even start to soon see content being billed as " created by real human creators" as a selling point as A.I's influence continues to grow in Art and Entertainment .
Me personally, at the end of the day, if something I enjoy but is just entertainment - something I’m spending disposable income on, moves me, entertains me, teaches me something, or makes me feel good, then it’s worth it.
Life is too short.
The thing is A.I. isn’t one simple thing. The way it can be used varies wildly, and that’s what makes the debate so hard to weigh in on.. For those who are completely against it, my question is: where do you draw the line? Who draws the line? Where is the line exactly?
What if a story is fully created and imagined by a human being, but that person uses A.I. to solve his writer’s block? What if A.I. is used to brainstorm ideas, maje dialogue better, or help structure /plot? What if it’s only used to help visualize storyboards or concept art?
At that point, it becomes extremely hard to prove what is “real” human creativity and what is A.I. assisted. And if you can’t prove it, what can really be dione?
Unless you have some kind of undeniable evidence almost like DNA-level proof - that A.I. was used, then realistically, society will just have to accept it. You kinda almost have to say “Go ahead and use A.I., just don’t get caught or make it obvious.”
Now, in my opinion, A.I. can be detrimental to creativity, but I do not think we’re going to see a massive amount of jobs being lost. Some careers may disappear or shrink, just like they have with every major technological advancement in history.
But I don’t see a total mass exodus of creators. I don’t believe content creators are just going to vanish overnight. People will still want to write, animate, draw, act, and tell stories. I think we may even start to soon see content being billed as " created by real human creators" as a selling point as A.I's influence continues to grow in Art and Entertainment .
Me personally, at the end of the day, if something I enjoy but is just entertainment - something I’m spending disposable income on, moves me, entertains me, teaches me something, or makes me feel good, then it’s worth it.
Life is too short.
Last edited:
