The Inevitable Topic of AI

​Let me begin this post by stating very clearly so there’s no confusion: I don’t like AI (artificial intelligence), and I want nothing to do with it or anything that uses it. 

I’m an artist. Art comes in many different forms, and so many people can claim the title of artist. Art is not just painting or writing stories, which are the two forms of art that I choose to do. There’s also sculpting, drawing, dancing, singing, composing, designing, decorating, photography. Even sewing and cooking are forms of art. There are more, but those are the ones that come to my mind. Despite the plethora of people who can claim to be an artist, there is one thing that cannot claim the title of artist, and that is a computer. 

Art is a human endeavor. It’s an expression of the human soul. Art evokes emotion by the emotion that is put into the creation of it. A computer does not have emotion. It cannot understand what it means to be human. Art, to me, is a human way of making something beautiful in an otherwise unfriendly and ugly world.

“Life beats down and crushes the soul, and art reminds you that you have one."
​~ Stella Adler

I don’t dislike all technology. I don’t necessarily trust it, but I also don’t necessarily hate it. I’m writing this blog on a laptop computer. I check my e-mail messages on my cellular phone. I listen to music on those same devices, and I look up on the internet new recipes to try for dinner. 

I enjoy the convenience of researching topics for the various books that I write from the comfort of my living room, rather than have to trudge to the local library and look up book information in a card catalog. I love staying in contact with friends and family around the country by seeing their activity on social media. Those things, I find comforting and enjoyable. What I don’t find comforting is the ease with which people seem to be handing over their humanity to computers.

People are using computers to allegedly create art. I have a bold truth to share with you: a computer cannot create. It can only mimic what humans have created. When you use AI to write a story, it’s taking a beautiful human idea and turning it into an abomination of borrowed techniques, styles, and voice. It takes samples of the work other artists have done and mimics it as something unique. But it isn’t unique, no more than pretending to be a character in a story makes you that person in reality. It’s false, emotionless, and a pitiful attempt to make real something that should not exist.

The following clip is from the movie Jurassic Park. As you probably know, it was about an island that had on it dinosaurs that had been re-created through the miracle of science. Dr. Ian Malcolm, played by Jeff Goldblum, argued that what had been done was wrong. His argument was about the re-creation of an extinct species, but I argue that it could also pertain to the creation of AI. People rush to see how quickly they can create programs to replace humans, but they don’t stop to think if they should.

It makes me weep sometimes to see people posting artwork done with AI. I see videos of AI-generated images being narrated by AI-generated voices reading scripts that were written with the use of AI. Recently, I’ve been inundated on my social media feed from people posting little AI-generated caricatures of themselves and their families. They think it’s cute, and many of the comments are on how amazing it looks and questions on how the commenter can get one as well. But what about the many caricature artists whose work was uncredited in that little AI program generating that cute image of you holding that cup of coffee or your child holding that soccer ball? That AI program had to get the knowledge from somewhere, and it’s important to stop and think of where it got it. It came from the struggling artists who’ve labored for years to improve their skill, the artists who’ve spent their days at fairs doing charcoal drawings for people walking by, the artists who’ve had to work a regular office job during the day just to pay the bills so they can spend the evening doing what their hearts truly love to do. I’ll hazard a guess that the thought never crossed the minds of the hordes of people who’ve recently told ChatGPT to create that caricature that they post to Facebook, Instagram, and Tik Tok.

Let me ask you this: would you form a meaningful and lasting friendship with an AI-generated person? Would you take your child to an AI-generated doctor to perform surgery on him or her? Would you trust an AI-generated person to interview you for a job and make the decision on whether to hire you or not? To some, this isn’t a dilemma. For me, it is. Because those things that I mentioned require instinct, emotion, and humanity. Without emotion, life is stale.

I repeat: a computer does not have emotion.

I don’t want to read a book written by something that doesn’t have a heart to weep at the words. I don’t want to buy artwork from something that doesn’t have eyes to see the breathtaking beauty of the colors in the sky at sunset. I don’t want to eat the food prepared by something that can’t taste the nuance in flavor that adding a pinch of salt can do for a meal. I don’t want to support something that doesn’t understand the contextual difference between longingly looking into the eyes of your lover, and logically looking into why your car engine isn’t working properly.

"​AI art is not progress, and it’s not inevitable. It’s theft, pure and simple."
​ ~ Lori Rush

And if the fact that this artificial art lacks that which makes art beautiful isn’t enough of a reason to not support it, think about all the people who are losing their livelihood to something that you think is cute and a bit of fun. This loss of livelihood includes more than the many artists who actually do the art that AI is being used to replace, but also includes other professions as well. My husband is an editor. His job is being threatened because his company thinks it can save some money by using the AI program Grammarly to do online editing instead of having human freelancers to the work. 

As I mentioned before, voice actors and narrators are being replaced by AI-generated voices. Heck, I wouldn’t be surprised if soon the animations will eventually be done solely by computers and the movie industry will consist of one or two people running computer programs. All the hard-working people (you know, the many people listed in the movie credits that most people don't stay and watch at the end of the film) might soon be replaced by AI.

Writers of instruction manuals have all but been replaced by AI-generated manuals, and I don’t know about you, but for anyone else who has tried to decipher what the heck those instruction manuals are trying to get you to do, it’s a very frustrating process.

When it started out, it was easy to pick out an AI-generated piece of art. For pictures, the person in the picture would have extra fingers or an arm that doesn’t quite fit. Websites that were AI-generated scams were moderately easy to pick out and avoid. Ads that were written by a computer were obvious in the inability to use the correct context of certain words, or, if there were vocals, the inflections or words were often mispronounced. But as times goes by, humans are “training” AI programs to be better. As if stealing the hard work of actual artists isn’t bad enough … as if taking away the livelihoods of other human professionals isn’t despicable enough … as if flooding the market with crap that makes it nearly impossible for actual art to be seen isn’t unethical enough … now, it’s hard for people to tell if something is fake or not. This leaves people open to scams and fraudulent activity that can further rob them of both their money and their dignity.

And as if all of that isn’t horrible enough, I think the worst thing that AI has done is devalue trust. I can’t trust that what I read is honest because there’s no requirement to label a book or anything as written by AI. I can’t trust that a photo is real because it’s so easy to alter and change an image with AI, and there’s no requirement to label it as being altered. I can’t trust that anything on the internet is legitimate because it could have been written and posted completely without the involvement of a human being verifying the accuracy of it.

Do people who use AI not want to fess up to using AI? Is that why things don’t get labeled as being AI-generated? If the person finds nothing wrong with using AI to write a book or do other forms of art, why is it so hard to admit that AI was used? I’ll tell you what I think. I think it’s so hard to determine if something was generated using AI because deep down in their subconscious, the people using it know that what they’re doing is wrong. It’s wrong to steal, lie, and cheat, and these people know it, but they’re doing it anyway.

And what would make someone go against everything he or she has been raised to believe to be ethical and generally accepted as good behavior?

​Money.

It comes down to people putting money above other people.

The subject of AI has come up many times in the different groups that I engage in on social media. I’m part of several independent writer groups, and the topic inevitably comes up about using AI to design a book cover or to pay a professional to design the cover. Another topic is whether to use AI to edit a book or pay an editor to do the work. I admit that making a profit on a book as an independent author is nearly impossible. The market is so flooded with new books that just getting a few books sold is cause for celebration. Deciding on whether to pay a professional at a higher cost or have AI do the work for pennies on the dollar is an ethical dilemma, to be sure. I guess it comes down to the individual person’s conscience. I’d rather do all the work myself than have AI do anything related to my book.

And, in fact, I am the one who does everything. I not only write the book (completely from my own ideas, not with prompts from AI bots), I’ve taken the time to learn the software to design my own covers and layout the book in the format needed for publication. I edit the book myself. I read and re-read and continue to read even after the book is published. I continuously update the print and electronic versions when I notice an error that slipped through my amateur editing process. I do everything from start to finish, and that process works for me. Being an independent author is not for the weak, or for those looking to make millions, or even those hoping to earn enough to pay the monthly rent. But the pride that I feel at having my books on the shelf is worth the work. I currently have sixteen books published and continue to write. I love sharing the stories in my head with anyone who wants to read them. I just can’t imagine feeling that same sense of accomplishment if I had allowed some impersonal AI program write my stories for me. 

I didn’t intend for this blog to be a rant, but I’m afraid it ended up that way. I feel very passionately on the subject. I think AI, when used to replace the human element in anything, but mainly in art, is an abomination. It dehumanizes something beautiful in the world. The human mind is one of the most beautiful things in nature. It can be a burden if your thoughts are out of control, but for me, I’m blessed to have the brain that I do. 

I often compare my brain to a motel, with guests checking in and out as I write the stories that are in my head. I’ve dubbed my brain The Noodle Motel. I have an overly friendly receptionist who refuses to turn a guest away when one decides to stop in. 

“You want to stay for a while?" she says to the new character checking in. “Sure! We have room for you. We can double up the light elemental in Room 3 with the fairies in Room 19. Stay for as long as you’d like.”

In all honesty, now that I think about it, I’m not sure an AI program could keep up with my brain. At a minimum, I think it might short-circuit with the many characters and stories that I have checking in to The Noodle Motel (See the blog post: It's Getting A Little Crowded In Here).

​Luckily, I’ll never find out.