The author further criticizes the use of A.I. in the creative industry, suggesting that it is part of a disruptive business model designed to undercut working artists by providing fast, cheap, and "good enough" alternatives. The author warns that this could lead to the devaluation of artists' work and the monopolization of the industry by tech companies. The author concludes by emphasizing the irreplaceable value of human expression in art and urging artists to reject the use of A.I. in their creative process.
Key takeaways:
- The author argues that using A.I. in the creative process can make an artist's work less interesting and less employable, as it removes the unique voice and perspective of the artist.
- A.I. is described not as a tool, but as a service that completes tasks for you, potentially leading to a loss of personal touch and uniqueness in the work.
- The author warns about the potential dangers of tech companies using A.I. to undercut working artists, leading to a devaluation of their work and potentially forcing them out of the industry.
- Despite the potential for A.I. to speed up parts of the creative process, the author believes that the costs, both short and long term, are too high, as it removes the artist's hand from the creation of their work.