Best of 2023 — Culture & Criticism
Creating is a joyous act, but it is one that takes time. I believe you have to put in the hours, weeks, and years to make things that are original, valuable, and enduring. This is why I’m extremely skeptical of AI, especially in the creative field. In my experience thus far the best possible use of generative AI is simply putting it in the hands of the people producing the work. Let them use it as another tool to iterate and arrive at the best possible idea, like they already do with all their other tools. However, the people most interested in AI (again, in my experience) are not interested in giving tools to creators. They want to replace creators. Or “accelerate their processes” so they can crank out more work in less time, for less money.
But generative AI, by definition, cannot create. It can’t have an original thought, because it is only trained using what’s come before it. Unlike a person, it doesn’t have its own lived experience to transform an iterative idea into an original one. So AI, in its current form, isn’t anything without a skilled, curious person on the other end making connections and pulling out insights. But the people most interested in using AI in the creative field are not curious, creative people. They’re more interested in extracting maximum value in the short term so they can go to their investors and show the growth arrow going up.
I’m not naive, eventually AI will be able to create work that is as good as what I or a skilled designer can make, in a fraction of time and a fraction of our costs. It doesn’t get sick. It doesn’t have to pick kids up early from school. It doesn’t want to unionize. It’d be the perfect employee. And that is the root of the problem. The people pushing AI into creative fields act like Mr. Burns, standing at his window, fingers tented.
Mr. Burns: This company would be so profitable if it weren’t for all these pesky employees.
Smithers: Present company excluded, sir?
Mr. Burns: Mmm? Oh, of course Smulders.
Smithers: Uh, it’s Smithers sir. I’ve worked here for 12 years.
Mr. Burns: This is exactly what I’m talking about! They’re all so needy.
This is, in my mind, the existential dilemma around AI. Those who are most interested in AI are not creators. They don’t know the fist-pumping joy of writing a clever line that works on multiple levels and speaks to different audiences in different ways. They don’t drive by a billboard on the highway and nearly crash their car because their design is right there, and it’s huge! There is so much more to creative work than what it costs you and how much you can charge for it. It affects the people who create it and see it in ways you can’t measure.
But there is no ROI on joy. Satisfaction doesn’t fit into a scope of work. You can’t reduce churn on perseverance. Sending a video you made to your grandparents? That’s not a paid impression, so it doesn’t count.
This is the fundamental disconnect in the creative field. We can measure so much that we’ve disregarded the value of things we can’t. Spending an entire day coming up with twenty ideas that will never, ever work is valuable. Slogging through days of audience research is valuable. Taking pride in the insights that come out of that time is valuable. Growing closer to your coworkers on a shoot is valuable. AI strips humanity out of creativity. It treats it like an equation to solve as quickly as possible, not a path to walk, get lost, and simply enjoy the time spent wandering.
Clearly, I’ve spent a ton of time thinking about this. Here are some of the pieces I read/watched this year that helped inform my opinions.
Productivity Rips You Apart
The book “How to do Nothing: Resisting the Attention Economy” by Jenny Odell had a profound impact on how I spend my days now. But more importantly, I’ve reset my relationship with what it means to be “productive.” If you find yourself on a treadmill trying to optimize your time so you can handle all the work you’re doing, you need to read the book. This video does a good job summarizing the ideas in it.
I Don’t Want to Be Friends with Kendall Jenner - Jessica Wildfire
This essay gets you asking, “who are creating these AI-driven experiences and what is their agenda?” Think about the views the typical tech CEO holds that are at odds with your own. There’s nothing stopping them from baking those philosophies into their products, or at the very least training users to avoid difficult thoughts and conversations and becoming complacent in the face of very real problems in the world. Part of the reason why I’ve deleted nearly all my social media apps is that whatever algorithm powering them decided that because I post pictures of myself cycling, I must be a fitness fanatic. So I was constantly served up ads and content of impossibly fit people telling me all the ways I’m eating wrong, not working out enough, and missing out by not taking these six supplements. It perpetuated some serious body image issues. I worry about the damage a more sophisticated, AI-powered version of that recommendation engine could do to people.
The Rot Economy - Ed Zitron
“…growth is a fire. If you build a nice, sustainable fire, it’ll keep you warm, cook food and sustain life. And if the only thing you care about is how big your fire is, then it’ll set fire to everything around it, and the more you throw into it, the more it’ll burn. Eventually, you’ll have nothing left, but if you desperately desire that fire, you will constantly have to find new things to burn at any cost.”
The Red Queen Fallacy - Brian Klass
“We may accrue wealth and status through hustling, but the scripture of hustle culture tells you that it will never be enough. Every successful hustle gives way to another one. Happiness lies in life hacks. Everything that matters can be measured—and if you don’t have a metric to showcase what you’ve achieved, why bother?”