Source (Bluesky)
Transcript
recently my friend’s comics professor told her that it’s acceptable to use gen Al for script- writing but not for art, since a machine can’t generate meaningful artistic work. meanwhile, my sister’s screenwriting professor said that they can use gen Al for concept art and visualization, but that it won’t be able to generate a script that’s any good. and at my job, it seems like each department says that Al can be useful in every field except the one that they know best.
It’s only ever the jobs we’re unfamiliar with that we assume can be replaced with automation. The more attuned we are with certain processes, crafts, and occupations, the more we realize that gen Al will never be able to provide a suitable replacement. The case for its existence relies on our ignorance of the work and skill required to do everything we don’t.
Exactly. There’s a Dunning-Kreuger effect here where if you don’t know what you’re doing, it looks like AI just miraculously does what you would have wanted it to do if you were smart enough to craft a good prompt.
But if you know what you’re doing, you know what tasks it is worth using AI for, and then you craft a good prompt, get a lot of valuable processing done by the AI, and then review, fine-tune and polish the rest.
It’s Dunning-Kreuger, so when you understand the complexities within the area of your expertise you’ll doubt the likelihood of effective automation using statistical brute force.
I’m not going to argue that take on “Fuck AI” but come on man, that’s just not reasonable.
Funny enough even that second part involves a lot of chaos out due to Dunning-Kreuger effect yet again.
I had 4 different friends go “I am experienced enough in programming, I can use it responsibly” during group projects with some paraphrasing at my uni.
For context those friends ranged from juniors to freshman. We were pretty skilled but NOWHERE near that experienced.