Do you worry about the influence of AI on the creation? And that, even if creation is made easier, it’s also made duller and more average by the training data?
There’s already so much AI slop out there and we’re in the early innings. I think yours is an optimistic view, but the pessimist in me says that a lower bar to create means lower quality at higher quantities.
If I look at old paintings I get a total different feeling than contemporary paintings. The fact that some of the painters spend almost half of their life working on it reflects the emotions that are evoked. Maybe AI co-creation can get you there faster, but the creativity might get lost. If you don't use that "muscle" it gets weaker.
I felt that way watching the US Open on Sunday. I guess I could have watched a version where they had robot rackets that made them way better, but this would have ruined it for me.
I think half the reason I like art, sports, music, etc. is because it inspires me that another human was able to accomplish it—and I am also human, and this creates a profound feeling
It's interesting to think about how AI speeds things up. That is why Amazon thrives as a business promising fast shipping. It's a "problem" that we all have a tombstone date of not enough time in life to do all the things, so AI is coming right in as well to fix that. And maybe that's why I see the trends in slow travel and analog devices - because people miss people doing people things.
I had a call with someone yesterday who edited a video herself without AI and I was instantly more inspired that it was maybe a skill I could somehow get better at if I were to actually want to. It's easy to see robots coding in hyperspeed to be superhuman with crazy abilities and then it makes human creation feel inferior. As a dyslexic born a slow reader, speed isn't everything. I've signed up for 2 different speed reading courses and I hated them and dropped out.
I've seen the saying around of using AI to do the tasks we don't want, but then don't use it for the tasks that we actually want to put in energy. Maybe that is the only way for the 'muscle' not to atrophy. Iworry about a world in the future that prizes speed as the ultimate metric of success
If you live under the constant pressure of not enough time you're not living. And eventually the moment comes when there really is no more time. It's tragic.
I'm wondering what would people move to create more art. It's easier and faster to create but looking at the world today most people prefer to (passively) consume.
You write: “In an AI-enhanced world, the realm of journals, sketchbooks, diaries and other private forms is expanded. Instead of compiling simple notes, doodles, fast impressions, small observations and other acts that can be done quickly, our journals, sketchbooks, and diaries will include fully rendered paintings, entire novels, feature-length movies, and immersive worlds.”
What makes you think creators are only doing short-form doodling by hand? That is absurd. So many writers on this site are talking about doing full drafts on paper. Ted Gioia just recently had a long article on people’s return to hand-to-paper creation. That is the correct pulse of this creation-oriented culture. You are just pushing AI from an arid vacuum.
This vision of a world where most art is created for a single audience ourselves makes me think of AI’s potential to fuel a deeply personalized, introspective creative revolution. It’s not about replacing human creativity but augmenting it, making every individual a co-creator of their own universe. This is the kind of bold, transformative thinking that excites me about the future. Keep pushing the boundaries, Kevin your ideas are sparking conversations that will shape the next decade!
I get what you're saying. A big component of making art is just expressing oneself. To live in art, to breathe words, to make something make sense only for you. The other side of this issue is, what do we do about universal art? Many people paint, but there are a few universal works of art, which we can contemplate, learn from, be touched by, and understand the world with—also books. Many people write diaries, but that doesn't make them universal. A lot of people speak, but we carry the poet's words with us. How to make sense of all of this?
I kinda both agree and disagree, and I’d express it with a slight modification: I think most art will be made for the group chat and/or small peer group, so for like audiences of like 3-12 people
Good point. But the minute AI is adopted poorly in school classrooms (as is typical), that is when the parents start screaming they want them to learn these calculations by themselves. And learn phonics and cursive as well. Then maybe those classrooms will start teaching “outside the box” as well. Common Core is AI enslavement.
It depends on which part of the mind or brain one wants to develop. A desk calculator enables one to avoid the effort that goes into low-level, routine calculations, but it's still necessary to have basic arithmetic in your memory if you want to do anything. London cab drivers are required to memorize the map of London. When they began using GPS, the capacity of their memory began to decline. X-ray technicians trained to identify cancerous lesions in a colonoscopy experienced a decline in their ability to spot cancer cells when the task was taken over by AI. At that point, the technicians were focusing on the machine's reaction rather than the lesions. AI can be an extremely powerful tool, but a good deal of thought needs to go into deciding how and when to use it. Also, AI is prone to adopting the biases and prejudices of the sample on which it is trained. When it comes to thinking outside the box, humans may still hae an advantage--that's why they are often so difficult to deal with.
I had never considered co-creation with AI in this way before, but the instant feedback loop when I’m trying to come up with a title is genius.
As an uncertain future influenced by AI definitely stays around, I appreciate this more positive mindset where AI can support creation rather than consumption.
In a world of noise, focusing on one person—your true audience—can sharpen your message. It’s about depth over breadth. Consider how you connect with that individual. What do they really need to hear?
Do you worry about the influence of AI on the creation? And that, even if creation is made easier, it’s also made duller and more average by the training data?
There’s already so much AI slop out there and we’re in the early innings. I think yours is an optimistic view, but the pessimist in me says that a lower bar to create means lower quality at higher quantities.
If I look at old paintings I get a total different feeling than contemporary paintings. The fact that some of the painters spend almost half of their life working on it reflects the emotions that are evoked. Maybe AI co-creation can get you there faster, but the creativity might get lost. If you don't use that "muscle" it gets weaker.
I felt that way watching the US Open on Sunday. I guess I could have watched a version where they had robot rackets that made them way better, but this would have ruined it for me.
I think half the reason I like art, sports, music, etc. is because it inspires me that another human was able to accomplish it—and I am also human, and this creates a profound feeling
Interesting observation, I can relate to that.
It's interesting to think about how AI speeds things up. That is why Amazon thrives as a business promising fast shipping. It's a "problem" that we all have a tombstone date of not enough time in life to do all the things, so AI is coming right in as well to fix that. And maybe that's why I see the trends in slow travel and analog devices - because people miss people doing people things.
I had a call with someone yesterday who edited a video herself without AI and I was instantly more inspired that it was maybe a skill I could somehow get better at if I were to actually want to. It's easy to see robots coding in hyperspeed to be superhuman with crazy abilities and then it makes human creation feel inferior. As a dyslexic born a slow reader, speed isn't everything. I've signed up for 2 different speed reading courses and I hated them and dropped out.
I've seen the saying around of using AI to do the tasks we don't want, but then don't use it for the tasks that we actually want to put in energy. Maybe that is the only way for the 'muscle' not to atrophy. Iworry about a world in the future that prizes speed as the ultimate metric of success
If you live under the constant pressure of not enough time you're not living. And eventually the moment comes when there really is no more time. It's tragic.
I'm wondering what would people move to create more art. It's easier and faster to create but looking at the world today most people prefer to (passively) consume.
You write: “In an AI-enhanced world, the realm of journals, sketchbooks, diaries and other private forms is expanded. Instead of compiling simple notes, doodles, fast impressions, small observations and other acts that can be done quickly, our journals, sketchbooks, and diaries will include fully rendered paintings, entire novels, feature-length movies, and immersive worlds.”
What makes you think creators are only doing short-form doodling by hand? That is absurd. So many writers on this site are talking about doing full drafts on paper. Ted Gioia just recently had a long article on people’s return to hand-to-paper creation. That is the correct pulse of this creation-oriented culture. You are just pushing AI from an arid vacuum.
This vision of a world where most art is created for a single audience ourselves makes me think of AI’s potential to fuel a deeply personalized, introspective creative revolution. It’s not about replacing human creativity but augmenting it, making every individual a co-creator of their own universe. This is the kind of bold, transformative thinking that excites me about the future. Keep pushing the boundaries, Kevin your ideas are sparking conversations that will shape the next decade!
“…making every individual a co-creator of their own universe.”
But that is precisely the problem. God did not create us to be little bots co-creating our own sandlot.
Seems like Kevin's vision leads to more and more isolation, more and more loneliness, more and more despair.
I get what you're saying. A big component of making art is just expressing oneself. To live in art, to breathe words, to make something make sense only for you. The other side of this issue is, what do we do about universal art? Many people paint, but there are a few universal works of art, which we can contemplate, learn from, be touched by, and understand the world with—also books. Many people write diaries, but that doesn't make them universal. A lot of people speak, but we carry the poet's words with us. How to make sense of all of this?
I kinda both agree and disagree, and I’d express it with a slight modification: I think most art will be made for the group chat and/or small peer group, so for like audiences of like 3-12 people
Good point. But the minute AI is adopted poorly in school classrooms (as is typical), that is when the parents start screaming they want them to learn these calculations by themselves. And learn phonics and cursive as well. Then maybe those classrooms will start teaching “outside the box” as well. Common Core is AI enslavement.
It depends on which part of the mind or brain one wants to develop. A desk calculator enables one to avoid the effort that goes into low-level, routine calculations, but it's still necessary to have basic arithmetic in your memory if you want to do anything. London cab drivers are required to memorize the map of London. When they began using GPS, the capacity of their memory began to decline. X-ray technicians trained to identify cancerous lesions in a colonoscopy experienced a decline in their ability to spot cancer cells when the task was taken over by AI. At that point, the technicians were focusing on the machine's reaction rather than the lesions. AI can be an extremely powerful tool, but a good deal of thought needs to go into deciding how and when to use it. Also, AI is prone to adopting the biases and prejudices of the sample on which it is trained. When it comes to thinking outside the box, humans may still hae an advantage--that's why they are often so difficult to deal with.
Interesting thoughts. Not sure how different is this from just people journaling and doodling to themselves, except now they do it with an AI chatbot.
Ai generated content reads and looks quite obvious
I had never considered co-creation with AI in this way before, but the instant feedback loop when I’m trying to come up with a title is genius.
As an uncertain future influenced by AI definitely stays around, I appreciate this more positive mindset where AI can support creation rather than consumption.
In a world of noise, focusing on one person—your true audience—can sharpen your message. It’s about depth over breadth. Consider how you connect with that individual. What do they really need to hear?
Hit like a ton of bricks
“An audience of one”. Couldn’t have said it better myself.