There is a statement I frequently hear from people who vehemently oppose artificial intelligence: people who use AI are nothing without it.
That may be true of some people. It is not true of everyone.
I use AI for certain functions and purposes, but I do not use it for everything. More importantly, I had a long history of creative and productive work before generative AI became publicly available. Before AI, I created more than 4,000 web pages. I wrote songs, blogs, and articles. I performed live as a musician. If the subject was one I knew well, I could sit at a computer and write a 1,000-to-1,500-word article off the top of my head in less than an hour.
AI did not suddenly give me the ability to create. I was already creating.
That naturally leads to a fair and reasonable question: If I can do these things without AI, why do I use it?
The answer is simple. I use it because it increases my productivity.
A Tool Can Multiply Existing Ability
Imagine someone who would have little or no productive output without AI. After gaining access to it, that person may suddenly have a certain level of productive capacity. That can be useful and, depending on how the tool is used, may allow someone to express ideas that would otherwise remain trapped in his or her head.
Now compare that person with someone who already has significant productive capacity without AI. Give that person a tool that saves time, accelerates repetitive parts of the process, and helps perform certain specialized functions. That person’s existing capacity is not replaced. It is magnified.
That is how I use AI.
It does not decide my purpose. It does not give me decades of experience. It does not create my work ethic, supply my judgment, or live my life for me. It helps me complete particular tasks faster so I can devote more time to other creative work.
Productivity has always been influenced by tools. A word processor allows a writer to revise faster than a typewriter. Digital recording software lets a musician do things that once required an expensive studio. A 3D animation program allows one person to build scenes that would otherwise require actors, costumes, sets, cameras, and a production crew.
Using those tools does not automatically mean the creator has no ability. It means the creator has chosen a more efficient process.
AI is another tool in that process.
The Practical Reality of Blog Images
Consider the images I create for my blog entries.
I write four blog entries a week for four different blogs, and sometimes I write more than that. Each entry benefits from having a relevant image. Those images are not merely decoration. They become thumbnails in social-media posts and RSS feeds, where an image can help a blog entry get noticed and read.
Could I create every image myself in my 3D animation program? Yes. In the past, that is exactly what I did.
But creating a single image that way can take two hours. I have to prepare the characters, build or load the set, arrange the scene, position the camera, set up the lighting, render the image, and edit the final result.
Why should I spend two hours creating an image for an article that took me an hour or less to write when I could use those two hours to create an animation, write another article, work on music, build a website, or develop another project?
Instead, I can generate an image that fits the subject of the article and continue working on something else. The image serves its purpose, the article has a better chance of being noticed, and my limited time is used more effectively.
That is not an absence of ability. It is a decision about priorities.
The False Choice Between AI and Hiring Someone
Some critics will say that if I am unwilling to spend the time creating an image completely by myself, I should pay a graphic designer to do it for me.
“Don’t be so cheap,” they might say.
But that argument ignores financial reality.
I publish at least four blog entries every week. Paying a graphic designer to create a custom image for every entry is not within my budget. The realistic alternatives are not always “use AI” or “hire an artist.” In my case, the alternatives are often “use AI” or “publish without an image.”
Publishing without images would make the entries less visible in RSS feeds and less effective when shared. Reducing the number of articles I write merely to reduce the number of images I need would also make little sense. I would be producing less useful material simply to satisfy someone else’s preferred method of production.
An artist does not lose a paid commission when no commission was financially possible in the first place.
Am I Stealing From Myself?
Another common accusation is that every AI-generated image is stolen art because artwork was used to train AI systems. The larger debate about how AI models are trained, how creators should be compensated, and what rules should govern these technologies is legitimate. It deserves more thought than slogans from either side.
However, the accusation becomes particularly strange when applied indiscriminately.
I often use characters that I designed and created myself, then use AI to place those characters into an image based on my own concept. I determine the subject, the setting, the mood, and how the characters will be used.
If I begin with my own characters and my own idea, who exactly am I stealing from—myself?
AI critics sometimes speak as though every user types a few careless words, accepts whatever appears, and claims to be a master artist. That may describe some users, but it does not describe everyone.
Some people bring years of writing, design, music, filmmaking, photography, animation, or business experience to the process. Their knowledge affects the ideas they develop, the instructions they give, the results they reject, and the final choices they make.
The tool does not erase the experience of the person using it.
Efficiency Is Not Incompetence
I understand why some people are concerned about AI. It can be used carelessly. It can produce low-quality material in enormous quantities. It raises legitimate questions about ownership, employment, authenticity, and compensation. I do not believe every criticism should be dismissed.
But “anyone who uses AI is nothing without it” is not a serious argument. It is an insult presented as a conclusion.
The truth is that AI users are not all the same. Some depend on it heavily. Some use it occasionally. Some use it to overcome a limitation. Others use it to magnify abilities they already possess.
What matters is not merely whether a person uses AI, but how it is used, what the person contributes, and what the finished work accomplishes.
I know what I could do before AI because I spent decades doing it. I also know that time is limited. Every hour saved on one necessary task becomes an hour I can invest in another creative project.
I do not use AI because I am nothing without it.
I use AI because I am already capable of doing many things—and it gives me more time to do them.
Bob Craypoe
Founder of Craypoe Productions®
No comments:
Post a Comment