With solidarity, legislation, class action lawsuits, and a little help from Guillermo del Toro. Plus, the Luddite Renaissance continues, and I open the mailbag.
Isn’t this AI hype JUST like the OUTSOURCING craze? You couldn’t get VC funding if you didn’t promise to outsource your labor. It seemed like all call centers moved to India. It all failed because dirt cheap labor soon got COMPETITIVE!
I can’t believe the upfront investment in millions they are paying out for unproven economic gains in Labor.
So for all the people out there that desire to avoid AI at all costs what exactly is the end game here? Because right now the entire anti-AI enterprise operates as if it is born out of principle or some ethical system and I must say it seems largely, irrational, illogical and driven by fear. What is hoped to be achieved? Given that AI and ML is in everything, nearly all our technologies, how is an anti-AI purist to avoid non Slop AI like;
I can't tell if you're being willfully obtuse here or if you legitimately believe if artists and workers are opposing AI in any capacity they must oppose Autocorrect as well. This is obviously not the case. So in the interest in having good faith discussion here, I'll just say that the artists are opposed to commercial generative AI technologies being used and sold to automate their work; no one is demanding an end to email filters.
(It is also perhaps worth noting that "AI" in 2025 is cultural shorthand for gen AI and products sold by OpenAI and big tech, and does not typically indicate machine learning techniques deployed by researchers etc, and almost everyone who follows this space recognizes that.)
The idea that we need to accept AI in every formation or none at all is pretty profoundly silly. It is, for instance, quite possible to say 'Autocorrect is good for society while large language models used in contexts that erode artists' working conditions are not'.
So why won’t modern artists and workers leverage these new AI tools to improve their craft and how they work? Historically artists have always leveraged new technical tools to improve and expand their craft, from painting to photography to digital art. Take for instance the use of the Camera Lucida, the Camera Obscura and other optical devices, to aid in the drawing process used by the old masters. Perhaps the art world should focus more on leveraging technology and what its existence offers like their forebears did instead of arguing against its use.
Old Masters use of optical devices to aid drawing and painting camera obscura lucida
There is some discussion here on substack of artists who have tested to see where in the process they might interject AI to e.g. clean up their sketches.
IMO for quick output, sure, gains are made but I’m not so sure the artist themselves learn and GROW from this which is the essence of art.
FWIW, my take is not that this readership, or the author, wish to "avoid AI at all costs", but rather to continue to explore and promote ways to avoid or mitigate the harm AI is causing many for the substantial benefit of a few already very wealthy individuals. Yes, we all benefit in ways you have outlined (though I'm not sure how many things on your list are AI, or just huge computing power search engines - you may be better qualified than I to answer that), but I would forgo most of those benefits if it meant avoidance of large scare job losses.
Isn’t this AI hype JUST like the OUTSOURCING craze? You couldn’t get VC funding if you didn’t promise to outsource your labor. It seemed like all call centers moved to India. It all failed because dirt cheap labor soon got COMPETITIVE!
I can’t believe the upfront investment in millions they are paying out for unproven economic gains in Labor.
Glad to see that my fellow artists are still fighting back and that your work is making the rounds! Also, go Jays!
So for all the people out there that desire to avoid AI at all costs what exactly is the end game here? Because right now the entire anti-AI enterprise operates as if it is born out of principle or some ethical system and I must say it seems largely, irrational, illogical and driven by fear. What is hoped to be achieved? Given that AI and ML is in everything, nearly all our technologies, how is an anti-AI purist to avoid non Slop AI like;
Virtual Assistants
Map and Navigation Apps
Autocorrect
All Search Engines
Facial Recognition technology
Chatbots
Streaming Recommendations
Book Recommendations
Music Recommendations
All Online Shopping
Smart Home Devices
Fraud Detection
Email Filters
Healthcare Diagnostics
Social Media Feeds
Self-Driving Cars
Security Surveillance
Education Platforms
Finance Apps
Weather Forecasting
Smart Appliances
Energy Management
Personalized News Feeds
Wearable Health Devices
Smart Alarm Clocks
Content Creation
Grocery Shopping Systems
On and on …
I can't tell if you're being willfully obtuse here or if you legitimately believe if artists and workers are opposing AI in any capacity they must oppose Autocorrect as well. This is obviously not the case. So in the interest in having good faith discussion here, I'll just say that the artists are opposed to commercial generative AI technologies being used and sold to automate their work; no one is demanding an end to email filters.
(It is also perhaps worth noting that "AI" in 2025 is cultural shorthand for gen AI and products sold by OpenAI and big tech, and does not typically indicate machine learning techniques deployed by researchers etc, and almost everyone who follows this space recognizes that.)
The idea that we need to accept AI in every formation or none at all is pretty profoundly silly. It is, for instance, quite possible to say 'Autocorrect is good for society while large language models used in contexts that erode artists' working conditions are not'.
So why won’t modern artists and workers leverage these new AI tools to improve their craft and how they work? Historically artists have always leveraged new technical tools to improve and expand their craft, from painting to photography to digital art. Take for instance the use of the Camera Lucida, the Camera Obscura and other optical devices, to aid in the drawing process used by the old masters. Perhaps the art world should focus more on leveraging technology and what its existence offers like their forebears did instead of arguing against its use.
Old Masters use of optical devices to aid drawing and painting camera obscura lucida
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uq9D0PMGYQc&t=5s
David Hockney, The Lost Secrets of the Old Masters
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMRpmqeKg-g
History of the Camera Lucida Drawing Tool
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_p9z-tRzCs
David Hockney's Secret Knowledge
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-0UXBcjlRY
There is some discussion here on substack of artists who have tested to see where in the process they might interject AI to e.g. clean up their sketches.
IMO for quick output, sure, gains are made but I’m not so sure the artist themselves learn and GROW from this which is the essence of art.
Did an AI make this list for you?
No I just been around a while
FWIW, my take is not that this readership, or the author, wish to "avoid AI at all costs", but rather to continue to explore and promote ways to avoid or mitigate the harm AI is causing many for the substantial benefit of a few already very wealthy individuals. Yes, we all benefit in ways you have outlined (though I'm not sure how many things on your list are AI, or just huge computing power search engines - you may be better qualified than I to answer that), but I would forgo most of those benefits if it meant avoidance of large scare job losses.
ML is a subset of AI