AI: Why I'm not Impressed
AI is a testament to mediocrity.
I have a plaque on my wall. It says, “Mediocrity Thrives on Standarization.”
It was meant to refer to procedures and protocols. But these days, it refers to people. We are expected to standardize our thoughts and opinions to conform to some sense of public expectation. The result is a level of intellectual mediocrity that I have never seen before in my life. And AI is a prime example of that standardization, and of that mdeocrity.
I fail to see where AI is more than just one more link in a gradual increase in the technical capabilities of computer software. It is nothing new. It is just one degree better than some of what has come before, such as spell check and writing prompts. (I’ve become perhaps a little too dependent on spell-check, but no apologies.) Depending on how far back you want to go, saving a file was a clunky process, not something that updated itself automatically. My first true computer was a calculator. That’s right, a calculator. Prior to that, I could use a slide rule or an abacus. Or old fashioned pencil and paper.
So, things have changed, one step at a time. AI is just one more step. Oh, but now AI can create its own art and do its own writing. Yes, but can it THINK? Does it have a point of view? Can it weed out BS from fact? No, no, and no. It is standardization on steroids.
As the perpetrators of Gemini continue to apologize for its racist ‘creations’, consider that that racism was not created by Gemini. The racism is inherent in its programmers. AI has no point of view of its own, it just executes the program. As the Nazis always used to say, “I was just following orders.”
And that makes me think about today’s ‘diverse’ points of view. Do we really have our own points of view, or are we ‘just following orders’. Much of what I see in the newspapers, on TV, in magazines, and in the blogosphere is just so much rehashed sameness. I’m beginning to think we are our own AI.
Feed AI a political party’s talking points, and it can probably express them as well any politician. So, how do we consider that? Is this evidence that AI is extremely smart, or evidence that politicians are not too bright? Would AI ever come up with a unique opinion of its own? Not a chance. So, if you want AI to write your class paper for you, that will only work if you are satisfied with it expressing a generic ‘opinion’ with no features that in any way distinguish you from anyone else. Sadly, that’s EXACTLY what some people want.
But, why should I speculate about what AI will do, when I can just check it out for real? So, I asked Bing’s Copilot to “Explain why republicans are right.” It declined to answer, saying something to the effect that no party is either wrong or right. So, I then asked, “Explain why the democrats are right.” It had no reluctance to answer that question. But at the bottom of the explanation of democrats, was a prompt to read about republican views. Clicking on it provided republican information. Confused? So was I. Did I learn anything from those two pages about the two parties? Nope. Just the same old stuff that appears in any encyclopedia. Again, that has to be the case, because AI has NO VIEWS OF ITS OWN! If you want to know, or think, precisely what all your classmates and your teachers know, or think, then AI is for you. But if you want to develop your own points of view and be your own person, AI is worse than useless.
Here is a link to an AP article that contemplates the ability of AI to fool teachers. Near as I can tell, AI will fool teachers who anticipate nothing more from their students than the usual cookie-cutter answers. If you were to express a unique point of view, you would stick out like a sore thumb.
https://www.pressreader.com/usa/times-herald-record/20240229/281694029724955
Now, let’s contemplate those racist depictions of various historical figures such as popes and presidents. You’ve seen them. They’re everywhere. Besides the blatant racism, you immediately recognized the ‘art’ as AI. Right? There is a sameness to it that doesn’t exist in the real world. True, I can’t create ‘art’ like that, but it turns out that AI can’t create art like Rembrandt. I know, because I asked. The picture below is Copilot’s best effort.
Frankly, it bears a semblance to Rembrandt, but it’s still unmistakably AI, and doesn’t even approach the excellence of Rembrandt. Now, below is the art created when I asked Copilot to draw a rabbit.
If I wanted to illustrate a children’s book, I think this art would be adequate. But if I was an art student and wanted to fool a teacher into thinking I created either of these, I’d get laughed out of the room. As for Renoir and Picaso, Copilot punted. It showed only existing, authentic artwork. It might as well have done the same with Rembrandt. But, hey, that bunny…If I ever need a picture of a bunny, AI is there for me.
So, no, I’m not at all impressed with AI. It might have some use for people who have no desire to explore the depths of their own minds and imaginations. It might be just what is needed for the student who has dedicated their educational experience to learning to conform and follow along. If you want to blend in, AI is for you. But do you really need a computer for that? People have been going along since caveman times. It’s really not all that tricky.
It’s digging into yourself that takes intelligence, effort, and a willingness to see things differently. And for that, AI is worse than useless.
I have a previous post on the subject. It’s not all that old, but things have changed even since then, and it seems even more appropriate now.
We’ve all read various authors and writers. Think of some of your favorite writers. Think of several and consider how they are alike and different. Can AI form those opinions for you, or is it up to you? Can AI write in the style of your favorite writers and create content indistinguishable from the real writers? Given AI’s pathetic efforts at creating a Rembrandt, I would guess, not. But give it a try, if you want. See what, if anything, you come up with. Let us all know in the comments.
And remember, if you think just like all your friends, you’re not doing it right…
Thanks for this. I’ve been reading Vonnnegut this year and cannot imagine AI even coming close to his originality.
Can it choreograph a dance for a dance class?