I stumbled across a TikTok discussing one of the new ways teachers are employing to find out who is using AI in their assignments. According to the TikToker (who I cannot find for the life of me, perhaps the video was deleted…), her teacher wrote commands in white text, hidden in the assignment prompt, that differed from the content covered in class. When copied into Chat GPT, the AI would then respond to said prompts, proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the student had been using AI. So, as opposed to my conclusion of “don’t use AI,” the consensus seemed to be “be careful of any white text.”
To be honest, I was shocked at the outcome of the video, and even more so at the comments, all in agreement or saying things like “I rewrite what the AI says in my own words,” “What if I use Chat GPT to summarize the readings?” or “I just use Chat GPT to give me ideas.” I thought most of us were on the same page on AI, but, apparently not. Perhaps I’m speaking as a creative, as a writer, a reader, but, above all, as a person.Â
The process of creating your own ideas and being able to explain and prove them is the foundation of critical thinking, which we then use to question authority and, in turn, create more. Art is made by pushing boundaries and asking questions core to humanity. “What does it mean to love?” “How can I change?” “What makes us human?” Many of these questions have been asked in Klara and the Sun, Detroit: Become Human, and many other works of science fiction that explore the threat of artificial intelligence.
Choosing ease and algorithms over complexity is what gives us the current state of young adult literature. Trope after trope after trope, all mangled together and placed within the same basic outline and churned out to the point where the market could be called oversaturated. Now, this is my opinion, I’m sure that plenty of people find enjoyment in their chosen YA novel, but all I see is an algorithm. The equation of “enemies to lovers” plus “found family” plus X, Y, and Z, equals yet another book on the shelf. Of course, it is this way because it’s profitable, but that isn’t an inherently good thing.
While I may have just lost a few of you, I’m sure we’re all in agreement on the state of movies, correct? Yes, there are tons of original, amazing features that come out every year, however, the taste in my mouth has soured over the years, each packed to the brim with remakes and sequels. “How can I make the most amount of money for the smallest amount of effort?” That seems to elicit the same response from nearly every studio. That is just another form of the AI algorithm: “Beloved animated movie” plus “live-action adaptation” equals easy profit but plenty of online ridicule, yadda yadda yadda, it’s all the same. Nothing original, nothing groundbreaking, because that’s all artificial intelligence can do.
AI can only replicate and copy ideas that already exist. By turning to AI to cut corners, more is being lost in the process. The best art is made by pushing boundaries, taking in the world around you, and critiquing it instead of summarizing it. To answer my own question, yes, AI is killing creativity. Using AI filters to see how you look as a Total Drama Island character is killing creativity, whether you like it or not. There are artists out there, open for commissions and willing to draw whatever you can imagine. Yes, it will cost extra than a “free” AI filter, but that’s not the case. AI consumes roughly one bottle of water per prompt. These AI systems are housed on swaths of land that once had trees growing and wildlife roaming, but that has since been destroyed. And all of this in the name of what? Comfort? Laziness? AI thrives off of previously existing content, some of which is copyrighted, as was stated by whistleblower Suchir Balaji, not long before he was found dead in his apartment from an apparent suicide. AI has caused so much harm in its wake, and it will only continue down this path, not just impacting the creatives, but everyone in the process.