One thing that keeps me up at night is the progressive certainty that we as a society are slowly but surely losing our ability to be bad at things. We are ceding that skill to AI.
"You don't understand, without AI, I couldn't have drawn this/written this/designed this." says a person, certain that surely this, this argument right here is the nail in the coffin of the anti-AI argument. Utility: "Without this thing, I would have been bad at this task."
Yes. Correct. You would have been bad at it. And that's ok. Not only because it's just... Ok to be bad at things in general. But also because being bad at a thing is the first necessary step to learning how to do a thing.
Every musician you love has spent thousands of hours first being bad at being a musician. Every artist that brings you to tears has spent thousands of hours being bad at art. Every single designer with a master's degree in design has spent thousands upon thousands of hours designing things that are utter crap.
We learn how to do a thing by first being bad at it. And then noticing what skills we need to acquire to be better at it. And then honing those skills on a million failed attempts. And THEN we are finally good at doing it.
And being bad at things isn't just about learning how to do it yourself. It also teaches you how to listen more effectively to music. How to see art with the eyes of an artist. How to study a design for design flaws before it's even built. It teaches you good taste. How to perceive the humanity in the things all around you - things built by humans, for other humans.
No, the biggest problem with AI isn't that it makes bad art - although it most assuredly does also do that. It's that it robs human beings of the legitimacy of creating bad art ourselves.
How can anyone ever be expected to learn to do a thing if we can't ever be bad at it first?
