Image crafted with Google AI (No, I did not prompt it)
Sometime ago, I came across a video on YouTube from the Scriptnotes Podcast, an interview with screenwriter and director Christopher McQuarrie (late of The Usual Suspects and the last four Mission: IMPOSSIBLE films) discussing his views on the future of screenwriting and the creative process with regards to the rise of AI and the harsh reality many creatives will have to face sooner rather than later, which is two-fold: first, AI will inevitably take over the entire Hollywood network of stand-by writers, and second, no matter how advanced AI develops in the future, whatever the machine churns out will always require human editing and fine tuning; because of the one thing that no amount of algarythams and digitized historical context can ever teach the machine: empathy!
All forms of human creativity (painting, writing, woodworking, etc.) feature structures and guidelines for crafting the best possible results, which AI is capable of learning, understanding, and executing. But what makes the creations therein (as done by humans) so unique is how the creators bend or break the structures and guidelines based on their preferences, experiences, and ideologies; things that machines cannot comprehend (yet). Which leads me to the most critical word and question regarding this entire endeavor: why? No, not the question "why are we heading in this direction," but the significantly superior and relevant question "why should the AI and its creators care about any of this?"
The most significant problem I foresee going forward with the impractical (at the moment) adoption of AI as a creative tool is that we are not taking the time to teach the machine why. Yes, we're feeding the machine all the essential information it needs to know about crafting works of art. Still, no one, at least presumably, seems to be remotely interested in attempting to demonstrate to the machine the motivation for any of it. Nothing in the world is worth doing, be it art or otherwise, if there isn't a firm contextual reason for the thing in the first place.
As of this moment, machines can only understand the technical and structural reasons for creativity; but until we take the time to teach the machine why it is essential to the human condition, which I do believe is possible, then AI will be nothing more than the simplest form it remains today: yet another form of terribly educated guess work!
What I mean to say is that because AI is inevitably on the rise, we should take the time to at least attempt to teach the machine not only the unusual and incalculable unknowns of the human condition, but also why it is acceptable to embrace it for what it is rather than attempt to formulate an answer that no one will wholeheartiadly agree with. We achieve this by teaching the machine the basics, reviewing its work, making notes and adjustments, and then informing the machine of the reasons and purposes behind these adjustments. Then, if the machine has further questions, we answer accordingly and to the best of our abilities. In short, the machine is not our servant, but our student.
One thing that some of the greatest works of science fiction have taught us is that there is always an opportunity for greater learning, provided we put in the effort, and impart to those in the most need of learning, i.e., the machine, the value of such efforts. AI is making its way into our everyday lives, and there is nothing we can do to stop it, short of dismantling and abandoning all technology, which, let's face it, no human being on this planet is willing to conduct, let alone consider. So, rather than rejecting and vilifying this occasionally fascinating technological advancement, perhaps we could benefit from a reevaluation of what AI can potentially become in the betterment of the human condition.
I'm not saying we should wholeheartedly embrace AI as it is right now (it has a long way to go before it can be appropriately considered usable in any practical application, despite what most others would have you believe); what I am saying is perhaps we are overlooking an opportunity to better enhance our condition (creatively speaking) by providing better understanding to the machine. This is an endeavor that will require tremendous effort on our part, calling us to look deeper into ourselves and find greater peace with both our understandings and lack thereof with regards to our place in the creative sphere and indeed the universe as a whole. While I'm not holding my breath for the majority of people to embrace this notion, I am at least saying out loud what needs to be said in my own way. I encourage you to do the same.
AI isn't our enemy; our inability to put in the effort for our betterment is!
Ladies & gentlemen, I am TheNorm; thank you all for reading.
No comments:
Post a Comment