Source (Bluesky)
Transcript
recently my friend's comics professor told her that it's acceptable to use gen Al for script- writing but not for art, since a machine can't generate meaningful artistic work. meanwhile, my sister's screenwriting professor said that they can use gen Al for concept art and visualization, but that it won't be able to generate a script that's any good. and at my job, it seems like each department says that Al can be useful in every field except the one that they know best.
It's only ever the jobs we're unfamiliar with that we assume can be replaced with automation. The more attuned we are with certain processes, crafts, and occupations, the more we realize that gen Al will never be able to provide a suitable replacement. The case for its existence relies on our ignorance of the work and skill required to do everything we don't.
I use Generative AI at work because I know it's being tracked. I've offered examples and suggestions about things I've done with it.
I've then outright referred to it as the World's Worst Intern. Sometimes it does the right thing, but you always have to check. Sometimes it says it's going to do the right thing, but actually does something different. Sometimes it does completely the wrong thing.
So I have it do the things that I can do -- rote steps, easy changes I can explain faster than I can type, bulk renames or code cleanup that the compiler can validate -- but not the things I don't know if I can do. I trust the compiler, I don't trust the code it wrote. I'll use it to write the first draft of documentation based on the steps I took, but I'm editing it and expanding it.
It's not smart. It's not intelligent. It can kind of do things as long as you're willing to let it flail for a while or to spend the time checking it's work. It's the World's Worst Intern.