One thing you don't mention is that Gen AI is burning money in amounts that have never been seen before. Ed Zitron has written many articles about how the big AI companies and VCs are throwing stupid amounts of money at it and not seeing any kind of return.
Google and Amazon and Microsoft probably have enough income from ads etc. that they will survive, other companies who are also blowing huge amounts of $$$ may not. That's going to be economically painful.
Having a vibe coded thing run some kind of critical service is a) going to happen if ti hasn't already and b) end in disaster because the service will turn out to have some ugly bug that no one can find in the middle of the vibe coded mess
It’s mad that they’re so gung ho with it all. It’s not just the super big companies. So many others seem to be throwing it all in on AI. Adobe’s gone mad, too.
Big bubbles of nonsense.
The possibilities of what can wrong in coding scares living shit out of me.
I forget where I got this from but AI can be likened to ultra processed food. convenient and some what fills a gap but not recommended to be consumed as a main part of your diet.
The process, the stumbling and fumbling towards the end product, is, as you say, the whole point.
Both for the viewer/reader, in handing them a fully formed, living work, rather than a film set simulacrum, and for the artist, in giving meaning to their thoughts and feelings, and shaping the ways they can be expressed.
'Pushbutton art' (although the reality will be 'push button 7,000 times over the course of several days until the output is vaguely plausible') is a pointless oxymoron.
I had to read this twice, and my only consolation was the knowledge that I was early into AI and very swiftly out of it. Do not use it unless you know it doesn't matter a fig. Even that is wasting time. Thanks for the telling it as it is.
I am using AI. It saves me time writing code and creating documents. I know plenty of others who find the same. BUT we treat AI as a dumb assistant who needs to be closely monitored, not a colleague who can be trusted.
Intellectual friend of mine read Lucy Pepper's writing because I thought he might enjoy it. He has been involved in all things code since the 70s or earlier. He said he used AI to shortcut long amounts of archived data he was using, but then, he understands these things way over most people do, certainly way ahead of me. He walked in one day in the 80s and told me about Chaos Theory.
Mmmh. The money laundering class is now willing to pay $35-55 million for an original Piet Mondrian. Art authenticators remain the gate keepers for original and unique art which the art market deems valuable (another whole discussion on valuation being a matter of collusion). So, the question becomes what is a fake? The best meditation on this subject is Orson Welles’ film “F for Fake”. He ends the film musing on the facade of Chartres cathedral built over decades by nameless artisans working only for the glory of god (creation). Clearly, this is his indictment of the commodification of art. The internet has stripped away the elite gate keepers and issues of intellectual property, public domain, and right to profit from individual effort are now so muddied as to barely exist. The digital system now indiscriminately provides fodder to massive media organizations insatiable for content. AI is simply just grand larceny offered as a modern convenience to disguise the massive profitability of getting rid of paid employees. Welles famously was always on the edge of bankruptcy because of his insistence on artistic independence. An artist needs the courage to somehow balance control over their creations with the need for patrons or clients. The rest of us are simply wage slaves most of our lives and then paint or sing or write just for ourselves in our free time or retirement. That freedom doesn’t need monetization, it is earned. Or should I say “was earned” since EVERYBODY, not just artists, will no longer have access to jobs with a living wage. Everyone, except janitors, maids, cooks and garbage men who should, in actuality, be paid top dollar.
The article argues that not everybody can be an artist. Which is true. On the other hand, not everybody can be a movie critic either, yet here we are.
Huh?
The joke was that the internet has convinced everyone they're an expert. Ironically, I may have demonstrated the point.
Brilliant. Thank you. I loathe AI with the heat of a thousand suns. Lovely to know I am not alone.
we need a gang!! Stomping on the AI at every turn
Yes! With special gang hats! And possibly a theme tune.
I was going to start a cult a while back. A gang is probably easier to market (it may still be a cult, with hats)
One thing you don't mention is that Gen AI is burning money in amounts that have never been seen before. Ed Zitron has written many articles about how the big AI companies and VCs are throwing stupid amounts of money at it and not seeing any kind of return.
e.g. his latest https://www.wheresyoured.at/ai-is-too-expensive/
Google and Amazon and Microsoft probably have enough income from ads etc. that they will survive, other companies who are also blowing huge amounts of $$$ may not. That's going to be economically painful.
Oh and the code quality?
https://techtrenches.dev/p/the-snake-that-ate-itself-what-claude
Having a vibe coded thing run some kind of critical service is a) going to happen if ti hasn't already and b) end in disaster because the service will turn out to have some ugly bug that no one can find in the middle of the vibe coded mess
It’s mad that they’re so gung ho with it all. It’s not just the super big companies. So many others seem to be throwing it all in on AI. Adobe’s gone mad, too.
Big bubbles of nonsense.
The possibilities of what can wrong in coding scares living shit out of me.
I forget where I got this from but AI can be likened to ultra processed food. convenient and some what fills a gap but not recommended to be consumed as a main part of your diet.
If only so many people weren’t chain-eating hotdogs
The process, the stumbling and fumbling towards the end product, is, as you say, the whole point.
Both for the viewer/reader, in handing them a fully formed, living work, rather than a film set simulacrum, and for the artist, in giving meaning to their thoughts and feelings, and shaping the ways they can be expressed.
'Pushbutton art' (although the reality will be 'push button 7,000 times over the course of several days until the output is vaguely plausible') is a pointless oxymoron.
I had to read this twice, and my only consolation was the knowledge that I was early into AI and very swiftly out of it. Do not use it unless you know it doesn't matter a fig. Even that is wasting time. Thanks for the telling it as it is.
I am using AI. It saves me time writing code and creating documents. I know plenty of others who find the same. BUT we treat AI as a dumb assistant who needs to be closely monitored, not a colleague who can be trusted.
Intellectual friend of mine read Lucy Pepper's writing because I thought he might enjoy it. He has been involved in all things code since the 70s or earlier. He said he used AI to shortcut long amounts of archived data he was using, but then, he understands these things way over most people do, certainly way ahead of me. He walked in one day in the 80s and told me about Chaos Theory.
You nicked that from me, Deek
That Deek… honestly…
Mmmh. The money laundering class is now willing to pay $35-55 million for an original Piet Mondrian. Art authenticators remain the gate keepers for original and unique art which the art market deems valuable (another whole discussion on valuation being a matter of collusion). So, the question becomes what is a fake? The best meditation on this subject is Orson Welles’ film “F for Fake”. He ends the film musing on the facade of Chartres cathedral built over decades by nameless artisans working only for the glory of god (creation). Clearly, this is his indictment of the commodification of art. The internet has stripped away the elite gate keepers and issues of intellectual property, public domain, and right to profit from individual effort are now so muddied as to barely exist. The digital system now indiscriminately provides fodder to massive media organizations insatiable for content. AI is simply just grand larceny offered as a modern convenience to disguise the massive profitability of getting rid of paid employees. Welles famously was always on the edge of bankruptcy because of his insistence on artistic independence. An artist needs the courage to somehow balance control over their creations with the need for patrons or clients. The rest of us are simply wage slaves most of our lives and then paint or sing or write just for ourselves in our free time or retirement. That freedom doesn’t need monetization, it is earned. Or should I say “was earned” since EVERYBODY, not just artists, will no longer have access to jobs with a living wage. Everyone, except janitors, maids, cooks and garbage men who should, in actuality, be paid top dollar.
YUP, to all of it. F for Fake is good for a look at that mad world.
The pastiche Harold Pinter my brief ChatGPT experiment produced was funny though…
For playing purposes, you’re allowed ;)
The below should be a salutary warning for anyone using AI
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/may/13/beware-what-you-tell-your-ai-chatbot-its-not-a-shrink-its-a-snitch
Worksite warning sign: https://files.catbox.moe/wyqy6s.jpeg