The Human Touch in a World โขof Algorithms
I recently embarked on a playful experiment, โขattempting toโ co-create a family game with โฃthe โขhelp of an AI application.โ The premise? A mystery, naturally, and the need for compelling characters and clues. What I discovered wasn’t a seamless collaboration, but aโข stark reminder of whatโค truly fuels creativity.
The AI, predictably, churned out a list of names – a parade of “Puddings” and “Freddies” – and plotโ points as bland as unrisen dough.โ It was efficient,โ certainly, โฃbut utterly lacking in spark. ironically, the process demanded more of myโข time and effort, forcing me โto inject personality and nuance into the game than if I’d simply relied on my own inventiveness from the start.The takeaway was โฃclear: AI excels at formula and speed. โขIt can generate variations on a theme, but struggles with genuine originality. The โฃheart of the story, the unique voice, remains firmly in the realm ofโฃ human experience. In myโ case,โฃ that meant tapping into the storytelling instincts honed over years, the same instincts my grandmother possessed. And, truthfully, the experience left me feeling not obsolete, butโฆneeded.
Though,the โcomfort is tempered by aโ growing unease. AI’s โcapabilities are rapidly โevolving. As a journalist, I seeโค the storm clouds gathering.It’s no longer a question of โฃAI simply โreporting routine news – school board meetings, weather updates -โ but of it perhaps tacklingโ more complex, analytical reporting. Our industry, frankly, has been โslow to adapt, andโ the risk of being overtaken by automated content โคis very โขreal.
The experts offer a glimmer of hope. They โbeleive writng rooted in personal experience, in a distinctive โvoice, will remain valuable. โAI can produce content,but โit can’t live โ it. It lacks the beliefs,โฃ the emotions, the โvery consciousness that informs truly compelling storytelling. As ChatGPT itself pointed out -โฃ a surprisingly self-aware โฃobservation – AI can’t “truly live anything.”
To test this further, I challenged ChatGPT to write a โpoem about a local political issue: a budget dispute threatening funding for our beloved Paramount Theater. The result, delivered in a fraction of the time it would have taken me, wasโฆsurprisingly good.
(Excerpt from ChatGPT’s poem)
In โคAurora’s proud city,a drama’s on stage;
Not just at theโข Paramountโ but on โthe front page.
Mayor Laesch sharpened pencils, cut budgets with โขflair;
And the theater folks cried “He’s โslashing ourโ air!”
While I might fancy myself a better poet, it highlighted a crucial point. My skills are better spent on tasks AI can’t replicate – for now.So, I’m officially retiring from โmy role as โa poetic columnist.
The question then arose: should Iโฃ relinquish my role in crafting the annual โfamily skits and hand the reins over to a chatbot? ChatGPT,inโค it’s typically diplomatic โfashion,advised against it. It โขframed my imagination โคas theโ “spark” that ignites these cherished traditions,positioning AI as a helpful “backstage crew” for polishing and brainstorming,but ultimately โaffirming my role as “director,producer and heart of the production.”
A reassuring sentiment, to be sure. Butโค a small part of me still wonders if that virtual assistant might, someday, be tempted to wield the proverbial knife.
Next week,โค I’ll be exploring โคhow local schools areโข preparing students for a future profoundly shapedโค by artificial intelligence.
dcrosby@tribpub.com