Even the most perfect reproduction of a work of art is lacking in one element: its presence in time and space, its unique existence at the place where it happens to be. This unique existence of the work of art determined the history to which it was subject throughout the time of its existence. This includes the changes which it may have suffered in physical condition over the years as well as the various changes in its ownership. The traces of the first can be revealed only by chemical or physical analyzes which it is impossible to perform on a reproduction; changes of ownership are subject to a tradition which must be traced from the situation of the original. ¶ The presence of the original is the prerequisite to the concept of authenticity. Chemical analyzes of the patina of a bronze can help to establish this, as does the proof that a given manuscript of the Middle Ages stems from an archive of the fifteenth century.
Paul Valéry, Aesthetics, “The Conquest of Ubiquity, ” translated by Ralph Manheim, (Pantheon Books: 1964), p. 225.
Go
Just as water, gas, and electricity are brought into
our houses from far off to satisfy our needs in response to a minimal effort, so
we shall be supplied with visual or auditory images, which will appear and
disappear at a simple movement of the hand, hardly more than a sign.
At a popular level, “AI” is the marketing label du jour for virtually every innovation in software, hardware, and technology that is up for sale or open to investment. Though the term is in ubiquitous use with vague semantic content, surely a more technical definition is on hand. Consider the literal definition of artificial: something made or produced by humans rather than occurring naturally. Everything about generative artificial intelligence is human in origin. Intelligence can also be difficult to define adequately. One fundamental definition is the ability to differentiate between this and that. Surely we can clarify this ubiquitous term.
Go
Many are anxious about the rise of generative software marketed as "artificial intelligence": software such as ChatGPT for text, Midjourney for images, Sora for video, and Suno for music. Some have raised concerns about a loss of truth and creativity, or about whole categories of gainful employment being decimated. To be sure, we've all seen our feeds populated by deceptive images and videos and lazy AI slop. There are bound to be many other harmful uses of generative software. Some jobs will be lost, others gained. Nevertheless, I’d like to make a case, from the perspective of a creator and graphic designer, that the anxiety about generative AI is largely unwarranted.
Go
The reason I wrote the book is not to settle old scores or give my version of the match, but to say that we should not be paralyzed by a dystopian vision of the future – worrying about killer AI and super-intelligent robots, which is like worrying about overcrowding on Mars.
Computers are actually pretty simple. We’re sitting here on a bench in this café. Let’s assume that you understood only the most rudimentary of directions and you asked how to find the rest room. I would have to describe it to you in very specific and precise instructions. I might say, “Scoot sideways two meters off the bench. Stand erect. Lift left foot. Bend left knee until it is horizontal. Extend left foot and shift weight 300 centimeters forward…” and on and on. If you could interpret all those instructions 100 times faster than any other person in this café, you would appear to be a magician: You could run over and grab a milk shake and bring it back and set it on the table and snap your fingers, and I’d think you made the milk shake appear, because it was so fast relative to my perception. That’s exactly what a computer does. It takes these very, very simple-minded instructions — “Go fetch a number, add it to this number, put the result there, perceive if it’s greater than this other number” — but executes them at a rate of, let’s say, 1,000,000 per second. At 1,000,000 per second, the results appear to be magic.