It’s taken me a while to process how I actually feel about AI. I typically don’t find myself at either end of the spectrum of emotional responses such a topic can solicit. There are the folks who already want it to take over their daily routines and the folks who think we should have pulled the plug already, but for whatever reason, I don’t like subscribing to these pre-defined camps. I like to think it’s because I want to form my own conclusion, but it’s probably more likely that picking some third choice makes me feel unique and special. Desperate for affirmation much?

I’ll start by addressing some of the typical slogans we’re seeing across the mediaverse: “They’re gonna take our jobs!” Pardon the gross oversimplifications I’ll likely use throughout my pontification here, but as it relates to physical work, AI – and robots for that matter – just strike me as the next wave of automation. Automobiles and trains rendered the entire horse and wagon industry obsolete. And at some point, some poor bastard in the rust belt said, “Whattaya mean the machine will turn the wrench?! But I turn the wrench!” Was the outcry of those buggy salesmen and industrial laborers any less valid than folks today, or is it that we are experiencing it here and now, and so it means more to us? Honest question.

As it relates to craftsman and the fine arts like images and film, I have a different prediction. AI is going to be novel until it’s not. We’ve already seen a pretty deep divide between the folks who want to see themselves recreated as a dapper wood elf businessman from some contrived bygone era and those who belabor some vaguely righteous protest about the AI exploiting the work of real artists. But the problem with the entire paradigm is that we’re already treating art like a commodity or a product. Don’t blame that on AI. There has always been, or at least has been for some time, a space for art as an expression and art as entertainment. Certainly, both can exist. But I think we are all quite familiar with the difference between a summer blockbuster and some introspective and emotional Oscar contender. My point here is that we’ve been exploiting artists’ intellectual property for some time. You can walk through the artists’ alley of most Comic Con type events and find an endless trove of copywritten characters being recreated in “an original style”. Is that hyper realistic water colored Pikachu more valid than an AI rendition of the same thing?

A well-documented comparison can already be found with CGI in movies. It started out as rough and sloppy and quickly hit a peak in the early 2000s before studios realized they could get away with mediocre effects on a smaller budget and that people would still pack theatres. And now, when you see a film done with actual practical effects, the attention to authentic artistry is palpable.

We live in a capitalistic society. I think it’s naïve to think that a ban against AI to save actors’ jobs is what is going to curb the use of AI. Studios are going to go where the money is. And if they can pay some programmer a fraction of a $50M A-lister for some perfect virtual actor who never gets sick and isn’t battling a public extra-marital affair, why wouldn’t they? And then, at some point a couple of decades from now, folks are going to want to see movies with real actors because that will then be the novel thing. The same thing has already happened with the craft and artisan renaissance of woodworking, leather goods, and sourdough bread as examples. All of those things can be had for cheaper from mass-produced sources, but folks choose to spend more because of quality and, yes, even on principle.

The real tragedy of AI that I don’t see getting nearly enough attention is its ability to rob us, and our future generations, of the joy of thinking. Chat GPT-style assistants are being rolled out everywhere. This week, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth introduced the DoD’s first version intended for mass use and commanded all DoD military, civilian, and contractor employees to incorporate it into everyday work. It’s here. Use it. There are so many folks who are using AI for grocery lists, business plans, drafting touchy emails, preemptively establishing holiday boundaries with their mother-in-law, and beyond. I just don’t get it. I’ve tried it, and my one resounding takeaway persists: what’s the fun in that? That might seem more obvious for an animator, painter, author, or screenwriter, but what about folks who just like to think? Think about problems. Think about solutions. Think for themselves. What’s the point of crafting a perfectly worded email with infinite polish and no missteps? Does that represent you? Your limitations? Your lack of eloquence? Maybe I like trying and failing because I get to learn and grow. Redoing things a 2nd and 3rd time and understanding more about them with each iteration. Maybe I like taking my cavalier first pass and then folding in my coworkers who love to edit but couldn’t fill a blank page if their life depended on it.

We’re talking about the death of Wabi Sabi, the Japanese principle of seeing the beauty in life’s imperfections. What’s human about perfection? Are you perfect? Am I? All that creating a perfect world around us is going to do is highlight how we don’t belong in it. Maybe we create a perfect world for the robots and then peace out? I don’t know. AI is cool. It’s fun. The latest robots are just plain breathtaking. But they aren’t people. Or a replacement for our messy imperfections, our flawed word choices, or our idiosyncrasies. Flaws are grounding, and I like that. But for now, I will enjoy watching the world chase its AI hubris straight into the sun.

Matt Hebert is an engineer and self-published author. His dopamine-fueled creative pursuits have spanned from chicken keeping, sand sculpture, acting, and public speaking, but writing is nearest and dearest to his heart. He lives in Bellevue with his wife and two daughters. You can find him on Instagram at @jerkofalltradeshebert or email him at matt.hebert.books@gmail.com

Opinions expressed by columnists in The Daily Record are not necessarily those of its management or staff, and do not constitute an endorsement or recommendation. Any errors or omissions should be called to our attention so that they may be corrected. Contact us at news@omahadailyrecord.com.