on AI, art, and human hands

i had a boss named Dave. Dave loved AI. Dave also had opinions about how i was using AI. a lot of opinions.

wrong model. no tools. no retrieval. no memory. no agent. no second agent supervising the first agent. Dave, i am trying to rename a file.

i got annoyed at Dave.

so i created an AI agent called Dave, fed it every piece of feedback he had ever given me. basically, a tiny corporate demon in my laptop whose job was to check whatever would trigger Dave before Dave got triggered.

my solution to Dave was more Dave, great software architecture if you hate peace.

-

one of the questions i get most is what i think about AI, as someone in tech who has supported the launch of several AI products.

i use it, i build with it, and i believe AI will permanently change how software is made. it's already part of how we write code, research, create documentation, and solve problems.

but AI-generated art is where i draw the line. out of respect for the artists i love and work with, AI-generated art is not accepted on my teams.

if something needs an artist, i want an artist to make it.

generative AI does not create in a vacuum. these models are trained on enormous datasets that can include real artwork made by real artists. and behind that training data are artists who spent thousands of hours developing a voice that was theirs.

technology should help humans create, not make human creativity disposable.

happy Inktober, my loves. keep making things only a human heart and human hands could make.