Why AI is not modern magic

From Skynet to strikes

Until recently, I didn’t have much of a personal opinion on AI. In fact, when my friend suggested this as a blog topic, I may have responded with a bit of a shrug. Honestly, my thoughts on AI were very Terminator-focused, i.e. if it would do anything, it would herald a nuclear apocalypse and killer robots.

But then…

But then it began to feel like every time I turned round, there AI was. And every time I saw it, well, let’s put it this way. I wasn’t exactly getting a good impression of it, especially after paying attention to the writers’ and actors’ strikes in America in 2023.

And now?

Now, it pisses me off.

I must caveat this with the fact that there are good applications for AI and there’s a whole cosmos of variations of AI too that we’ve been using without much issue, like online shopping and smart homes (though smart homes terrify me for other reasons). The problem is when AI is being used as a shortcut, either out of misguided cost-saving measures or just plain laziness.

Now, I’m a pragmatist and I love anything that makes my life a wee bit easier, but as someone who spends most of my time either teaching, translating, or writing, I can’t help but be confronted by the detrimental effects of AI on both us and the world around us.

The environment

I’m not as much of an environmentalist as I should be, but even I can understand that the sheer consumption involved with AI is shocking. According to the UN environment programme, AI not only relies on heavily destructive mining for the raw materials it requires, it also produces hazardous waste (including mercury and lead). Add to that the significant water and electricity consumption and you can hardly call AI environmentally friendly.

Critical thinking

Now, this is more my wheelhouse. Universities are now cracking down on AI use in students’ assignments (with varying success), but there seems to be a strange distinction being drawn between using AI to write an assignment for you (bad) and using AI to simplify ideas, perform research, and synthesise arguments (okay).

Fine, the finished product might be the student’s own work, but a whole load of the thought process isn’t. Students learn so many soft skills at university that don’t necessarily pertain to the exact content of their degree, but relying on AI potentially stunts their ability to think critically, let alone their problem solving and communication skills.

In fact, a recent MIT study compared students using ChatGPT, Google, or nothing at all to write SAT essays. Guess which group ‘consistently underperformed at neural, linguistic, and behavioral levels’?

Creativity

The 2023 strikes in the US really highlighted the fear creative industries have about AI. Actors and writers called for various protections and improvements in their working conditions, which included specific safeguards from AI, particularly around the use of content and in the case of the actors, their likenesses.

I can understand why everyone from small businesses to huge corporations is intrigued by AI in a world in which we are, quite frankly, churning content. AI might be a bit quick and dirty, but I suppose it’s efficient and while the results might sometimes be mediocre, they’re saving money they could’ve been spending on human time and resources.

However. Human creativity is unrivalled. We all have a spark of something that AI just can’t replicate.

And to be brutally honest, this is putting extremely talented, highly specialised people out of work.

Me, myself, and AI

I don’t use AI, at least not in the current sense of ChatGPT, Gemini, etc, but then you might’ve already guessed that. I do use things like Google Translate when studying the languages I’m learning, although I tend to take its results with a pinch of salt and cross-reference them (or, shock horror, check with a human).

When ChatGPT first became a big thing a couple of years ago, I tried it out of curiosity, feeding in a creative writing prompt. The results? Well, to me, they sounded like a fairly gifted pre-teen’s work. Bit purple prose, bit laboured, but nice ideas. No more, no less. If one of my students had given me the writing, I would’ve made suggestions and encouraged them to keep at it, because in a few years, they could be a great writer. Couldn’t really say that to ChatGPT though.

And now, as an almost-published writer, I find myself taking a firmer stand against AI. I’m working with a publishing house that has their own policies against using AI, therefore I know that my editor and cover designer are real humans completing human tasks in a human way. I do my marketing myself and when I do work with others, they are, again, marketing and PR professionals with years in the industry. I’m years off potentially having illustration, translation, or audiobook work done, because if and when I do, I’ll hire a proper illustrator, a translator with experience, and a skilled narrator, which rightly costs time and money.

Oh, and it goes without saying, but despite my overzealous use of em-dashes and Oxford commas, I do my writing and editing myself. I’ve been writing creatively since I was six years old, I have two degrees in the language, and I’ve been a professional copywriter. Not to brag, but it would be really skeevy of me now to just push out books with AI.

It’s not happening until that Skynet-induced hell freezes over.

Coldharbour: A world in which there are only two Terminator films

Maybe that’s why I’ve set Coldharbour in a simpler time, when the Internet was a thing but I had to go to the library to use it. Here’s a little dose of Nineties nostalgia:

As soon as Alex and Pandora had got away from the canal, Alex had launched herself into the nearest telephone box and had left a deliberately vague message with Shaz’s pager operator:

Alex is at the house. Need help.

She really needed to get one of those mobile phones Sam was always banging on about.