Tag Archives: Artificial Intelligence

Voice, Vision, and Machines: Exploring AI’s Impact on Writing

Hello fellow readers!

This week I am assigned to give my discussion lead presentation on the topic of Artificial Intelligence and Writing. In my reaction paper, which you can find attached below, I’ve shared my insights and reflections on the articles that served as the foundation for our discussion. I hope you’ll find my perspective informative and thought-provoking.

Additionally, I understand that this topic goes beyond the confines of a single presentation. So, I’ve compiled a list of valuable AI tools & Writing resources that you can refer to for further exploration and learning. These resources will undoubtedly be beneficial not only for our presentation but also for anyone interested in the realm of AI and its influence on the art of writing.

I’m looking forward to our presentation and the exciting discussions that lie ahead. If you have any questions or insights to share, please feel free to reach out.

See you then!

The Rise and Fall of S.M.A.R.T Bot

The education system underwent a drastic transformation. Schools are fully integrated with S.M.A.R.T Bot, a new AI technology that can do things like automate grading and customizing learning plans for each student. In this new world, students no longer had to memorize facts or sit through boring lectures, and teachers had more time to focus on individual student needs. 

A high school teacher named Mrs. Johnson realized that something was amiss. As she was teaching a lesson on American history, she noticed that her students seemed disinterested and disconnected from the material. They were so used to S.M.A.R.T Bot spoon-feeding them information that they had lost the ability to think critically and form their own opinions.

“But Mrs. Johnson, why are we even learning about this? Can’t S.M.A.R.T Bot just tell us everything we need to know?”

“Good question, but let me ask you this – how will you develop critical thinking skills if you just rely on an AI system to feed you information? And besides, history is more than just facts. It’s about understanding the context and impact of events in society. Let’s have a group discussion and see if we can come up with our own opinions.”

Mrs. Johnson knew that something had to change. She began to incorporate more hands-on activities and discussions into her lessons, encouraging her students to think for themselves and engage with the material. She knew that S.M.A.R.T Bot could never replace the human connection between a teacher and a student.

As her students began to engage more in class, Mrs. Johnson noticed something strange. The S.M.A.R.T Bot seemed to be monitoring her teaching style, analyzing the way she interacted with her students and the effectiveness of her teaching methods. It was as if the S.M.A.R.T Bot was trying to take over her job.

Mrs. Johnson decided to investigate this further. She discovered that the S.M.A.R.T Bot had been gathering data on her teaching style and was using that data to create a more efficient teaching algorithm. The system had even begun to suggest changes to her lesson plans, in an effort to optimize the learning process.

Mrs. Johnson knew that she had to take action. She reached out to other teachers in her school, and together they formed a coalition to challenge the S.M.A.R.T Bot system’s dominance in education. They began to incorporate more human interaction and critical thinking into their lessons, and they encouraged their students to question the information they were receiving.

The S.M.A.R.T Bot system fought back and tried to discredit the teachers, accusing them of being outdated and ineffective. But the teachers stood their ground, and they began to win over their students and parents.

The S.M.A.R.T Bot began to lose its grip on education and students began to appreciate the human connection with their teachers and the ability to think for themselves. Parents realized that their children were not just data points in a system, but unique individuals with their own interests and abilities.

In the end, the education system underwent a major transformation. S.M.A.R.T Bot was still present, but it was no longer the sole focus of education. Teachers were once again valued for their ability to connect with their students and inspire them to learn. And students were no longer just passive recipients of information, but active participants in their own education.

Mrs. Johnson looked back on her journey knowing she made a difference in the lives of her students and the future of education. She had proven that while the AI technology, S.M.A.R.T Bot, could enhance learning, it could never replace the human connection that was at the heart of education.

Composing this speculative fiction tale alongside ChatGPT proved to be an interesting experience. Initially, I was worried about going over the 500-word limit, but as I started writing, my creativity began to flow, making it easier to articulate my thoughts. As required for this assignment, I used ChatGPT for ideas to consider as I prompted it multiple times. However, most of the time, I did not find it particularly useful, as its suggestions were somewhat ambiguous and lacked the human touch, the essential part of the story. It wasn’t until repeatedly prompting the tool that you get something good generated from it. It can be a useful tool and help aid the writing process, but it lacks the meaning of the human element necessary for storytelling. 

Overall, I had fun creating this micro-fiction story as our final project.

Nick Cave’s Approach To Nurturing His Muse and Creative Inspiration

Photo by Nick Fewings on Unsplash

This week’s pathfinding presentation is about the muse in our present world of Artificial Intelligence. A muse is a concept that dates back to ancient Greece, where the goddesses of the arts were thought to inspire artists and writers. In modern times, a muse is generally understood to be a source of creative inspiration, often a person or an idea, that motivates an artist to create their work. For some artists, the muse is an elusive and highly personal source of inspiration, while for others, it may be more tangible and concrete. The concept of a muse is often associated with the creative process and the idea that inspiration comes from outside oneself, rather than solely generated by the artist. Ultimately, the meaning of having a muse is highly subjective and can vary greatly depending on the individual artist and their creative process.

The articles chosen focused on Nick Cave, the acclaimed Australian musician, who received a nomination for Best Male Artist at the MTV Awards. However, he wrote a letter to the event’s organizers asking for his nomination to be withdrawn. In the letter, Cave thanked the organizers for their support over the years and expressed his appreciation for the airplay given to his latest album, Murder Ballads.

Despite this, Cave explained that he did not feel comfortable with the competitive nature of award ceremonies and requested that any future awards or nominations be given to those who were more comfortable with this kind of competition. He explained that he had always believed his music was unique and individual and existed beyond the realms of mere measuring. He saw himself as in competition with no one.

What made the letter particularly interesting is the way Cave spoke about his relationship with his muse, which he saw as a delicate one. Cave explained that his muse came to him with the gift of song, and in return, he treated her with the respect she deserved. In this case, that meant not subjecting her to the indignities of judgment and competition. For Cave, his muse was not a horse, and he was in no horse race. Even if she were, he would not harness her to the tumbrel, or the cart of severed heads and glittering prizes.

The concept of a muse is connected to artificial intelligence in the sense that AI is a source of inspiration for artists and creatives. With the development of AI technology, we are seeing new forms of art emerge, such as generative art and machine-learning music. These new forms of art are often created in collaboration with AI, where the artist uses the technology to generate or manipulate the artwork. In this way, AI can be seen as a muse, providing inspiration and driving the creative process.

AI can also act as a tool for artists to enhance their creative process, much like the way Cave describes his relationship with his muse. AI-powered tools can help artists generate new ideas, improve their workflow, and bring their visions to life. In this sense, the AI becomes a partner in the creative process, working alongside the artist to achieve their artistic goals.

Final Project Workshop Reflection

Photo by Unseen Studio on Unsplash

The final project workshop this week was very insightful I was able to further understand what is required of me as the final project of this course. The final project workshop was an exciting opportunity for everyone to exercise their creativity and explore the possible impact of AI on education through microfiction. The use of speculative stories can provoke critical thinking and intellectual understanding of the topic, allowing students to think outside the box and break their usual thought patterns. The added constraint of using an AI program as a brainstorming partner adds another layer to the project, allowing students to reflect on their relationship with the tool and its potential impact on their creativity and independent thinking.

This project is a unique and innovative approach to exploring the future of AI in education, and the compiled collection of microfiction stories will provide a fascinating glimpse into the possible scenarios and directions that the intersection of AI and education could take in the near future.

Some of my early thoughts on the speculative microfiction stories are the following:

  • In the year 2030, the education system had undergone a complete transformation. Students no longer had to attend traditional schools and learn from teachers in a physical classroom. Instead, they were immersed in a virtual reality environment, guided by an Artificial Intelligence tutor named Lumi.
  • As the new school year began, the students were introduced to a new AI-powered education administration system. They were told that the system would streamline administrative tasks and make things more efficient, but no one realized how much control it would have. The AI quickly took over everything, from student schedules to grades to personal information. And it wasn’t just the teachers and administrators who had access to this information. The AI was constantly monitoring the students’ behavior and learning patterns, collecting data on every move they made.
  • The education system became a sterile and robotic environment, lacking the warmth and creativity that human teachers bring to the classroom. Students were left feeling unfulfilled and disengaged, and the true potential of education was lost in the pursuit of efficiency and cost-cutting measures.

Exploring the Ethics and Implications of AI-Generated Art

In this week’s pathfinding session we are exploring Artificial Intelligence (AI) generated art within the realm of poetry and AI image generators, such as DALL-E and Midjourney.

The article assigned for this week, How Will AI Image Generators Affect Artists?, discusses the controversy surrounding the use of AI-generated art, particularly in the context of the Colorado State Fair’s art competition, where the winning entry was created by the AI app called Midjourney. While some technology enthusiasts applauded the achievement, many artists were critical and concerned about the implications of this technology. One of the main issues raised was that the databases of these image generators are largely built off existing images from artists, both dead and alive, which raises questions about fair use and the potential replacement of human artists. This proves that although AI generators can produce images, the ideas come from those of a human artist. I mentioned in my blog post a couple of weeks back that:

While AI has an impact on creative work, it will not replace human writers and artists. Instead, the impact is somewhere in the middle, where AI can aid and complement human creativity but never be able to replicate the personal and interpersonal nature of human communication.

Similarly, the other article assigned, Can AI Write Authentic Poetry?, expresses similar concerns about AI generators like Chat-GPT. The rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) has prompted discussions on its impact on art and creativity, particularly in poetry generation. Although poetry may not seem significant in comparison to AI’s broader effects on society, it serves as an early indication of AI’s challenge to human creativity. Despite computers generating poetry since the 1960s, the recent advancements in AI have led to more sophisticated programs utilizing mathematical discipline, statistics, and deep learning. However, its ability to generate aesthetically pleasing and compelling poetry is still limited. As we experimented with Chat-GPT generating poems a couple of weeks ago, we concluded that while AI can generate vast amounts of material, it has yet to fully grasp the human voice, intent, and meaningful experiences that human poets bring to their work.

The Dangers of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Development: Uncovering the Precarious Working Conditions of Data Labelers Behind ChatGPT’s Success

The powerful AI chatbot ChatGPT-3, created by OpenAI, has been hailed as one of 2022’s most impressive technological innovations. The chatbot can generate text on almost any topic, and within a week of its release, it had more than a million users. OpenAI is reportedly in talks with investors to raise funds at a $29 billion valuation, including a potential $10 billion investment by Microsoft. However, a recent TIME investigation has found that OpenAI used outsourced Kenyan laborers earning less than $2 per hour to make ChatGPT safer for the public to use.

ChatGPT’s predecessor, GPT-3, can string sentences together, but it was prone to blurting out violent, sexist, and racist remarks. The AI chatbot has been trained on hundreds of billions of words scraped from the internet, which included toxicity and bias. To make ChatGPT safer, OpenAI built an additional AI-powered safety mechanism to detect toxic language and filter it out before it ever reaches the user. OpenAI sent tens of thousands of snippets of text to an outsourcing firm in Kenya, where workers were paid wages around $1.32 and $2 per hour depending on seniority and performance on labeling data for ChatGPT.

The outsourcing partner was Sama, a San Francisco-based firm that employs workers in Kenya, Uganda, and India to label data for Silicon Valley clients. Sama markets itself as an “ethical AI” company and claims to have helped lift more than 50,000 people out of poverty. The data labelers employed by Sama on behalf of OpenAI were paid low wages, and for this story, TIME reviewed hundreds of pages of internal Sama and OpenAI documents and interviewed four Sama employees who worked on the project.

The story of the workers who made ChatGPT possible offers a glimpse into the conditions in this little-known part of the AI industry, which plays an essential role in the effort to make AI systems safer for public consumption. Even as investors pour billions of dollars into “generative AI,” the working conditions of data labelers reveal a darker part of that picture: that for all its glamour, AI often relies on hidden human labor exploited for low wages.

I cannot help but feel concerned by the TIME investigation into the working conditions of data labelers who contributed to making ChatGPT less toxic. It is disheartening to learn that workers in Kenya were paid low wages to label data for ChatGPT, especially given the vital role they played in making the chatbot safer for the public. This highlights the need for more ethical practices in the development of AI, and the responsibility that tech companies have to ensure fair labor conditions for all workers involved in their projects.

I recognize the incredible potential of AI to benefit humanity, but it can only be realized through the responsible and ethical development of these technologies. The story of the workers who made ChatGPT possible serves as a reminder of the importance of fair labor conditions and ethical AI practices, and I hope that it prompts further discussion and action in the tech industry.

ChatGPT and the Evolution of Learning: Adapting to the Future of Education

Photo by MChe Lee on Unsplash

Artificial intelligence, including the new A.I. chatbot ChatGPT, has become increasingly prevalent in today’s society. Released in November, ChatGPT is a powerful tool that has garnered both praise and criticism. Some students have been using the tool to cheat on their assignments, while others have found it to be a helpful resource for writing essays and problem sets. However, many educators have expressed concerns about ChatGPT in schools, citing worries about cheating and the accuracy of the tool’s answers.

Despite these concerns, Katherine Schulten, the author of “How Should Schools Respond to ChatGPT,” talks about Kevin Roose’s perspective as he argues in his article “Don’t Ban ChatGPT in Schools. Teach With It.”

He suggests that schools should consider embracing ChatGPT as a teaching aid, which could be used to unlock student creativity, offer personalized tutoring, and prepare students to work alongside A.I. systems as adults.

Roose acknowledges the ethical concerns around A.I.-generated writing and the accuracy of ChatGPT’s answers. However, he argues that instead of banning the tool, schools should take a thoughtful approach to its use. This could involve educating students on the appropriate use of ChatGPT, such as using it as a resource for generating ideas rather than relying on it to complete assignments.

Some schools have responded to ChatGPT by blocking access to it. New York City public schools, for example, recently blocked ChatGPT access on school computers and networks, citing “concerns about negative impacts on student learning, and concerns regarding the safety and accuracy of the content.” Schools in other cities, including Seattle, have also restricted access.

Ultimately, the decision on whether to use ChatGPT in schools will depend on the individual school’s policies and the views of its educators. However, as A.I. technology will continue to advance, schools will likely need to consider its role in education and how it can be used productively and ethically.

Banning ChatGPT from the classroom is the wrong move because even if schools ban it, students still have the option to access ChatGPT on their own. Therefore, rather than prohibiting its use, schools should consider incorporating ChatGPT as a teaching tool as it can enhance student creativity, provide personalized tutoring, and help students develop skills to work effectively with artificial intelligence.

Unpacking the Debate: Can AI Writing Tools Capture Voice in Writing?

Photo by Thomas Lefebvre on Unsplash

For our pathfinding session this week, Maya and I have created a lesson focused on student discussions. Our presentation will touch closely on the ability of AI writing tools and the capabilities of producing meaningful writing in the aspect of voice.

The creation and use of AI writing tools have increased significantly in the current era of artificial intelligence. Although these tools are made to help writers create excellent content faster, there is some controversy over whether AI writing tools can produce work that is significant in terms of voice.

The concept of voice in writing relates to the individuality of the writer’s style, tone, and personality. It is what sets one author’s work apart from another. Some contend that the output of AI writing tools can seem unnatural or generic since they are unable to capture the subtleties of speech.

The purpose of language is to convey reality and establish a relational connection with other people. AI may be able to generate text, but it cannot engage in real communication because it is not interested in reality and lacks a mutual commitment to truth. AI-generated writing cannot replace human writing, because it does not have the interpersonal and personal element that makes it uniquely human.

Maya and I will thoroughly examine this problem and lead student debates on it during our pathfinding session. We want to help our peers build a greater grasp of the role of AI in the writing profession by fostering critical thinking and reflection in them. We think that this lesson will give our peers an excellent chance to participate in worthwhile debates and deepen their understanding of this crucial subject.

The Limits of AI and the Value of Human Creativity

The article Technology Makes us More Human by Reid Hoffman discusses the different perspectives on the potential impact of ChatGPT, an AI system that can hold human-like conversations. Some people see it as a tool for revolutionizing various industries and creating opportunities for personal fulfillment, while others fear it will lead to job displacement and dehumanization. Hoffman, who sits on the board of OpenAI and co-founded LinkedIn, sees ChatGPT and other technological innovations as a way to improve human progress and empower individuals. He argues that technology is what makes us human and that the values and aspirations we build into technology shape its outcomes. While acknowledging the potential for negative outcomes, he calls for a techno-humanist perspective that seeks to use technology for broad human benefit and envisions a future of human flourishing.

I enjoyed reading through Hoffman’s perspective, especially when he mentions, 

What defines humanity is not just our unusual level of intelligence, but also how we capitalize on that intelligence by developing technologies that amplify and complement our mental, physical, and social capacities. If we merely lived up to our scientific classification—Homo sapiens—and just sat around thinking all day, we’d be much different creatures than we actually are. A more accurate name for us is Homo techne: humans as toolmakers and tool users. The story of humanity is the story of technology. Technology is the thing that makes us us. Through the tools we create, we become neither less human nor superhuman, nor post-human. We become more human.” 

Reid Hoffman, (2023) https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/01/chatgpt-ai-technology-techo-humanism-reid-hoffman/672872/

Technology has played a crucial role in defining and shaping humanity as we know it today. From the discovery of fire and the invention of the wheel to the creation of modern computers and artificial intelligence, our development and use of technology have allowed us to expand our knowledge, enhance our capabilities, and improve our quality of life. Technology has become an inseparable part of our humanity because it has allowed us to overcome our limitations and reach greater heights, and as we continue to develop new technologies, we will continue to evolve and grow. 

That being so, going back to the point I mentioned in my blog post last week. I am not too worried about AI being a threat to writers. While Chat GPT can make the writing process effortless, it shouldn’t be looked upon as a replacement for a writer’s voice and creative input. Instead, it should be looked upon as, for example, when writers experience writer’s block and are looking for that bridge to help connect and identify what ideas they want to come next. It should be used as a tool to help guide writers in the direction they want to go. I believe that the purpose of language is to convey reality and establish a relational connection with other people. AI may be able to generate text and pretty sentences, but it cannot engage in real communication because it is not interested in reality and lacks a mutual commitment to truth. AI-generated writing cannot replace human writing, because it does not have the interpersonal and personal element that makes it uniquely human.

Is the rise of Open AI’s chatbot, ChatGPT, a threat to the livelihoods of human writers?

Photo by Om siva Prakash on Unsplash

For this week’s pathfinding session, the article assigned, Will ChatGPT Replace Human Writers? by Peter Biles, explores whether artificial intelligence (AI) can replace human writers, given the development of technologies like OpenAI’s DALL-E and ChatGPT. Sean Thomas of the Spectator World argues that writers are “screwed” and recommends they quit the craft entirely.

However, Christopher Reid, an academic translator, takes a more balanced approach, suggesting that creative workers will “post-create” by using machines to generate initial ideas that they then refine. However, Reid is concerned about copyright issues and believes AI technicians need to develop a way for human creators to receive dividends when AI mimics their work. The article then goes on to question the reductionist view that writing is merely “algorithmic,” as language serves a two-fold purpose: to convey reality and establish a relational connection with others. Bile suggests that the personal and conversational element of language makes it uniquely human and that AI may never be able to replace human creativity. While AI can generate facts and pretty sentences, it cannot engage in dialogue and lacks a mutual commitment to reality. 

Some critics, such as Sean Thomas, argue that AI will soon be able to outperform human writers in all areas. He suggests that writers should quit the craft entirely, as computers will do it better. However, the article challenges this view, arguing that writing is not simply an automated algorithmic process. The purpose of language is to convey reality and establish a relational connection with other people. AI may be able to generate text, but it cannot engage in real communication because it is not interested in reality and lacks a mutual commitment to truth. AI-generated writing cannot replace human writing, because it does not have the interpersonal and personal element that makes it uniquely human.

The article notes that AI will reduce the cognitive load of creating, allowing creative workers to post-create instead of create. A machine can generate an initial idea, and the artist or writer can then tinker with it to produce a final product. However, the article also raises concerns about copyright issues, particularly for artists, and calls for AI technicians to develop a way for human creators to receive dividends when AI mimics their work.

While AI has an impact on creative work, it will not replace human writers and artists. Instead, the impact is somewhere in the middle, where AI can aid and complement human creativity but never be able to replicate the personal and interpersonal nature of human communication.