After watching the documentary and reading the article assigned for this blog I can only help but ask myself “where is the fun!?” I guess working hard at things isn’t too much fun to people – not everyone likes to organize their record collection in protective plastic sleeves alphabetically and continuously take part in the maintenance that is required to “respectably” house a collection nearing 500, or however many I own. I think that this is all part of the joy and love that I have for record collecting, the tangibility of it all. Sure, convenience is nice and accessibility is great for many, some need it just to be able TO DO.

I’m fortunate enough to have working everything (I’m certain, if anything lacks let me know). So why not try to enhance the act of doing the thing rather than enhance the capabilities of ease in which that thing can be achieved?

I don’t think that machine and vinyl would go well together in the practice of an AI de-dusting, and whatnot, maybe – I doubt it. I wouldn’t trust my rare marble pressed copy of Kate Bush’s ‘Hounds of Love’ with it. No way. But then there comes the element of physical storytelling. To me there is a human quality (to more reference the article, whereas I was more so referencing the documentary prior) that is unparalleled to what an AI can accomplish.

I care so much for Will Ospreay’s crushing defeat to Kenny Omega because the story told, while predetermined in outcome, the consequences of defeat is real to WILL OSPREAY. Everything he expresses in the post-match press conference happened to him. An AI cannot replicate that. I don’t care about whatever it endures according to its programming, it doesn’t either. Will Ospreay is such a fascinating character, person, and professional wrestler because HE does what HE does.

The first four minutes of this interview, featuring Ospreay, represent professional wrestling in as real of an emotive state as it gets. Blood, sweat, tears, sacrifice.

When the AI beat the humans 4-1 in that Go game, and all of the tech people were cheering it like a legitimate victory, I cringed. Why are we so obsessed with our tools? I don’t cherish that copy of ‘Hounds of Love’ because of it being a tool that plays music, I care because of the human art it contains. The 12″x12″ art print that houses the record, is a beautiful photograph compositionally and contextually in-relation to the art housed. Vinyl is a cool tool and all, but the experience is one that is tangible. Getting a computer to make music for you is not, at least in a romanticized sort of essence that I’m leaning towards.

Getting an AI to draw experiences from is questionable to me too, it is fun, and may enlighten research and whatnot, but where is the authenticity of influence being acquired there? When I sample ideas from film and music in my work – professional wrestling, whatever – I am sampling from the lexicon of my own perspective, and those around me.

Depeche Mode/New Order/Brand New/Converge/etc. all represent the record store clerks that I used to hang out with as a teen at Vintage Vinyl in Fords, or the teachers that would guide me through my high school journey. All of this represents a part of me. I might take from it, but it’s based off of the environment that has crafted my own life. An AI is not my life.

Some Quotes From the Documentary that Made Me Churn:

“A driverless truck would not have that limitation.”

“I wish i had drawn that graph.”

“Overcoming the limitations of our minds.”

An Interview With Minoru Suzuki that Makes My Soul Flutter:

“Interviewer — I see.

Suzuki: Do you, though? Look at what makes a great wrestler. Tall, muscular, can kick, can throw hands, can suplex people, can tap them out, can fly, is charismatic. Get all that together and you have a cleanup hitter. That’s the kind of guy that makes hacks like you, or the fans in the crowd give them the nod.

Interviewer –Right. The total package.

Suzuki: But make an all star team of guys like that, and they’re the most boring team in the league. These days, you can make your own characters in the videogames, right?

Interviewer –Yes, they have edit modes.

Suzuki: So some kid with their video game goes and makes their dream promotion, and it’s full of those aces right? But a baseball team that’s full of cleanup hitters won’t go anywhere. It’s the same for wrestling promotions.

Interviewer –So, even though he was successful in the major American leagues, Jon Moxley is by no means the total package as a wrestler, in your opinion.

Suzuki: It’s a bit of a paradox, but it’s because of that he got chances in WWE. There’s nobody else like him, right? Nobody in the majors in America is like him. So he stands out. Nobody gets that.

Look. An absolute all-round perfectionist, the perfect complete player, tens in every category? Not even Tanahashi is that. Naito isn’t that. They don’t exist.

Interviewer –Those slants, the weaknesses make strengths stand out, and made Moxley stand out.

Suzuki: Hehehe… Everyone in this business is a mark, you included. You fans have this idea of ratings, of skill points. You put all those points in a hexagon graph and calculate an average; ‘oh he’s a good wrestler, over 80 overall’. BS. Who the hell will pay money to buy a ticket, and see a guy who’s a perfect hexagon, 8 out of 10 or above in all areas? The guy with zero overall, the guy who can’t do anything at all, he’s a better draw.

Interviewer –Moxley is a unique breed? Organic, you mean? Real?

Suzuki: Why is Lance Archer popular? Why does Zack Sabre Junior have the support he does? Because there’s stuff they can’t do. Nobody in this goddamn business understands that. Wrestlers don’t understand that. Trainers, people teaching these kids don’t understand that for crying out loud!

Interviewer –The system wants to create all rounders.

Suzuki: So the kids go in, and they train, and their trainers find what the gaps are in their games, and they try to fill those gaps right up. So you have this perfectly smooth, grey lump of boring trash. Fill in those holes on a wrestler and there’s no way in hell he’s filling seats with asses. It’s up to us to make people talk, to make them disagree. Make them argue. So Moxley? It’s because he can’t do s**t that he’s a good wrestler.

Interviewer –So you actually rate him quite highly?

Suzuki: He has something very special about him.”

Interview Link: https://www.njpw1972.com/71601

Alrighty, so for those of you who have been following this blog in the past, cool. For those of you new to me (I hope that there are a few) I’m Brandon. Most of my friends call me by whatever insulting name comes to mind – that’s our sense of humor. You can call me WHATEVER you want, I like personable, unique, nicknames.

I’m a huge film/music/professional wrestling nut (you’ll see constant references to each throughout this blog if you pay close attention), and really wear my interests on my sleeve. I really dig expression and boldness, and never understood why people reserve themselves. It’s weird. If someone is going to like you allow them the opportunity to like you for you, otherwise the relationship (in whatever form it takes) is probably going to crack much easier.

Besides all that I’m quite impulsive and hyper and whatnot, but I don’t necessarily view that as as negative as I did as a kid. I think over time you tend to work with those kinds of details and refine them to be positive factors of your ability/personality. Still, I find that I grate people sometimes. Like how run-on my writing can be and how scattered my ideas are expressed here, such is essentially a representation of how I speak in real time.

Oh, vulgarity! I can be pretty vulgar too. I’ve always been a big fan of shock-schlock. I love old exploitation films and really questionable corners of the music world. I’m still waiting for some super ironic GG Allin TikTok resurgence. Not because I’m a huge fan of Allin, or even his music, but because I think that Irony is A bit of Dead Scene, and like to laugh at how absurd it gets – even if those causing it are completely unaware/unironic.

As for this course I’m pretty excited for it. The students that I already know I think are an enlightened and engaging bunch, and my new peers seem like the kind to bring a different perspective to the table. The content itself seems to be pretty intriguing – especially the focus on artificiality in the sense that I want to look closer regarding how near or far such a thing really is to our own human core.

Ok, after reading the article and watching the documentary, many things come to mind and I say, wow, the world is crazy, we fly away. I still remember when I was in the second semester, we were talking to some engineering colleagues about how technology facilitated everything to which they answered yes, that almost all jobs are going to be replaced by machines and we graduates said that education could not be replaced by machines, because it needs interaction between people capable of enabling a relationship between teaching and learning.  Then I said literature and writing, or writer’s work can’t be replaced, but then I remembered a page that edited texts, another that made summaries and I said, yes, we’re all going to be replaced. Today I do not think that we are going to be replaced in the jobs (which is where there is a greater concern), but that technology will allow optimizing processes because there will already be 2 minds that think about how to do everything better. As for the writing and the article, I agree that AI helps the writer with writer’s blocking or facilitating writing, I do not consider that AIs should be judged or demonized, we must recognize that you must have control of them, and more control has it is easier to use them. The important thing is not what technology does or does with us, it is what we can do through it for the benefit of others.

On the other hand, every time I listen to AI, the image of the movie I, Robot comes to mind, and it scares me. I also think about algorithms, how they know everything about us (what we make known), and how easy it is to deliver our information without even recognizing the risks, here I wonder, are we living in freedom?

However, it’s not all bad, just while listening to the documentary I saw a post on Instagram from NATGEO where it showed that Japan introduced a variety of approaches and technologies to adapt again to the elderly population and make them feel useful and in the community.

Before the start of this semester I had seen a video or two on TikTok about AI and how college students were using it for writing. I wasn’t too sure what it was and didn’t do any further research but thought it was pretty cool. This weeks reading and documentary gave great insight on AI and gave a better understanding as to what it is and what it does.

I find this way of writing or this tool of writing I don’t disagree with AI or dislike it, I do feel and believe that AI can be a helpful tool when it comes to writing but not the only tool. I personally don’t want to see the human touch disappear from writing completely. It can be a great way to get things started if it is difficult.

as for the documentary I find that AI can be very beneficial in so many ways but again I say it would be greta as an extra tool and not so much as what completely takes over everything. Im very interested to learn more about it and how it can be beneficial in all aspects.

Can we trust them with our writing? Whenever I want feedback on my writing, I have to show it to someone who cares. Someone who will read and interpret it in their own way and tell me what worked for them or where it loses them. While I think AI hasn’t reached up to that point yet, its input seems to be a helpful tool…to an extent.

However, there’s no authentic connection on that other side and I think that’s too important to let go of. The articles mentions, “But when a computer ends up changing what the writer set out to achieve, writers may start to wonder whether their vision is getting muddied by an entity that lacks any experience with the real world.“

That experience and emotion is just as important in collaboration as it is in the writing process itself, in my opinion. It’s the best (and worst) part of being human. I want my work to connect with people who resonate with words I put out and, if some of those words are AI-generated, how do I know whether or not they give off the authenticity I strive for?

Towards the end, they discuss the eye of the beholder aka the reader. Again, going back to the importance of connection, the reader and the writer are truly the only entities who are able to detect what is derived from genuine emotion versus what is artificially produced. That line may be blurred as AI improves but, as long as the intention of the writer is still visible, that human connection remains irreplaceable.

AI has become more noticeable in our everyday lives and sometimes, it’s helpful and other times it’s not. The article, “AI Reveals the Most Human Parts of Writing” talks about how some writers use an AI as a writing companion. The AI would help generate ideas by giving prompts or paragraphs that may inspire the writer. Though there is a downside to AI, and that is that it may not give useful prompts or paragraphs.

That’s just one example of AI. In the documentary, “In the Age of AI”, they outlined different ways AI was being used in China. One being that it would send people tickets when they jaywalked. That usage can be beneficial, however, there have been times in the past when people (mostly minorities) were falsely identified. Granted, in the documentary, the AI seemed to be able to analyze people’s faces to an extent that it was sure of who it was viewing. But then what if someone has an identical twin? Will it be able to distinguish between the two the way humans do?

I see how AI will be beneficial in everyday life. Even I use an AI everyday. But I feel like there will always be a need for humans. Whether that’s verifying what the AI claims or doing what the AI can’t, or even teaching the AI how to be more human. It will need help, at least for now.

Both the documentary and reading were both helpful and insightful to further dive into the subject of AI. Not sure if I have been living under a rock or something but being back in school for my second semester of graduate school, this is my first introduction of AI. I did have one student tell me one day that a system did write his paper, I was confused. With the lack of knowledge of these online tools, I had just assumed that the software had edited his paper for him to make it better. Little did I know.

I am not fully against computer systems. While there are more cons’ than pros’ of course, I do feel like in a way AI can benefit writers, if used correctly. But with everything in life, everything needs to be used with moderation. I like that in the reading there was a distinct message that compares what a creator and an artist is. This is important. While AI systems can be compared to ghost writers, AI still generates writing at a low bar. The artist/writer still needs to build and work on what was created. AI systems really can mostly push and help with any writers block one may have, and I feel like that’s what it mainly should be used for. Computer systems are trained to predict what comes next. And just like that YA author who was writing a fantasy novel and used AI, as we can predict, AI does not always have the best predictions itself of what should come next. The system should be used with a grain of salt, it may be helpful and it may inspire other ideas within yourself that was pushed.

I agree with HOLLYMAHOGANY, AI does loose that human touch. While it can be a great and helpful tool for writers and artists, it will still never be as creative as a human can be. In my opinion at least. While the tool can be there and used when needed, I don’t think it’s a system creators should primarily be fixated on using. It should be there as tool of recourse, not a tool for creativity.

I found both the reading and video great introductions to the AI world, how far technology has come, and how far can it go in advancements.

Starting I felt AI introduces a conversation that compares what exactly a creator is and what an artist is. I feel a lot of people in this era create content on the internet and are able to captivate their particular audience. When I think of artist I think of Da Vinci with the Mona Lisa and he actually created something others have been inspired by of many years. It was his original thought that sparked many creators to put a spin on his work. This idea may become blinded at some point when it comes to AI in the near future.

It was mentioned that China will soon have a lead against the U.S. when it comes to AI technology by the year 2025. The reason being is they have a leg up when it comes to data and information they are getting from their vast population. They have 10x more data being pressed through AI technology than the U.S., and this is simply because they have a wider population and are able to have the majority using it. They have started using AI as ways to rank what type of citizen you will, or can be.

“Black Mirror” on net flicks has an episode in season 3 that shows this exact method China is using, and exactly how it leads different in the society to the way they chose to live. This community used ratings for housing, travel, and other life necessities that could affect your economic status in America. The main characters whole goal was at first to buy the house of her dreams, and lived like some of her “friends” were. Her rating was lower than those who brought property in that area, so she tried her best to raise her score by getting likes from those around her, and trying to be more interactive with the social part of their society. It drove her crazy, and really showed me how very soon everything will be using this AI technology to take away the “Human Experience”.

The true voice of authors, writers, musicians, and artist are that they were able to make personal connections with an audience that they can keep engaging with. I feel with AI this enters the ideas of just creating content as opposed to actually making it. It loses the human touch that is always needed, because as humans we have something machines can never have, and that is Empathy. This is why movies like M3Gan end with the robot wanting to destroy humans and companions no matter how much information you download in them, or how close you get them to be with a human. Machines lack the human emotion of having empathy for the world around you, and that isn’t something they have mentioned in the AI development process.

Hi, I’m Edna, I’m 23 years old and I have a very long name. I like classical music, Goya and writing things that are a bit existential. I like photography (black and white), going for a walk and sitting in parks. I am of few words, but I try. I like to dance to Greek music, salsa, merengue, or whatever.