Generative AI | Love it, hate it or leverage it?

The conversations around generative AI and Chat GPT remain impassioned & emotive. But how are the experts suggesting we leverage the assistive benefits to serve us in our humanity? And will machine learning trump human agency?

I am writing this - hot off the press - from The Franschhoek Literary Festival; an annual event and gathering place for authors, writers, readers and poets, (and wannabe authors, writers, readers and poets). This is my first time attending and it’s hard not to be affected by the enthusiastic hive of activity and energy. The location, in my opinion, is one of the prettiest in South Africa and we can be hugely proud of the historical and preserved beauty of the buildings and surrounds. (You can’t really afford to buy anything here, but so be it, coffee and the setting will do just fine). 

Back to the conversation at hand and the reason you clicked to read. One of the talks I signed up for was titled, ‘I Spy With My Little AI.’ (Catchy). 

A panel of 3 astute authors and experts in the field - Steven Boykey Sidley, Arthur Goldstuck and Kerushan Govender - weighed in with their unique observations, opposing views, industry experiences and personal insights. 

Here's the scoop: beyond the techy lingo and geeky jargon, the topic of AI stirs strong emotions. 

(Disclaimer: I haven’t read any of their books; this is merely my takeaway from a stimulating and passionate discussion among 3 accomplished gurus in academia and business). 

Exploring transformative technology - i.e. generative AI - through various lenses is fascinating. Views are varied, starting points are extreme and conclusions can be flawed. And no matter your association or experimentation with Open AI and Chat GPT, the hype is real and the reality is both exciting and scary. Also, no-one is disputing the astonishing rate at which AI innovation is moving, 

Kerushan - to me the most measured, refreshing and ‘logical’ of the 3 - is of the persuasion that humans are intrinsically special and that AI will never have the intellectual capacity to go beyond the human trifactor of observation, resourcefulness and creativity. His technical pièce de résistance viewpoint - ignoring religious and nonreligious nuances - is that at its core, generative AI is separate from humans. 

His logic is as follows: 

• AI architecture is constructed on historical data sets; what is already out there. 

• It then goes and finds patterns in existing data and makes ‘judgements’ on that available data it has access to at that moment in time. 

• The data points and information it computes are based on the past ;what is already out there and known contexts.

• Human beings, on the other hand, ‘compute’ by assigning a future ambition, goal or desire to their personal contexts. 

• Humans are compelled to a mission and have aspirations that are contrary to a given contextual or experiential data set. 

“Human beings can invent and envision a brand new future independent of, and despite, our pasts.” -Kerushan Govender

Arthur was quick to counter this, mentioning evolving history, and Steven was quite bold with his more anthropomorphic arrogance, purporting that AI will be able to surpass humans. (But as moderator, he was required to show much restraint).

The discussion then turned a tad intellectual, touching on Geopolitics, the AI ‘arms’ race and the speculation that AI could determine global power: “He who owns AI owns the world.”  

Once again, Kerushan’s reasoned voice stepped in saying that, at this stage, Open AI - the owner of Chat GPT - doesn’t know how its algorithm produces answers and that this assumption is what beautiful nightmares are made of. He reminded us that we really have more important things to worry about and focus on in our country. (Hear, hear).

For me, the valuable and helpful takeaway from this type of discussion comes down to the following: How do we exploit generative AI technologies to assist us in the real world and serve us as humans? 

• By recognising AI as ARTIFICIAL intelligence with limitations constrained by current computing power, our starting point is to leverage it as ASSISTIVE intelligence. 

• Take advantage of AI tools to make you more productive and save you the time of undertaking mundane assignments..

• See it as a tour de force when it comes to research, summarising, brainstorming and ideation. 

• Leave the strategic analysis and interpretative nuances to humans - but let AI do the groundwork and heavy lifting. 

• Free up time in your day by using it cleverly to take care of monotonous  admin tasks. 

• Leverage the transcription powers of Chat GPT - especially on your phone - for remarkably accurate output as it beautifully organises, rearranges and makes sense of your voice input.

Of course, when the floor was opened for questions, the one on all our minds related to the world of blogging and writing. (Knowing my personal views on this, I was poised for the answer). 

I appreciated both Kerushan’s and Arthur’s considered viewpoints on this; and they should know. 

Kerushan pointed out that AI will only impact writing jobs that are based purely on word count. But most brands and businesses are looking for people who produce content imbued with ingenuity and creative nuances. There is no replacement for the human touch when it comes to writing compelling, relatable and engaging content that is masterful and offers dynamic opinions, angles, perspectives and insights. Content that resonates so deeply with an audience it has the ability to stir in them laughter, tears, compassion or rage; or simply make them pause at the immense power of the written word. Writing that connects with authenticity to the greater human experience.

After all, human beings are designed to appreciate excellence; the human eye is looking for beauty and greatness. 

To the discerning critic and seasoned writing mind, the mediocrity of AI content is undisputed. 

Arthur’s takeaway - which really resonated with me as a writer - was just as profound: “AI makes bad writers average, keeps average writers average and makes good writers average.” (Love it).

There you have it. 

Despite 3 opposing minds having it out on stage, I walked away from the conversation with a newfound respect for AI’s potential and a deeper appreciation for human emotion, intuition and creativity. (Even though a machine can learn, it lacks emotions). 

AI will never represent the humanity that makes us feel deeply.

So, have fun with it and exploit it. Go ahead and let it analyse your facial features to determine how much caffeine should be in your coffee to counteract your fatigue, but value the wonder of the human connection with the barista who actually makes it for you.

The bottom line? Power to the human mind and power to human agency.

---

Arthur Goldstuck is the author of The Hitchhiker’s’ Guide to AI

Kerushan Govender is the author of Age of Agency | Rise with AI