0:02 A couple of days ago, I stumbled across
0:04 a video on Tik Tok that started like this.
0:05 this.
0:08 >> How bad's the pain from 1 to 10? [Music]
0:09 [Music] >> 10.
0:11 >> 10. >> Good.
0:12 >> Good.
0:13 >> It's a good hook. It's got sort of an
0:16 analog horror vibe and it stuck with me.
0:18 So much so that I actually scrolled past
0:20 and then I returned. I wanted to know more.
0:20 more.
0:23 >> I think this one's good to go. What do
0:25 you say? This is an episode of the Tik
0:28 Tok series Angel Engine, an analog
0:29 horror series about an angel who
0:31 descends from heaven to come to the
0:33 earth, who's captured, and whose energy
0:35 is harnessed to power the world,
0:38 ushering in an era of prosperity. And
0:41 here's the thing, it's AI.
0:43 Not the writing, not the memorable part,
0:46 but the voices and art isn't made by the
0:48 human hand, it's generated. As AI
0:50 continues to sweep through industries,
0:53 decimating white collar entry-level jobs
0:55 everywhere, it seems like every group is
0:57 waiting with baited breath asking,
0:59 "Well, they can't possibly replace me,
1:01 can they? Can it?" It was announced a
1:03 couple of weeks ago that Amazon was
1:05 investing in a studio dedicated to
1:09 making AI TV and movies. And as the film
1:10 and television industry still hasn't
1:13 fully recovered from the strike, and
1:15 more and more voice acting and graphic
1:17 design jobs are slowly being outsourced
1:19 to AI, there's been at least one
1:21 recurring saving grace. Well, it can't
1:24 make anything good. >> Bye-bye.
1:26 >> Bye-bye. [Music]
1:33 [Music]
1:35 >> If you see her walking alone at night,
1:38 don't stop. Don't speak. just run. She
1:40 is Rokur Kubi.
1:41 >> I mean, it's clearly just a lot of
1:42 garbage, you know, like a whole lot of
1:44 nothing. But as I watched Angel Engine,
1:47 I began to ask myself a question for the
1:49 first time. What if it figures out how
1:51 to make something that's not completely
1:54 terrible? What happens? What will happen
1:57 when AI art is good?
1:59 There's clearly no AI citizen cane yet.
2:01 If you look up best AI art, basically
2:02 everything that comes up is just
2:05 advertisements for products that create
2:07 AI art. As much as I've enjoyed Angel
2:09 Engine, while the art is AI generated,
2:11 the actual story is written and produced
2:14 by an account called Unearly Guy,
2:16 presumably a human. But he got his start
2:18 in the game by producing lots and lots
2:21 of AI content. Stuff like what your
2:22 favorite character would look like as
2:24 Studio Ghibli art. The sort of stuff
2:26 that if you scroll long enough,
2:28 eventually you'll stumble upon. Ever so
2:30 slowly, AI content is beginning to creep
2:32 into our lives. A couple of weeks ago, a
2:33 bunch of people got tricked by that
2:35 video of a bunch of bunnies jumping on a
2:37 trampoline. And in a way, that doesn't
2:39 seem that bad. It's not like everything
2:40 else the average person scrolls through
2:42 is such high caliber. Take the
2:44 environmental concerns away, and is this
2:46 video of a lady jumping into a pool
2:48 really that much worse than all the
2:50 other crap we consume every day? Videos
2:52 of bottles rolling down the stairs, and
2:54 guess which one of us is the drummer? Or
2:56 these couples shooting each other with
2:59 Nerf guns? Or did baby Gronk ri up Livy
3:01 Dune? I don't think there's any depth to
3:04 an AI kitten skydiving, but is there any
3:05 depth to this?
3:08 >> Thanks, bowling ball.
3:20 >> These AI videos feel like to me less of
3:23 a new thing and more of an extension of
3:24 a phenomenon that's been on the rise for
3:27 the last two decades. We as humans are
3:28 consuming more and more entertainment
3:31 and less and less art. 10 years ago, if
3:33 I was bored or lazy, I would watch an
3:35 episode of a TV show or like read a
3:37 comic or something. And now I find
3:39 myself consuming the oh so dreaded
3:42 content. And while you and me both still
3:44 watch good TV shows and movies and read
3:46 good books, the ratio of time we spend
3:48 consuming pure entertainment is gaining
3:51 on art. And it's because the ven diagram
3:53 of art and entertainment is growing
3:55 increasingly distant. For a very long
3:57 time, most of the entertainment that
4:00 people consumed was on some level art.
4:01 While maybe you aren't going to be
4:03 profoundly moved by a Bem movie horror
4:06 flick or an episode of All in the Family
4:08 or Archie comics, each of those was the
4:10 product of hundreds of hours of
4:12 deliberate choices and decisions. Even
4:14 if they were bad, they all represented a
4:16 specific worldview, a specific point of
4:18 view. Even the garbage back then would
4:20 at least have the decency to be
4:21 embarrassed that it was garbage and try
4:23 and defend its quality. So why the
4:25 change? What happened? Before the
4:28 algorithm era, distribution was a hugely
4:30 expensive and time-consuming process.
4:32 Whether it was getting what you made on
4:34 TV or getting published in a magazine,
4:37 it involved logistics in transport and
4:39 convincing gatekeepers to give you a
4:41 shot. And if you were going to invest
4:42 money and time in something, then you
4:44 were incentivized to make it good
4:45 because you didn't have infinite
4:48 chances. But the almighty algorithm has
4:49 essentially made the price of
4:50 distribution so low that it's
4:52 essentially free. You don't even have to
4:54 build a fan base. your stuff will just
4:56 be shown to people which you know has
4:58 its advantages. Thank you to the
5:00 algorithm for you know all of this. So
5:03 now everyone is making stuff all day
5:05 every day. And if you can make hundreds
5:07 of hours of content on your phone for
5:10 free the algorithm incentivizes you to
5:12 do just that. And the price of that is
5:14 that we've become inundated with content
5:17 that lacks complexity, care, or meaning.
5:18 It's not like things like America's
5:20 Funniest Home Videos didn't used to
5:23 exist. But even then the videos were
5:25 curated and there were jokes in between
5:27 and there was a competition format.
5:29 There was no avenue to watch hot knife
5:32 versus random object. And now there is
5:35 and people are watching a lot. As
5:37 distribution costs reach zero and
5:39 production costs reach zero too because
5:41 everybody's got a camera in their pocket
5:44 now. The only real cost left is time.
5:46 And as we offload more and more to AI
5:49 that's disappearing too. Soon you won't
5:51 need to write a sketch or sing a song.
5:53 Now you don't even need to buy a knife.
5:55 And the worrying thing is that we as
5:57 consumers are okay with this. Maybe not
5:59 consciously, but many of these videos
6:01 have millions of views. We're voting
6:03 with our attention. And this is what we
6:05 want. Art and entertainment have become
6:07 decoupled to such an insane extent. So
6:09 much so that even without the human
6:11 fingerprint being involved in it, Angel
6:13 Engine, when I stumble across it, feels
6:15 much more interesting than a lot of the
6:17 other stuff that I'm watching. Is the
6:20 use of AI to make the images really that
6:22 much worse than all the other garbage
6:24 that we see out there? The comments on
6:26 every Angel Engine video seem to think
6:31 so. Uh, and I do too.
6:33 Act two. I'm a big believer in not
6:36 letting robots dream for us. Robots
6:38 cannot reflect the human condition for
6:41 us. Nicholas Cage. Months before I saw
6:43 Angeline, something terrible happened to
6:45 me. Uh, I stumbled across an AI video
6:47 that I liked. It was a video of a bunch
6:49 of AI people responding to the idea that
6:50 they were prompts.
6:52 >> Honestly, the biggest red flag is when
6:54 the guy believes in the prompt theory.
6:57 Like, really? We came from prompts? Wake
6:58 up, man.
7:00 >> Vote for me and I'll ban the prompt
7:03 theory from schools. There's no place
7:05 for that nonsense in our lives. Now, I
7:07 don't know if the script for this was
7:09 generated or whether it was directed by
7:11 a person or what, but I found the video
7:12 interesting. Probably just because it
7:14 was meta in the way that I like. I don't
7:16 have an answer for why I specifically
7:18 thought this one was good and not the
7:20 other ones that I stumbled across. Maybe
7:22 I'm just falling for this meme, which I
7:24 see a lot anytime somebody freaks out
7:26 about AI. Act like you're a scary robot.
7:29 I'm a scary robot. No. And Angeline,
7:31 even though the writing is human, the
7:34 art is made by AI by Midjourney to be
7:36 specific. And I like what I've seen of
7:38 Angel Engine. See, when guided
7:40 correctly, AI is a tool and maybe even a
7:43 tool that can be wielded well. But
7:44 everyone's missing the point with the
7:47 recent discussions around AI art.
7:49 Discussions around AI art need to stop
7:51 focusing on quality. That's not what
7:53 this is about. There's a much more
7:56 important route. That being said, here's
7:58 a really quick discussion about AI art
7:59 and quality. [Music]
8:01 [Music]
8:03 The greatest move in marketing in the
8:05 2020s is the intelligence part of
8:08 artificial intelligence. AI can't think.
8:10 It doesn't. It can't make anything new.
8:12 I mean, what most people consider to be
8:16 AI isn't even named AI. It's an LLM.
8:18 What it really is is just the synthesis
8:20 of billions of words and all of the
8:21 writing of the internet. And what it's
8:24 done is it's made an amazing technically
8:26 impressive autocomplete. A couple of
8:27 months ago, there was a pretty major
8:30 paper released by Apple about AI and
8:31 about how it's not thinking, it just has
8:34 the illusion of thinking. When tasked
8:35 with puzzles, it gave up at a threshold
8:38 that given enough time, you or I could
8:39 figure out. I know we all read things
8:41 all day every day from like the news or
8:43 Twitter about how AI is going to
8:46 revolutionize every single industry. I
8:48 see so many articles quoting like a wild
8:50 prediction from a guy who would make a
8:52 lot of money if that prediction came
8:54 true. Like, oh, Sam Alman, the CEO of
8:57 Chat GPT, thinks that ChatGpt is going
9:00 to be important. Breaking news. Beeper
9:01 salesman predicts big summer for
9:03 beepers. What I'm trying to say is that
9:05 the straits may not be as dire as we
9:07 think. The best AI art that I've come
9:09 across has been only in service of good
9:12 writing. But I think even if that wasn't
9:14 the case, it wouldn't matter. Is Angel
9:16 Engine good because of its use of AI or
9:18 in spite of its use of AI? Doesn't
9:20 matter. If I asked an LLM to generate me
9:22 a movie and it did with a full
9:24 beginning, middle, and end and it popped
9:26 out, wouldn't matter. If I asked AI to
9:28 make me a crime movie and it popped out
9:30 the actual Godfather, it wouldn't
9:33 matter. See, as we cope and frame the
9:35 problems with AI like it's one of
9:37 quality, we seed ground to the enemy by
9:39 allowing them into the arena in the
9:41 first place. We're giving them something
9:43 to fix. Because the problem at the core
9:46 of AI isn't about quality. It's a
9:48 spiritual one.
9:50 Every artistic movement from the
9:51 beginning of time is an attempt to
9:53 figure out a way to smuggle more of what
9:55 the artist thinks is reality into the
9:58 work of art. David Shields. I think at
10:00 best art is an invitation for
10:02 connection. This is what the world looks
10:04 like to me. Come into my living room and
10:07 take a look around. Every proper artist
10:09 is more or less a realist according to
10:12 his own eyes. Zola, the problem with AI
10:14 art is that AI doesn't have eyes. It
10:16 doesn't have a worldview. It has
10:18 amalgamated billions of words and
10:20 millions of pieces of writing into an
10:23 unimaginably large faceless mass. It
10:25 takes whatever sharp edges of human
10:27 experience that we have and it sands it
10:29 down. It filters it through everybody.
10:32 What happens when AI art is good? It
10:34 can't be. It never will be. It's only
10:36 capable of making entertainment. It's
10:39 patently incapable of creating art. All
10:41 of the best art and even the worst art
10:43 is a reflection of the individual or
10:45 individuals. It's why people are
10:48 obsessed with a cinema. People who have
10:50 a singular vision from top to bottom.
10:52 It's why popthe heads make fun of other
10:54 pop singers who don't write their own
10:56 music and venerate their singers for
10:58 writing it all on their own. It's why
11:00 every time Jonathan Franson does an
11:02 interview, all anybody wants to know is
11:04 what part of his writing is reflection
11:06 of his real life upbringing. The most
11:08 interesting part of art has always been
11:10 and always will be the human
11:12 fingerprints that are left behind. The
11:14 problem with AI art is that every piece
11:16 of it is written by committee. It can't
11:19 have a worldview. Angeline's mystique is
11:22 man-made. Its art is just a rehash, a
11:24 boring fimile of Evangelian. The Studio
11:26 Ghibli trend was just a rehash of
11:28 something real. Just as you can tell
11:30 that every time a movie has 15
11:32 screenwriters that it's going to suck,
11:35 AI is just millions of screenwriters on
11:38 everything that you make. Who cares? The
11:40 stylistic developments that AI
11:42 regurgitates back to us, it's patently
11:44 incapable of developing on its own. So
11:47 much of art is found in serendipity.
11:49 Jaws is one of the greatest films of all
11:51 time because of its score and the
11:54 tension generated by a single fin in the
11:55 water. But that's not what Spielberg
11:58 wanted to do. Spielberg wanted to show
11:59 the shark more, but it kept
12:00 malfunctioning. And because of that, he
12:02 had to find a different way to generate
12:04 tension. Instead of showing the shark,
12:06 they hinted at it, increasing the
12:08 tension with that iconic score. And it
12:10 worked. He went on to say that shark not
12:13 working was a godsend. That could never
12:15 happen with AI. A John Williams score
12:17 can be regurgitated by it, but it can
12:19 never be originated by it. In my
12:21 opinion, the best bits, the best jokes
12:23 are when somebody says something and you
12:25 think, "Oh, how did I never think of
12:27 that?" When somebody crystallizes a
12:29 universal human experience and puts it
12:31 into words for the first time. Language
12:33 models can't do that. They'll never be
12:35 able to push any mediums forward because
12:37 what human experience do they have to
12:39 offer? What insight?
12:42 They literally can't notice things. So
12:44 much great art and artistic progress
12:46 happens through people who push the
12:48 boundaries forward. And while yes,
12:50 humans are beings that create things
12:52 based off of synthesis, they're all
12:53 filtered through our unique human
12:56 experience. If you and I both watch the
12:57 Super Bowl, we're going to both
12:59 experience the exact same thing
13:01 completely differently depending on who
13:04 we are and what teams we root for. An AI
13:05 can only make things based off of stuff
13:07 that other people have already made. It
13:09 can't make anything new. It's just like
13:11 a big game of telephone and so much is
13:14 lost in the process. When people
13:16 emphasize that AI can't make quality
13:18 art, they're moving the goalposts.
13:20 They're letting it into the arena. And
13:21 if you're like, "Yeah, okay, whatever.
13:23 AI can't make art, but it can make
13:24 entertainment. Isn't that distinction
13:26 super pretentious?" Uh, and to that I
13:29 say, yes, it is. But I also think it's important.
13:31 important. [Music]
13:32 [Music]
13:34 Every few months, I see a new study pop
13:36 up polling American and Chinese
13:38 children, and it's always like, "The
13:39 average Chinese 8-year-old wants to be
13:42 an astronaut, and the average American
13:44 child wants to be a movie star, and this
13:47 is why we're falling behind." W But as
13:48 somebody who's been paying attention to
13:50 these for years, I think there's a much
13:52 more interesting trend in place. In the
13:54 past decade, American children's dreams
13:57 of being a rock star or a movie star
13:59 have been replaced with dreams of being
14:02 a YouTuber or an influencer. And while
14:03 those are similar in some ways, I think
14:05 it's an important distinction. For a
14:07 long time, if you were a kid and you
14:09 dreamed about fame or prestige, it came
14:12 at the end of a craft or a work. A dream
14:15 of being a movie star just by byproduct
14:17 involves a dream of being part of the
14:19 creation of a movie. A rock star
14:22 involves being musical. The fame is an
14:24 extension of an act. The children, even
14:26 if not consciously, are still dreaming
14:29 of being artists. But what is a YouTuber
14:31 or an influencer? Not that there aren't
14:33 high quality artistically valuable
14:34 things happening on those platforms, but
14:37 I don't think that's most of what it is.
14:38 And I don't think that's part of the
14:40 dream. I'm always astounded by the
14:42 amount of people on the YouTube
14:44 subreddits talking about faceless
14:45 channels and niches. It's like, why are
14:47 you even doing this? The dreams of our
14:50 children represent our societal values.
14:52 Just as presumably the children of
14:55 Sparta dreamed about glory in combat and
14:58 the children in medieval England dreamed
15:00 about being landed gentry, the switch
15:02 from our kids dreaming about making art
15:04 to dreaming about making entertainment
15:07 or content is indicative of a larger
15:09 societal trend. We're downstream of
15:11 something. How much longer until our
15:13 children stop dreaming of making their
15:15 own entertainment and start dreaming
15:17 about asking a robot to make it for
15:20 them? Act three. But Paul
15:22 But Paul, you say, "I'm a human. I'm not
15:25 a robot. I've got a worldview. I can
15:27 mold and prompt this robot to do
15:29 whatever I want it to do. It's just a
15:31 tool. A hammer can't dream, but does
15:33 that make the house that it builds count
15:35 for less?" And to that I say, "Good
15:36 question." But let me answer with a
15:38 really long anecdote. A couple of months
15:40 ago, I was hanging out with this girl
15:41 and we were both getting some work done
15:43 on our laptops. I was working on a
15:45 thumbnail and she was working on some
15:47 schoolwork for college. And I looked
15:49 over and she was like, "Haha, don't
15:51 judge me." And she was copying and
15:54 pasting her homework into chat GPT and
15:56 then posting the answers. And it's like,
15:58 yeah, she doesn't care about an
16:00 astronomy 101 class that she's taking
16:02 just cuz she needs the credit. And her
16:04 teacher doesn't care about some minor
16:06 homework assignment for an introlevel
16:08 community college course. So, like, why
16:10 not? Why not use it? I saw a really
16:12 fascinating graph showing chat GPT use
16:14 declined dramatically when summer break
16:17 began. And I've seen so many articles
16:19 about how both students and teachers are
16:21 relying on it all day every day. How
16:23 teachers are using it to create and
16:25 grade assignments and how students are
16:27 using it to complete those assignments.
16:29 And I've been thinking about that
16:31 astronomy homework a lot cuz this was a
16:33 really smart, well- readad woman who I
16:35 really respected. But here she was
16:37 telling her prompt, "Write it like a
16:40 23-year-old. Make sure not to use any M
16:43 dashes." just so that she could convince
16:45 her robot to trick her teacher's robot
16:48 into thinking it was human. Even if AI
16:51 is a tool, it costs us something. It
16:53 detracts from our humanity. And maybe
16:55 that's a price you're willing to pay for
16:58 homework, but for art, for everything.
16:59 One of the challenges with discussions
17:02 around AI is that it's so broad and it
17:04 covers so many bases. So much of what we
17:07 think about as AI is just an algorithm
17:08 that's been brushed up for marketing
17:10 purposes. What does the work gain from
17:12 you meticulously cutting a guy out of
17:14 the background compared to just pressing
17:17 the remove background button? Probably
17:19 nothing. But generative AI using it to
17:21 make something from scratch, skipping to
17:23 the end result without any of the middle
17:26 parts. I know this is silly, but I think
17:28 so much about the movie Click. Adam
17:30 Sandler gets a remote that lets him
17:32 pause and skip time. So, he begins to
17:33 use it to get through fights with his
17:36 wife or stressful days at work or boring
17:38 dance recital. And what ends up
17:40 happening is his remote picks up on his
17:42 patterns and begins automatically
17:44 skipping through those moments. By the
17:46 end of the movie, Adam Sandler can't
17:48 stop it and his remote skips through all
17:50 of his life, the stress, the negative,
17:52 and the positive. It's a shockingly
17:54 moving film for a movie that also
18:03 If we offload the pinnacle of human
18:05 experience and wealth, the opportunity
18:08 to get to express oneself and create
18:10 something, then what are we doing? Our
18:12 fathers were soldiers and farmers, so we
18:14 could be lawyers and doctors, so our
18:16 children could be artists and poets,
18:19 John Adams. We're greatly privileged to
18:22 get to act and write and sing and create
18:23 things. And if we're willing to skip to
18:25 the end of that, too, then what are we
18:28 here for? generate me a painting and
18:29 then, you know, let's turn on an AI TV
18:32 show and let's get a drone to bring us
18:34 food and, you know, I'll text my chat
18:35 GPT girlfriend on my phone. Let's just
18:37 let's just get rid of all the human
18:38 parts of the human experience. Let's
18:41 just skip right to the end.
18:43 There's a quote from Marcus Aurelius
18:44 that I love, and it's a long one, but
18:48 it's worth it. At dawn, when you have
18:49 trouble getting out of bed, tell
18:51 yourself, "I have to go to work as a
18:53 human being. What do I have to complain
18:55 of if I'm going to do what I was born
18:58 for, the things I was brought into the
19:00 world to do? Or is this what I was
19:01 created for, to huddle under the
19:04 blankets and stay warm? So, you were
19:06 born to feel nice instead of doing
19:08 things and experiencing them. Don't you
19:10 see the plants, the birds, the ants, and
19:12 spiders and bees going about their
19:14 individual tasks, putting the world in
19:17 order as best they can, and you're not
19:19 willing to do your job as a human being?
19:20 Why aren't you running to do what your
19:23 nature demands? You don't love yourself
19:25 enough or you'd love your nature too and
19:28 what it demands of you. As evidenced by
19:30 the decline of its use during the summer
19:33 break, AI is primarily a cheating tool.
19:35 But it's not just cheating school. It's
19:37 cheating you out of your ability and
19:39 your opportunity to be human. The thing
19:41 with AI art is the only one losing out
19:44 is you. AI will make art accessible for
19:47 everyone. It already was. Every time you
19:50 choose to use AI to skip to the end, the
19:53 only one losing out is yourself. If you
19:55 can't write or sing or act or dance or
19:58 dream anymore, you're denying your own
20:02 nature. What are you here for?
20:05 And I'm torn on Angeline. Unearly Guide
20:08 the Creator confuses me. His backlog of
20:10 work prior to Angel Engine is almost all
20:13 AI slop, Studio Ghibli stuff, and like
20:14 uh this is what your favorite character
20:16 would look like in a different art
20:19 style. But Angel Engine is good. And
20:21 even if it's not your cup of tea or you
20:24 like much more niche, hip analog horror
20:26 than I do, it's something. It's
20:28 interesting, and people are connecting
20:30 with it. Is it the creator's
20:32 responsibility to not use AI visuals,
20:34 even if maybe the visual arts aren't
20:35 something they're passionate about or
20:37 interested in? If they can't afford to
20:40 pay a creator, is it their moral duty to
20:42 not create anything at all? I don't
20:45 know. I can't offer an answer that's
20:46 completely satisfying because it turns
20:49 out life is complicated. It's not that
20:51 AI isn't convenient or that it can't be
20:54 useful, but it's a pact with the devil.
20:56 How much of your humanity are you
20:59 willing to outsource, to sell off? Angel
21:01 Engine is such a fascinating example
21:03 because it's about technological
21:05 overreach. It's about the price that
21:07 humanity pays to achieve progress. An
21:09 angel descends from heaven, something
21:11 that exists beyond our wildest
21:14 imaginations. And the way humans use it
21:16 sacrifices our own humanity. Like the
21:18 kid who can no longer figure out how to
21:20 complete an assignment without chat GBT,
21:22 or the lawyer who can't figure out how
21:24 to send an email with that one, or the
21:26 programmer who's lost when he runs out
21:28 of tokens. Where is the end of the
21:31 slippery slope? And usually these sorts
21:33 of videos end with somebody being like,
21:35 "The world is terrible. Everything's
21:37 going down the toilet. We can never go
21:39 back." So rarely do these sorts of
21:41 videos have like a happy ending, but
21:43 this one does. Every top comment on
21:45 Angel Engine videos are people
21:47 criticizing the use of AI. Almost all
21:49 the discussions around it aren't about
21:51 the series itself, but about its use of
21:53 artificial intelligence. And now,
21:55 finally, the creator has commissioned a
21:57 real artist to make the visuals for the
21:59 series. The most recent episode is
22:02 man-made. That's a win generated by us,
22:04 by cultural pressure, by people
22:06 believing in something and believing in
22:09 the human experience. And look, I've
22:12 used AI before. Not a ton, but I was
22:14 fascinated by it. I was curious about
22:17 it. And I bet you've used it, too. But
22:19 as I've thought more and more deeply
22:21 about it, I've decided I'm done with it.
22:23 I'm swearing off of it. In a world where
22:25 everyone else is becoming less human, is
22:28 outsourcing the point of all of this to
22:30 something else, there's an actual
22:33 solution, and it's you and me. You don't
22:34 need to be perfect, and you don't need
22:36 to have been. But every time you choose
22:39 not to use AI, you're making a decision
22:41 to be more human than the other people
22:43 who are letting it diminish their own
22:46 human experience. I can ask AI to
22:48 generate me a an image of a cave
22:49 painting and it will be technically
22:51 complex. But there is nothing more
22:53 meaningful to me than images of this
22:57 cave painting. It's just hands on walls,
23:00 but it's so powerful. We were here. We
23:03 were alive. So go make art and write a
23:05 song and make a puppet and wear a
23:08 costume. the the poem that you wrote in
23:10 your notes app 6 months ago will tipsy
23:12 outside of a bar. That terrible,
23:15 terrible poem is worth literally 10,000
23:18 times more artistically than any poem or
23:20 piece of anything generated by a robot
23:23 ever will be. Art is a celebration of
23:25 your life. So go out there and make
23:32 Special thanks to John Howard, Parker
23:35 Burgett, and JP King, my patreons. Yes,
23:37 I started a Patreon account. These
23:39 videos take a lot of time to make
23:41 because I do it all by myself. So, if
23:43 you want to support me being able to
23:45 keep doing this, go give that a check
23:47 out. Um, these videos will release a
23:48 couple days before and there's some
23:50 extra stuff on there that I think is
23:52 fun. Um, but thank you guys so much for
23:55 watching. Please like and subscribe. Um,
23:58 and have a great day. Go have fun
Chrome Extension