ChatGPT (Did Not Write This Blog)

I tested out ChatGPT a couple weeks ago and gave it a shot, but the story that it churned out was boring and a little weird. Later on, I combed through Google and read a report about someone who had used AI to self-publish a children's story, but it hasn't gone very far. It's not that surprising if you know about publishing.

The publishing industry is complicated, but they definitely don't want someone running up to them with an unsolicited AI manuscript. Hey look Ma, I'm a writer too! Publish me, I spent five minutes asking AI to write this crappy story — uh nope. 

I know I'm putting a damper on things, when so many people are excited about ChatGPT but I'm just not impressed so far. It's good enough at some things but the hype is misleading, and it's a mistake to be relying on it for anything important. For example, the other day at work, when things were slow, one of my colleagues tested out Adobe Firefly (a new AI imaging program) and said how much he loves it. He consistently pulled me over to see what he had produced. 

"Yes," I said, "its great, but it's low res so I can't use it for print, and and I really can't copyright it." 

He ignores this."Look here," he said, "look at this cool blue and gold background I made." 

I look.  "Its cool. Maybe I could use that as a background of a jewelry catalog? Have no idea how I would use it." (Thinking I would use iStock instead since its high res.)

That's a big issue. Image generators like Midjourney or NightCafe charge 3 credits to output a 0.8 megapixel image (896 x 896) so you can't use it for print, like posters, T-Shirts or signs which need high res images. Nothing you do in Adobe Firefly can be copyrighted, because it's already using royalty free images to do the work. The U.S. Copyright Office (USCO) has stated that AI-generated images are not protectable under current copyright law, as they “are not the product of human authorship.”

Take my opinion for what its worth but if you change the image enough you can copyright it- although I'm not sure how much tweaking that would actually take. It seems to me, that images are easier to produce with an original idea, instead of trying to get around copyright infringement. One good part of AI imaging that I do like (throwing in some positives here) is on images you've originally produced, there is a new AI fill in photoshop- so if you wanted to make a horizontal image vertical, or a vertical image horizontal, there is a new fill feature which works incredibly well. 

Back to ChatGPT, now college students have used it to cheat on tests. Students are adopting this high technology to avoid learning. I don't see this as an indicator of a failing education system - I see this as typical behavior of students. There will always be students who try to cheat, and today - they have found a new way to cheat.  Too bad ChatGPT did not have the foresight to see this coming. Now we'll need something that detects ChatGPT. Then there will be something that makes the detector detected, and then the detected detector detected. Until ChatGPT becomes old news and everyone switches over to the latest program without detection. 

I'll just reiterate what I've always believed when it comes to the arts such as graphic design, writing, photography, or different types of fine art. Computers are a tool, and AI is powerful, but they can't help you think of WHAT to do. They can only help us HOW do to something. Maybe someday I'll make use if it, but honestly – I would be more excited to have a NAO robot in the house, or a Tesla :)

#ChatGPT