Specifically re: Larian getting tomatoes thrown at them over mild, 'backend' AI use and not ad agencies, Rocket Mortgage, etc. --
I agree that 1) people care viscerally about disruption to the arts and not to commercial content but also want to add 2) people yell at who they think will listen. Brands that people affiliate with their own identities, whether game-makers, indie streaming platforms, fashion houses, etc. are perceived as 'extra accountable', reactive, likely to respond to online invectives.
It's why people pressure seemingly random tiny arthouse presses to come out with special anti-AI statements.
The biggest problem this ongoing furor causes is not, you know, all the anti-AI cancel mobs...
but that if the prestigious creative class is against generative XYZ medium, the best aspiring creatives in that medium will also avoid AI tools. If you're trying to make a tool or a platform for AI games, AI movies, AI music, whatever, you're going to instead systematically attract casual dilettantes and find it much much harder to build any real creative ecosystem.
Really good point, and well stated. Being "against AI" is not doing anybody any good at this stage. I think you can be skeptical, reluctant, just resigned. You can and should question everything. You can oppose certain uses or practices. But opposing AI altogether is just self-defeating. For creatives and everybody
Yeah, good point. If they're leading media orgs, they might not be. Or they'll just obfuscate/run-silent-run-deep until the backlash dies down (which I believe it will).
But if they're leading any other kind of org, they can probly brag all they want, on every tech podcast that'll have them, about using AI for creative work. That's what Rocket's boss did, and crickets
Specifically re: Larian getting tomatoes thrown at them over mild, 'backend' AI use and not ad agencies, Rocket Mortgage, etc. --
I agree that 1) people care viscerally about disruption to the arts and not to commercial content but also want to add 2) people yell at who they think will listen. Brands that people affiliate with their own identities, whether game-makers, indie streaming platforms, fashion houses, etc. are perceived as 'extra accountable', reactive, likely to respond to online invectives.
It's why people pressure seemingly random tiny arthouse presses to come out with special anti-AI statements.
The biggest problem this ongoing furor causes is not, you know, all the anti-AI cancel mobs...
but that if the prestigious creative class is against generative XYZ medium, the best aspiring creatives in that medium will also avoid AI tools. If you're trying to make a tool or a platform for AI games, AI movies, AI music, whatever, you're going to instead systematically attract casual dilettantes and find it much much harder to build any real creative ecosystem.
Really good point, and well stated. Being "against AI" is not doing anybody any good at this stage. I think you can be skeptical, reluctant, just resigned. You can and should question everything. You can oppose certain uses or practices. But opposing AI altogether is just self-defeating. For creatives and everybody
The medium is more important than the method... at least with video games vs. home mortgages it seems.
Based on backlash like this, why would leaders be honest about their use of Gen AI in the future?
Yeah, good point. If they're leading media orgs, they might not be. Or they'll just obfuscate/run-silent-run-deep until the backlash dies down (which I believe it will).
But if they're leading any other kind of org, they can probly brag all they want, on every tech podcast that'll have them, about using AI for creative work. That's what Rocket's boss did, and crickets