Thinking specifically about AI here: if a process does not give a consistent or predictable output (and cannot reliably replace work done by humans) then can it really be considered “automation”?
Thinking specifically about AI here: if a process does not give a consistent or predictable output (and cannot reliably replace work done by humans) then can it really be considered “automation”?
I said from the consumer’s point of view, it doesn’t matter unless the process is the commodity, ie art. I said that if the process isn’t the commodity, then from the consumer’s perspective, they are roughly equivalent if both are identical end-products.
From the laborer’s point of view, throwing a few prompts into an LLM is hardly an expression of artistry, art has use-value when the medium is intimately grappled with as a form of expression, whatever form that may be. If the laborer is just trying to show a floor plan, for example, they don’t need to draw it by hand, the information is the goal. AI is fine if advanced enough to help with that.
That’s why it’s important to correctly analyze tools, their limitations, and where they could have potential use, rather than insisting on avoiding tool usage for not making us “struggle” as hard.