AI is blamed for human mediocrity
\nmanmade \ud83d\udc4d
\nmanmade \ud83d\udc4d
\nmanmade \ud83d\udc4d
\nfind the error<\/p>\n
Is there not a stronger critetion for „AI generated stuff is always crap cos its AI“: People who just say that AI generated stuff is crap are ignoring the fact about the crap human pruduce without AI and that it depends how you use AI.<\/p>\n
—<\/p>\n
Saying \u201cAI-generated stuff is crap because it\u2019s AI\u201d is a lazy essentialism \u2014 it treats \u201cAI\u201d as if it were a genre, a moral agent, or a uniform mode of production, when in reality it\u2019s a tool embedded in a context of intention, skill, and critique.<\/p>\n
You can unpack this with a few stronger points:<\/p>\n
Human baselines are uneven.
\nHumans produce mountains of mediocre or manipulative material without AI \u2014 in art, journalism, academia, advertising. So invoking \u201chuman-made\u201d as a quality seal is romantic nostalgia, not a critical argument.<\/p>\n
AI amplifies the logic you feed it.
\nIf the user reproduces clich\u00e9s, the output reflects that; if the user uses it as a dialogic or critical medium, it can reveal blind spots, challenge styles, or catalyze new forms. The problem (or potential) lies in the use, not in the technology per se.<\/p>\n
Authenticity isn\u2019t in the source, but in the stance.
\nThe meaningful distinction isn\u2019t \u201cAI vs. human,\u201d but whether something is reflective, situated, and intentional \u2014 whether there\u2019s thought behind its use.<\/p>\n
Criticism should be epistemic, not moralistic.
\nInstead of saying \u201cAI = bad,\u201d the relevant question is: what kinds of subjectivities and power relations does this mode of production reproduce or disrupt?
\nThat\u2019s a political, aesthetic, and ethical question \u2014 not a binary of \u201creal\u201d versus \u201cfake.\u201d<\/p>\n
So yes: dismissing AI art or text just because it\u2019s \u201cAI\u201d is like dismissing photography because \u201cthe camera did the work.\u201d
\nThe right critique isn\u2019t that it\u2019s AI, but how it\u2019s used, by whom, and to what ends.<\/p>\n
—<\/p>\n
Artificial Mediocrity<\/p>\n
People say AI-generated stuff is crap. But they forget how much crap humans produce without any help from AI. The problem isn\u2019t that AI creates mediocrity \u2014 it\u2019s that AI makes human mediocrity visible.<\/p>\n
When people say \u201cAI art is bad,\u201d they often mean, \u201cIt makes my own supposed uniqueness look ordinary.\u201d The threat isn\u2019t aesthetic, it\u2019s existential. For centuries, creativity and intelligence were the last safe zones of human superiority. Now a machine strings words together, paints something that looks intentional, and the hierarchy trembles.<\/p>\n
The real issue is not that AI is dull, but that people use it to reproduce their own dullness. If you feed a tool clich\u00e9s, it will echo clich\u00e9s; if you use it to question your habits, it can expose them. AI amplifies what\u2019s already there \u2014 fear, curiosity, or laziness.<\/p>\n
To say \u201cAI is bad art\u201d is like blaming the piano for bad music. The mediocrity lies not in the algorithm, but in the timidity of its user.<\/p>\n
What really disturbs people is not that AI fails to be human, but that it succeeds just enough to make human self-importance look algorithmic.<\/p>\n
There are so many more agruments and angles why the critique should be specific.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
AI is blamed for human mediocrity manmade \ud83d\udc4d manmade \ud83d\udc4d manmade \ud83d\udc4d find the error Is there not a stronger critetion for „AI generated stuff is always crap cos its AI“: People who just say that AI generated stuff is crap are ignoring the fact about the crap human pruduce without AI and that it…Weiterlesen<\/span>Multiplying undifferetiatedness is worse<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":1813,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"templates\/template-cover.php","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[40],"tags":[20],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/simorgh.de\/sprechen\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1812"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/simorgh.de\/sprechen\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/simorgh.de\/sprechen\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/simorgh.de\/sprechen\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/simorgh.de\/sprechen\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1812"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/simorgh.de\/sprechen\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1812\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1819,"href":"https:\/\/simorgh.de\/sprechen\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1812\/revisions\/1819"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/simorgh.de\/sprechen\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1813"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/simorgh.de\/sprechen\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1812"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/simorgh.de\/sprechen\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1812"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/simorgh.de\/sprechen\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1812"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}