AI vs. Human Creativity: The Blurring Line Between Inspiration and Imitation

The line separating humanity and programming gets blurred daily with the current advancements in Artificial Intelligence. Jobs are kicking out office workers for lines of code, and the executives are starting to think that humans might not be that necessary.  At least our creativity is one thing that cannot be replaced, right? Well, that's a tricky subject. It ultimately relies on what you consider to be new and creative. Is a painting not original because the artist took inspiration from others in the community? What if an AI took art pieces it found online and generated something out of it? Is that considered to be any less original? Why? While that question might not be answered completely today, I will certainly try my best to give you the information necessary to make your own decision on this controversial subject.

If you have been keeping up with the news spreading online, you might know about the recent controversy being raised about how AI is allegedly training its own model on millions of videos uploaded to YouTube. As the New York Times wrote, "Ultimately, an OpenAI team transcribed more than one million hours of YouTube videos, the people said. The team included Greg Brockman, OpenAI's president, who personally helped collect the videos, two of the people said. The texts were then fed into a system called GPT-4, which was widely considered one of the world's most powerful AI models and was the basis of the latest version of the ChatGPT chatbot." This is a big issue since YouTubers are robbed of their right to own their content. Youtubers rely on their personalities to create their videos and keep up the success of their channels, but even that might be stolen from them. "Full-time YouTubers patrol for unauthorized use of their work, regularly filing takedown notices, and some worry it's only a matter of time before AI can generate content similar to what they make — if not produce outright copycats," written on Proofnews. You might be wondering why YouTube doesn't do something about it. They are, but companies are ignoring the rules placed anyway since their gain from this is much higher than their loss if they get caught.

While outside personas can be mimicked, the spark and human connection that kept the flame burning cannot. An example is the online artist Boris Eldagsen, who revolted against AI corrupting his profession. After seeing people enter photography competitions with AI-generated images and winning, he decided to play their own game against them. "In 2023, artist Boris Eldagsen won the World Photography Organization's Sony World Photography Awards for a picture that had been created with the help of an AI generator. After that outcome, Eldagsen declined to accept the award, saying, "AI images and photography should not compete with each other in an award like this," as Artnews wrote. Boris’s stunt made it clear that something about human art is unique. Humans live lives that shape their perspectives, from studying at school to competing with their coworkers on who gets the promotion. Births, deaths, life, and nature are things only we can perceive. These things cannot be conveyed via words and pictures alone, so AI can never glimpse the beauty it holds and the stories it tells. In the end, our perspectives are what makes us special and irreplaceable. Boris was not the only artist who opposed the AI takeover. Scriptwriters also began to protest against the use of AI in their profession. Animators are collecting signatures online to showcase how many people prefer hand-drawn cartoons over AI-generated videos. Even graphic designers are starting to incorporate anti-AI code into their work. Soon, laws will be set in place to prevent events like the YouTube theft from happening again. The fight against AI art is far from over.

In conclusion, the rapid advancement of Artificial Intelligence is reshaping what defines creativity. As AI continues to encroach on domains once thought to be uniquely human, the distinction between human originality and machine-generated outputs becomes increasingly blurred. The controversy surrounding AI's use of vast amounts of online content, such as YouTube videos, for training purposes, highlights the ethical and legal challenges that arise when AI replicates human work. While AI can mimic external personas and styles, it lacks the intrinsic human connection and spark that drive genuine creativity. The actions of individuals like Boris Eldagsen underscore a growing resistance within the creative community against the encroachment of AI. By challenging AI's place in creative competitions and questioning the validity of machine-generated art, Eldagsen and others are drawing a line in the sand. They argue that while AI can produce technically impressive results, it cannot replace the depth, emotion, and human experience that true creativity embodies. As AI continues to evolve, society must grapple with these complex issues and decide how to value and protect human creativity in an increasingly automated world. The conversation is far from over, and each of us must consider where we stand on this critical subject.

AI will never become better or more intelligent than humans. Ultimately, everything it generates is the average accumulation of different media, not the best or worst. AI can only learn from us, so it can never be smarter than the most brilliant scientist or more creative than the most genius painter. Do not let the fear of it being better than you stop you from creating. Create because your creations are unique, while AI’s are always average.