Oh (no) the humanity
While waiting for my yoga class to begin, I noticed the woman next to me staring out the window. Across the street from the studio, one of those delivery robots came to a stop in front of a cannabis dispensary.
“I guess AI understands the concept of the munchies,” I said.
The woman next to me giggled.
“Those things are so adorable,” she said.
Another woman agreed.
“Every time I see one I want to pet it.”
“I’ve never used one,” I said. “Have you?”
Both women shook their heads no. The three of us were living in the past, evidently, still eating food delivered by humans who weren’t nearly as adorable as their robot competitors.
After yoga, I went back to work. I edited a piece about Sora 2, OpenAI’s new video-generation app. Sora 2 powers a new social network that’s exclusively for AI-generated content. Some people call this kind of content “slop,” and they argue that AI is accelerating “slopification.” Looking at a social network with 100% AI content, it’s hard to argue against that concern. AI lets us produce a seemingly infinite amount of crap quickly and at costs that approach zero. These dynamics excite two kinds of people: Those with financial stakes in AI companies and those who need to produce crap at the lowest possible cost.
For the most part, it’s fashionable for people who make stuff — writers, illustrators, filmmakers, etc. — to hate AI. They say AI is built on stolen material, which is true, but nobody wants to confront the fact that the Web is also, largely, built on stolen material. They say AI is an environmental disaster because it uses so much energy, which is also true, but nobody wants to confront the carbon footprints of cloud storage, streaming, personal devices, cars, planes, or modern civilization; the problem is AI, not the things we like, damn it. Mostly, however, they say, “nobody wants to watch AI-generated crap,” which feels true, except of course, people are watching AI-generated crap at the movies, on TV, and online.
As someone who makes stuff I wish AI would go away. If AI didn’t exist, I wouldn’t have to confront the fact that sometimes my clients hire me to make crap as quickly and cheaply as possible, even if they use words like “clickable” or “shareable” instead of crap. For most of my career, knowledge of SEO best practices, i.e., the ability to write in such a way that a machine will see value in your work, has been non-negotiable. Ostensibly, we master SEO to reach more humans, but SEO-optimized content is crap because machines have shitty taste. Actually, that’s not true. Machines don’t have any taste at all. They’re machines. But the point is this: Creating a lot of crap as cheaply as possible isn’t new. What’s new, aside from AI, is that the creative class increasingly seems to believe that anything created by humans is good / superior, while anything created with AI is shitty / inferior. Whether that’s true or not, that’s how we trick ourselves into believing that nobody wants AI-generated crap, even if they’re already consuming, liking, sharing, and paying for AI-generated crap.
Which brings me to my real beef with AI. I like my job. I’m good at it. I can make crap fast and cheap, if that’s what you want. I can also make something good for a lot more money, if you’re willing to pay. In my experience, the crowd that wants crappy stuff fast and cheap vastly outnumbers the crowd that wants quality stuff slow and expensive. But here’s the thing: My job isn’t any more, or less, important than the non-adorable delivery drivers being replaced by adorable delivery robots. I’m sure the delivery drivers are pissed about those robots. But I don’t think delivery drivers are fooling themselves into believing that their customers prefer that humans bring them their food.
After I finished editing the piece about Sora 2, I went to the hardware store. I needed a screw to fix a door hinge. Actually, the hinge was fine, but it was missing a screw. Christina had a hunch that the missing screw was the reason the door no longer shut after a recent home renovation project. The experts disagreed with Christina. Our contractor said we needed a new door. The cost? Low four figures. Our handyman said he could save the door by sanding off an eighth of an inch, then priming and painting the door. The cost? Mid three figures. We decided to go the DIY route.
At the hardware store, I found the aisle where they keep the screws, but there are, figuratively, 83 billion types of screws. Since I only know about two types of screws — flat-head and Phillips-head — I needed help. I searched for someone who worked there, but hardware stores pride themselves on their ability to place employees precisely where customers can’t find them. So I asked ChatGPT. It took longer than Google, because ChatGPT had follow-up questions.
Interior or exterior door? Interior.
Solid wood core, or MDF? Solid wood.
How many hinges on the door? Three.
Which hinge had the missing screw? The top hinge.
Which screw was missing? Top screw in the top hinge.
Approximately how much of the door was getting caught on the door jamb? Less than an eighth of an inch, but only at the top corner of the door.
Approximately how many inches from the top of the door to where it catches in the door jamb? Four inches, maybe less.
ChatGPT processed my answers and recommended a 2 ½ inch #10 Phillips-head wood screw. That particular screw was one size larger than what you’d typically use for an interior door hinge, but according to ChatGPT, a slightly larger screw would pull the hinge and the door tighter to the door jamb, possibly eliminating the need to sand and paint the door to make it fit. I was excited, so I bought the screw, but I was also skeptical, so I bought some sand paper, primer, and paint, just in case.
When I got home, I got the drill out and screwed that sucker into place. I tested the door.
Son
of
a
bitch.
ChatGPT was right.
Our contractor had tried, and failed, to fix the door twice, sanding down and repainting the area around the door jamb, before insisting that the only solution was a new door. Our handyman likely would’ve fixed it, but his plan seemed like something we could do for less money. We had asked both of these people about the missing screw, but they said that wasn’t the problem. They were wrong; the AI was right. A novice, with help from ChatGPT, had bested the pros, fixing the door better, faster, and cheaper.
At the end of the day, when we talk about AI what we’re really talking about is replacing human labor. That doesn’t make me feel particularly good. Actually, I feel lousy about it. But the degree to which I feel lousy depends on how I feel about the people being replaced. My heart is with the creative class, i.e., people just like me. But when it comes to people who aren’t like me, I love the idea of replacing them. Maybe that makes me an asshole, or maybe it just makes me human. Because maybe the delivery drivers, contractors, and handymen feel the same way. Instead of bringing me lunch and fixing my door, maybe they’re up to their eyeballs in AI-generated slop and loving it.
Shout out time!A big human-generated thank you to for buying a paid subscription to Situation Normal! Annie, I usually send good vibes via U.S. mail, but with the shutdown I’m not taking any chances. Your good vibes will arrive via FedEx; a signature may be required.
Currently, I’m four subscribers away from getting my bestseller badge back.
A book for people who 💙 this newsletterNot Safe for Work is a slacker noir murder mystery set against the backdrop of the porn industry at the dawn of Web 2.0. Like everything you read here, my novel is based on personal experience, funny as hell, and according to many readers, “surprisingly insightful.” Seriously, people, you’ll laugh your tits / man-boobs off.
The ebook is 99 cents, so you can’t go too far wrong. Just sayin’.
Not Safe for Work is available at Amazon and all the other book places.
One hopeful spark after anotherI wrote about One Battle After Another, Paul Thomas Anderson’s adaptation of the Thomas Pynchon novel Vineland, for Slacker Noir. Given the politics of this moment, I thought the movie would be bleak, but I found it to be a surprisingly hopeful story. Also, I loved it. Read all about it here.
IAUA: I ask, you answerHas a robot ever brought you food? Tell your story.
Have you ever tracked down a hardware store employee? Share your secret.
If a social network only has AI-generated content, can humans log off and let the machines entertain themselves? Explain.
What was the delivery bot doing at the cannabis dispensary, and do androids dream of electric bongs? Unhinged answers strongly encouraged.
If we’re going to use AI to replace human labor, shouldn’t we start where the money is with a CEO-GPT? Hint: Yes.
