AI creativity vs Human creativity
For this week reading, Adobe says it wants AI to amplify human creativity and intelligence, what Adobe emphasizes is on augmenting human creativity, particularly designers, rather than on making on creative machines. It also says “that message is very much in line with what Microsoft and others are also talking about, though Adobe obviously wants to focus solely on enabling its creative professionals.” I wish AI would not replace a designer’s job, but at the same time, I repeated a question: Can AI really replace designers by creativity?
In other article, Will AI replace creative professionals? by Anthony Wood, he says “In order to determine how automation will affect designers, it’s important to examine several factors and developments”, and the factors include “what types of jobs are most likely to be automated, the rise of new technologies, and the template for a new way forward that can combine human minds with machine learning.” In addition, NPR assesses that the percentage of automation that graphic designers would face is 8.2, but art directors have only 2.3%. This means the best “defense” against automation is still creativity, and the current technology is not that level of unorthodox thinking and imagination. It technically does rote work by analyzing and processing a huge amount of data. In other words, AI does not implement competencies such as persuasion, negotiation, or editing for taste. Then, what should we do in order to embrace such technology? Giving an example of Google’s Alpha Go, Anthony mentions deep learning, specifically, stressing that “it’s incredibly important to create robust job training programs.” It makes sense because as we execute thorough implementation and well-organized plan, machines could assist us, enabling more creative and more imaginative. I am still not sure if AI would replace designers, but now, it is also important to develop each own originality and creativity.