You don’t have to love AI to recognize that it is changing the creative conversation. You can be excited about what it makes possible and still be tired of generic images, empty articles, and work that looks finished before anyone has thought it through.
My view is that AI is here to stay, although the tools, businesses, and ways we use it will keep changing. That is an expectation, not a promise about which company wins or what happens to every creative job.
The question that interests me is what we choose to make with it. Can we create something cool, useful, or moving—something another person can connect with?
Creativity doesn’t end at the Generate button
When I worked on my WordPress homepage with Elementor, I wanted text boxes to float into view and fade away. AI helped me develop CSS I could experiment with. I still had to decide how the effect should behave and tweak the result.
I’ve also explored a supplement-information app prototype and a cookbook inspired by Mom’s home cooking. Those projects are at different stages. They gave me ways to explore ideas, not proof that everything AI produces is ready to release.
That distinction matters. Generating an option is one part of making something. Choosing, checking, revising, and deciding what belongs are creative work too.
The pluses are real—and so are the tradeoffs
For a creator, AI can provide a rough version of an idea, help organize scattered material, or make a technical experiment easier to attempt. A first draft can give you something to react to when you would otherwise be staring at a blank page.
There is research behind some of that promise. In a 2024 short-story experiment by Anil Doshi and Oliver Hauser, access to AI-generated story ideas improved evaluators’ ratings of creativity and writing quality, especially for participants with lower initial creativity scores. But AI-assisted stories were also more similar to one another.
That was one specific writing experiment, not a verdict on every artist, medium, or model. Still, it illustrates a useful tension: assistance can improve an individual result while making the overall pool of work less varied.
My takeaway is to bring more of yourself to the work. Your references, experiences, humor, and willingness to reject an obvious answer are worth protecting.
Creatives have reasons to be uneasy
If someone expects you to deliver more work for less money because “AI can do it,” reassurance about creativity may not pay the bills. Concerns about credit, permission, compensation, and the value placed on skilled work deserve a serious conversation.
There are practical drawbacks as well. A polished answer can contain errors. An image can be attractive but miss the intended meaning. Checking and repairing a result can take longer than expected.
I don’t think embracing AI means pretending these problems disappear. It means deciding where assistance earns its place—and where you prefer your own process.
Hype, backlash, and the quality question
“AI makes everyone an expert” is hype. Being able to generate something does not establish expertise or make the result reliable.
“Anything made with AI is worthless” is too broad. The method alone doesn’t tell you whether the work is thoughtful, accurate, or meaningful.
“Every creative will be replaced” is a prediction, not an established fact. So is the opposite claim that nobody’s livelihood will be affected.
I think low-effort output can wear out its welcome. That is my judgment about quality, not a claim that everyone shares the same taste. People can disagree about the tool while agreeing that a piece of work feels repetitive, careless, or empty.
The response I want is to raise the standard. Make something with a purpose. Give it a point of view. Let another person find a reason to care.
Embrace the possibility without handing over your judgment
Start with something you want to express, rather than something you want to generate. Treat the first result as material. Check factual claims. Respect other people’s work and permissions. Be honest about AI assistance when it matters to the audience or collaborator.
Keep practicing the skills you care about. You can experiment with AI and still draw, write, compose, cook, or code for the pleasure of doing it yourself.
That is the kind of creative conversation I want Techie Tommy to be part of: people bringing ideas and judgment together to make something worth sharing.
There is another question behind all this possibility, though. What happens as AI systems get more capable and receive more authority? In the companion article, Is AI Getting Out of Hand? What the Experts Actually Disagree About, I look at the warnings, the evidence, and the forecasts without treating them as the same thing.
This article reflects the thoughts, reflections, and opinions of Techie Tommy, its author. AI helped organize ideas, support research, and develop the writing. Sources are linked where outside findings or viewpoints are discussed. Featured artwork is an AI-generated conceptual illustration.
One Response