What Leon did was to request an AI critique of his photograph of a woman on the street holding an umbrella. The response was appropriate, but lacking in some interesting ways that the photographer describes quite well. The thrust of his argument was that the AI critic made a reasonable but inadequate response which omitted a consideration of how the photographic image might be interpreted.
Several things occurred to me when I considered the photograph and the discussion, starting with the idea that AI is going to intrude on every human endeavor including those activities which may have until now been considered uniquely human. I agreed with Leon's analysis of the inadequacy of the AI critic's evaluation of his photograph.
I also think that the shortcomings of the performance might also be considered due in part to the fact that the prompt was inadequately framed. It seems highly likely that adding some detail as to what was required would have produced something closer to what was wanted. Also, making some more information available to the AI critic would have produced a learning opportunity which would certainly have altered future responses to similar questions.
Another angle on consideration of the AI response was that there was some value in spite of of the perceived inadequacy. For instance, it is not hard to see that an AI summary of the issues in question could prove to be a useful time saver. In fact, students at all levels are using the technology in precisely that way now.
Many are understandably nervous and critical about the perceived threats from widespread AI implementation. However, it is probably also important not to overlook potential benefits. An example of this balancing act is to consider one AI implementation that has now been in place for a considerable period of time -- the application of AI to the game of Chess. I.E.
GPT-4o mini (via DuckDuckgo):
"A computer first beat a chess grandmaster on May 11, 1997, when IBM's Deep Blue defeated the reigning world champion, Garry Kasparov, in a six-game match. Deep Blue won the match with a score of 2-1, making it a historic moment in artificial intelligence and computer science. This event marked a significant milestone, demonstrating the capabilities of computers in strategic thinking and complex problem solving."
That development seemed to foretell the possible coming supremacy of machines over humans. That may turn out to be true, but in the meantime AI programming has provided a means for practitioners of the art of Chess to deeply investigate potential strategies. It also seems very likely that the opportunity AI provides for online chess competition has contributed to the appearance of a great number of youthful chess prodigies from all over the world.
So, it seems important not to jump to conclusions about such a complex issue. Given the billions that are currently being poured into AI development there is likely no way to stop the train. Better, perhaps, to consider to what ends the technology will be applied and to whose benefit.
