In the ” The future of writing is A lot like hip hop” he talks about how A.I. is changing writing by comparing it to hip hop. He is basically saying that writing is about everyone using the same style of writing and copying each other ideas. Also, like hip hop artists use the same beat but make A.I. remix the beat and beats that already exist they try to make it sound different. I think he makes a lot of good points and Writing was also influenced by other people. But I also think people depend too much on A.I. and don’t think hard enough to come up with their own ideas.

In the article, “The Future of Writing Is a Lot Like Hip-Hop” by Stephen Marche, the writer uses the analogy that Hip-Hop and AI are the same because, according to him, AI makes alterations of writings in preexisting prompts, similar to hip-hop remixing old songs. I agree with his views and the alterations he discussed through different examples. Some of the key alterations that AI makes in writing are discussed in the following paragraphs.

The author speaks of how AI is turning writers into editors and curators, not just writers, because they need to edit and curate AI-generated essays. Creativity is not being replaced; it is being used differently to create something. The unique ideas of writers are being used in the new piece of writing. He talks about creativity being derivative. To present his opinion, he talks about everything being repetitive in today’s world. He says that AI is not creating derivatives but instead exposing them.

Hybrid writing, i.e., the mixture of authors’ ideas and AI’s essay, is a common alteration that is happening now. Writing is now more combined, so it really questions the authorship. While writing his story with the help of AI, Marche realized that he couldn’t just order AI to copy a certain writer’s writing style. He understood that mimicry is possible, but not fully without his creative intervention.

AI can create storylines for movies and books, but without proper knowledge of the subject, it is not possible to identify a good story. Marche says in his article, ” you need more understanding of literary style, not less,” because the writer must recognize what good writing looks like to refine AI-generated text. ” So, no matter how good AI is, the writer’s creativity and guidance are needed for a piece of writing to get recognized. In conclusion, Marche presents a balanced view of an AI-generated written essay and a human essay.

Based on the article,”The Future of Writing is A Lot like Hip HOP”, the author Stephen Marche argues that AI is going to be a creative tool. He also mentions that just like people use cameras to create art, so why AI cannot be. When cameras were first invented, some artists argue that photography cannot be considered as art because it was automatic. Now everyone accept photography is art. He also proudly mention that he is the author of the novel even if he uses AI. What he means is that you need to be proficient in AI to give a prompt that is useful and he knows better than an average person.

In the article “The Future of Writing is A Lot like Hip Hop,” Stephen Marche argues that generative A.I. is transforming writing from a process of original generation into one of literary curation, comparing it to sampling technique used in hip hop production. Marche uses the history of hip-hop as a roadmap for how AI will transform writing.

He discussed several key alterations, focusing on the transition from writing to “curation”, he also claims that’s “originality died well before the arrival of A.I.”

I agree with Marche’s argument.He proves it with evidence from his own experience.

In his article “The Future of Writing is A Lot like Hip Hop,” investigates how A.I. might be altering writing. What are the alterations he discusses? What do you think abou them?

Questions for Ted Chiang’s “Why A.I. Isn’t Going to Make Art”

1. What does Chiang say about effort? What is its role in the creative process?

Chiang says effort is important in making art. Since AI is lacking effort, he believes it loses the important part of creative process.

2. What does he say about the purpose of college essays?

He says it is not about the final essay. It is about brainstorming and developing ideas to understand the topics better.

3. What does he say about “skill” and its relationship to intelligence? Chiang says skill is developed through practice and effort. He explains that skill is connected to intelligence because when people practice a skill, they are also thinking, learning, and improving their understanding.
4. Why, according to Chiang, is A.I. “a fundamentally dehumanizing technology”?

Because it replaces human effort, thinking and creativity. He is also worried that if people relies on AI too much and too lazy to do deep thinking which are important parts of human being.

How does human art differ from A.I. art? What makes human art special? Why is human art still chosen over A.I. art even though A.I. is more efficient and less time consuming to use?

Chiang has his own answers to these questions in his article. He said that, the numerous choices that humans use to make art, which can be either drawing, painting or writing novels, is what makes it so different from A.I. art. As much as I agree with this statement, I also have a question for this. The question is, “Can it be considered art if you tell an Ai to make all the choices that you would make?”. Humans like art not just because someone chose to make a large number of decisions in his/her work. I believe that humans like human made art because we understand that the piece of art made took a lot of time, effort and talent. What I mean to say is that, we like art made by humans because it’s not something that every human is capable of creating. We know that every fine masterpiece is a result of hard work and talent, something that holds value and is not easy to achieve. Let’s think about it for a second. If Mona Lisa or any other widely known piece of art could be painted by any person with barely any effort or talent, would the painting in question still hold the same value?

I agree with what he says about college essays. We are in fact, not lacking is the number of essays to read. Students are told to write such essays because it shows a student’s capability of expressing his/her thoughts about the topic and helps develop critical thinking. The more essays you write, the more you will learn how to think and write better, after all, experience is the best teacher.

I do have a little bit of disagreement with Chiang’s statement “The faster the person picks up the skill, the more intelligent we think the person is”. This can be argued a little because an individual’s ability to pick up skills can be called talent. An individual is called talented when the person shows a capable amount of skill on a task that he/she is fairly new with. I believe intelligence refers more to an individual’s ability to think critically and come up with solutions that is most suitable to for solving the problem they’re facing. And it is intelligence which helps prosper the skill and talent of any individual. For, example, if a child who are never touched a crayon, suddenly starts drawing very wonderful drawings, people will not say, “The child is intelligent”, they’ll say , “The child is talented” but if the child is solves a difficult puzzle it is considered intelligent as well as talented. A person who lacks intelligence will be unable to develop his/her skill and talent.

Despite Chiang’s article sounding like he is against A.I., he hasn’t explicitly said that A.I. should not be used or that he hates the use of A.I. He only sounds like he discourages it. So, the question arises. Is the use of A.I. to make art in any form, unethical? Is the use of A.I. in art really a bad thing? I believe that, as long as the intention of using A.I. to make art for non commercial intentions and just to mess around and play with it is okay. As long as people don’t go around claiming they made the art which they generated using A.I., I think using A.i. to experiment for fun is completely fine.