Humanity is always progressing.
However the progression is not linear. We tend to experience periods of apparent slow progression in technology, followed by sudden explosions of innovation and growth.
This is nothing new.
We have had in recent history:
- the agricultural age,
- the industrial age
- and most recently, the information age.
Each time we enter these new eras, society changes drastically.
I am here to argue that we have recently entered a new age, an age which I am coining as "The creation age".
The Creation Age
If you are in any doubt whether we are entering a new age, just look at ChatGPT.
2 months to reach 100 million users.
But not only is the growth explosive, it is utilising a "new" technology and embracing it...AI.
Now I say "new" as AI has been around for decades. The idea of a computer being intelligent is something that humans have considered for decades, even centuries.
But where this is different to previous AI implementations is in adoption and acceptance.
People are using AI regularly in their day to day lives, more importantly they are actively using it (not being at the mercy of it or passively using it, as is the case with feed algorithms and search engine results).
This shift is monumental, I am just not sure many people realise just how significant it is.
Why is this a new age?
A new age occurs when there is a rapid shift in society, often directly linked to an advancement in technology.
The agricultural age meant that food scarcity was far less of an issue (in the developed world), and food abundance (or should I say efficiency in production) meant that more time (across the population as a whole) could be spent on other pursuits other than farming.
Then came the industrial age, where analogue machines replaced a lot of manual labour. This allowed us to produce far more as a society with fewer people hours, yet again changing valuable skill sets.
Most recently we had the information age. An age where people from around the world were able to share knowledge almost instantaneously and at next to zero cost. An age where information was no longer localised, resulting in rapid globalisation.
And now we enter a new age.
An age where "digital brains" are able to produce content at a decent level, comparable to that of an average human, in certain specialised disciplines.
Artists are being displaced by AI image generators. Copywriters are soon going to be replaced by machines that write copy for them etc. etc.
But more importantly, as with any change of age, more can be produced with less resources.
One individual can now produce the same as 3 people could, and this will only accelerate.
Also the skills required change.
For example: I no longer need to spend years perfecting my skills as an artist, instead I need to spend time perfecting my skills at prompting and adjusting the output of AI, at curating the output to meet my needs.
I need to be creative in a different way, but in a way that has a much lower barrier to entry and a much shallower and shorter learning curve.
This is what heralds a new age.
A shift in how society values skills, an increase in output and a great shift that results in new opportunities. A shift that results in old skills and old businesses no longer being as relevant, or even being replaced by those that can operate at the new required scale.
Why call it "the creation age"?
It is quite simple really, each age is defined by the key characteristic that drove societal change.
Farming for the agricultural age, factories and production at scale (industry) for the industrial age, the internet (dissemination of information at reduced cost and increased speed and scale) for the information age.
The age of AI is going to result in creation at an unprecedented scale.
AI can write music (reasonably well), create art (pretty well), write a poem (well) and is already make great strides in video editing, video creation and more.
AI takes previous computation (generation of data sets for example) and can create new visualisations, new analysis, new perspectives and even more variations of data and dare I say even new data.
The very core of any AI is to take some inputs and generate something "new" from them, sometimes in a very rigid way (such as data analysis), and sometimes with an element of chaos (AKA "creativity") in the form of art or literature etc.
But it is more than that. Humans have finally created something that is capable of "creating"...albeit at a very simple level.
And AI can do something that we cannot.
It can create at a huge scale.
We are confined by our physical form to have only so much creative ability due to the limited processing power of the human brain.
AI does not have the same limitations, and although it may not think like us, or have the same breadth of skill, it can specialise in something and work at a much faster rate.
Want more output? It can just utilise more computing power (up to current technical, energy and physical space limitations of course).
Be prepared for change.
When a new age arrives, society adapts.
Old jobs and skills become less relevant and valuable. New jobs and skills become more valuable and relevant.
Tools and processes emerge that further increase the productivity of an individual. Those who embrace and utilise those tools flourish, those who refuse to adapt tend to fall behind.
What do you think?
This was just a random thought I wanted to share.
Do you believe we are entering a new age / era?
Do you think society will change rapidly over the next few years? Or do you believe that AI will change very little?
I would love to hear your thoughts! 💗
Latest comments (64)
Lots to think about here:
Table of contents | Better without AI
How to avert an AI apocalypse... and create a future we would like
Thanks for sharing that bud! I have bookmarked it to read over the next couple of WEEKS as it looks like a lot lol! 🙏🏼💗
it's absolutely true. we entering the singularity age. AI consuming the content it has created and the feedback continue.
Hello GrahamTheDev,
thank you for your article.
I enjoyed reading it and your questions in the "What do you think" section are very interesting questions.
Here are my short answers.
"Do you believe we are entering a new age / era?"
Not yet, as society and large corporations are very slow when it comes to change, but I would agree that it is a foreshadowing of things to come.
"Do you think society will change rapidly over the next few years? Or do you believe that AI will change very little?"
No, as I mentioned above, large companies are very slow when it comes to change. Having said that, I would like to say that it also matters what a few years mean, right?!
I'm saying all this because things need to be answered first.
-"What happens to the 'losers' in scoiety who don't benefit from this new change?"
-"Does more productivity bring more wealth to society, that is, is it shared to reduce poverty and increase wealth?"
-"What happens if the new era creates too many unemployed? Who can then buy the products?"
Depending on the impact of the change, I think some governments will stop or slow it down. This could mean that an era that would have come will never come or will come later, like the energy transition from gas/oil to renewable energy.
Cheers!
I'd just call it the Age of Artificial Intelligence to be perfectly honest
I think the current progress in machine learning, impressive though it is, has been excessively overhyped. We're still years and years away from a general AI.
Also, every progress in human history has been accompanied by a corresponding counter-movement, like at the moment, trolls feeding ML-chat-bots racist BS and lawmakers finding and filling new gaps in IP laws. The age of information is stunted by disinformation.
That being said, society always changes and adapts; changes come gradually and suddenly seem like they had happened in a short amount of time because everyone forgets the gradients.
AGI - oh yes years, decades away.
But the scarier part of AI is that we are just not ready for specialised tools that can perform at such a high level, and those are in timescales measured in months away.
I think the current uses of AI are massively overhyped, but the dangers of it are also underplayed.
As you pointed out, we still haven't managed to adapt to the information age, and that was still primarily human driven. That improved our productivity per person a decent amount.
But the creation age, give it a couple of years and specialist tools will double, triple or 10x productivity. Long term this is great, but short term, the displacement is going to be huge.
There's a cycling community called "The Velominati", who publishes some "Rules", and I find that #10 describes the situation perfectly: "It never gets easier, you just go faster."
If developer's productivity increases tenfold, they will merely pump out features even faster. Yes, managers currently dream about replacing developers with AI, but that's a pipe dream even in a few decades of time.
Also, why do you think that developers who are actually losing their job even now would stop being developers? It just means that a lot of productivity has been unleashed from company politics. I'm pretty sure that new endeavors will start even now to utilize this productivity. I'm not too concerned even short term.
I'm more concerned about the legal and societal implications. This technology enables new kinds of criminal schemes, even worse than current crypto fraudsters would dare to dream of.
AI digital networking has definitely taken over the entire globe and and still has more energy to update and upgrade in quality and suppirority, prolifiently, so far ,there is air and living beings,more technology discovering and rebranding to meet up and satisfy human wants, technically more things are coming up and the young are still growing,which I believe they will do more findings to tackle any existing issue in the community, the more the day count down ,the more ,the young ones engage in healthy competition.
How i said:
The first revolution was the computers,
the second revolution was the internet,
the third revolution was the social networks,
and now are the IA.
This time, Zuckerberg failed about the roadmap of Meta!
Age of creation, hmm ... if all of the "creativity" is completely auto-generated by AI and "bots", then creativity rings quite hollow to me - what's are "creative" people supposed to do, just fill in a few "parameters" and then press a button on the ChatGTP page?
Apart from that, I'm doubtful regarding the demand for all that creative output - we're already couch potatoes by way too large a degree, do we really want to "consume" EVEN MORE digital content?
Saturation will quickly set in, while we're all gasping for a breath of (real) fresh air, and to get out into nature and "reset" from our excessive screen time (this is also the problem that I see with things like Meta's "meta verse" and stuff like that).
I have the feeling I don't want an "age of creation" - what I would like to see is an "age of solutions" - creative (yes) and effective solutions for the myriad of problems mankind is confronted with. Now THAT would inspire me ... but "age of creation", no I think I'll pass.
You misread it. It is the "creation" age, not necessarily the "creativity" age.
We have created something that can, at scale, create "new" (depending on your philosophical perspective) things.
As for whether this will yield more "crap"...I think I agree it will. But it also opens up new opportunities for people who have a vision, but not the skill or financial resources to make it happen, to explore new possibilities.
New opportunities, but inevitably at the expense of some extra noise and some displacement of existing skill sets.
So I believe it is all about framing.
For me, the noise and mess we will have to deal with for a while until we find ways to counter mediocrity and high volumes of rubbish will be offset by the new ideas it will inevitably spark! 💗
Yeah okay I see what you mean ... personally I'm not really getting warm & fuzzy feelings about this, it's not a development that makes me optimistic.
I'm indeed afraid that we're gonna see huge amounts of "crap" and I doubt if it's going to improve our lives in any way or shape, to put it like that - I think it will just add to the tons of distractions that we already have - tons of mediocrity within our "mass culture" and social media, and we're already wasting huge amounts of time "consuming" all of that, so it will only get more ... yeah just call me a pessimist in this regard.
Oh it will lead to crap, as most people are lazy, so they will just let AI do everything and become their voice, instead of using it to support their voice and vision.
BUT - for people who utilise the tool to lift their work, I think it will let them shine.
For example the cover of this article would be beyond my abilities if it wasn't for AI, and would cost a lot from a professional artist. AI has allowed me to create a cover that I believe is one of my best covers yet. 💗
Yeah well I can see this happening, however where my doubt is if this should really be considered a new "age" on par with "the industrial age" or "the information age", looking at its magnitude and breadth/depth of impact. I'm a bit skeptical there, I think the industrial and information ages were more transformational than the 'creation' age will be.
But yeah okay, always interesting to philosophize. Maybe rather than the "creation age" it's simply gonna be the "AI age", that's a notion that would sound more compelling to me - by now it's becoming obvious that the impact of AI is going to be massive, and arguably it's going to impact more than what could be captured under the moniker "creation".
But yeah it could well be that what you mean isn't exactly what I mean, that we're just having some semantic confusion ("words" or "terminology").
Interesting approach. I agree when he talks about skills and professions, which are born and extinguished according to the needs of humanity. What is up to us, as human beings and organically limited, is to transmit to the next generations, not only knowledge and experiences, but also values.
Love it, we are certainly a fluid race. A lot of skills (and beliefs) we had as a general population 100 years ago are almost obsolete (or have evolved) or are only utilised by specialists. 💗
If AI is going to be the driver then I would call it the homogenisation age, as AI doing all the "creating" (i.e. remixing things humans have done) will just lead to everything looking, reading and sounding the same.
Ah I think that is true if the prompts are all the same or similar.
But AI can produce variety.
This will be a problem (getting flooded with average work), but only due to the speed AI can produce average and the laziness of people who prompt it, not because AI can only produce average.
This influx of average and crappy work is only a reflection on the fact that AI makes it easier to produce content. Eventually it will even out as we employ methods to filter the poor and average content more effectively and leave the premium content at the top (which AI can certainly help with producing).
A whole other problem that is worth exploring in a future article! 💗
but the AI training set can't grow if there's noöne to produce more art. what AI does is riff on what it knows, it doesn't generate novelty, uncomparable works, it can't be affected by politics or its personal life. with prompts all you get is an averaging out of what has come before directed to a topic.
And if noöne is willing to pay for human artists to learn art, all we will get is art from the rich.
it is inevitable that this way lies mediocrity.
That is an interesting thought. I do not entirely disagree, but I will say this: do you think anything you do is actually original?
Humanity advances due to "prior computation", we take the work of others and rearrange it to meet our goals and aims. There are very few truly original ideas, the old saying "there is nothing new under the sun" is very true for majority of us and our work.
As I said, I do not disagree entirely, but I do not think AI necessitates mediocrity if used to it's potential.
I'm 100% original. Everything I create has come from me living my life.
I am not an algorithm.
The people who train something like midjourney take the real expressions of real people a turn it into a slurry to be fed to the artificial neural networks.
If capitalism wasn't such a life drain maybe I wouldn't care so much, but none of the artists who have had their works fed to machines get their due credit, let alone some analogue of royalties.
These algorithms are not trying to express who they are, because they are not "whos", they are trying to predict the next word or pixel.
Yes, the tools can be helpful, but given our current socioeconomic climate it seems immoral to allow them to perpetuate unchecked like this.
First, with any artist whose work has been used to train AI, I am with you, and I have no doubt at some point there will be some large legal case or lawsuit and we will answer what is considered "fair use". I am hoping some precedence is set at some point that allows for a new type of licensing and compensation for artists whose work trains AI.
But you said something interesting there I would like to touch on: "I'm 100% original." and "I am not an algorithm".
This is not entirely true. We are a product of "prior computation". The whole of humanity advances in all fields because we build on the work of others before us.
Our art style is inspired by multiple pieces of art we have seen in life, our abilities and our passions. The words I write here are essentially a very complex algorithm that my brain is processing based on grammatical rules, social context, my experiences in the world etc.
We are algorithms, we are a product of the input of others. The difference is we have concepts of morality, spirituality, soul etc.
With all that being said, I tend very much to agree "it seems immoral to allow them to perpetuate unchecked like this", we need to, as a race and a global society, define what compromises we are and are not willing to make in this new age. 💗
Calling life a "computation" is a broken analogy that I no longer get on board with. It's like saying we do differential calculus when catching a ball. I can't honestly say they way human culture has evolved with me along with it is comparable to computing the weights for an ANN.
We can agree to differ on that. We agree on what's important ❤