Rage against the machine – but no actionable plan

Would you hate a piece of art because it was created a a Black person? A woman? A Jew, Muslim, or "Mormon"? A Democrat or a Republican?

Or can you appreciate art on its own merit for what it is, regardless its creator?

Jason Allen's "Théâtre D'opéra Spatial" took first place in the digital category at the Colorado State Fair — and people are furious about it.

Why?

Because it was created by AI.

People are flooding the internet with "rage against the machine" because work created by artificial intelligence was allowed to compete with human creations, and because people thought it was better, and chose it for first place.

I understand their concerns, but these people have lost touch with reality.

In the real world, people compete against machines.

Millions of people around the world have lost their jobs to advancing technologies — stagecoach drivers, elevator operators, travel agents, milkmen, file clerks, switchboard operators, ice cutters, lamplighters, telegraphists, factor workers, field hands, warehouse workers, clock keepers, etc.

And literally no one thinks the world is done with finding things that machines can do better than humans. Machines are going to continue to displace humans.

In fact, lately in my Facebook feed I have been seeing advertisements for AI-software that writes blogs.

Rest assured that the art world will soon create a category for AI are will be created as well —so that human artists will never again have to compete against machine artists in art competitions.

But protectionist sheltering humans from the quality of work by machines in art contests is not actually a plan that will help human artists in the real world.

We now live in a world where human artists will have to compete with machine artists evermore.

If art is needed for a building, an advertisement, a movie set, etc. does anyone care if it was created by software on a computer by a human artist or an machine artist?

The world has changed, and people don't like it — and with good reason. But this song has been sung by many people many times before, and the song is not yet over.

By the way, to his credit, Jason Allen did not hide the truth that this art, printed to canvas, was created by AI. He let that fact be known up front so that this bias would work against it. And all the while Allen suggested that a new category be created for AI art.

Nothing unethical is happening here.

But I agree something concerning is happening.

As machines evolve, how will we?

Even if the USA does come up with a long-range plan for machine/human evolution, it's not like China, Russia, Iran and North Korea will honor it. The U.S. will always have to compete in a global economy.

By the way, every dystopian movie and book that I know of casts artificial intelligence and robotics as the bad guys. Given recent history, it seems to me that machines are more likely to stay true to their programming than mankind is to moral and ethical behavior.

Who's to say man won't be the bad guy in the real story?

What if Putin could invade Ukraine with drones and robots and almost no people? Would a machine uprising against its Russian creators be considered ethical or unethical?

Which human-told "truth" should machines believe when deciding which humans to serve and which to harm?

Thanks for listening.