People go jogging and ride bicycles, even though cars exist, because they enjoy it and to tone their bodies. It's more effort, but it does things for them the car does not do, including provide thrills or promote well-being.
That is to say, these tools will exist and they will be used. But people will still write and make art - often perhaps using these tools in some way - because they'll have the time and find it rewarding to do so. And others will also assign some value to this. We might briefly get addicted, and then have a society-wide discourse on what healthy use is, similar to social media.
Isn't it compelling to wonder what humanity will decide to do with technology when technology were to be limitless? As in, what essentially human choices will we make in what, when and how to use technology? (Singularity-themed scifi tries to provide some answers since the 90s.)
Yes, and I mean, while you could argue that jogging or riding bicycles is a form of self expression, I don't consider them so the same way I consider writing to be so. Cars help you get from point A to point B in a way that is qualitatively different than walking; but both are ontologically different from writing, because writing is not a thing that a single person does -- it's an act of communication. Writing and reading, and the dynamic of both playing out among people, is related to the formation of the self for both parties in the deepest and most crucial way.*
Easier put: the joy of writing and the joy of reading are strongly linked. I don't write things with the expectation that nobody will read them, and I don't read things with the expectation that nobody wrote them. Or, in this case, a machine.
And I think a "writing photoshop" will be much harder to detect than an image Photoshop. Did I picture the author as a white collar Yale graduate because they are one, or because the machine told them that was best?
* For example: I would sooner give up my ability to walk than give up my ability to communicate myself to others; that's the difference I'm talking about.
That is to say, these tools will exist and they will be used. But people will still write and make art - often perhaps using these tools in some way - because they'll have the time and find it rewarding to do so. And others will also assign some value to this. We might briefly get addicted, and then have a society-wide discourse on what healthy use is, similar to social media.
Isn't it compelling to wonder what humanity will decide to do with technology when technology were to be limitless? As in, what essentially human choices will we make in what, when and how to use technology? (Singularity-themed scifi tries to provide some answers since the 90s.)