[armada651]

If you use an AI to generate all your work, then are you the genius or is the AI?

[ZiiS]

If you generate work enough above average to be awarded major international prizes they you are. If everyone produces the same quality from the same AI it will simply move the bar.

[armada651]

You're assuming a level playing field, but what if better trained AIs are only usable by a select group of people wealthy enough to pay for it?

It's certainly going to exacerbate the advantage that wealthy kids going to elite universities have at becoming geniuses.

[LanceH]

If it didn't exist before and it exists now and is useful, sure.

It's not like you push a button and it releases something awesome.

[tptacek]

Nobody in this story used an AI to generate their work, and there's not much confusion about who the genius is in it.

[bensyverson]

If you use a power saw to cut the boards to build your house, did you really build your own house?

[armada651]

If the power saw also drew up the blueprints of the house and chose its design elements, then I'd say the power saw built the house.

The difference that makes AI more than just a tool is that it comes up with creative ideas, or at least plagiarizes them very well.

[bensyverson]

At the risk of stating the obvious, you don't have to let AI come up with your ideas. You can just use it to execute them.

[armada651]

If the AI comes up with better ideas, then why would you put yourself at a disadvantage? Especially if people consider it just another tool even if it did all the creative thinking.

[bensyverson]

Indeed, why would you?

[armada651]

Personally, because I'd feel like a fraud, but perhaps that'll just be the new imposter syndrome.