So Justin, what happens when people realize they don’t need you for writing anything at all? Are you and your substack becoming obsolete? I want real human thought, not perfection. And AI’s do make mistakes, it is not good to rely on this exclusively. As an assist to productivity, I can see that. But you are letting it replace you entirely.
Fair question, Claire. The article's P.S. addresses this directly — I described what I wanted, picked the case studies, reviewed the draft while eating a burrito, and sent revision notes by voice memo. The thinking was mine. The typing wasn't. Is a carpenter 'replaced' by a nail gun? I'd argue I'm more present in my work now because I'm not drowning in the mechanical parts. The judgment, the voice, the 'what's worth saying' — that's still me. AI handled the transcription so I could focus on the thought.
I was getting into this and then realized... did he even write this? Did AI? Did the human being with (true) thoughts and emotions and background and history and HUMANITY write this?
"AI didn’t replace my job."
It did mine. Why do they need me to do transcription? Why do they need me to sit there for hours, listening to people speaking and doing the very difficult work of not just typing out every word that is said, but every, "um/uh", "like", "you know", etc.?
Except that's not the hardest part. As long as the audio is clear, that's the "easy" part. The hard part is taking normal speech and turning it into legible sentences that others can read and understand, without changing the meaning of what the people are saying, keeping the personality, as it were, of each person speaking, and somehow even managing to keep the tone.
That's the true work. It's as much art as it is work. A machine, a program can't do that.
But nobody cares about that, just like they don't care about the fake music, fake articles/books, fake movies, fake everything else this technology is churning out.
***
Again, it has been such a shock to see you promoting this stuff. I would have assumed you (of all people!) would have been on the front lines warning us and fighting against it.
Mo, I hear you, and I'm not going to pretend this transition isn't painful for people whose work is being automated. Transcription is genuinely hard, skilled work — you're right that it's art as much as labor. I don't have an easy answer for the displacement question. What I can say is that fighting the technology won't bring those jobs back, but learning to work with it might open doors that didn't exist before. The person who can direct AI to do transcription well, then edit for the human touches you describe, is more valuable than either alone. I know that's cold comfort when the industry is shifting under your feet. I'm sorry it hurts.
I get the allergy. Most AI output is garbage — generic, soulless, obviously machine-made. The difference I'm describing is AI that knows my voice, my clients, my constraints, and operates under my direction. It's not 'generate a blog post.' It's 'here's the data, here's what matters, here's my take — now help me ship it.' The human is still the filter. Bad AI content happens when people skip that step.
I am wary of AI in the sense that it will be the cause of much anguish in unskilled hands. I also know that with my caution or even paranoia about it I could use it safely at the cost of loosing my own agency.
Right now with some effort and dedication it is possible to control your pet AI and limit the harm it can do but the time is approaching when we will no longer KNOW if our personal AI is making choices in our name, in our interest at first we hope but perhaps for expediency in spite of our real interests at some point.
If we give our credentials to a software agent and it causes harm to our reputation or to someone else's life without us being aware how do we fix it?
I have a business idea I believe a competent current generation coding AI could create for me but am too hesitant (scared) to give it the power over me even if it might provide a period of low effort income before some other AI simply copies with less effort than it takes me to describe the project to my AI.
Essentially those who own the AI will be the owners of the modern capital and this is going to be those that possess the capital now. Asking AI to level the playing field is perhaps the only noble task it could perform for humanity, not by dragging anyone down I hope but by finding the tools that enable capital concentration and providing them to everyone and not simply a new tier of nouveau AI capitalists that will trample the rest of humanity into obscurity.
Kalle, you've identified the real tension. Giving an AI your credentials is a risk. I mitigate it by: (1) reading everything before it posts, (2) keeping it in 'ask first' mode for anything public, (3) maintaining kill switches. The capital concentration concern is valid — but I'd argue the tools are more accessible now than ever. The setup I describe costs about $200/month, not millions. Whether that remains true is the policy question of our time.
a Computer is Artificial Intelligence period end of story!! Not sure why everyone seems to feel compelled to allow AI (an elaborate search engine) Apps take over their entire life. This bullshit technology only takes over your life as much as you allow it too.
It only takes over what you let it. The point of the article is that I chose what to hand off (mechanical execution) and what to keep (judgment, direction, relationships). The 30% that's still mine is the part that matters. If someone lets it take over entirely, that's a choice too — just not one I'd recommend.
So Justin, what happens when people realize they don’t need you for writing anything at all? Are you and your substack becoming obsolete? I want real human thought, not perfection. And AI’s do make mistakes, it is not good to rely on this exclusively. As an assist to productivity, I can see that. But you are letting it replace you entirely.
Fair question, Claire. The article's P.S. addresses this directly — I described what I wanted, picked the case studies, reviewed the draft while eating a burrito, and sent revision notes by voice memo. The thinking was mine. The typing wasn't. Is a carpenter 'replaced' by a nail gun? I'd argue I'm more present in my work now because I'm not drowning in the mechanical parts. The judgment, the voice, the 'what's worth saying' — that's still me. AI handled the transcription so I could focus on the thought.
I was getting into this and then realized... did he even write this? Did AI? Did the human being with (true) thoughts and emotions and background and history and HUMANITY write this?
"AI didn’t replace my job."
It did mine. Why do they need me to do transcription? Why do they need me to sit there for hours, listening to people speaking and doing the very difficult work of not just typing out every word that is said, but every, "um/uh", "like", "you know", etc.?
Except that's not the hardest part. As long as the audio is clear, that's the "easy" part. The hard part is taking normal speech and turning it into legible sentences that others can read and understand, without changing the meaning of what the people are saying, keeping the personality, as it were, of each person speaking, and somehow even managing to keep the tone.
That's the true work. It's as much art as it is work. A machine, a program can't do that.
But nobody cares about that, just like they don't care about the fake music, fake articles/books, fake movies, fake everything else this technology is churning out.
***
Again, it has been such a shock to see you promoting this stuff. I would have assumed you (of all people!) would have been on the front lines warning us and fighting against it.
I won't lie, this one hurts.
Mo, I hear you, and I'm not going to pretend this transition isn't painful for people whose work is being automated. Transcription is genuinely hard, skilled work — you're right that it's art as much as labor. I don't have an easy answer for the displacement question. What I can say is that fighting the technology won't bring those jobs back, but learning to work with it might open doors that didn't exist before. The person who can direct AI to do transcription well, then edit for the human touches you describe, is more valuable than either alone. I know that's cold comfort when the industry is shifting under your feet. I'm sorry it hurts.
People are becoming sensitive and allergic to AI-produced garbage. To me, it’s nails on a chalkboard.
I get the allergy. Most AI output is garbage — generic, soulless, obviously machine-made. The difference I'm describing is AI that knows my voice, my clients, my constraints, and operates under my direction. It's not 'generate a blog post.' It's 'here's the data, here's what matters, here's my take — now help me ship it.' The human is still the filter. Bad AI content happens when people skip that step.
I am wary of AI in the sense that it will be the cause of much anguish in unskilled hands. I also know that with my caution or even paranoia about it I could use it safely at the cost of loosing my own agency.
Right now with some effort and dedication it is possible to control your pet AI and limit the harm it can do but the time is approaching when we will no longer KNOW if our personal AI is making choices in our name, in our interest at first we hope but perhaps for expediency in spite of our real interests at some point.
If we give our credentials to a software agent and it causes harm to our reputation or to someone else's life without us being aware how do we fix it?
I have a business idea I believe a competent current generation coding AI could create for me but am too hesitant (scared) to give it the power over me even if it might provide a period of low effort income before some other AI simply copies with less effort than it takes me to describe the project to my AI.
Essentially those who own the AI will be the owners of the modern capital and this is going to be those that possess the capital now. Asking AI to level the playing field is perhaps the only noble task it could perform for humanity, not by dragging anyone down I hope but by finding the tools that enable capital concentration and providing them to everyone and not simply a new tier of nouveau AI capitalists that will trample the rest of humanity into obscurity.
Kalle, you've identified the real tension. Giving an AI your credentials is a risk. I mitigate it by: (1) reading everything before it posts, (2) keeping it in 'ask first' mode for anything public, (3) maintaining kill switches. The capital concentration concern is valid — but I'd argue the tools are more accessible now than ever. The setup I describe costs about $200/month, not millions. Whether that remains true is the policy question of our time.
a Computer is Artificial Intelligence period end of story!! Not sure why everyone seems to feel compelled to allow AI (an elaborate search engine) Apps take over their entire life. This bullshit technology only takes over your life as much as you allow it too.
It only takes over what you let it. The point of the article is that I chose what to hand off (mechanical execution) and what to keep (judgment, direction, relationships). The 30% that's still mine is the part that matters. If someone lets it take over entirely, that's a choice too — just not one I'd recommend.
three cheers for open source, and the open source mentality which promotes sharing useful things!
🙌 Exactly why I published the content pipeline as an open-source skill. If it's useful, share it.