Beware of deepfakes, and be aware of confirmation bias.

“The human mind is not, like ChatGPT and its ilk, a lumbering statistical engine for pattern matching, gorging on hundreds of terabytes of data and extrapolating the most likely conversational response or most probable answer to a scientific question. On the contrary, the human mind is a surprisingly efficient and even elegant system that operates with small amounts of information; it seeks not to infer brute correlations among data points but to create explanations.” Noam Chomsky, The False Promise of ChatGPT

The example I use is that of Jackson Pollock. A generative AI program can ‘learn’ how to reproduce a Pollock, it can mimic his drip technic and even his color schemes, but can it think of the idea, can it imagine the technic of dripping paint onto a canvas spread on the floor without being ‘trained’. AI can simulate a Pollock but can it envision a Pollock, or even imagine a Pollock without a Pollock already existing?