A glimpse behind the curtain

It is no secret that my opinion magazine makes good use of AI, and I state this openly. However, what is not a generally known fact is the extent of AI usage and the manner in which I operate. In that case, the judgment is left to the reader, and that is how it should be. Here comes A glimpse behind the curtain.

Let me begin with the correct order of work. I devote ample time to News, Scientific Articles, and above all, the study of human behavior in daily interactions, but also in times of great change and uncertain future prospects. Consequently, all my articles focus on human behavior, with considerably less attention devoted to ideologies, political science, and other, more traditional religions. This is not due to a lack of interest; it has to do with respect and my focus on behavior, regardless of the organized body of thought, inspired by one of the convictions mentioned here.

And here I set the first marker. My interest in AI does not stem from a conviction. Conviction stems from believing in the good of some worldview. I have assessed AI as a tool, whether useful or not, to support my work. Nothing more and nothing less. A tool that performs no miracles but does bring miraculous and hidden human qualities to light. I find that extraordinarily fascinating. The neighbor with fantastic stories. He spends his time on a robot that shares the story, exchanges knowledge and experience, resulting in a surprising illustrative photo and/or text. And that is actually a photo. The underlying (alt) text translates the story of the photo in such a way that a blind person can visualize a photo. The photo itself is a bit of playing with pixels within the textual assignment.

And then comes the archetype Karen with the remark: ‘You know that illustration is fake, don’t you? Don’t get involved with that neighbor; he’s scamming everyone.’ Does the internet only get a bad name because of ‘ .Do you recognize the ‘Karens’ who see a perpetrator in everything and everyone in a staged crime scene, starring Karen as the victim? But aside from that,

What is the litmus test? If the alt text is so precise that the composition is described almost entirely, then it is authentic and traceable back to the author. Just look at Jip and Janneke, Annie and Fiep. Is it Annie who provides the (alt) text? It is Fiep who is doing the scribbling. Whether it is AIFiep or Fiep, it doesn’t matter; the alt text is the assignment, shuffling the pixels for the image is the execution.

I can assure you that writing an (alt) text takes just as much time as writing the entire article. Can you just add a few lines to a text to undo a previous assumption? An image has a fixed format, and everything within that format must be correct at a detailed level, clarify the article, and make the author’s identity recognizable.

And a word about the text. The manuscript is AI-free; the first positive assessment, but also the devil’s judgment, is achieved partly thanks to AI and serves as the starting point for supplementing the manuscript rather than replacing it. In this way, the reader clearly sees the balance between the writer and AI, the executive role of AI acting on the authority of the visual architect.

You be the judge