In a handful of generative AI, both Zeitgeist technology and general dinner table conversation, people within the design industry, from independent graphic designers, an interesting mantrage to use technological managers to use independent graphic designers: This is just a tool.
In many publications, in 2023, Caspar Lam and Yujune Park, “If we see a meaningful way of a designer’s communication and role in people, it turns into another means and avenue for creative expression.” This perspective is not inherent. Razorfish CEO Josh Campo praises the virtues of the EU Creator Forbes“Writing the effectiveness of the EU, creative teams open to the opportunities that the creative teams are not previously not before, but he is for readers to remember that AI is just a tool.”
Graphic Design and AI, Graphic Design and EU, Nicolas Hamilton, registered Graphic Designers (Canada), the most repeated phrases by the designers are “only one tool”. For designers, “New technology is not a new thing,” it is ahead of this observation. Some even went so far to suggest that AI is like a pen. In a LinkedIn post, the global design head for Philips says Peter Skillman says “Al is just a tool” says, “Buy is just a tool” and then what’s your Mrsembered design context? ”
If you will not read the rest of this article, AI is very bad for Peter. Very, very bad.
I think that anyone is excited that AI (what concerns) is not a supporter of the “Just-A-Tool” logic. “It’s not just a means! It’s better!” the crowd. I will avoid dealing with this form of AI boosterism because I think the logic of Just-a-Tool is more difficult.
“It’s not crackdown A vehicle “EU,” is not just a means, not a creative partner “and” This is not a tool, this is not a tool, this is a tool. “This and other superlatives, like the logic of” Just-a-Tool “, work with the operation of AI’s material and ideological truths, as well as the capitalist class of class policies, and use of the use of class policies, use by the capitalist class.
Great AI ‘panic’
One of the columns of the Just-A-Tool’s logic is that any new technology is doubtful or concerned that those who are concerned are simply the “panic” technoptobs or not to understand. Somehow use this approach to progress and smart members of progress and smart members “paradigm slide” or “this” is more effective than more More than a vehicle “Talking about AI approach.
“Paradigm turn” may seem scary, but it feels less reasonable to have reservations about something that is “only one means”. Indeed, as Hamilton said, designers are engaged in new technologies during the existence of the area, and any panic to the EU should be extreme. The new technology, Hamilton, “evolution” and this logic is not against a sunamo, to resist an evolution, which is a tool. Although one panic, the supporters of the “Just-A-Tool” logic can report us to “technological panic,” he said. Regardless of the real effects, resisting new technologies – “Panic” is designed to prepare all kinds of skepticism as unfounded.
But the panic is accurate If necessary to make. Our If necessary Because it has benefited from any membership in any designer or employee class to cause panic, partial damage, any designer or employee class. When looking at the view of a real-use campaign from AI-CSAM to AI CSAM, the consensual looks at the voice-cloning until the sound cloning used to save life
Although the above-mentioned panic seems reasonable, it is likely that there is nothing to worry when it comes to concerns about the loss of work. Hamilton tells us that “[AI] Probably some designers will be unnecessary. . . . In the same way, Conva made some designers or introduced some people outside the industry’s application of computers. Everything is more reason. . . To look for ways we can work for us. “Like the World Economic Forum and Price Water House Cooper, many in the capitalist class went, he said he would create more work than EU’s elimination.
Although some people invested in the storage of the status quo, there are three issues I have complicated this claim. First, as Aaron Benanab demonstrates so gentle, aaron Benanavin, with business and unemployment less unemployment and less unemployment less unemployment than less unemployment. Second, the innovation under capitalism is characterized by attempts to reduce the costs “worthy of the bottom” or every turn. Today, technologies like Genay often reduce the cost of searching for quarterly earnings and shareholders that share shareholders are as profitable as possible. And finally, technology does not operate inside a vacuum. Some “Development” does not work along the predefined line and only * poof * does not appear without people identifying it Design criteriaThis means how to benefit from the functions and whose functions.
The reality is that any efficiency obtained from the use of AI is not useful for anyone who is not strength and without privileges in society. For the working class, if the more work is created or more productive, the majority of benefits will increase the number of capitalist oligarchs. In the meantime, everyone still suffers in the conditions of reducing real salaries and reducing the growing resources. The policy of this situation is very important to accurately assess the progress in the AI.
Myth of human centers
Just-a-Tool is resonated with the idea that the logic designers can be released to disturb themselves with the choreography and pikevley. In 2025 The job sheet will comeAccording to the World Economic Forum forum, the 11th fastest “work” caught the design employers (emphasis mine). UX works, service design, customer experience and other system-oriented roles will continue to grow. Thus, the nature of the design works can be changed by AI, perhaps the number of work will not really change. Probably, others have a mutually beneficial trade that can use a generative AI that allows people who cannot provide high-quality cigarette design work, “bad problems”.
It is such a prospect but privileged and does not take into account the welfare of the classroom, capital or planet. Taking a system-level approach to users’ journeys through product service ecosystems – if we are considered, instead of the accepting of what individuals, societies, societies and the environment, societies and the environment.
Let’s take a moment and see the adobe Express advertising, which is the founder of the rendering, trying to challenge the exploitation chains and support small-scale farmers of North Ghana. Sounds like a pretty cool company based on the information on the website and social media. Adobe’s trade is effectively presented by the African continent and the people to promote a technological technological technological technological technological technological technological.
Designers who saw Genayi as “only a means” can be relative to Adobe’s genayi, and this trade may seem well without warming. However, such designers really think about the “human-centered” (or “centralized”), and how do they think about the people in the global southern global southern people? What about AI about the ongoing neooconialism of colonial history and technological corporations? What about the global influx of global wealth to the global southern global southern southernstania? Or environmental effects?
In addition, when the EU allows designers to think at a higher level, it is a tool that allows you to make the designers think at a higher level, contributes to the obfuscation of the true issue of AI (and design)
Why not a vehicle is not just a ‘vehicle’
The last thing I want to say about the logic “Just-a-Tool” is that the word “instrument” is bad. But to suggest that something is crackdown Indeed a vehicle is very problematic. In 1973, Ivan Illich put forward the most attractive approach to thinking about the instruments where it understands a broad and distant sense, including everything from the decks up to the highway infrastructure. The tools allow us to do business, but also limits our activities. They form the impossible and the effects we can be around the world around us. In this account, the tools are understood with a nuance that the logic of “Just-A-Tool” itself rejected.
Tools, Illich, should be contextual, using them and understanding their relationships affected by this use. Most importantly, Illich writes, design criteria for all means must be democratically identified. This is the opposite of our situation today. In our modern world, the AI ”Tools”, Tech Oligarchs, I had to squeeze every five years of working every five years of those who worked by Hellbent, and it is so deep, as if we must accept them on their terms.
However, history shows that there is no need to be. The AI should resist Luddiths, trying to destroy their work in the establishment of any subsequent developments, people who violated their handicrafts and endangered technologies, and trying to destroy the expected teaching value for the capitalist class. And the working class should demand democratically identifying design criteria for any new technological innovation.
Progress in the field of calculation, if people can determine the design criteria for these innovations, if they can determine the design criteria for these innovations, take into account the interaction of the labor and the environmental system. It is impossible to imagine today, including those technologies, those tools – used by designers. But John Culkin, as his father wrote in 1967, “we form our tools, and then form our tools,” we begin to change our tools, and we must change our tools.