I use AI a lot. One of the most important things to remember is garbage in garbage out. So if all you get from AI is slop, it’s time to look at what you’re giving it.
Director Christopher Nolan has a reputation for tortuous storytelling. His movies elliptically jump across time (“Memento”), or move backwards through it (“Tenet”), or toy with solipsism to have us question what’s real (“Inception”). We suspect his upcoming adaptation of the classic Greek epic “The Odyssey,” which hits theaters later this month, won’t be any different.
All indications point to it being woke garbage.
But when the famed director decided to give his thoughts on AI, he didn’t prevaricate; instead, he straightforwardly explained why everyone – and especially the younger generations – absolutely loathe the tech.
First time I’ve heard that.
“I’ve never seen a more rapid wholesale dismissal of a supposedly foundational jump in technology in my lifetime,” Nolan said in a new interview with the Telegraph. “So much energy has been expended on bringing in AI, but if you look at that generation’s reaction, they’re utterly rejecting it.”
Nolan jumped on the topic after praising Kane Parsons and Curry Barker, two young directors who got their start on YouTube and whose debuts, “Backrooms” and “Obsession,” were massive hits this year. In particular, he was cheered by their ambivalence towards AI, which he saw as emblematic of how the tech is being rejected by Gen Z at large. He also cited his own for children, who are in their late teens and early 20s, as further evidence.
“Their judgment of AI slop has been immediate and harsh,” Nolan said of the youths. “They see it for what it is very quickly – and it’s much easier for them to identify it, because it grew out of an online world they know really well.
“And while that doesn’t mean that every aspect of the technology is useless or meaningless, in filmmaking it’s hitting at exactly the wrong time,” he added. “After years of driving towards heavily virtual environments, we’re seeing a renewed interest in more tactile, more real forms of storytelling.”
It’s a refreshingly intelligent and frank assessment of AI from a major filmmaker, which isn’t something you can take for granted. For cinephiles, recent events have been an inculcatory lesson in ‘never meet your heroes.’ In June, for example, revered director Martin Scorsese revealed that he’d partnered with an AI startup whose tech he uses to help storyboard his movies. Weeks later, the beloved studio A24 entered a $75 million partnership with Google to develop AI tools for filmmaking, causing a crisis among fans.
That’s not to say Nolan is alone in the film industry, though. Last year, his colleague Guillermo del Toro responded memorably to a question about whether he’d ever use the tech: “I’d rather die.”
As I said before I use AI a lot, although I’ve found it pretty useless for writing articles likes this (it never gets my voice quite right). But anyway, here’s a fun exercise. Ask it to describe Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity as if it were Stephen King or whatever favourite author you like.
I wouldn’t quite call critics of AI luddites. I’d call them more ‘reluctant adopters’. And there is no more clear example of this than software developers.
A senior software developer who refuses to use AI will tell you how AI produces garbage, how it generates “technical debt”, how it’s fine until something goes wrong etc, etc. In short, how it’ll never be able to write code better than a human can; the human, of course, being himself.
Then you have senior software developers who have fully adopted AI and use it to write most, if not all, the code. Here the senior software developer has a massive advantage because, as they are experts in the domain, they know how to prompt the AI model – good stuff in: great stuff out.
This principle applies to other domains. A senior editor will always use AI more effectively than a junior editor, because the senior editor knows what to prompt.
Before I go, here are some practical tips:
• Give the model a clear role. For example: “You are an expert in Einstein’s general theory of relativity.”
• Explain the goal – not just the task. Tell the model what you are trying to achieve and who the response is for.
• Provide relevant context. The model can only work with what it knows, so include any background, source material, or definitions it may need.
• Be specific about constraints, such as length, tone, audience, deadline, or what should be included and avoided.
• Specify how you want the response presented – for example, using headings, bullet points, a table, or a step-by-step explanation.
• Give an example of what “good” looks like. A short example can communicate your expectations more clearly than a long explanation.
• Break complicated tasks into smaller stages. You might ask for an outline first, then develop each section.
• Ask the model to identify missing information, unclear assumptions, or potential weaknesses before answering.
• Treat the first response as a draft. Ask the model to shorten it, challenge it, simplify it, or try a different approach.
• Your opening prompt sets the direction for everything that follows, so invest time in making it clear, specific, and complete.
• Here’s a useful cheat code: “Improve the prompt below so it is clear, specific, and likely to produce a high-quality response. Preserve my intent, add any helpful context or constraints, and ask me questions if important information is missing. Prompt: …”
You know how I said I don’t use AI to help me write these articles? In this case I lied. I used it to write the practical tips bit above.
Source: https://nz.news.yahoo.com/christopher-nolan-unloads-ai-slop-110000636.html
