Local Sports

Humanity first

Is AI helping you or are you helping AI? What's at stake in this debate, and why it matters

It has crept, slowly but surely, into our everyday lives.

Audio. Video. Text. Disguised as hands-free convenience, promising what seems more and more like necessary shortcuts to answers, planning and solutions.

Artificial intelligence and its future standing in our society has become a main, often-polarizing topic of conversation - especially over the course of the past year. More and more, we see posts, emails, pictures, posters, music and other previously-handled human tasks now being authored by programs like ChatGPT, Gemini, Grok, Claude, Muse, Suno and others.

I'm not here to blame - or shame - people who use it. I recognize that the horse, for all intents and purposes, has left the barn.

I'm also well aware of the fact that, in this very space, an "assistant" AI program could generate a column just like this in a matter of seconds. Hell, it would probably be, technically speaking, better.

Please skip the "you don't know what you're missing" spiel, though. I know there are ways to make my job, as a writer, a journalist and an editor, "easier" with a little - or a lot - of help from AI.

As long as I'm willing to voluntarily make concessions.

The question becomes this, though: where and when do we draw the line? When does "support" morph into an all-out takeover? Are we comfortable with handing over and off our originality? Authenticity? Resilience? Imagination? Instinct to problem solve? Ability to think, act or even feel?

The slope is a slippery one, and the traps are everywhere.

Since the beginning of time, achieving an intellectual goal has required hard work. Consistency. Concentration. Contemplation. Persistence. Trial and error.

These standards are amplified in fields and areas defined by integrity. And, more specifically, when it's not always financially beneficial to do so.

I'm sorry if I'm not willing to outsource that because a program is begging to "assist" me in providing a virtual blueprint for my eventual elimination as a professional. Or person, for that matter.

I am no longer necessary in that world. Most of us are no longer necessary in that world.

Applications are available now in sports journalism that will produce a game story from a box score with one click. Many schools already use them in the name of "efficiency." Just like a song can be written in a matter of seconds, or a picture created, or a letter crafted, or an event flier produced. No worries, no stress - and no thought.

But in the name of short-term convenience, what are we actually allowing? What precedent are we setting? And what message are we sending? These programs are able to complement or even handle our workload, sure, but what happens to customer service, fostering relationships and establishing person-to-person trust in the process?

I often think about this from the perspective of a child growing up in today's world. We tell kids not to use AI when writing papers or retrieving answers or generally outsourcing their education, because the learning process still matters. And it does.

Shouldn't the same rules apply for us as adults?

There is a certain sense of both pride and value in the "imperfection" of what we do and how we create. I believe we are selling ourselves woefully short if we continuously succumb to the path of least resistance here.

The seven forms of art are widely considered to be literature, painting, sculpting, architecture, film, music and theater. The layers of quality and levels of success are often considered subjective and personal. The work isn't intended to capture flawlessness, but rather, feeling. A human emotion from a human experience.

I'd like to think the same could be said for many jobs and ways of life.

Something tells me we will need - and crave - much more of that connectivity moving forward.

I am of the belief that we should resist the temptation to hand over our core tenets and abilities strictly for technological advancement. Maybe not at all times, mind you, but we absolutely should be better about holding ourselves accountable in the moments where our thoughts - and the creative process - would be beneficial in a bigger picture of need. Or, ultimately, survival.

And yes, that may require more time and struggle in doing so.

There is a fundamental principle - and, possibly, a defense of humanity - still at stake. Some of what we do and how we act in accordance with technology may not seem to have long-term implications, but we can't keep sacrificing quality and originality for the poor substitution of microwaved solutions - authored by a machine that started by looking over our shoulder and copying us in the first place.

A world driven and dominated by artificial intelligence is only inevitable if we collectively allow it. Please think before you willingly hand over the keys to your mind, your heart and your soul. All three are worth fighting for and preserving in a life that still - despite the frequent messaging and temptations to the contrary - desperately needs human touch.

It’s up to you. It’s up to us. Choose wisely.

Eric Pratt is Sports Editor at The Messenger. Contact him via email at sports@messengernews.net, or on Twitter @ByEricPratt