I (Rachel) read a lot, especially lots of stuff online. Some of it is good, some gets skimmed, most of it is fairly unmemorable. I assume that much of it — even the unmemorable stuff — adds to my overall “mental fabric” of ideas and thoughts and experiences, but there are few things that actually keep me thinking about it for days or weeks after I close the tab.
Here are four pieces I found this month that actually have done that.
“Here’s my suggestion: instead of seeing AI as a sort of silicon homunculus, we should see it as a bag of words.”
Read it >>> Bag of words, have mercy on us
“That’s why I’m not afraid of being rendered obsolete by a bag of words. Machines have already matched or surpassed humans on all sorts of tasks. A pitching machine can throw a ball faster than a human can, spellcheck gets the letters right every time, and autotune never sings off key.
But we don’t go to baseball games, spelling bees, and Taylor Swift concerts for the speed of the balls, the accuracy of the spelling, or the pureness of the pitch. We go because we care about humans doing those things. It wouldn’t be interesting to watch a bag of words do them—unless we mistakenly start treating that bag like it’s a person.”
Thinking of AI in human terms (is it smart? is it cool? is it better than me at my job?) is the wrong approach, and this article provides a really helpful breakdown of why exactly — as well as presents a different metaphor that might be more helpful in allowing us to think accurately about how to use (or not use) AI.
As I continually wrestle with how to use or not use AI tools, and for what, and for whom, I found this piece very nuanced and balanced in basically saying:
- AI is not human, and we shouldn’t expect it to be.
- AI is a tool, a kind of “bag of words” tool, and we should use it when a bag of words might be helpful.
- AI isn’t going to be good at things that require novelty, or weirdness, or discovery, because it’s pulling from what already exists, not actually making something new.
- Some things we really only care about humans doing them, and AI isn’t really going to be a player in those categories long-term.
h/t to Ryan Sargent for sharing this with me!
“But the moment taste resolves into a system [for making the correct choice people will like], it stops being taste and starts being fashion. And fashion… is what makes you the same as everyone else.”
Read it >>> Taste Test: Encrusting the Tortoise
“The mainstream conversation about AI and taste is boring. Can machines even have taste? Will AI replace creativity? Is generative art real art? These are À rebours questions. Consumption and curation. They miss the point entirely.
What is actually happening is obvious, and painfully human. We gave the world a generative engine for taste and 99% of companies, brands, and people produced slop with it. Then we blamed the engine. This is like handing someone a Steinway and cursing the piano when they play “Chopsticks.” AI didn’t create slop. It merely revealed that most of the people who claimed to have a taste level were actually just good at moodboarding and copying Dieter Rams. The moment they had to generate instead of curate, the emptiness was right there on the screen. And it stung.
This was Huysmans’ point. Taste that only consumes produces nothing when you finally ask it to create. We’ve established that real taste is tied to a personal point of view. Well, the one prerequisite for having a point of view is having a life. Not a reference library.”
Fascinating read on taste from a non-tech perspective, that I feel like hits on so much of what is missing in conversations about taste right now.
TL;DR: Taste is not liking “the right things,” or being able to codify what a certain group of people will or should like. Taste is a “distinct, stylistic view of the world” that comes with contradictions, weirdness, and sets your perspective apart from everyone else.
“I think we often underestimate the power in just telling people we tried really hard on something and we’re proud of it.”
Read it >>> Evidence of effort
“The best content on the internet right now heroes effort. Telling the story of people actually trying. The effort heuristic is a studied cognitive shortcut that assumes that tasks requiring significant investment—whether it’s time, energy, or skill—will result in a better quality compared to those achieved without that investment.
On social media, audiences are often making snap decisions on whether they want to stick around to watch a piece of content. Perceived effort is a strong way to create that cognitive buy in.”
I’m a big fan of Rachel Karten’s Link in Bio newsletter, and this piece was a banger, in part (perhaps) because it highlights something I’ve been thinking about a lot: effort matters. Care matters. Brainrot goes viral, too; sure, but putting clear effort and intention into your content makes it more memorable, resonant, and powerful.
I also appreciate that she breaks down three ways to use or showcase effort, with examples from brands who are actually doing it and getting results.
“The idea that art wasn’t just for everyone, but it was something for anyone who cared enough to participate.”
Read it >>> What does it mean to make something?
“Making things is a pleasure, it is holy, it is something we do instinctively — like breathing — and it is something we can’t stop. The creative impulse is one of the things that makes us human, I think. It’s important to say that, even if it does feel, as they say, a little cringe. It is good to make things.”
If you work in content marketing, you likely make things everyday… not art, per se, but something. But I think when we conflate what it means to make things with making profit, it’s easy for the things we make to become the strip-mall equivalent of content: hastily thrown up, with no real care or intention to last or create beauty or give our audiences something good.
This essay isn’t really about “content,” it’s about art, I suppose, but I think the principle behind it holds. Making things is (should be?) a pleasure, a beauty, something impulsive, something human. We can (and should) make content that works for our brands and businesses, and there are many, many ways to do that. But we should be very wary of making a lot of stuff that has no heart, pleasure, soul, care, etc. behind it.
h/t to Ronnie Higgins for this rec!
If one of these articles sparked some new ideas for you, or if you have something we should read or feature, reach out and let me know! ■
Leave a Reply