Your Voice: How AI threatens art; concerns about Hong Kong’s waste-charging scheme (long letters)
- One reader writes how artificial intelligence can never replace or replicate genuine human emotion, but its ability to generate content quickly puts artists at risk
- Another student discusses the flaws in the city’s upcoming rubbish scheme, saying it won’t actually help the environment or change habits
When it comes to AI art, the only advantage it has is output speed; it can never replicate human emotion, one student says. Photo: ShutterstockHave something to say? Send us a letter using this Google form.
AI’s threat to human artistry
Jodie Leung Sin-yu, Kowloon True Light School
Is artificial intelligence (AI) a threat to human artistry? Tim Cook, the CEO of Apple, once stated, “What all of us need to do is to make sure we are using AI in a way that is for the benefit of humanity, not to the detriment of humanity.” With the technology’s continuous evolution and improvement, it can now effortlessly create art pieces, song lyrics, poems, and even novels within seconds.
While it sounds enticing, with AI venturing into the realm of art, many individuals have expressed concern over its threat to human artistry. As a songwriter and novelist, I want to share my perspective on this important topic.
Music transcends mere expression and delves into the realm of impact. It reveals its true power when it moves beyond personal expression to become a force that resonates with others. For decades, art and music have served as mediums for artists to paint strokes of desolation, weave unspoken words into song lyrics, and compose poignant pieces that reflect their experiences and the world around them.
YouTube creators will soon have to disclose use of gen AI in videos or risk suspension
Unlike AI, which operates within predefined rules, codes, and data, human creativity knows no bounds. It is not constrained by algorithms or software-imposed restrictions. Our creativity, perception of life and the world, and our emotions allow us to explore endless possibilities in art, constantly discovering new ways to express ourselves.
Human creative genius is an essential part of our identity, culture, and society. It is the driving force behind art, music, literature, and other forms of self-expression. It is something so unique that no artificial intelligence could ever replicate or replace it.
However, one area where AI may surpass us is efficiency.
The process of creating a song, including songwriting and production, can often take weeks or even months to complete. It requires effort and dedication to craft a quality piece of music. However, with AI, complete sets of lyrics can now be generated in the blink of an eye, eliminating the challenges typically associated with the creative process.
Yet, the debate remains as to whether the quality of these generated lyrics matches the quantity. One must also consider whether the output speed of these generated lyrics is truly worth sacrificing the art itself. AI’s ability to generate lyrics at an efficient pace could diminish the hard work that artists put into creating their art. This could lead to artists feeling discouraged and possibly abandoning their craft.
In the end, human creativity and artistry may face extinction as coded and calculated “art” takes over the world.
AI puts the heat on the publishing industry as low-quality computer-written books flood the market
Additionally, with music executives and labels prioritising financial gain, it is not hard to believe they would forsake artists in favour of convenience.
Human creativity will become even more invaluable as we move towards a future increasingly reliant on AI and automation. It sets us apart from machines and enables us to innovate.
One thing is certain: if individuals in the music scene allow AI to seep in and erode human genius, the legacy of art will come to an end.
Concerns over new rubbish scheme
Thomson Wong Chun-lam, King’s College
I am writing to express my concerns about Hong Kong’s proposed municipal solid waste-charging scheme. While the intention behind this policy is to reduce domestic waste and promote sustainable rubbish management practices, I believe that the scheme is flawed and counterproductive.
The programme was initially introduced to encourage citizens to adopt the 3Rs principle (reduce, reuse, and recycle) and to hold individuals accountable for their waste disposal. However, I feel that Hong Kong is not yet ready for such a scheme, and it is too early to implement it in the current stage of environmental protection.
One of the key issues with the scheme is that it fails to effectively motivate people to change their waste-producing behaviour. The increased cost of purchasing designated garbage bags is unlikely to have a significant impact on domestic waste, as those who are already conscious of the issue and actively practise waste reduction will continue to do so. Those from affluent backgrounds who produce excessive waste are unlikely to change their habits despite the added charges. This policy mainly burdens low-income families, as they have to bear the additional expense of purchasing more expensive disposal bags.
Furthermore, the scheme inadvertently contributes to increased plastic bag usage, exacerbating the problem of land pollution. As people are forced to purchase additional bags to dispose of their rubbish, rather than reuse the plastic bags they obtain from markets or supermarkets, this approach contradicts the objective of reducing plastic waste.
Some critics argue that the government-approved garbage bags are fragile and easily torn, forcing people to purchase new bags to replace them. While I cannot verify the accuracy of these claims, it is evident that the scheme’s requirement to purchase designated plastic bags will add to the load on landfills.
Instead of solely targeting consumers, it is crucial for different stakeholders to share the responsibility of waste reduction. The government should integrate green infrastructure and sustainable principles into urban planning to minimise the impact on the environment.
For example, creating more green spaces and promoting the use of renewable energy sources would be beneficial. It is essential that the government does not place the burden solely on Hong Kong residents.
Should Hong Kong’s waste-charging scheme have a grace period?
Financial rewards and tax incentives could be offered to businesses that implement “green office” practices, which involve reducing waste production through participation in environmental protection schemes.
Public education campaigns focused on sustainable practices should be launched as a core solution to address the issue of saturated landfills. By increasing citizens’ awareness, we can establish a long-term solution to this problem.