.avif)
Things are going a little more iRobot and a little less iHuman, if you know what I mean.
.avif){kind=small}
A couple years ago I wrote about artificial intelligence and horology, where I argued that in order for AI to truly make a mark within the watch industry itself, the technology will need to become affordable enough for smaller brands to adopt. Otherwise, it will only serve to widen the economic gap between the largest and smallest brands.
It is with this topic in mind that I want to revisit AI, but approach it from a different angle: How do we as writers and publishers use AI?
AI as a tool is becoming more and more prevalent across all aspects of modern life. Many have the opinion that content generated by AI should not be published online or that doing so somehow lacks authenticity. I don't think I agree with that perspective. But I will say that I think it's very important to be mindful of how we use AI.
So what do I advocate for? Well, I think AI writing and research tools can be used ethically within editorial content, but should be used in a manner which is transparent to the reader. I would also argue for requiring that any watch-related content which incorporates AI-generated writing must disclose this fact to the reader.
As publishers and writers, our job is to bring the passion and reverence we have for watchmaking to the page. That can still be achieved with AI assistance, so long as the human perspective remains central, and the tools serve only to enhance our ability to tell a story.
I believe this is an important conversation for us to have, and one that I expect will continue to evolve over the coming years as technology advances. In the meantime, I'll continue writing content the old fashioned way: with coffee, keyboard, and an automatic watch strapped to my wrist.
Why do we love watches so much?
Is it because they look cool, impress our friends, or make us feel good inside? Maybe, but let me ask you this, if I were to say to you that I had a machine that could print out whatever Patek Philippe you wanted. Push a button and out pops a Nautilus, a 5980, an Aquanaut Travel Time for example. You still have to pay for it of course, but instead of waiting for people to make it with their hands, my machine prints it out, atom by atom, perfectly in about ten minutes. Would that watch feel the same on your wrist? Yes, it’s the same. But would it feel the same in your soul? Perhaps not.
What I’m getting at here is that we value things differently based on the effort that was put into creating it. That’s why we value a hand made watch more than a mass-produced one. Even though the latter is probably going to be more accurate and reliable. This is true with many things.
It’s a little cliché, but the saying ‘It's about the journey, not the destination’ rings true here. We as humans draw the most value from the process of creation, and with AI, we’re loosing that.
I won’t lie here. I’ve thought about using ChatGPT to write articles in the past. Heck, I probably would have published 10x more stories if I did. But even though it’s getting better every day, the test articles I gave it left me feeling empty.
I missed the struggle, the friction, and the pressure that comes with squeezing your brain like a dried up orange to extract a drop of creativity. Every story I write makes me happy not because I get to publish it to the world, although that is nice, but because of the growth I’ve had to go through to write it. It’s all about the process, and I think my readers can feel that.
I don’t look down upon publications that are using it, but I do think those that do will lose something special. They will lose their humanity, their struggle, and their magic. When you become results obsessed and metric focused, you miss out on the opportunity to grow as people and as companies. I worry that as more and more people use it as a writing tool, essentially replacing flesh and blood writers, we will become stagnant as an industry. Regurgitating content over and over again until everything sounds the same.
We can't let the creative process die. I won't let it.
Cya in the next one x.
.webp)
