The analogy makes a lot of sense to me. Once you have an “easy button”, it’s hard to not use it. It’s sort of like when you’re at work and see the “quick workaround” effectively become the standard process.
I remember burning out on games because the cheats made them really fun in the short term, but afterward playing normally felt like agony.
Counterpoint, like, I can draw things, but I can’t draw people, but I have used AI to generate pictures of people that I can then trace to learn how to draw people, and because it’s a new person, and it’s something I’m in control of, I feel more encouraged to fire up Krita and work on my drawing.
I still suck, don’t get me wrong, but I have done more artwork since having access to AI art tools than I did for several years prior to that.
There’s just something about having an idea of knowing what the finished output is supposed to look like that helps me figure out how to draw what I’m supposed to draw.
And eventually I will be fully drawing my own stuff from scratch, thanks to using AI as a self-learning tool.
I think that’s more than a fair point. AI is a tool, and I’m personally (tentatively) optimistic about what it will be capable of helping us with.
I think the distinction to be made in this case is when the use of a tool undermines the desired experience without us realizing it.
Like “I want to enjoy playing this game.” > (uses cheats for a little bit) > “Now I don’t enjoy playing it normally anymore.”
Or “I want to be able to think critically.” > (consults AI for everything) > “Now I have a hard time reasoning on my own.”
This argument says,“I use a tool as a tool.” Which is valid, using a tool as crutch when you don’t need one is wrong.
Like I sell AI art as a business.