There are no facts on the future, that's why making predictions is dangerous. But, you can usually ground a prediction in something that was said some time ago, that's still true today. (Timeless, perhaps?)
A long time ago, speaking on 'The Future of Advertising', Bill Bernbach said:
'The person with talent will be able to persuade and the person without talent won't.'
A lot of people talk about the future as if it’s humans vs AI. I suspect that’s the wrong fight entirely.
I think the real divide is going to be between talented humans, equipped with AI, and amateur humans with the same tools. A battle between people who understand their craft, and people who don’t, both armed with the same machines. Between people who could still do their job, without a machine's aid, and people who've forgotten how to, or never truly learned.
AI is a magnifier of experience, not a substitute. There is a set of skills that are necessary for AI to work as the true catalyst of human potential that it can be. Otherwise, we're just putting nitrous oxide in a Nissan Micra.
Put the tools in the hands of people with professional discipline and rigour, who know what good looks like, and have cultivated that judgement and discernment through thousands of hours in the professional seat, and you get astonishing leverage.
Put it in the hands of someone without this, and you simply get more output. (Read: slop.)
It’s a bit like giving everyone a Stradivarius.The violin doesn’t magically create musicians. It simply makes the difference between the good and the bad very obvious.
When tools become extraordinarily powerful, the advantage shifts toward those with true judgement and domain knowledge. The people who can tell when the machine is right, when it’s wrong, and when it has produced something that merely looks convincing.
When everyone can generate something instantly, the scarce skill becomes knowing what’s actually worth generating in the first place.
