Notebook

Journal #5

Should We Pretend AI Doesn't Exist?

1 September 2026

So what exactly are we supposed to do? Pretend AI doesn't exist? 😄

I don't want AI to write books or make movies, even if fantasy worlds look way more realistic with modern CGI: I enjoy stories that stem from human mind.

I don't want AI to make music: I prefer the fascinating ability of human hands mastering a complex instrument.

I don't want AI to make art or illustrations: I prefer human creativity.

And yet, I use AI. A lot.

I use it to help me debug code, correct a sentence when I'm unsure, find information and references, analyse data, identify patterns. And sometimes I use it to illustrate something I have in mind, because I can be good at some things, but when it comes to drawing, I suck.

This recently earned me some criticism.

«Tsk, tsk», someone commented under one of my posts. «You used AI for a picture. Don't you know you're STEALING from artists and illustrators? And besides, the image sucks».

The latter is, of course, debatable. 😄

But what I found interesting is that the post wasn't about the picture. It was about my website, my articles, my books, the little personal publishing project I've been building. None of that seemed to matter. The AI-generated picture was what inflamed their spirit.

I explained that the picture was simply there to illustrate an idea.

«Tsk tsk», came the answer. «You should use Canva. It's easy.»

Oh, well. Is it?

I did try Canva for some projects. It is intuitive, yes. But I didn't get the results I had in mind.

Maybe I'm not very good at Canva, or maybe not every tool is good for every task, every person and every situation.

And this is where the interaction made me think.

What exactly are we supposed to do with AI?

I use it as a tool.

I can handwrite, but when I write an article, I use a keyboard. It's probably not so cute as cursive handwriting, but I'm writing an article, not showing off my calligraphy.

Similarly, I could technically grow some of my own food, but I go to the supermarket instead. Yes, vegetables may taste better when picked fresh from a garden. But I still buy them in the supermarket.

AI is a tool. Using it doesn't necessarily mean being lazy: sometimes it simply means choosing the tool that helps you get the result you want.

Of course, AI is not ethically neutral. There are legitimate questions about copyright, training data, regulation, transparency, environmental costs, quality. For example, I personally hate when training AI means destroying books (I talked about this in another article).

Those discussions matter.

But the person who confronted me had a much simpler position: AI "steals" from artists, therefore I should use Canva instead.

So I'm wondering:

Is using AI morally not acceptable? And if so, where do we draw the line? Are all AI morally bad or just some of them? Does it depend on the task? Is AI acceptable for coding but not for pictures because artists are artists and programmers are not? (Yes, this is a provocative question, of course).

I respect artists. I love art, in the broadest sense, including writing, cinema, illustration and music.

I also don't particularly like the idea of AI replacing human creativity. Sometimes I even get pissed off when AI can do something better or faster than I can.

But AI exists.

We can regulate it. We can criticise it. We can decide where we don't want to use it. We can demand better rules for the people whose work contributes to these systems.

But pretending it doesn't exist, or expecting people simply not to use it… seriously? Luddism isn't a strategy for dealing with technological change.

So, what are we supposed to do?

The illustrative picture is a Canva template, so I don't piss anyone off 😄

---

Stories continue to live when they are shared.

If you enjoyed this story and would like to comment on it, write to me! info@casadonatalina.it