Creativity perceive, but that a ‘bot “understands” as an entirely different style of image: . . . that Stable Diffusion would associate with, for example, the splattered paint blobs of Jackson Pollock. . . . When [artist Karla] Ortiz posted her Glazed work online, an image generator trained on those images wouldn’t be able to mimic her work. A prompt with her name would instead lead to images in some hybrid- ized style of her works and Pollock’s. “We’re taking our consent back,” Ms. Ortiz said. It’s an early example of what’s sure to be a dynamic and some- times contentious relationship between creators and AI. But then, creators’ relations to tech innovation have always been complicated. At the mid-19th-century advent of photography, painters had legitimate concerns. Some careers surely were dis- rupted—and both painters and photographers have been doing incredible creative work ever since. Of course there are many, many other ways GPTs will be rele- vant to our creative futures. To get a sense for the scope, I nat- urally asked GPT-4. (By now I’d gotten good at remembering to ask it to write in a more enjoyable style than its default.) Reid: For a book about the future of GPT, outline a chap- ter about GPT’s impact on creative work and cultural production. Don’t cover the basics of what GPT is or how it works, as that will be covered in earlier chapters. Include good and bad potentials. Outline should be 200 words or less. Write for a college-educated but non-spe- cialist audience. Slightly breezy in style. 63