What are the real risks of using AI, especially when it comes to the creative process?
‍

My mum once said to me, “When I didn’t know something, I had to read a book to find the answer.”

There’s something in that word, find, that stuck with me.

Finding used to take effort. You had to actually look for things, sit in the unknown for a bit, follow different threads. And in that process, you didn’t just land on the answer, you’d pick up other bits along the way. Context, random information, different perspectives. Stuff that shaped the answer itself.

Now everything tends to just appear…

You don't have to find things anymore; they're just given to you. And although this shift is super convenient, I feel it might affect us more than we realise.

‍
Could discovery be replaced with something more passive?
‍

I used to Google everything… What is the meaning of life? Why does my left eye twitch? Is broccoli really man made? I was just really curious and felt like I always needed to know the answer. And in that process, I’d skim articles, click links and piece things together. It wasn’t instant, but it felt a bit more… earned.

Now I type something in and get a straight answer from AI. No real searching. No back and forth. Just output. And I’ve noticed how quickly I’ve gotten used to that tool.

When I recently switched to a search engine without using AI summaries - Ecosia (they plant a tree for every 45 searches!), I actually had to look again. Read things properly, compare sources, figure it out myself. It felt a lot slower, but also a lot more interesting. Like I was actually part of the process again, not just consuming the result.

That’s the bit that feels strange.

Because we’re now at a point where you can make almost anything in seconds. Ideas, timelines, images, and entire business strategies. And we all know AI is a useful tool if you use it well - but we also know humans love to take shortcuts, especially in a world that's dominated by convenience… which makes me think, if we rely on it too heavily, it could actually be quite dangerous.

The main thing I keep coming back to is what happens to the ‘process of making’ if we no longer engage in that process. Because that’s kind of where all the thinking lives. If we stop searching, do we lose curiosity and discovery? If we stop making, do we lose actual skills? If everything becomes frictionless, do we lose depth?

It might sound a bit extreme, but I don’t think it’s that far off.

When you remove the effort, you also remove the things that come with it, like problem solving, patience and those unexpected ideas you only get when you don’t know straight away. Most good stuff comes from that space.

‍

So what happens when we don’t really sit in that process anymore?
‍

This conversation is not entirely based on AI. We’ve already been moving toward this kind of frictionless life for a while. Uber Eats, online shopping, even how we socialise - everything is quicker, easier, more convenient (and to be honest, making us lazy!). You don’t really have to go out of your way for much anymore.

I’ve even heard that Gen Z are starting to lean more toward online socialising over real life interactions (which is a whole other topic). But it does make me think. Are we already starting to lose some of those more natural processes? Like making friends on a night out, or simply experiencing things properly in real time.

And I think this is where it actually gets interesting.

AI shouldn’t be the thing that ‘makes’ the idea. It should enhance something that already exists. To use it properly, you still have to bring something to it. References, context, taste, instinct, a point of view. What you put in is just as important as what you get out. If you bring nothing to the process the output will probably feel like nothing too. Because if everyone’s using the same tools, the same prompts, the same shortcuts, everything will start to feel the same. Which is kind of the opposite of vibrant cultures.

I think the important bit is changing. It’s not just about what you make anymore, it’s about how you make it. That part still has to be human.

As someone who produces music, I think about this a lot. The best parts of the process aren’t very efficient. They’re slow, a bit frustrating, and sometimes unclear. But honestly, that’s where things start to take shape. That’s where something original can come from. Even my experience as a DJ has been slow. I didn’t rush into playing out. I spent years playing at home, not because I lacked the skills, but because I wanted to be sure of what I was presenting. Music that actually felt like me.

And in that space, I learnt that music selection really does take time. You have to research, listen, and grow into it. If you want to present something you’re truly proud of, there aren’t any shortcuts. During those years at home, I realised I started enjoying the process of digging music more than anything else. That’s where the magic of discovery really happened for me.

And maybe that’s the same with AI - the digging doesn’t disappear, it just moves. You still need references, curiosity and taste. You still need to know what feels right. Because the input still matters, maybe more than ever.

So…If that process disappears, what are we left with? Yes, we might be gaining efficiency, but at the cost of losing instinct. Curiosity. Even just the ability to sit with something long enough to properly figure it out.

So the question isn’t whether we use AI, because we will. (And honestly, it’s a pretty cool tool.)

It’s more about how we use it without losing the parts of thinking that actually matter. Because effort was never really the problem - it’s where most of the good stuff comes from. 

And if everything becomes instant, automated, effortless… it does make you wonder what we lose in that. 🤯

‍