<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><channel><title>Self-Reflection on IT Made Simple</title><link>https://itmadesimple.co.nz/tags/self-reflection/</link><description>Recent content in Self-Reflection on IT Made Simple</description><generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator><language>en</language><managingEditor>Thaddeus</managingEditor><webMaster>Thaddeus</webMaster><lastBuildDate>Sun, 24 May 2026 08:12:00 +1200</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://itmadesimple.co.nz/tags/self-reflection/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>To AI or Not to AI</title><link>https://itmadesimple.co.nz/posts/to-ai-or-not-to-ai/</link><pubDate>Sun, 24 May 2026 08:12:00 +1200</pubDate><author>Thaddeus</author><guid>https://itmadesimple.co.nz/posts/to-ai-or-not-to-ai/</guid><description>A little AI self reflection</description><content:encoded><![CDATA[<h3 id="the-conundrum">The Conundrum</h3>
<p>After my last post, <a href="https://itmadesimple.co.nz/posts/10-things-it-pros-dont-want-you-to-know/">&ldquo;10 Things IT Pros Don&rsquo;t Want You to Know&rdquo;</a>, I did some soul-searching. I realised I might be <strong>leaning on AI too much to solve my problems</strong>.</p>
<p>Where would I be if AI suddenly imploded and shat itself?</p>
<p>Is AI making me a <strong>better, more constructive team member</strong>, or is it slowly turning me into a moron like those in <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387808/"><em>Idiocracy</em></a> (great movie, by the way)?</p>
<p>So, with that said&hellip; <strong>what’s the plan moving forward?</strong></p>
<hr>
<h3 id="a-very-real-problem">A Very Real Problem</h3>
<p>I’ve dabbled with AI music—both as a consumer and a creator.</p>
<p>At first, I didn’t even realise I was listening to AI-generated music. Like I always do when I find a song I enjoy, I went looking for more tracks from the same artist. The assumption is simple: </p>
<blockquote>
<p><em>If they’ve got one banger, they must have more.</em></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Well… this artist had banger after banger.</p>
<p>Normally, that’s a good thing—but this time, it became clear that they weren’t a real band.</p>
<p>Not entirely bad, though. I liked the music (if you can call it that), and at the end of the day, it made my commute more enjoyable.</p>
<p>That got me thinking: </p>
<blockquote>
<p><em>“Alright, let’s try this AI music thing.”</em></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Within <strong>15 minutes</strong>, with minimal prompting, I was pumping out some surprisingly passable tracks.</p>
<hr>
<h3 id="so-whats-the-issue">So What’s the Issue?</h3>
<p>Here’s where things get murky.</p>
<p>Some AI music platforms may have trained their models on <strong>real musicians’ work without permission</strong>. That puts us in a bit of a <strong>quagmire</strong>:</p>
<ul>
<li>On one hand: 
  AI is an <strong>incredible tool</strong> for quickly mocking up ideas.</li>
<li>On the other hand: 
  It’s potentially <strong>lifting from real artists without credit, compensation, or acknowledgment</strong>.</li>
</ul>
<p>That’s… not great.</p>
<hr>
<h3 id="the-aha-moment">The <em>Aha!</em> Moment</h3>
<p>I stumbled across this video: </p>
<p>👉 <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8aLGHmnRyc">Poison Your Data. Fight Back Against AI</a></p>
<p>Which led me to: </p>
<p>👉 <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMYm2d9bmEA">The Art of Poison-Pilling Music Files</a></p>
<p>These two videos genuinely <strong>shifted my perspective on AI</strong>.</p>
<p>Then came the final piece of the puzzle: </p>
<p>👉 <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPDKbSZfXQE">CyberCPU</a></p>
<p>He talks about stepping back from creating how-to content because AI is <strong>scraping and repackaging his work without attribution</strong>.</p>
<p>And honestly? That hit home.</p>
<hr>
<h3 id="whats-the-big-problem">What’s the Big Problem?</h3>
<p>If AI is pulling its knowledge from everyday creators—musicians, bloggers, YouTubers like CyberCPU—then what happens when those people stop creating?</p>
<p>We end up with a dangerous cycle:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Creators stop → content dries up → AI quality drops → everything gets worse</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>No fresh ideas. </p>
<p>No new tutorials. </p>
<p>No original music. </p>
<p>Just increasingly mediocre output built on stale data.</p>
<p>In the long run, <strong>AI actually depends on humans continuing to create</strong>. Without that, the whole system degrades.</p>
<hr>
<h3 id="the-plan-moving-forward">The Plan Moving Forward</h3>
<p>I’m not ditching AI—but I <em>am</em> changing how I use it.</p>
<p>For example, in Microsoft Copilot, you can define <strong>custom instructions</strong>:</p>
<p><img loading="lazy" src="/posts/to-ai-or-not-to-ai/custom-instructions.png" type="" alt=""  /></p>
<p>You can tell it <em>how</em> to respond, <em>what tone to use</em>, and even <em>how to behave</em>. </p>
<p>(Not that asking it to speak in a Jamaican accent is particularly useful… but it might be good for a laugh.)</p>
<h4 id="my-new-rules">My New Rules:</h4>
<ul>
<li>
<p>✅ <strong>Always require references</strong> for answers </p>
</li>
<li>
<p>✅ <strong>Double-check outputs</strong> instead of blindly trusting them </p>
</li>
<li>
<p>✅ Use AI as a <strong>learning tool</strong>, not a crutch </p>
</li>
</ul>
<p>At the very least, AI should point me toward <strong>real sources and creators worth acknowledging</strong>.</p>
<hr>
<h3 id="final-thought">Final Thought</h3>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Don’t trust. Verify.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>If I can use AI to <em>learn better</em>, rather than <em>think less</em>, then maybe there’s a balance to strike after all.</p>
]]></content:encoded></item></channel></rss>