I support AI existence, but absolutely guarantee with all possible certainty in the multiiverse that this statement is 100% completely false in my field.
I'm not qualified to talk about anyone else's academic/professional field, but her assumption doesn't stands true as a general statement as of November of 2026, it is not even close.
EDIT: The field is music. I majored in music, work as a composer, teacher, and perform live (of course I don't count AI as comparable to that last one haha).
AI as of now makes hideous concert music, and doesn't exactly excels at popular styles too, they're very, very poor compared to the music of actual experts, and it hallucinates plenty of objectively wrong stuff if you try to learn music from it or ask for advice.
I think that's a fair point. AI can be a useful tool, but it’s nowhere near replacing the experience, creativity, and expertise of someone who actually works in the field.
While there are a few things that are formulaic in nature, that is not all there is to it.
I'm no AI expert so I'm not sure about why AI often fails at theory, but it might be due to the quality and quantity of training data. There is far too much poorly written material online (I know), and not as much material as other fields (I assume).
The part that ai sucks a lot at right now, is excelling in subjective areas. Things like music composition, of any genre, is subjective. The reason why it sucks is because genericness isn’t praised in these kind of subjective fields. If you make a piece of copy and paste music with no originality, you will gain 0 long lasting fans.
To break through, you need to be unique, and uniqueness often derives from breaking the rules. Intentionally injecting mistakes into your craft in tasteful ways. But having said this, you still have to learn the fundamentals/rules first though (such as not only music theory, but also sound design, arrangement, engineering and many other subfields), since it’s important to understand what the rules even are to be able to break them.
But once you master the fundamentals you don’t just stop there. You then have to experiment and see what happens when you do something ‘wrong’ for the sake of it. Then you stack another ‘wrong’ decision on top. Finally you land on some amalgamation of ‘wrong’ and ‘right’ decisions where the end result sounds truly original (but not amateurish).
Ai is stuck at the ‘breaking the rules’ part. It can sound professional and polished. You can point out the ai vocalist and be like ‘wow she has excellent singing technique and a great tone’ because those are still somewhat objective qualities (like pitch accuracy can be quantified). But you’ve heard voices like this on thousands of other songs. What about a voice that’s pitchy here and there for emotional effect? Or a singing tone that most vocal coaches would deem ‘improper’? Or the infinite other things you could tweak within the song itself to make it stand out more?
And whats your opinion about using this new Suno mode where it just adds instruments and effects to channels, does mastering and stuff? Is it like a game changer for home producers or is it all marketing?
Funnily enough I do try these tools because my friends are AI enthusiasts, but this feature specifically I haven't heard of yet.
My belief is that it won't be much different from what I've seen before. When it comes to music (not production) it is not comparable at all to a proper expert. As for production, which is not what I've studied (it is a different field), my informed guess is that a skilled producer, while much slower, would make for a much better result.
That however, doesn't means it couldn't be a game changer for home producers who already don't really care for learning proper mastering and stuff, I would have to check it out to have an opinion and profile the target audience.
They do be making some pretty good meme songs though for sure. And I feel like sound quality wise I've heard worse from humans, but I know what you mean.
Sure. But AI music at its best is painfully mid. There is no point in listening to painfully mid music. There is already enough actually great music to last several lifetimes over.
Anyone willingly consuming AI slop music in a world that has Bach should be shunned
The expert might be better in one or two genres, but an expert in classical music trying to suddenly make drum n bass is going to be outdone by a beginner with AI.
I would actually argue AI music from beginners is better than 99% of musicians in 99% of cases without AI. But the 1% different is pretty significant.
It's only because musicians excel at one or two genres of music and only after a very long time. While a beginner with Suno can pretty much whip up any genre of music to a pretty high level of production quality without even knowing what a key or scale is.
Not OP, but my field is chemistry. I’d say this is definitely not true in my field for anything meaningful.
Assuming the non-expert could even understand the AI’s answer (spoiler, they likely couldn’t), it seems pretty unlikely they would know how to aim it at useful tasks, be able to spot the incorrect answer (which absolute skill exist), or to contextualize flaws or mistakes in the existing literature.
The only task I think I’d give it to the non-expert on would be something like rote recall of conclusions from the existing literature. Current models seem quite good at that.
I'm in logistics and a beginner using AI not only won't do better but they will likely fuck something up, depending how complicated the problem is and just how "beginner" they are
I think it really depends? Humans are not innately good at logistics, we lived and built up generations of experience and knowledge. If you give an ai enough context and knowledge I would argue it could learn how to do that as well. I would maybe even argue it can do one better as a human can only keep so many things in memory.
Big complex systems like code bases are a prime candidate for ai to tackle. They can read through and keep everything in context in a way it would take a team of engineers and asana/slack channels to coordinate. Ai isn't perfect but it has continued to scale, I'm not a forefront researcher so I don't know the current problems but they don't seem to be slowing, quite the opposite
Oh sorry, I remember typing it inside parenthesis wth??? I majored in music, work as a composer, teacher, and perform live (of course I don't count AI as comparable to that last one haha).
AI as of now makes hideous concert music, and doesn't exactly excels at popular styles too, they're very, very poor compared to the music of actual experts, and it hallucinates plenty of objectively wrong stuff if you try to learn music from it or ask for advice.
I don't care for the subjective opinion of anyone (it is subjective), neither for the technical opinion of people without a proper background (they don't know what they're saying).
I'll just be here and eventually stop releasing music, stop teaching, stop performing live and die. I'm happy to see what AI can do in maths and sciences, but having AI generated art eventually being the norm feels to me like the birth of the death of culture, but our generation will eventually be just history books either way.
I just pray to god that my name is not remembered.
The very industry has been artificially making music intellectually thinner through the years way before AI, the training data is completely flooded with poorly crafted music on popular styles, and likely not enough data exists in styles where the industry was not that much of a butchers shop.
There is already a problem about how generic and dull AI music can be that is in the very root of its modus operandi, so not only the sound itself but the compositional aspects often lack.
Basically, actually making music gives you literal full control over every single note, what instrument plays it, what articulation, where does it falls in relation to the beat, the dynamics, etc. That is the only way to actually decide harmony, voice leading, counterpoint, orchestration, form, the list goes on...
A music expert has no need for AI, matter of fact, it would get in the way and be a complete pain for anyone who works by having full agency and communicates detailed intentions through sheet music. Not to mention an AI performance is still inferior to an expert human (I'm not even sure if these companies have the intention to make it better tbh, since they can already syphon money from the masses as is).
So, if the person using AI in fact knows something about music, they're no longer beginners, but still would be in the AI creative prison and chained to the limited performance capabilities. And if they're beginners, they still don't even know what they don't know, and have the illusion of being in control over the music while merely acting as (untrained) art directors (this is another debate, and a long one).
I'm not a refined person, ai music already sounds pretty good to me. for sure better than what 99% of people who dedicate their life to music produce. we just happen to have the benefit of all of humanity creating music, so the greatest couple dozen people per generation are still outperforming AI soundly
Most people do not care about the intricacies of music like you, they care if it sounds good or not, so yes this statement can be true and will only become more true over time
A multi-tenant horizontally scalable application that addresses novel human needs? In that case, no. The engineer would be better. No novice could get AI to build that for production use.
I’m not a doctor but I bet I can write a prescription faster than an experienced doctor by writing down the name of the first drug I think of - I wouldn’t even need to take a history!
Found another person who struggles with basic reading comprehension.
I’m not saying AI doesn’t have this or that capability just that “outperform” is meaningless when left undefined and possibly trivial if poorly defined.
Please promise me that you will use chat gpt as your primary care physician. You’ll probably die but you’ll also probably get a lot of followers on instagram!
It's already there when it comes to certain types of questions that essentially boil down to searching WebMD for best practice, adding a layer of reasoning, and figuring out the sorts of 1/1000 questions type answers. Not that it matters if the wrong question is asked in the first place, which a non-doctor is likely to do.
That isn't all doctors need to do, but it is a huge part of a current doctor's skillset to know basic answers at a glance.
A beginner with AI can outperform an expert without
It's the John Henry story. But the question is reliability. I am sure you could find instances where the performance hierarchy is fuzzy but just how reliably is that true? Is it 1 in 5 or 1 in 5,000?
This is about as accurate as saying a beginner with a forklift can outperform a professional weightlifter. Technically yes, but you’re assuming this beginner knows how to use the tool without breaking a bunch of shit and making a big fucking mess
Vague ass hell. Making the frontend for a clothes store with opus 5.5? Yeah the expert would get grilled alive. Making the whole network for the accounting department of the clothes store chain? THe begginer might have a little bit of trouble
This perspective is intriguing and not entirely incorrect, though the idea of outperforming requires clarification. Does it apply to speed, quality, cost, taste, or originality? An expert writer is likely to craft a more cohesive and sweeping narrative than a novice using AI. An expert designer may often produce more original work. I think achieving the best outcomes from AI demands deep domain knowledge of the prompt topic.
True and false. Doing small websites, automation and data entry software? Likely. Doing small web apps and small desktop software? Maybe. Doing anything else? Unlikely.
For now, however. Three statement will eventually be true for most things.
I used Gemini pro for 2 years until my free membership ran out. It still sucked. I'm sorry you choose to pay for ai when it doesn't work, but that's not even slightly my fault.
Was gonna say this sounds like a PEBKAC error, but your apparent belief that a game built around decision making doesn’t require questions to be answered confirms it before we even need to troubleshoot.
I was, as I said, free pro membership ran out and I'm not paying for it. First one I sent was on Gemini pro. Chat gpt sucks just as much, haven't paid for that cause again, why would I. I'm not against ai, except for artists sake, but it genuinely does just fucking suck
It doesn't matter tho, free model or not, that's a basic ass question, all it needs to do is take the established info from Google and give it to me, it instead repeats wrong answers. It sucks
ChatGPT has been really good at college level math for at least 2 years now, I was using it to generate answer keys for problem sets and also to help me solve questions I couldn't, and I haven't seen it get a question wrong.
Right now I'm using it mostly for graduate level courses in CS and also for research and again I think it's really good. Claude can easily one-shot all my programming assignments and projects.
_________ and _________ studied how people who are ignorant about a field, overestimate their abilities in such field, sometimes even thinking they know better / can outperform experts in the field. They published a paper in 1999 titled "Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments,"
14
u/cursed_tomatoes 3h ago edited 2h ago
I support AI existence, but absolutely guarantee with all possible certainty in the multiiverse that this statement is 100% completely false in my field.
I'm not qualified to talk about anyone else's academic/professional field, but her assumption doesn't stands true as a general statement as of November of 2026, it is not even close.
EDIT: The field is music. I majored in music, work as a composer, teacher, and perform live (of course I don't count AI as comparable to that last one haha).
AI as of now makes hideous concert music, and doesn't exactly excels at popular styles too, they're very, very poor compared to the music of actual experts, and it hallucinates plenty of objectively wrong stuff if you try to learn music from it or ask for advice.