AI has not democratised design. It has "democratised output". There is a difference. Generating an image is not the same as taking responsibility for what that image does in the world. Design begins where consequence begins. It asks who is affected, what behaviour is enabled, what harm is possible. A system can execute intent. It cannot be accountable for it. If your value lives in speed, a machine will outrun you.The uncomfortable truth is this. Much of what we called design was styling. Much of what we defended as expertise was software literacy. AI has not attacked the profession. It has exposed its shallowness. What remains is judgment. Restraint. Ethical clarity. The question is no longer can you make it. The question is should it be made, and who will take the responsibility for it. That is the work.
AI has not democratised design. It has "democratised output". There is a difference. Generating an image is not the same as taking responsibility for what that image does in the world. Design begins where consequence begins. It asks who is affected, what behaviour is enabled, what harm is possible. A system can execute intent. It cannot be accountable for it. If your value lives in speed, a machine will outrun you.The uncomfortable truth is this. Much of what we called design was styling. Much of what we defended as expertise was software literacy. AI has not attacked the profession. It has exposed its shallowness. What remains is judgment. Restraint. Ethical clarity. The question is no longer can you make it. The question is should it be made, and who will take the responsibility for it. That is the work.
Thank you for validating my point, Lefteris. I appreciate the time you took to read and comment on my post.