> arts rivaling an experienced illustrator
Maybe to a lay observer, but that art will not be new, very creative, or technically perfect in any way, sorry.
> lab scientist… data pipeline
No please, they already mess up statistics and code enough, causing bad papers! They don’t know how to code and thus cannot know if that code is correct.
Edit: (I’m posting “too fast” so here’s my last response here for now:)
I’ll concede on point one there, art doesn’t have to be perfect for most uses.
On point two, I think every HN reader has seen how very smart scientists can mess up stats and data even when they write their own code. I’m not saying they are dumb, I’m saying I don’t trust those same folks to be able to find the mistakes an AI makes. Obviously I’m painting with a broad brush here, not every scientist is bad at that, but a large number are, and the current gen AI isn’t trustworthy enough, in my opinion, to let untrained scientists use it and produce important work based on that data.
I would love to eat my words here someday, but this is a hype cycle and although impressive, most AI today is better for marketing and fund raising than serious use.