I paused the ep at 4 minutes in and came to the substack specifically to see if there were comments about the AI podcast, or some sort of explanation, and I am relieved to see there is!
I'm both a bobbin lace maker, knitter, crocheter, and also the registrar of a craft and design college where we are just abhorred with what is happening with AI. The way my stomach dropped when an AI podcast started to be featured, oh my! I should have known not to doubt my favourite podcast about real people and what we wear and how we do things. PHEW! :D Thank you Avery, I will resume my listen and just cringe at these fake voices, they're so unsettling!
I had to jump in and comment--not only does my mom have pieces of lace that my great-great-grandmother made, we have photos of her wearing one of the collars! You've reminded me that I want to do something to preserve them. Excellent article and I look forward to listening.
I'm also a crochet historian and so glad you covered this! It's a bit much to cram into one episode, since you also go into crochet's origins and knitting and knitting machines, etc. Actually the Germans were equally influential in woolwork as were the British, and Northern Europeans did both practical solid crochet as well as lace crochet. Other than the Irish, who were desperate, hobbyists were not trying to earn money via crochet, but the pattern writers who were brilliant needlewomen, did. These mid-19th century publishers of patterns were entrepreneurs ahead of their time! Knitting and crochet were also all over Russia, Turkey, Armenia etc. Knitting is 1000 years old, crochet dates from early 1800s.
If anyone came here to see the crochet and stone dress by Magdalena Koluch, it's on her IG @maggiefashionstudio, scroll down - posted 12/1/24 and a close up of the tote on 12/3/24. It's fascinating work!
Its clear to me that the AI is being used here for satire, I just don't think its particularly successful. I'm a very big fan of the podcast and I understand the point being made about the limits of automation/technology, but I think its use seems more like capitulating to the unchecked use of technology. When you discuss fashion and industry you do so with such care, it seems like the use of AI in this context is just kind of unexamined, uncritical. Sort of tantamount to you making the case that human authored writing or journalism is radical resistance, when you are doing so with the aide of AI systems that are systematically fed stolen material. It feels like you are just acquiescing to the notion that human made (creative) work is inevitably going to just become a luxury that only people with leisure time and resources can engage in. pass.
I’m sorry to disappoint and if I didn’t make myself clear. The AI neglected to mention that there are some forms of making that can’t be automated, which is why the whole thing is an ode to crochet, and what machines cannot do. I hope it was clear that Elizabeth and I, and our team of real humans, told a story that the robots could have never told.
I’m sorry I did not overtly say “I hate AI and am opposed to this” — but I assumed that smart and discerning listeners would get it
I had no idea of crochet’s origins and when I googled Irish crochet lace I was blown away. I visited a lace museum in Burano, Venice a few years ago and have never looked at lace the same way since—the delicacy, artistry and backbreaking labour of the technique was astounding.
This was a great episode, though I wasn’t fond of the AI bits (it was a bit jarring and distracting) I can see why you did it to make your point. And we have to know what it does (and doesn’t do) it be informed haters.
Even if it is for a point later on, I am very disapponted that you would use generative AI for parts of your podcast. It was very surprising to me. I am now taking a break even though I used to love this podcast.
Some good comments to read here and overall an interesting episode as usual and I just wanted to add my 2c. By the end of the episode, I sort of understood the commentary being made through the inclusion of AI voices but overall it fell short of the typical insightful storytelling I am accustomed to with this show.
My general feeling about the AI voices was that it was very disorienting. I feel I don't have much memory recall of those sections due to the way it was incorporated.
In the spirit of constructive criticism, I think the way AI podcast voices were included was not well grounded. It broke the continuity of thought, often times the tone and lack of depth to the idea made it hard to follow. Typically, as I listen, I will be thinking deeply, considering the implications of your words. When the AI voices played, this deep thinking was disrupted because there was not a deeper message to connect to. It feels like wading through a stream, enjoying the water flowing. Then hitting an unexpected sandbar where the water is only a couple of inches deep. I stumble for a sec. My focus is on finding where it gets deep again so I can get back to enjoying the water. When my focus is on navigation, I'm not able to do the deep thinking that puts the knowledge into my actual memory, and I forget it.
Loved this article! Couldn't get through the podcast episode because of the Ai. Even when used to show that some things cannot be automated and Ai sucks, I just don't want to listen to it. The slop is everywhere and I'm tired of it!! I hope future episodes stay Ai free.
“Err” is sometimes pronounced like “air,” has the same etymological root as “error,” can mean “wander” and “make a mistake,“ and is a component of the cliche, “to err on the side of….”
:-) you have a good attitude and i love your work. here is the absolutely gem-like origin of the expression, from alexander pope: "Ah ne’er so dire a Thirst of Glory boast,
Nor in the Critick let the Man be lost!
Good-Nature and Good-Sense must ever join;
To err is Humane; to Forgive, Divine." very apt here. i hope i have pope's good attitude.
Elizabeth's explanations and descriptions of the technical aspects of crochet versus knitting are insightful and authoritative. The images in this post are especially enlightening. This isn't a podcast, it’s an essay written as an accompaniment to a podcast, and as such owes much of its informative nature to the illustrations. Don't be pissed off about an AI voice reading it to you—that was just a filip, a sop nowadays required as a value-added for written communications. No matter who or what read it aloud to you, like a child's bedtime story, it was never written as an audio experience. Read the damn thing yourself and get the full, intentional experience. The podcast on this topic was excellent, go there if you can’t stand AI voices.
I also thought initially that it was a bit of AI sponcon and felt pretty icky about it, but definitely got the idea as the episode went on that it wasn’t. It might have been helpful to specify that a bit earlier, especially with the large use of the AI “podcast” early on, but I think it’s also totally valid to assume that we trust you to make things clearer eventually (which you did)
One nice thing about the use of it was that initially I though “oh wow this is quite convincing” but the more you juxtaposed it with actual people talking, the clearer it became that even though it initially seems convincing, over time you can clearly see the soullessness compared to humans, which ties in well with the topic at hand (which I assume was your point).
I paused the ep at 4 minutes in and came to the substack specifically to see if there were comments about the AI podcast, or some sort of explanation, and I am relieved to see there is!
I'm both a bobbin lace maker, knitter, crocheter, and also the registrar of a craft and design college where we are just abhorred with what is happening with AI. The way my stomach dropped when an AI podcast started to be featured, oh my! I should have known not to doubt my favourite podcast about real people and what we wear and how we do things. PHEW! :D Thank you Avery, I will resume my listen and just cringe at these fake voices, they're so unsettling!
I had to jump in and comment--not only does my mom have pieces of lace that my great-great-grandmother made, we have photos of her wearing one of the collars! You've reminded me that I want to do something to preserve them. Excellent article and I look forward to listening.
I'm also a crochet historian and so glad you covered this! It's a bit much to cram into one episode, since you also go into crochet's origins and knitting and knitting machines, etc. Actually the Germans were equally influential in woolwork as were the British, and Northern Europeans did both practical solid crochet as well as lace crochet. Other than the Irish, who were desperate, hobbyists were not trying to earn money via crochet, but the pattern writers who were brilliant needlewomen, did. These mid-19th century publishers of patterns were entrepreneurs ahead of their time! Knitting and crochet were also all over Russia, Turkey, Armenia etc. Knitting is 1000 years old, crochet dates from early 1800s.
I haven't listened yet, but THANK YOU! Images showing lace mounted in a frame gave me a great idea for MY grandmother's needle work.
This is fascinating, but I have to admit I got really excited even I thought you were going to talk about lace!
If anyone came here to see the crochet and stone dress by Magdalena Koluch, it's on her IG @maggiefashionstudio, scroll down - posted 12/1/24 and a close up of the tote on 12/3/24. It's fascinating work!
oh thank you for mentioning that! We’ll add it to the post!
Its clear to me that the AI is being used here for satire, I just don't think its particularly successful. I'm a very big fan of the podcast and I understand the point being made about the limits of automation/technology, but I think its use seems more like capitulating to the unchecked use of technology. When you discuss fashion and industry you do so with such care, it seems like the use of AI in this context is just kind of unexamined, uncritical. Sort of tantamount to you making the case that human authored writing or journalism is radical resistance, when you are doing so with the aide of AI systems that are systematically fed stolen material. It feels like you are just acquiescing to the notion that human made (creative) work is inevitably going to just become a luxury that only people with leisure time and resources can engage in. pass.
I’m sorry to disappoint and if I didn’t make myself clear. The AI neglected to mention that there are some forms of making that can’t be automated, which is why the whole thing is an ode to crochet, and what machines cannot do. I hope it was clear that Elizabeth and I, and our team of real humans, told a story that the robots could have never told.
I’m sorry I did not overtly say “I hate AI and am opposed to this” — but I assumed that smart and discerning listeners would get it
I guess I am simply not smart or discerning enough
oh stop it, you clearly are. And I'm glad that you also hate this shitty ai slop podcast
I had no idea of crochet’s origins and when I googled Irish crochet lace I was blown away. I visited a lace museum in Burano, Venice a few years ago and have never looked at lace the same way since—the delicacy, artistry and backbreaking labour of the technique was astounding.
This was a great episode, though I wasn’t fond of the AI bits (it was a bit jarring and distracting) I can see why you did it to make your point. And we have to know what it does (and doesn’t do) it be informed haters.
OMG I hope you get to tatting
I've been building a clown costume and collecting as much old lace and crochet as I can possibly afford. It's literally the most incredible thing
Even if it is for a point later on, I am very disapponted that you would use generative AI for parts of your podcast. It was very surprising to me. I am now taking a break even though I used to love this podcast.
Some good comments to read here and overall an interesting episode as usual and I just wanted to add my 2c. By the end of the episode, I sort of understood the commentary being made through the inclusion of AI voices but overall it fell short of the typical insightful storytelling I am accustomed to with this show.
My general feeling about the AI voices was that it was very disorienting. I feel I don't have much memory recall of those sections due to the way it was incorporated.
In the spirit of constructive criticism, I think the way AI podcast voices were included was not well grounded. It broke the continuity of thought, often times the tone and lack of depth to the idea made it hard to follow. Typically, as I listen, I will be thinking deeply, considering the implications of your words. When the AI voices played, this deep thinking was disrupted because there was not a deeper message to connect to. It feels like wading through a stream, enjoying the water flowing. Then hitting an unexpected sandbar where the water is only a couple of inches deep. I stumble for a sec. My focus is on finding where it gets deep again so I can get back to enjoying the water. When my focus is on navigation, I'm not able to do the deep thinking that puts the knowledge into my actual memory, and I forget it.
Loved this article! Couldn't get through the podcast episode because of the Ai. Even when used to show that some things cannot be automated and Ai sucks, I just don't want to listen to it. The slop is everywhere and I'm tired of it!! I hope future episodes stay Ai free.
“Err” is sometimes pronounced like “air,” has the same etymological root as “error,” can mean “wander” and “make a mistake,“ and is a component of the cliche, “to err on the side of….”
Hahah we are both used to writing for the ear! Thank you
:-) you have a good attitude and i love your work. here is the absolutely gem-like origin of the expression, from alexander pope: "Ah ne’er so dire a Thirst of Glory boast,
Nor in the Critick let the Man be lost!
Good-Nature and Good-Sense must ever join;
To err is Humane; to Forgive, Divine." very apt here. i hope i have pope's good attitude.
Or did I misunderstand this kerfuffle completely?
Elizabeth's explanations and descriptions of the technical aspects of crochet versus knitting are insightful and authoritative. The images in this post are especially enlightening. This isn't a podcast, it’s an essay written as an accompaniment to a podcast, and as such owes much of its informative nature to the illustrations. Don't be pissed off about an AI voice reading it to you—that was just a filip, a sop nowadays required as a value-added for written communications. No matter who or what read it aloud to you, like a child's bedtime story, it was never written as an audio experience. Read the damn thing yourself and get the full, intentional experience. The podcast on this topic was excellent, go there if you can’t stand AI voices.
was not paid by them! was just using my own horror at what they can make!
Going back to the episode, I had misinterpreted the introduction as a sponsorship because the AI model was name dropped. My bad, deleted the comment!
No, noted! Maybe I shouldn’t have dropped the ai model name, I just wondered if people would be curious
I also thought initially that it was a bit of AI sponcon and felt pretty icky about it, but definitely got the idea as the episode went on that it wasn’t. It might have been helpful to specify that a bit earlier, especially with the large use of the AI “podcast” early on, but I think it’s also totally valid to assume that we trust you to make things clearer eventually (which you did)
One nice thing about the use of it was that initially I though “oh wow this is quite convincing” but the more you juxtaposed it with actual people talking, the clearer it became that even though it initially seems convincing, over time you can clearly see the soullessness compared to humans, which ties in well with the topic at hand (which I assume was your point).
Oh thank you so much. I hope so, shit. It’s so terrifying
Thank you- noted. Sorry I assumed people would get the metaphor!