That's how doing manual search and replace instead of search/replace in editor or computing stuff in spreadsheet by hand instead of using formulas.
If you think AI's output is suboptimal, right. Maybe find a way to use/train AI better to produce good enough output. But simply wishing to out-robot a robot is pointless.
Think of the recent generative AI artwork...rather than drawing, and creating, (some/most?) artists fear just being prompt-carvers. The fun of the art has been replaced with menial labour of crafting prompts.
Someone can make a print generated by AI - and it will be beautiful I am sure.
So when someone wants a physical panting with impasto texture and painterly strokes… the “real” painters will for sure still make bank.
I mean - not me: I have only panted for 8 years and still “suck” - but I love it.
But Thomas McKnight will still paint his beautiful scenes and people will still buy them for what they are: art.
AI art is art. Meatspace art is art. Heck: I code for money. CODE is art. Software is art.
Fearful that a prompt carver can replace 10 artists is the more realistic fear here. That is the essential trajectory being plotted out by this technology and the trajectory described by the article.
Artsy types doing art using basic tools such as brushes will be the same as handicrafted assembly in programming. Rarely needed and not much people are hired to do so.