Generative AI

Overview

Hideki Saito adopts a supportive stance on generative AI, actively using and publishing works created with tools like Avalab. While he strives to understand perspectives from both proponents and critics, he expresses frustration with sentiment-based arguments from opponents, often finding them lacking in substantive or constructive criticism.

Articles

Where I Stand on Generative AI (and Why I’m Not Here to Negotiate It) – This article articulates a stance of being broadly pro–generative AI while maintaining firm personal boundaries and rejecting moral absolutism in AI discourse. The author supports AI as a practical tool that reduces friction and enhances workflow, but rejects evangelism, purity tests, and slogan-driven narratives such as “AI is theft,” arguing that such framings collapse complex issues into unproductive moral theater. Instead, the piece emphasizes evaluating AI use through behavior, intent, and accountability rather than treating the tool itself as inherently ethical or unethical. The author advocates for nuance, logical rigor, and responsible use—particularly distinguishing supervised, accountable AI-assisted workflows from unsupervised “vibe coding,” which risks creating opaque technical debt. Ultimately, the article asserts that meaningful discussion requires clarity, boundaries, and good-faith engagement, and that disengaging from bad-faith or performative debates is sometimes the most effective response.
Is VR Turning Slice-of-Life Anime Into Something You Live? – This article explores whether social VR is beginning to fulfill the same emotional role that slice‑of‑life anime has long occupied in Japan, proposing that the two media forms may be converging on similar affective functions through different mechanisms. Slice‑of‑life anime provides comfort through authored distance, observational warmth, and low‑demand continuity, whereas VR offers comfort through presence, co‑experience, and flexible participation. Drawing on qualitative observations of VRChat culture, Virtual Market exhibitions, and everyday social VR practices, the piece argues that VR can stage lived versions of the gentle, low‑stakes moments traditionally depicted in slice‑of‑life narratives. Japan’s cultural familiarity with stylized identity, anime aesthetics, and ambient media consumption makes this overlap especially visible. The article further examines the strategic dilemma facing slice‑of‑life IP holders as immersive media challenges the genre’s foundational reliance on distance. Rather than predicting displacement, it frames the current moment as a theoretical shift: two emotional grammars—observational and experiential—now address the same desire for everyday warmth, each with distinct risks, affordances, and futures.
AI Creation Is Not a Magic Button — and Never Will Be – This article challenges the popular belief that generative AI enables effortless, one‑click creation, arguing that high‑quality work with AI is inherently iterative and judgment‑driven. Using writing as the primary lens, the piece shows that while AI can accelerate parts of the creative process, it cannot replace the human decisions that define quality—such as framing, contextual judgment, prioritization, and audience awareness. The essay dismantles the “magic button” myth by demonstrating how meaningful output emerges only through cycles of constraint‑setting, refinement, correction, and editorial shaping. It further distinguishes expressive from instrumental writing, noting that many users intentionally trade stylistic individuality for clarity and efficiency, while others require deeper involvement to preserve voice. Ultimately, the article argues that AI does not eliminate authorship but exposes it, revealing that the real work lies not in pressing a button but in making the decisions that give a piece coherence, purpose, and meaning.
AI Isn’t Stealing Your Job — Skill Alone Was Never Enough – This article argues that AI is not “stealing jobs” but accelerating a structural reality that has always existed: skill alone has rarely been enough to guarantee career stability. Drawing on examples from bookkeeping, software development, and creative fields, the piece shows that roles built primarily on isolated execution have long been vulnerable to replacement through globalization, tooling, and market pressures. AI merely compresses the timeline, making pre‑existing fragilities visible more quickly. The essay distinguishes between execution—easily automated—and judgment, context, and accountability, which remain resistant to automation and form the true basis of durable work. It contends that only a small minority can survive on skill alone, while most people gain resilience by operating across domains, integrating perspectives, and building credibility in the interpretive spaces where decisions carry consequences. Ultimately, the article reframes AI not as a thief but as a force that exposes which roles were never structurally secure, urging readers to shift from skill‑centric identity to cross‑domain positioning and compounding judgment.
Voice and Style: a Misplaced Anxiety in the GenAI Debate – This article challenges the widespread claim that generative AI inevitably erodes an author’s “voice” and “style,” arguing that the concern reflects a professionalized anxiety that does not generalize to most writers. While experienced writers with established stylistic identities may experience AI assistance as a form of homogenization, the majority of people write functionally rather than artistically and often lack a stable voice to “lose.” For these writers, AI tools frequently enhance clarity, coherence, and communicative confidence rather than diminish individuality. The essay highlights the social asymmetries embedded in the debate, noting that stylistic vulnerability and the risks of misinterpretation fall disproportionately on less polished writers, not on those advocating for stylistic purity. By reframing the issue as a divergence of needs—distinction versus legibility—the article argues for a non‑interference approach that respects differing goals and acknowledges that GenAI reshapes writing unevenly across contexts.
My Practical Perspective on AI – In a landscape increasingly shaped by generative AI, Hideki Saito offers a grounded and nuanced take on how these tools are transforming the writing process. Drawing from his experience as a software engineer and AI enthusiast, Saito explores the tension between innovation and authenticity, arguing that AI should be embraced as a supportive tool—not feared or blindly trusted. His article challenges rigid policies and one-size-fits-all judgments, advocating instead for transparency, inclusivity, and respect for diverse writing styles and needs.
Beyond the Hype: Why Thoughtful Engineers Should Be Wary of Autonomous GenAI Coding – Generative AI (GenAI) has captivated the tech industry with promises of revolutionizing software development, offering tools that can seemingly conjure code from thin air. In his thought-provoking piece, Hideki Saito explores the growing allure of autonomous GenAI coding and urges engineers to look beyond the dazzling demos. He advocates for a grounded, strategic approach—one that recognizes GenAI’s potential while remaining vigilant about its limitations in real-world engineering. This article invites readers to rethink the role of AI in software creation, not as a replacement for human insight, but as a tool that demands careful integration and oversight.
AI Agents: Just a FUD? - The article critiques the practicality of AI agents, arguing that while they may be useful in niche applications, their widespread adoption faces significant hurdles. Unlike traditional automation, AI agents are designed to operate independently, but their inherent unpredictability makes them unreliable for high-stakes fields like healthcare and finance. The probabilistic nature of AI, susceptibility to data manipulation, and challenges with real-time voice interactions further complicate their effectiveness. Additionally, the lack of clear accountability for AI-driven decisions raises ethical and legal concerns. While AI agents may succeed in controlled environments where errors have minimal impact—such as logistics or simulations—the vision of fully autonomous AI handling critical tasks remains unrealistic. The article concludes that AI agents are more of a speculative idea than a viable replacement for human decision-making in most fields.
Beyond the Buzzwords: Rethinking AI in Writing - The article challenges the oversimplified assumptions about AI-generated writing, particularly the idea that words like “Furthermore” or polished text automatically indicate AI involvement. It highlights how writing style is influenced by reading habits, education, and editing tools like Grammarly, making AI detection based on superficial markers unreliable. The piece also critiques the flawed logic of AI “policing” in creative fields and argues that AI can be a helpful tool rather than a threat. Ethical concerns arise when anti-AI articles rely on sensationalism rather than meaningful discussion. Instead of fixating on AI detection, the article advocates for evaluating writing based on purpose, accuracy, and value, encouraging a more constructive dialogue on human-AI collaboration.
The State of Generative AI Sentiment in Japan’s Illustration Scene – This article examines the polarized debate surrounding generative AI in Japan’s illustration scene. It analyzes the cultural and ethical concerns fueling the divide between traditional artists and those embracing AI tools, highlighting the impact on business practices and the challenges of finding common ground in a rapidly changing creative landscape.
The Tricky Terrain of Defining “AI Involvement” in Writing – This article explores the blurred lines between human and AI contributions in writing. It examines the spectrum of AI assistance, from grammar correction to full text generation, and the difficulties in detecting such involvement. The ethical considerations of disclosure and the impact on perceived authenticity are discussed. The article concludes by advocating for transparency and prioritizing the inherent value of the writing, irrespective of the tools employed.
The Alarming Assumption: When Writing Gets Dismissed as AI-Generated – This article discusses the author’s personal experiences as a non-native English speaker whose writing style is sometimes mistaken for AI-generated. It highlights the challenges faced by non-native writers and criticizes the assumption that polished or unusual writing is automatically AI-produced. The author advocates for appreciating the diversity of voices and judging writing by its content rather than its perceived origin.