The concept of "taste" is demystified as the crucial human act of defining boundaries for what is good or right. An LLM, having seen everything, lacks opinion. Without a human specifying these constraints, AI will only produce generic, undesirable output—or "AI slop." The creator's opinion is the essential ingredient.
Related Insights
AI won't replace designers because it lacks taste and subjective opinion. Instead, as AI gets better at generating highly opinionated (though not perfect) designs, it will serve as a powerful exploration tool. This plants more flags in the option space, allowing human designers to react, curate, and push the most promising directions further, amplifying their strategic role.
Users are dissatisfied with purely AI-generated creative outputs like interior design, calling it "slop." This creates an opportunity for platforms that blend AI's efficiency with a human's taste and curation, for which consumers are willing to pay a premium.
AI tools rarely produce perfect results initially. The user's critical role is to serve as a creative director, not just an operator. This means iteratively refining prompts, demanding better scripts, and correcting logical flaws in the output to avoid generic, low-quality content.
As AI drives the cost of content creation to zero, the world floods with 'average' material. In this environment, the most valuable and scarce skill becomes 'taste'—the ability to identify, curate, and champion high-quality, commercially viable work. This elevates the role of human curators over pure creators.
![Ari Emanuel - The Anti-AI Bet - [Invest Like the Best, EP.448] thumbnail](https://megaphone.imgix.net/podcasts/c5910280-c4dd-11f0-94be-ab6a7a5865b0/image/1e5a2263eb62fcde200846919e24419a.jpg?ixlib=rails-4.3.1&max-w=3000&max-h=3000&fit=crop&auto=format,compress)
Technical talent is not the primary driver of resonant creative work. The key ingredient is 'taste'—an unteachable ability to discern what will be emotionally pleasing and impactful to an audience. This intuitive sense separates good creators from great ones.
Instead of giving an AI creative freedom, defining tight boundaries like word count, writing style, and even forbidden words forces the model to generate more specific, unique, and less generic content. A well-defined box produces a more creative result than an empty field.
To codify a specific person's "taste" in writing, the team fed the DSPy framework a dataset of tweets with thumbs up/down ratings and explanations. DSPy then optimized a prompt that created an AI "judge" capable of evaluating new content with 76.5% accuracy against that person's preferences.
The best AI models are trained on data that reflects deep, subjective qualities—not just simple criteria. This "taste" is a key differentiator, influencing everything from code generation to creative writing, and is shaped by the values of the frontier lab.
