Lawyer Lin Shanglun's Special Article: Viewing AI Fear from the Cai Aga Incident: What You Are Angry About Is Not AI, but the Fear of Being Outdone

Recently, Cai Aga went to Japan and compared street portrait painters to AI, sparking a nationwide backlash and eventually leading to an apology video. The public's anger stems from "disrespecting other creators," but on a deeper level, it's because people "misunderstand" AI and therefore "underestimate" it.

(Previous context: Attorney Lin Shanglun's exclusive article > Still skeptical about AI? Top lawyers are already using it like "water and electricity")
(Background supplement: AI panic about unemployment! Microsoft executive warns: Most white-collar workers will be automated within "12-18 months")

Table of Contents

Toggle

• The Most Absurd Misunderstanding: "AI Shouldn't Be Compared to Humans"
• Tearing Off the Fig Leaf: The Essence of Anger is Naked Fear
• "I Write Better Than AI" – This Is Naive and Misguided
• Don't Mistake "Cherishing Your Own Things" as a Reason Not to Improve
• Conclusion: AI Will Not Wait for You

Key Takeaways

• Cai Aga went to Japan and compared street portrait painters to AI, sparking a nationwide backlash and eventually making an apology video
• Attorney Lin Shanglun points out that the only benchmark for AI's progress is humans, so "shouldn't be compared" is inherently contradictory
• Global AI adoption rate is less than 1%–2%; those embracing AI are heading into the next era

Recently, Cai Aga went to Japan and compared street portrait painters to AI, sparking a nationwide backlash and eventually leading to an apology video. On the surface, this was a public trial of "an influencer disrespecting grassroots creators." But as a lawyer, I see something deeper and more alarming. I want to use this incident to review several common misunderstandings about AI that I've observed over time. It's a shame that so many people, due to "misunderstanding" AI, "underestimate" it, then "boycott" it and "attack" it.

The Most Absurd Misunderstanding: "AI Shouldn't Be Compared to Humans"

In my view, the most widespread and damaging backlash is when people righteously say, "How can art be compared to AI? That's disrespectful to the artist." This statement itself reflects a serious misunderstanding of AI's nature. And this misunderstanding is completely at odds with how AI operates.

Consider this: Why has AI advanced to where it is today? Whether it's passing medical exams, writing code, or generating images like Nano Banana or GPT, its sole benchmark has always been "humans." We test AI by comparing it to human test-taking abilities; we evaluate AI-generated images by comparing them to human artists; we assess AI's legal analysis by comparing it to professional lawyers. Every second, AI is comparing itself to humans, constantly measuring progress to know how far it has come and whether it can take over mechanical, repetitive tasks, freeing humans to invest their precious time and resources in higher-level strategy and creation. Isn't that the essence of AI?

So when someone says "AI shouldn't be compared to humans," this statement itself is a contradiction. The issue has never been "whether it can be compared," but why people are so afraid of being compared.

Tearing Off the Fig Leaf: The Essence of Anger is Naked Fear

If we dig deeper, the causes of this anger stem from several different layers.

The first cause is "when effort no longer guarantees value." Human society has long believed in "no pain, no gain," and habitually equated "hours of practice" with "personal value." AI has broken that equation. What the public fears is not that AI draws better, but rather: "If my skill, honed over ten years, can be done by AI in ten seconds, then where is my value?" This collapse of self-worth is too painful, so people instinctively refuse comparison and even attack the person who makes the comparison, thereby defending their inner unease.

The second cause is "the brutal truth is exposed." This is the hardest part for people to face. Many jobs we think require high-level mental work are essentially just "pattern recognition" and "repetitive output." Whether drawing a standardized portrait, drafting boilerplate contracts, or handling complex regulatory comparisons, as long as there is a fixed logic and routine, it's exactly the domain AI should take over. AI's power inadvertently tears off this fig leaf, forcing people to realize that their work is not as "irreplaceable" as they thought—this is the true cause of the fear explosion.

History has shown this before: When the camera was invented, painters were terrified, thinking art would die. What happened? The camera took over "realistic recording," but forced the emergence of Impressionism and Abstract art, pushing humans to explore the inner world that cameras couldn't capture. The AI era is the same—it's just drawing a new "human baseline."

"I Write Better Than AI" – This Is Naive and Misguided

The most dangerous aspect of fear is that it blinds you, making you cling to old methods and miss the opportunity to evolve. And in the end, it punishes you.

The legal profession is a classic battlefield. Many traditional lawyers reject AI, insisting that every document, every search, every contract must be done purely manually, believing that's what "professionalism" means. But in reality, if you can use AI to automate these repetitive paperwork tasks and searches, then free up mental energy to focus on the business logic of cases, cross-border strategy, and client trust, that's a true upgrade of professionalism. You should know that today, the law firms that fully embrace AI are the top-tier, most profitable international firms, and everyone from interns to senior lawyers to partners uses AI. Why? Because when a machine can already do something, no one goes back to the old way. It's like once you have a calculator, you don't use an abacus; you can fly to a destination, so you don't walk or sail. That's the essence of progress. Rejecting AI is like insisting on walking while cars race past—not only tiring, but also limiting how far you can go.

Don't Mistake "Cherishing Your Own Things" as a Reason Not to Improve

This "cherishing one's own things" mindset (treating your own broken broom as a treasure) can be seen in every professional field. But look at those who truly treat AI as their "strongest assistant"—they have already reached impressive new heights.

Take gaming as an example: Traditional RPG NPCs are like script readers, repeating the same lines, boring players after two encounters. Now the industry introduces generative AI (like NVIDIA's ACE technology), giving NPCs a ChatGPT-like brain that can react in real-time based on player tone, haggle, or even reveal hidden clues. AI hasn't destroyed gaming; instead, it has brought immersion to unprecedented levels. Another example: Artist Refik Anadol, whose work has been exhibited at MoMA in New York, uses not paintbrushes but "algorithms" and "massive data." AI learns from millions of images to generate flowing "data sculptures." The impact is something pure human handwork could never achieve in a thousand years. Rie Kudan, winner of Japan's highest pure literature award, the Akutagawa Prize, openly admitted in her acceptance speech that about part of her award-winning novel was "verbatim use of generative AI responses." For her, AI is not cheating but a super-intelligent assistant to break through creative blocks and inspire.

This is like: When the world's top, most profitable law firms all recognize that "AI is a very useful tool," it's like this year's NBA championship team unanimously agreeing that "this basketball is great to play with." But many people reject it, like a third-world basketball team claiming "this basketball is not good to play with." Such a claim is irrational and, in terms of probability and common sense, hard to convince anyone.

This is the real situation: The top writers, lawyers, and tech people are using AI to evolve like crazy. But we are still arguing online about whether "comparing AI to humans is disrespectful"—a fake issue—and even refusing to embrace new technology to protect so-called "self-esteem." That picture is truly sad.

Conclusion: AI Will Not Wait for You

Finally, back to Cai Aga's incident. The public demands basic respect for grassroots creators—I completely agree. But if this backlash only makes people more confidently conclude that "AI will never catch up to humans" or "AI will never deserve to be compared to humans in art," then these people are truly missing out.

Because after all the shouting, AI will not wait for you. The wheel of technology will not stop turning for a second due to anyone's fear. Today, you should know that AI is a "universal technology," like a smartphone, with a low learning curve and intuitive use. Yet, despite being so accessible, powerful, and useful, the global adoption rate is less than 1%–2%. From another perspective, this is the best time for those who embrace AI, because while 99% of people are still on the shore cursing the boat, those who boarded early have already sailed toward the next era.

The future world is never "humans vs. AI," but "those who use AI vs. those who don't." When top experts have already boarded the high-speed train, ready to head to the next era, some insist on walking and loudly criticize the train for "not experiencing the warmth of the journey." Those who will truly be eliminated by the times are never those defeated by AI, but those who close their eyes out of fear and then accuse others of "shouldn't compare AI." Embrace comparison, evolve to a higher dimension—that is the greatest dividend this AI era offers us.