About
I’m a technologist, author, and lifelong digital media enthusiast who’s been lucky enough…
Courses by Tom
Articles by Tom
Activity
8K followers
-
Tom Green shared thisJon elegantly explains why the “human in the loop” is important and why one person can’t possibly know it all or do it alone with AI.Tom Green shared thisIt's 1968, it's peak Cold War, and the software the world is starting to depend on is falling apart. That's why NATO convened the best programmers alive — software failure had become a strategic problem. The machines had grown powerful enough to attempt far more than any one expert could hold, and the moment the ambition outran the single mind carrying it, everything broke. Projects ran late, over budget, shipped broken. They gave it a name that stuck: The Software Crisis. The fix wasn't a better tool. It was the multidisciplinary team — building, managing, testing, designing, deciding, in one room. And here's what we misremember: the team didn't just split the work. It split the weight of being right. No one had to hold every judgment alone, because no single vantage point sees the whole thing truly. Correction, distributed. Disagreement, built in on purpose. It's not 1968 anymore. But listen to how we talk about AI, and we're about to do the whole thing again. The trap isn't new, and AI didn't create it. The lone mind holding everything is the oldest failure in software — the one 1968 diagnosed. AI just made it cheap enough to fall for again, by removing the friction that made going solo impossible. The people using AI to fire their teams and the people insisting AI can't replace them agree on one thing: AI does the production, the human keeps the judgment. They're right. And they've all made the same mistake — they've put that judgment back inside a single head. The exact head that buckled in 1968. Because judgment was never a property of one head. Taste, prioritization, knowing whether your work is any good — those come from friction between minds. From someone who sees what you can't. From a person who tells you you're wrong before the customer does. Quality was always the thing we caught between us. And AI doesn't lift that weight — it concentrates it. AI will do the typing; it will not share the load. It does whatever you ask, including when you're wrong, so every call lands on one person, alone. It's the lone expert the team was built to rescue, reborn with a faster keyboard and the same blind spots. We can't reinstall fifty years of process this quarter. We don't have to. The relief is cheap and available today: one other person who holds a standard you can't see past. So when everyone's being told they can finally go it alone — go find someone on the other side of the room. The discipline that isn't yours. The function you think you've automated away. Not because you can't do the work alone. Because you can't carry it — or see it clearly — alone. We're nearly there. And this time we have something the room in 1968 didn't: their report. We know how this ends when one mind carries it all. So let's not repeat it. Let's do this one right — and skip the next software crisis altogether. The point of each other was never the extra hands. It was the extra eyes.
-
Tom Green shared thisOpportunity:Tom Green shared this👋🏼 I am looking for a remote freelance Experience Strategy leader to join my team at Apple. This role focuses on defining the future of connected experiences, driving clarity from complexity, guiding cross-functional teams, and turning insight into impactful, scalable design systems. You’ll play a key role in shaping both the vision and execution across a broad ecosystem. 👉🏼 Learn more and apply here: 🍏 Associate Creative Director, Experience Strategy https://lnkd.in/g9vx42kc
-
Tom Green shared thisOpportunity:Tom Green shared this👋🏼 I am looking for a remote freelance Experience Strategy leader to join my team at Apple. This role focuses on defining the future of connected experiences, driving clarity from complexity, guiding cross-functional teams, and turning insight into impactful, scalable design systems. You’ll play a key role in shaping both the vision and execution across a broad ecosystem. 👉🏼 Learn more and apply here: 🍏 Associate Creative Director, Experience Strategy https://lnkd.in/g9vx42kc
-
Tom Green shared thisOpportunity:Tom Green shared this👋🏼 I am looking for a remote freelance Experience Strategy leader to join my team at Apple. This role focuses on defining the future of connected experiences, driving clarity from complexity, guiding cross-functional teams, and turning insight into impactful, scalable design systems. You’ll play a key role in shaping both the vision and execution across a broad ecosystem. 👉🏼 Learn more and apply here: 🍏 Associate Creative Director, Experience Strategy https://lnkd.in/g9vx42kc
-
Tom Green posted thisConsider this simple fact of life: The AI tools reshaping the creative industries were built on stolen work. Every AI image generator and writing tool you've used was trained on creative work scraped from the web. Billions of images. Text pulled from books, articles, and websites. Most creators never consented. None were compensated. This wasn't an oversight. It was a business decision. Building today's AI models required training data at a scale no licensing arrangement could realistically supply. The companies involved didn't have the time or resources to negotiate rights with millions of creators, publishers, and estates. So they scraped at scale and dealt with the rights questions later. Court filings confirmed the logic: move fast, build the capability, figure out the legal and ethical issues afterward. In short, ignore permission and apologize later using unheard-of financial resources. The attitude of “let the courts handle it” is breathtaking in its arrogance. You have to admit it was a slick heist. Scrape the data. Release the product, and when people catch on, say, “Well, shucks, we are profoundly sorry, but there is no way to remove the data now.” The datasets have names worth knowing: LAION-5B, Common Crawl, The Pile, Books1 and Books2. In 2025, Anthropic settled a class action lawsuit involving roughly 500,000 pirated books, 8 of which were mine, used to train its Claude models for $1.5 billion, the largest copyright settlement to date. What we are left with is a technology that is a compression of human creative output, not an expression of it. Think of it as turning human creativity into a jpg. It can mimic any style and approximate any tone because those capabilities were extracted from someone else's work. Anything you have posted online has, in all likelihood, been turned into training data. The proof is closer than you might think. #AIEthics #GenerativeAI #Copyright #CreativeIndustries #IntellectualProperty #ArtificialIntelligence
-
Tom Green posted thisVague in. Vague out. That's the whole problem with how most teams and individuals are using Generative AI right now. Before you scale AI to an enterprise or agency level, you need to understand the medium — because its quirks shape every decision going forward. Generative AI is no different from a camera, a paintbrush, or a musical instrument. Each has properties you learn to manipulate. Each rewards precision and punishes vagueness. We gravitate toward the human in the artists we admire. Kandinsky's sense of folly. Lumière's cinematic flair. The back-painted halo on a Wayne Thiebaud slice of cake. These are the creative reference points we carry. When AI gets them right, it's almost transparent. When it gets them wrong, it feels brutish and opaque. That gap isn't a flaw to work around. It's a design problem to solve. Design Thinking — Empathize, Define, Ideate, Prototype, Test — maps directly onto how Generative AI actually works. Not prompt once and ship. Observe. Reframe. Evaluate. Iterate toward your design intent. The shift that matters most? The quality of your questions. "What do I want?" gets you something. "What does my audience need, and what constraints am I working within?" gets you precision. Generative AI rewards the second approach — not because it's an oracle, but because your intent is reflected back with surprising accuracy. Are you or your teams asking the right questions before they open a prompt window? #AI #GenerativeAI #CreativeAI #DesignThining #CreativeIndustries
-
Tom Green shared thisLove this.Tom Green shared thisTomohiro Okazaki is an designer who does some of the most unusual and oddly captivating stop motion animation I've ever seen. He say he approaches stop motion 'from a place outside the stop-motion field, and have been tackling stop-motion from a design perspective', and that clearly shows in the strange and unique ideas he brings to his animation videos. If you like this film, check out his youtube page here for more animation oddness, it's packed with ideas: https://lnkd.in/ea4J4fy2
-
Tom Green shared thisOpportunity:Tom Green shared thisWe are looking for a talented Junior Designer to join Immersive Garden, full-time or remotely as Freelancer. 🦢 You’ll work alongside our senior team on award-winning digital experiences, helping craft refined UX/UI interfaces and social media content for some of the world’s most ambitious brands. No agencies, send me a DM.
-
Tom Green posted thisThe biggest mistake creative teams make with Generative AI isn't a bad prompt. It's a bad process. Prompt once. Review. Shrug. Ship. Or worse: prompt once, love it uncritically, and ship something that looks like everyone else's AI output. Generative AI doesn't reward that approach. It tolerates it. Design Thinking does something different. It forces you to slow down before you speed up. Generative AI is AI slop’s best friend. It will generate something regardless of what you give it. That is a trap. The output looks great, but it rarely meets your intent. Design Thinking puts a process, much like a series of speed bumps, between you and the prompt window. The first speed bump requires you to face a difficult question. The subsequent speed bumps force you to slow down and actually think before you prompt. Here they are: Empathize before you generate. Who is this for, and what do they actually need? It is not what do you want to make. The question, therefore, should be, “Is it what they need to receive?" That question alone will completely change your first prompt. Define before you ideate. What are your constraints? Your tone? Your medium? Your non-negotiables? AI reflects your intent with remarkable accuracy, but only when your intent is clear enough to reflect. Garbage in, garbage out is too simple. It's closer to: fog in, fog out. Ideate without attachment. Use AI to generate options, not answers. Treat the first output as a rough sketch, not a draft. Ask it to surprise you. Push against it. The interesting work starts where the obvious output ends. Prototype iteratively. Adjust, refine, layer in specificity. Each iteration teaches you something about the medium and sharpens your sense of what you're actually trying to make. Test against intent, not output. The question isn't “Does this look good?” The question is, “Does this serve the person it's intended for?" Design Thinking and Generative AI were made for each other. It is not because the technology is intuitive, but because the methodology compensates for exactly where the technology falls short. Vague in. Vague out. Design Thinking forces precision before you open a prompt window. All of this raises a most interesting question: Are you bringing a process or just a prompt to your AI work? #GenerativeAI #CreativeAI #DesignThinking #CreativeIndustries
Tom Green commented on a post
2d
Yes, the Token Feeding Frenzy grinds to a halt when the ROI is out of whack.
Tom Green commented on a post
4d
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/has-linkedin-learning-abandoned-tom-green-fdhlc?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_ios&utm_campaign=share_via
Tom Green commented on a post
4d
Monika Gause Completely agree. Ignores how the million or so colors in the RGB gamut that are mixtures of light are not reproducible in the CMYK gamut. This sort of magical thinking is dangerous.
-
Tom Green liked thisTom Green liked thisThe Adobe Educator Institute is back in June with virtual, hands-on training to help you streamline workflows, strengthen your teaching toolkit, and get more out of Adobe tools. Open to all faculty and staff at Adobe partner institutions: https://lnkd.in/eyPQ2WHN
Experience & Education
-
LinkedIn e-learning
View Tom’s full experience
See their title, tenure and more.
or
Volunteer Experience
-
-
Cub Leader 75th Old Mill
Scouts Canada
- Present 6 years 9 months
Missed Scouting and found this pack
Publications
-
Foundation Adobe Edge Animate
Friends of Ed / An Apress Company
Foundation Adobe Edge Animate is a project-oriented book that will walk you through the features of Edge Animate - Adobe's exciting new motion and interaction tool for web standards development. Edge Animate is an application that allows web designers and developers to make full use of many of the features of CSS3, JavaScript, and HTML5.
Other authors -
-
Foundation Flash CS4 for Designers
Apress (friends of Ed)
Other authors -
Projects
-
Getting Started with Edge Animate
A comprehensive deep dive for designers and developers new to Edge Animate
Other creators -
Organizations
-
Adobe Community Professional
-
-
Adobe Education Leader
-
Recommendations received
3 people have recommended Tom
Join now to viewOther similar profiles
Explore more posts
Explore collaborative articles
We’re unlocking community knowledge in a new way. Experts add insights directly into each article, started with the help of AI.
Explore More