beetlejuice's ghoulish wifeI'm not that concerned about like rogue AI destroying humanity but I'm scared shitless of the human costs of a bunch of business geeks trying to shoehorn AI into every space of human endeavor as a hedge against workers (who they despise)
Something that really strikes me about people posting like "Hollywood is OVER!!!" over some weird uncanny valley nightmare video is - I genuinely do not believe these people understand that when directors or writers or illustrators have creative visions they want control over how those ideas are actualized. That the process of changing an idea into a piece of art is where the art COMES FROM
Clinical Rawlsian@mark The story emerging around "AI" has so many parallels to the history of the Luddites.
As @pluralistic says, "It’s not what technology does that matters, but who it does it for and who it does it to."
@mark @pluralistic The issue with AI isn't that it will automate some processes previously done by human creators. It's that it will do so using the output of those creators as "training data" without those creators ever being compensated.
And it will do so to further enrich people that are already rich at the expense of creators, performers, and audiences.
MiloWinterBurn@MadMadMadMadRN @mark @pluralistic well not only. It will also enable lots of artists with little budget to create, and probably earn a decent sum of their creation (well the latter is already in place)
@MiloWinterBurn @mark @pluralistic
No, it won't. Things like Dall-E and ChatGPT are free to use now. But they are owned by huge tech companies that exist to make their shareholders wealthy. As with so many other tech products, once creators are hooked, the companies that own these AI products will enshittify them by charging more for an ever worse product. Also, why would anyone pay an artist for art generated by an AI when they can just go to the source?
No, it won't. Things like Dall-E and ChatGPT are free to use now. But they are owned by huge tech companies that exist to make their shareholders wealthy. As with so many other tech products, once creators are hooked, the companies that own these AI products will enshittify them by charging more for an ever worse product. Also, why would anyone pay an artist for art generated by an AI when they can just go to the source?
@MadMadMadMadRN @mark @pluralistic because the tool isn't the art.
And - the OS models are chasing them big companies, in some areas they are not that far behind (eg stable diffusion). I think there is a decent chance for this to play out with not that much enshittification, since that drives OS innovation.
There is no platform power here, and it remains to be seen how advantageous big models are over medium sized models that we can run on our own machines or with a couple of € of cloud gpus
@MiloWinterBurn @mark @pluralistic Maybe. I hope so. My concern is that these tools will do to creators what Pages did to graphic designers. It won't completely eradicate jobs, but it will make them far more precarious and poorly compensated.
@MadMadMadMadRN @mark @pluralistic well sure, lots of jobs are precious now or soon. Times are a changing. In the end humanity will gain from this, at least overal.
Some people will need to up skill/reskill, or well, lots. I think it's time for UBI. But I give it a couple of years for that to sink in.