@AuthorJMac
And that is exactly where this whole "Ai" shit went wrong.

Companies just want to make money and not make our lives easier.

@Uddelhexe @AuthorJMac Absolutely. But that's the same with every business, whether they admit it or not. Almost nobody goes to work because it's fun or helpful, they go because there's money in it.

The "labo(u)r-saving" devices of seventy years ago were invented to free citizens to get out and do stuff they hated with people they didn't like for bosses they despised so that folk they never met could have unearned incomes. AI's no different.

@AuthorJMac @Uddelhexe I'm sure you must be right, but I'm not sure I see it. As I understand it, AI's good at churning out boiler-plate prose and images (likely plagiarised and probably wrong) and spotting anomalies in account-books or X-rays, but none of that sounds much like fun.

The risk, as I see it, is managers will assume AI will boost productivity, and give workers twice the "fun" in half the time, to make them four times as profitable.

But that's a tale as old as time-and-motion men.

@wibble @AuthorJMac @Uddelhexe Well for art, it certainly isn't fun if we would use AI instead of creating our own thing. So yes in that regard it would take away the fun part. Plus people might lose jobs, because companies rather use AI to make pictures. (Even if someone would do those, they might just need one person for it and not more, which they might have needed before.)

That's what we mean with losing the fun jobs.

@wibble @AuthorJMac @Uddelhexe

I don't think people condemn all AI, when they talk about AI. Like the ones used for science to analyze large amount of data, that's sure something useful.
Or things which can upscale a picture or choosing an object when clicking on it, that's also not something people see as bad.

But AI generating pictures, 3D models, text etc. that's something people worry about.
Some already feel their impact and worry it might get worse.

@kanrei @AuthorJMac @Uddelhexe It's definitely a threat, I'm just not sure how much it'll be. For, even if AI does manage to solve the problem of the seven-fingered foot, there's still the question of plagiarism and, if there's a positive aspect to lawyers earning more than artists, that'll be it.

Still, I've seen typists, typesetters and music copyists go extinct in my lifetime, thanks to technology, so it's possible that AI will do for illustrators what, say, photography did for painters.

@wibble @kanrei @AuthorJMac

I hope not, cause the forementioned functions that went extinct were not those producing new art or writing, just doing technics around it. And fotography did not erase painters. They do very much exist and paint. Photography is just an added artform that still uses the human mind to search for the motive, set in in scene, focus...but Ai is for one not producing something new and cannot live out of its own products. It needs human inpact