Replaced
-
what happens if it’s cranking out screenplays and paintings that DO pass muster?
It's inevitable. Eventually we will be able to ask for, and then refine, the perfect TV show for our particular tastes. Want 'Buffy' but set in the Fallout universe with Dumbledore and Boromir? Give it a minute and you'll have it.
It is definitely possible to create that. The question is, will it ever be profitable, or cheap enough to be user made/controlled? I doubt it. Tech growth isn't just limited by what's possible, but also by what's practical.
-
Gpt will probably replace a lot of jobs but creative ones it will not. Don't forget that it's a tool, it need input to "create". ...I hope
I don't think it will replace creatives for personal projects and requests. But in the souless corporate/business world it will definitely replace them. We already see it happening, even with gpt in its infancy.
-
I actually think the "it's soulless... FOR NOW" panel is pretty important.
People who believe in the value of human creativity have been pretty casual about saying that AI generated work isn't as good as work created by a person, but what happens if in another iteration or two it actually CAN produce "good" "art"? Like, what happens if it's cranking out screenplays and paintings that DO pass muster? We've got to be prepared for that possibility, and try to act now to make sure that our world is structured around preserving human dignity on its own merits. The existence of a faster work-doing machine shouldn't necessitate that all human workers must now starve.
I think this idea misses the fundamental way that the transformer works on neural networks. The output can be useful, but the mechanism of arriving there is more about probability than creativity.
An LLM cannot create true art because it cannot experience feelings, it has no continuity of being. It can only replicate the artistic patterns it was trained on; those patterns can come from true art, and can be combined in unique ways, but the only real art is in the writing of the prompt and the data it was trained on.
It's like how the patterns of a kaleidoscope can make beautiful images, but all the creativity is in it's construction and how it's used.
We could conceivably extend the transformer model to include other aspects of thought, possibly even a consciousness capable of artistic expression, but it will take a lot of new work, it's not a place we can arrive by simply adding more power or additional training to our current models.
Almost all the algorithms used by modern AI were written decades ago, it's only usable now because compute power has made such huge gains. It will likely take many decades more to create true artificial consciousness.
-
YouTube added the shittest, laziest AI generated category graphics to the app, leaving me thinking “fucking Google doesn’t have any spare money knocking around to spend on this?!”.
-
The flip side is that AI being able to create art democratizes art so that anyone with an idea can execute it. I don't need to have a steady hand to make a drawing of the idea I have and I don't need to be a software expert- I can describe what I want and what message I'm trying to convey and when the AI produces what I had imagined, I can share it with the world.
What does 'democratise art' even mean? It's not like everyone votes for a specific generated AI image.
Anyway, I think what you mean is Socialism, in terms of AI making 'skills' available for everyone.
But it's not. It's stealing your capability to learn and taking it for itself without paying you for your efforts. Every input you use trains the model. Even though you're not creating art, you're still creating a prompt and you should be paid for your labour.
It's already been said by the operators of this massive scam. They can only operate via theft.
-
wrote last edited by [email protected]
Not pictured: broke stenographers operating the rollercoaster in tears because their jobs were taken by computers long before the chatbots came to town.
(It's me, I am the stenographer
) -
Humans learn by copying other artists too.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Yup yup Leonardo totally got sued by the first person who made a cave painting for plagiarism.
Great logic.
Go huff your own farts some more, troll bait.
-
+100. I wish I could pin this.
That being said, I think AI Bro existentialism and singularity hype has a lot of people on particular edge, beyond what the camera and other past innovations triggered, since it's pushed at such high levels of our world. But (speaking a fervent local ML tinkerer), the proof is not in their puddin', as professional, foundational researchers would tell you as well. Not just because of technical limitations, but because corporate enshittification is already taking effect.
People on the more spiritual side of things thought that being photographed meant trapping a part of your soul into the camera. It was a more existential creation than we give it credit for. Before then, nobody had ever stopped time.
-
AI produces what I had imagined
nope. AI is producing what AI imagined. It is not some kind of magic brain reading machine and never will be. I'd rather see palsy-drawn shaky line stick figures than midjourney six finger abominations any day.
By choosing the path of least resistance you're cheating your own creativity and robbing the world of yet another human voice.
And training the machines to take other artists jobs.
Cute.
AI is producing a vague estimate from a large amount of training data (usually image-description pairs), and a user prompt, sometimes with the help of a user image. As such, the AI is unable to be used for anything beyond slop. But for the media executives with their "granduous ideas", it's more than enough. They're almost always having the outsider's understanding of what art is (the "coming up with an idea" thing), but de facto see themselves as a kind of "artists".
-
Wow I use boost and I had no idea!
It's the reason I started using boost in the first place.
-
AI is producing a vague estimate from a large amount of training data (usually image-description pairs), and a user prompt, sometimes with the help of a user image. As such, the AI is unable to be used for anything beyond slop. But for the media executives with their "granduous ideas", it's more than enough. They're almost always having the outsider's understanding of what art is (the "coming up with an idea" thing), but de facto see themselves as a kind of "artists".
wrote last edited by [email protected]Yep. And the big names are so overinvested on AI that we're building gigantic data centers and google is investing in fusion (PURCHASING!) before it's even proven.... pouring more resource stress and emissions worldwide...
what the fuck are we doing
-
AI should have been used to do work for us to give us more time for art. Not the other way around...
Time to collapse the system
-
You don't have to draw perfect art. I make a webcomic and it's not all straight lines shit. But it's true art that I did myself no AI needed.
Example
That's still better than anything I've ever drawn in my life lmao
Truth be told, I've given up on the idea of ever creating anything artful on my own. The couple of video game ideas I have, if I end up creating any of them, will have to have outsourced art. For which I'd use humans, just nobody particularly expensive lol
I have an idea for a fast-paced side scroller that doesn't require all that much artwork necessarily, but is also not the one I'm most excited about. The one I really want to make is a 3D RPG (without the MMO that often comes in front of those letters - I'm crazy but not THAT crazy) and I have a lot of mental material, but I literally can't afford to get it done at the moment. Have been considering reaching out to a studio whose asset packs I like on the Unreal and Unity stores to get a lot more work done in the same style, but I already know it'd be crazy and my ADHD ass isn't going to finish the game anyway. Plus I'd want sound effects, semi-OK voice acting... All things I can't do alone unless AI (voice actually is the easiest - I could do one role myself, and get some friends to do a few more).
But at this point I've realized my other two projects are more likely to bring in money than the game which is more of a creative output, and I can work on them alone or give people a stake in the company to get them to work for cheap. Why make a passion project for yourself and other people to enjoy when you can focus on what truly matters in life, B2B SaaS.
-
Not pictured: broke stenographers operating the rollercoaster in tears because their jobs were taken by computers long before the chatbots came to town.
(It's me, I am the stenographer
)I wish I could type as fast as you.
