9 ms·

When asked about what jobs the robots would come for first, I would have had to say that digital artist was pretty low on my ranking before now.

Dylan16807 4y ago
Maybe, but this is replacing fifty cents of stock photo, not digital artists.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- jonas21 4y ago
  Who do you think created that 50-cent stock art?
  - Dylan16807 4y ago
    Probably not a digital artist. Is there a big fraction of that on stock photo sites?
  - stemlord 4y ago
    There is a semantic issue going on here, "digital art" I thought meant fine art, not illustration for blog posts
ravenstine 4y ago
It's coming for us, too. It won't be long before most software engineer positions are eliminated while some are replaced by software "technicians" with enough expertise to command AI to generate working code. Perhaps the technicians will be tasked with building tests and some automation, but even that stuff can be delegated to AI to an extent. This may seem far off because the present economy is accustomed to paying engineers large sums of money to write apps. Even with the retractions we've been seeing in hiring and venture capital, there's just enough easy money still there and the capabilities of code-writing AIs isn't quite there yet. All we need is a significant market correction and the next generation of AI to wipe out a large swath of tech jobs. The next step regardless is applying technologies like DALL-E to web design, and for said technology to be widely used, open and affordable. We won't need web designers or even UXD. Then we won't need as many engineers when AI can solve a lot of common problems in building software. AI can do it better because it won't spend inordinate amounts of time dillydallying over next-gen frameworks, toolchains, and preprocessors. AI won't even have to worry about writing "clean" and maintainable code because those things will no longer matter.
- Dylan16807 4y ago
  > software "technicians" with enough expertise to command AI to generate working code People keep trying to make simplified programming environments for significantly less-trained people and they keep failing. Is mixing in an AI actually going to make it easier to get a result that has no crippling bugs?
  - numpad0 4y ago
    And how is it going to increase information in the output by having AI involved, if these AIs aren’t actually thinking and pouring out of their own entropy source into outputs?
  - lmm 4y ago
    No, but when have crippling bugs ever stopped software businesses from shipping it anyway?
    - tablespoon 4y ago
      >> People keep trying to make simplified programming environments for significantly less-trained people and they keep failing. Is mixing in an AI actually going to make it easier to get a result that has no crippling bugs? Yeah. I've even worked in one of those environments for a year (not my choice). I'm of the opinion those kind of environments won't ever work. They'll either be: 1. Extremely cookie-cutter (e.g. make a clone of our "standard app" with a insignificant little tweaks). 2. Require software engineers to get anything useful out of them, and those engineers will feel like they're working with one hand tied behind their backs (or banging their heads against a wall). IMHO, one of the main skills of a software engineer is translating user requirements into technical requirements that work and understanding when they work. I don't think skill is automatable without a fairy-tale AGI. > No, but when have crippling bugs ever stopped software businesses from shipping it anyway? A lot? Depends on your definition of "crippling." A software engineer will gripe and say, "I don't want to use this;" something that's awkward but the people who use it can still get their work done; or the system literally incapable of performing its function?
- 4y ago
gitgud 4y ago
The reason it's focused so much is that art has incredibly low stakes... and people don't want AI making any seemingly important decisions...
Bjorkbat 4y ago
And digital artists aren't still pretty low on your ranking? I don't know, after all the predictions about self-driving cars, I'm cautious. Especially considering that back then, it almost seemed obvious that we'd have self-driving cars by now. Cars were certainly capable of driving themselves back in 2016, it just seemed like we needed to iron out a few kinks. How long could that possibly take? Now, I have no idea when it'll happen. I'm not necessarily saying that it'll take AI forever to do what humans can do. Rather, I think its very hard to make good predictions with all the hype slightly deceptive marketing.
- vbezhenar 4y ago
  Self-driving cars are reality for a few years already. Issue is with laws and people, much less with tech.
  - nawgz 4y ago
    I think this is a comment for which "sources needed" is kind of the bare minimum. To most people, the "readiness" of self-driving cars doesn't even come about when they would accomplish parity with human drivers across all situations, because they should be better. And we're not even close to parity with human drivers across a large swath of common situations. Unless you have links showing otherwise...
  - Sebb767 4y ago
    They issue is absolutely with tech. Cars can drive themselves right now in good conditions and with a human taking over ASAP in case it fails and even that isn't working 100%. Put that self driving car on a mountain road or in deep snow and see what happens. Also, if your bar for accidents is "slightly better than a drunk driver and even less accountable", sure, then we can fully deploy that right now. Unfortunately this really isn't sufficient and car companies are fully aware. There's a reason Mercedes made headlines by taking responsibility for the car for ten seconds after disengaging the auto pilot and why they're the only ones who are doing this so far.
  - prmoustache 4y ago
    They works great when conditions are ok. As soon as there is an outstanding parameter they fail spectactularly. We can also talk about AI support service crap with accounts banned/locked without the user having any way to know why or prove he didn't break any terms of the contracts.
smugma 4y ago
Same. I would have thought the arts would be the last to move to AI. What do you put at the end of the list now? It's not trucking. Or ordering. Or anything related to porn. Eliza is 50+ years old, not actually a good replacement for a psychotherapist yet but I would imagine it could go a long way. I'm biased from the terrible experience I had trying to get my kids to learn online in the pandemic, but I think schoolteacher might be one of the mass professions that is least susceptible to being AI Engineered away. Ethicist is probably a safe career path too, but there aren't that many of those. And Politicians will of course prevent robots from taking over their jobs.

Dylan16807 4y ago

Maybe, but this is replacing fifty cents of stock photo, not digital artists.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
jonas21 4y ago
Who do you think created that 50-cent stock art?
- Dylan16807 4y ago
  Probably not a digital artist. Is there a big fraction of that on stock photo sites?
- stemlord 4y ago
  There is a semantic issue going on here, "digital art" I thought meant fine art, not illustration for blog posts

ravenstine 4y ago

It's coming for us, too. It won't be long before most software engineer positions are eliminated while some are replaced by software "technicians" with enough expertise to command AI to generate working code. Perhaps the technicians will be tasked with building tests and some automation, but even that stuff can be delegated to AI to an extent. This may seem far off because the present economy is accustomed to paying engineers large sums of money to write apps. Even with the retractions we've been seeing in hiring and venture capital, there's just enough easy money still there and the capabilities of code-writing AIs isn't quite there yet. All we need is a significant market correction and the next generation of AI to wipe out a large swath of tech jobs. The next step regardless is applying technologies like DALL-E to web design, and for said technology to be widely used, open and affordable. We won't need web designers or even UXD. Then we won't need as many engineers when AI can solve a lot of common problems in building software. AI can do it better because it won't spend inordinate amounts of time dillydallying over next-gen frameworks, toolchains, and preprocessors. AI won't even have to worry about writing "clean" and maintainable code because those things will no longer matter.

Dylan16807 4y ago
> software "technicians" with enough expertise to command AI to generate working code People keep trying to make simplified programming environments for significantly less-trained people and they keep failing. Is mixing in an AI actually going to make it easier to get a result that has no crippling bugs?
- numpad0 4y ago
  And how is it going to increase information in the output by having AI involved, if these AIs aren’t actually thinking and pouring out of their own entropy source into outputs?
- lmm 4y ago
  No, but when have crippling bugs ever stopped software businesses from shipping it anyway?
  - tablespoon 4y ago
    >> People keep trying to make simplified programming environments for significantly less-trained people and they keep failing. Is mixing in an AI actually going to make it easier to get a result that has no crippling bugs? Yeah. I've even worked in one of those environments for a year (not my choice). I'm of the opinion those kind of environments won't ever work. They'll either be: 1. Extremely cookie-cutter (e.g. make a clone of our "standard app" with a insignificant little tweaks). 2. Require software engineers to get anything useful out of them, and those engineers will feel like they're working with one hand tied behind their backs (or banging their heads against a wall). IMHO, one of the main skills of a software engineer is translating user requirements into technical requirements that work and understanding when they work. I don't think skill is automatable without a fairy-tale AGI. > No, but when have crippling bugs ever stopped software businesses from shipping it anyway? A lot? Depends on your definition of "crippling." A software engineer will gripe and say, "I don't want to use this;" something that's awkward but the people who use it can still get their work done; or the system literally incapable of performing its function?
4y ago

gitgud 4y ago

The reason it's focused so much is that art has incredibly low stakes... and people don't want AI making any seemingly important decisions...

Bjorkbat 4y ago

And digital artists aren't still pretty low on your ranking? I don't know, after all the predictions about self-driving cars, I'm cautious. Especially considering that back then, it almost seemed obvious that we'd have self-driving cars by now. Cars were certainly capable of driving themselves back in 2016, it just seemed like we needed to iron out a few kinks. How long could that possibly take? Now, I have no idea when it'll happen. I'm not necessarily saying that it'll take AI forever to do what humans can do. Rather, I think its very hard to make good predictions with all the hype slightly deceptive marketing.

vbezhenar 4y ago
Self-driving cars are reality for a few years already. Issue is with laws and people, much less with tech.
- nawgz 4y ago
  I think this is a comment for which "sources needed" is kind of the bare minimum. To most people, the "readiness" of self-driving cars doesn't even come about when they would accomplish parity with human drivers across all situations, because they should be better. And we're not even close to parity with human drivers across a large swath of common situations. Unless you have links showing otherwise...
- Sebb767 4y ago
  They issue is absolutely with tech. Cars can drive themselves right now in good conditions and with a human taking over ASAP in case it fails and even that isn't working 100%. Put that self driving car on a mountain road or in deep snow and see what happens. Also, if your bar for accidents is "slightly better than a drunk driver and even less accountable", sure, then we can fully deploy that right now. Unfortunately this really isn't sufficient and car companies are fully aware. There's a reason Mercedes made headlines by taking responsibility for the car for ten seconds after disengaging the auto pilot and why they're the only ones who are doing this so far.
- prmoustache 4y ago
  They works great when conditions are ok. As soon as there is an outstanding parameter they fail spectactularly. We can also talk about AI support service crap with accounts banned/locked without the user having any way to know why or prove he didn't break any terms of the contracts.

smugma 4y ago

Same. I would have thought the arts would be the last to move to AI. What do you put at the end of the list now? It's not trucking. Or ordering. Or anything related to porn. Eliza is 50+ years old, not actually a good replacement for a psychotherapist yet but I would imagine it could go a long way. I'm biased from the terrible experience I had trying to get my kids to learn online in the pandemic, but I think schoolteacher might be one of the mass professions that is least susceptible to being AI Engineered away. Ethicist is probably a safe career path too, but there aren't that many of those. And Politicians will of course prevent robots from taking over their jobs.