4 ms·

I personally have a while yet before I can be replaced by AI art tools, yes. What I am concerned and angry about is the next generation. The people who are jus

I personally have a while yet before I can be replaced by AI art tools, yes. What I am concerned and angry about is the next generation. The people who are just becoming pros, who are at the point where they are glad to get a job cranking out hundreds of models of sneakers for EA's Basketball Jam 2024 or doing a bunch of D&D character commissions or whatever other commercial art job because it is paying the bills (including working off their massive student debt) by doing what they actually trained to do instead of some shitty minimum-wage job or an even shittier "gig economy" thing. That's the window that all this AI art crap is making a lot smaller.

tluyben2 4y ago
Sure, I know. But what is the use being angry about it? It is happening. You are looking for a socialist/basic income world but live in a capitalist one. That is the problem. If AI replaces (it already does) people that doesn’t create new jobs (it still does!), there is no other route than political. I will be dead and have (notably because of this) no kids, but still vote parties that understand this. Living in a country that requires working like you say is already not ok but, if AI moves on, will collapse. An AI winter might happen though if we don’t move on from this place.
- egypturnash 4y ago
  Research moves forwards when people are willing to put time, money, and effort into it. Remember e-paper? Where'd that go? Patents made it hard to work on, and transmissive displays kept getting better, so we're still staring into flashlights while we're arguing about this. One new law that explicitly redefines "fair use" to exclude "scraping half the entire internet and dumping everything you find into a training dataset", and creates a new framework for proper licensing of training data along with hefty penalties for distributing datasets without these licensing would be a huge roadblock. A grassroots effort of pissed-off artists starting a sideline in assassinating AI researchers would have a pretty chilling effect on the field, too. This may be a little extreme. There are probably solutions that don't go this far. It sure does make a pleasant revenge fantasy though. Time to go read some accounts of how the Unabomber was caught...

tluyben2 4y ago

Sure, I know. But what is the use being angry about it? It is happening. You are looking for a socialist/basic income world but live in a capitalist one. That is the problem. If AI replaces (it already does) people that doesn’t create new jobs (it still does!), there is no other route than political. I will be dead and have (notably because of this) no kids, but still vote parties that understand this. Living in a country that requires working like you say is already not ok but, if AI moves on, will collapse. An AI winter might happen though if we don’t move on from this place.

egypturnash 4y ago
Research moves forwards when people are willing to put time, money, and effort into it. Remember e-paper? Where'd that go? Patents made it hard to work on, and transmissive displays kept getting better, so we're still staring into flashlights while we're arguing about this. One new law that explicitly redefines "fair use" to exclude "scraping half the entire internet and dumping everything you find into a training dataset", and creates a new framework for proper licensing of training data along with hefty penalties for distributing datasets without these licensing would be a huge roadblock. A grassroots effort of pissed-off artists starting a sideline in assassinating AI researchers would have a pretty chilling effect on the field, too. This may be a little extreme. There are probably solutions that don't go this far. It sure does make a pleasant revenge fantasy though. Time to go read some accounts of how the Unabomber was caught...