3 ms·

Pretty soon the content will be better than we can produce anyway. You're fiddling while Rome burns. You need to pivot hard because your business model is dead.

Pretty soon the content will be better than we can produce anyway. You're fiddling while Rome burns. You need to pivot hard because your business model is dead. As are the jobs of almost all white collar workers. We have AI and its not like we thought, AI is people in a box. A person in a box is much cheaper than a meat sack in the real world and will only get cheaper.

em-bee 4y ago
writing, painting, etc, is not a business model. it is a creative act. sure, some do it for the money, some artists become successful and can live off their artwork. but, unlike many other businesses. humanity needs creativity and art for its development as a society. AI created art is somehow part of that, but its domination prevents the development of art by actual humans. it is not a question of what is better, but what is actually creative and furthers human development. AI created art is not that.
- plutonorm 4y ago
  AIs are humans. We have extracted human essence from the data and put it in a box.
  - em-bee 4y ago
    but they are stale, static humans that don't develop. frozen. they are zombies. (actually, even zombies are more alive than an AI) the point of being human is continuous development. an AI can't do that. it can only summarize existing data and not generate new insights on its own. (doing that can help humans generate new insights, but that is something different)
    - plutonorm 4y ago
      Irrelevant comment in 3.2.1
  - roguecoder 4y ago
    AIs are less humans than corporations are, and we've seen what Citizen's United has done to politics.
roguecoder 4y ago
"Better" by what metrics? We don't write to produce objectively "good" writing: we write to communicate. "Good" writing is writing that accurately and successfully communicates to the audience the thing the composer wanted to communicate. It is always contextual in the context of both writer and reader. The computer has nothing it wants us to understand. It writes for no purpose, which is why it is flooding systems like Clarksworld submissions designed to support purposeful communication. It may eventually be able to evade the detection algorithms that for now have prevented it from completely shutting down human communication, but that won't make it "better": it will make it a successfully DDOS attack on society.

em-bee 4y ago

writing, painting, etc, is not a business model. it is a creative act. sure, some do it for the money, some artists become successful and can live off their artwork. but, unlike many other businesses. humanity needs creativity and art for its development as a society. AI created art is somehow part of that, but its domination prevents the development of art by actual humans. it is not a question of what is better, but what is actually creative and furthers human development. AI created art is not that.

plutonorm 4y ago
AIs are humans. We have extracted human essence from the data and put it in a box.
- em-bee 4y ago
  but they are stale, static humans that don't develop. frozen. they are zombies. (actually, even zombies are more alive than an AI) the point of being human is continuous development. an AI can't do that. it can only summarize existing data and not generate new insights on its own. (doing that can help humans generate new insights, but that is something different)
  - plutonorm 4y ago
    Irrelevant comment in 3.2.1
- roguecoder 4y ago
  AIs are less humans than corporations are, and we've seen what Citizen's United has done to politics.

roguecoder 4y ago

"Better" by what metrics? We don't write to produce objectively "good" writing: we write to communicate. "Good" writing is writing that accurately and successfully communicates to the audience the thing the composer wanted to communicate. It is always contextual in the context of both writer and reader. The computer has nothing it wants us to understand. It writes for no purpose, which is why it is flooding systems like Clarksworld submissions designed to support purposeful communication. It may eventually be able to evade the detection algorithms that for now have prevented it from completely shutting down human communication, but that won't make it "better": it will make it a successfully DDOS attack on society.