4 ms·
Yes, my experience is that most hype comes from people that don't actually work in the jobs they claim will be replaced. Writers, for example. While generative
by keiferski 3y ago
Yes, my experience is that most hype comes from people that don't actually work in the jobs they claim will be replaced. Writers, for example.
While generative AI does make writing some things more efficient, it almost always has a bland, generic style that is immediately recognizable. The only jobs it will be replacing are ones that didn't require much effort in the first place.
- spi 3y agoIsn't that almost always the case, and in truth the beauty of automation? Replacing simple, repetitive tasks that, if you have to do that, you say "I wish I had a machine doing this for me"? Of course, that might impact the number of available jobs and it's something that need to be taken under control. But, if talking about writers, while AI won't realistically replace imaginative authors and investigative journalists (at least, certainly not in the short term), it will likely replace (some) copy editors and dollar-per-thousand-words "journalists" that have to fill tabloids and free subway "newspapers". While it might be a financial loss for the people involved, the society will hardly sink due to that. In fact, if I feel optimist, in theory it might reduce costs for publishing houses and newspapers, to invest more into quality (human-made) content.
- keiferski 3y agoChatGPT will definitely be used for rote tasks that are currently fulfilled by low-end writers, but realistically could already be automated by a competent programmer. Stuff like generic product descriptions or content farm product reviews. But I don't see it actually replacing flesh-and-blood writers that have a viewpoint anytime soon.