4 ms·

Tv and Hollywood writers in one of the most culturally exported countries in the world striked for several months with specific anti AI demands, which were then

Tv and Hollywood writers in one of the most culturally exported countries in the world striked for several months with specific anti AI demands, which were then capitulated to today.

raincole 3y ago
Writers striked in 1988 and 2007 too. Don't think it's something new. Also even this strike doesn't demain to ban AI.
WalterBright 3y ago
If Hollywood wants to cede its business to other countries...
- danShumway 3y ago
  There is approximately a zero percent chance that AI enables a foreign film market to dethrone Disney any time soon.
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > zero percent chance that AI enables a foreign film market to dethrone Disney any time soon Disney’s stock is down about 20%. Netflix up almost the same amount. Why do you think one of these has cheaper access to capital?
    - danShumway 3y ago
      Netflix is a US company. And not only are they a US company and not a foreign film market, they're also not even separate from the strikes. Netflix was one of the companies that signed agreements after the writers' strike -- Netflix capitulated to union demands just like Hollywood did. > Why do you think one of these has cheaper access to capital? In any case, cheap access to capital or labor also has about a zero percent chance of allowing a foreign film market to dethrone Disney in the domestic film market any time soon. Disney owns Marvel. And Star Wars. And basically everything else. It doesn't matter if you can make a film more cheaply somewhere else.
danShumway 3y ago
Writers struck as part of larger contract negotiations; they had relatively tame demands around AI that mostly boiled down to IP contracts. And modern strikes themselves are really tame compared to what the Luddites did. If people look at the writers' strike as more extreme than Luddite protests, they don't know much about Luddites. The Luddites struck too, the difference is their strikes involved riots where they intentionally destroyed factory equipment and where they clashed directly with police. Modern AI "protests" barely register, Silicon Valley workers just think the backlash is extreme because the modern tech industry is culturally disconnected from the history of most blue-collar labor movements. There is something to the idea that this is the first time that many white-collar workers have ever seriously thought about the cultural impacts of automation before and on a small-scale it's the first exposure many people have to backlash over automation and so that backlash feels novel to them. But that doesn't mean the backlash is actually more extreme now, Luddites captured an attitude about automation's impact on labor and worker rights that is largely absent in today's society.
dragonwriter 3y ago
> striked Not really the point, but "struck". > with specific anti AI demands, which were then capitulated to today. The AI provisions of the tentative agreement seem to be (1) GenAI can't be directly used by non-covered people to (re)write content in place of union writers, (2) writers can't be forced to use GenAI (but can use it to the extent that the employer allows), and (3) GenAI produced materials given to writers to use must be disclosed as such. That's...not particularly anti-AI. Its certainly nothing along the lines of the Luddites destroying machines. Partially its a class difference, partially its a context difference (legally protected labor rights and a government that isn't actively working with employers to suppress strikes help make strikes in general much less violent), but partially its that the even if the rhetoric painted the terms the AMPTP was seeking as an existential threat, the union itself isn't anywhere close to as fundamentally opposed to the tools involved as the Luddites were, only to the particular business methods in which management proposed to incorporate them.

Tv and Hollywood writers in one of the most culturally exported countries in the world striked for several months with specific anti AI demands, which were then capitulated to today.

raincole 3y ago

Writers striked in 1988 and 2007 too. Don't think it's something new. Also even this strike doesn't demain to ban AI.

WalterBright 3y ago

If Hollywood wants to cede its business to other countries...

danShumway 3y ago
There is approximately a zero percent chance that AI enables a foreign film market to dethrone Disney any time soon.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > zero percent chance that AI enables a foreign film market to dethrone Disney any time soon Disney’s stock is down about 20%. Netflix up almost the same amount. Why do you think one of these has cheaper access to capital?
  - danShumway 3y ago
    Netflix is a US company. And not only are they a US company and not a foreign film market, they're also not even separate from the strikes. Netflix was one of the companies that signed agreements after the writers' strike -- Netflix capitulated to union demands just like Hollywood did. > Why do you think one of these has cheaper access to capital? In any case, cheap access to capital or labor also has about a zero percent chance of allowing a foreign film market to dethrone Disney in the domestic film market any time soon. Disney owns Marvel. And Star Wars. And basically everything else. It doesn't matter if you can make a film more cheaply somewhere else.

danShumway 3y ago

Writers struck as part of larger contract negotiations; they had relatively tame demands around AI that mostly boiled down to IP contracts. And modern strikes themselves are really tame compared to what the Luddites did. If people look at the writers' strike as more extreme than Luddite protests, they don't know much about Luddites. The Luddites struck too, the difference is their strikes involved riots where they intentionally destroyed factory equipment and where they clashed directly with police. Modern AI "protests" barely register, Silicon Valley workers just think the backlash is extreme because the modern tech industry is culturally disconnected from the history of most blue-collar labor movements. There is something to the idea that this is the first time that many white-collar workers have ever seriously thought about the cultural impacts of automation before and on a small-scale it's the first exposure many people have to backlash over automation and so that backlash feels novel to them. But that doesn't mean the backlash is actually more extreme now, Luddites captured an attitude about automation's impact on labor and worker rights that is largely absent in today's society.

dragonwriter 3y ago

> striked Not really the point, but "struck". > with specific anti AI demands, which were then capitulated to today. The AI provisions of the tentative agreement seem to be (1) GenAI can't be directly used by non-covered people to (re)write content in place of union writers, (2) writers can't be forced to use GenAI (but can use it to the extent that the employer allows), and (3) GenAI produced materials given to writers to use must be disclosed as such. That's...not particularly anti-AI. Its certainly nothing along the lines of the Luddites destroying machines. Partially its a class difference, partially its a context difference (legally protected labor rights and a government that isn't actively working with employers to suppress strikes help make strikes in general much less violent), but partially its that the even if the rhetoric painted the terms the AMPTP was seeking as an existential threat, the union itself isn't anywhere close to as fundamentally opposed to the tools involved as the Luddites were, only to the particular business methods in which management proposed to incorporate them.