2 ms·

> is just the real world as it is What? Have you ever paid for a book? a subscription to a publishing medium of any sort, a movie or a piece of music? Have you

> is just the real world as it is What? Have you ever paid for a book? a subscription to a publishing medium of any sort, a movie or a piece of music? Have you noticed a copyright sign somewhere? Is that arrangement of recognizing and rewarding those who create something worthwhile part of the real world or not? Not even a hallucinating AI would be so incongruous.

surgical_fire 3y ago
Have you ever paid for food? For clothing? For cars? You might be shocked, but automation replaced humans in all those industries. I'll still pay for books, music, or whatever. I won't really care at which capacity they were AI generated.
- nologic01 3y ago
  > but automation replaced humans in all those industries. So? To the extend that people are still involved, they are typically paid - unless it is slave labor, that is. This is not an automation vs manual labor debate. Creators will use any technology that helps them create something worthwhile. It may even involve algorithms in various ways. Generative art was a thing way before the AI bro invasion. The question is about provenance, attribution and remuneration of whatever human work and creativity is involved in producing unique pieces of work. Work that is used as input for the algorithmic production of infinite variations and replicas. The AI crowd simply wants to devalue that human input (while pressumably charging for API's or whatever comes on the other side of the meat grinder). Which I suppose might happen in an increasingly dystopic world, but they seem to also believe that people will keep embarking on literary studies, movie or music making studies etc. as some sort of non-remunerative hobby, just to keep producing useful inputs for the AI models. Its not going to happen. The golden goose will be dead before you can spell "AI".
  - surgical_fire 3y ago
    > The question is about provenance, attribution and remuneration of whatever human work and creativity is involved in producing unique pieces of work. The remuneration will always go to who owns the means of production. That is true in essentially any industry. > Its not going to happen. The golden goose will be dead before you can spell "AI". Then what are you worried about?
    - nologic01 3y ago
      > The remuneration will always go to who owns the means of production. Repeating slogans one does not understand is something to be left to "AI", not functional humans. The means of production in the creative process is the brain of the person creating. Unless what you really wanted to say is "The remuneration will always go to who can steal the means of production".

surgical_fire 3y ago

Have you ever paid for food? For clothing? For cars? You might be shocked, but automation replaced humans in all those industries. I'll still pay for books, music, or whatever. I won't really care at which capacity they were AI generated.

nologic01 3y ago
> but automation replaced humans in all those industries. So? To the extend that people are still involved, they are typically paid - unless it is slave labor, that is. This is not an automation vs manual labor debate. Creators will use any technology that helps them create something worthwhile. It may even involve algorithms in various ways. Generative art was a thing way before the AI bro invasion. The question is about provenance, attribution and remuneration of whatever human work and creativity is involved in producing unique pieces of work. Work that is used as input for the algorithmic production of infinite variations and replicas. The AI crowd simply wants to devalue that human input (while pressumably charging for API's or whatever comes on the other side of the meat grinder). Which I suppose might happen in an increasingly dystopic world, but they seem to also believe that people will keep embarking on literary studies, movie or music making studies etc. as some sort of non-remunerative hobby, just to keep producing useful inputs for the AI models. Its not going to happen. The golden goose will be dead before you can spell "AI".
- surgical_fire 3y ago
  > The question is about provenance, attribution and remuneration of whatever human work and creativity is involved in producing unique pieces of work. The remuneration will always go to who owns the means of production. That is true in essentially any industry. > Its not going to happen. The golden goose will be dead before you can spell "AI". Then what are you worried about?
  - nologic01 3y ago
    > The remuneration will always go to who owns the means of production. Repeating slogans one does not understand is something to be left to "AI", not functional humans. The means of production in the creative process is the brain of the person creating. Unless what you really wanted to say is "The remuneration will always go to who can steal the means of production".