4 ms·
I'm not worried in the medium-to-long term. Tech (which is nothing more than a lackey of Big Business) will never understand that real demand for cultural arti
by 23B1 3y ago
I'm not worried in the medium-to-long term.
Tech (which is nothing more than a lackey of Big Business) will never understand that real demand for cultural artifacts – art, books, film – comes from the consumers' need for real human connection. (The rare exception might be a guy like Steve Jobs).
This is a huge advantage to artists and creative people because they can and will bypass that mindset entirely, and can do so with the confidence that they're connected to what human beings – consumers – actually want.
It's why 'tech forward' orgs like NFLX can't really do much except churn out derivative works, meanwhile you've got the Davids, the Wachowskis, the Cohens, Tarantino, Chris Nolan, etc. constantly pushing the limits of creativity and writing their own ticket, without the permission of big business and its lackey tech bros. When these guys 'break out' of course everyone wants to be their best friend, but in no way was Warner Brothers or Paramount able to mechanize or catalyze that creative genius.
What chaps my ass the most about the current crop of GAI is that its gone after writers and illustrators and artists because, in the process of sharing their works with the world, had that work hoovered up and used for training data without their permission or recompense.
Luckily, all of the mediocrity these systems shit out is obviously superficial and soulless. Yeah you might some day be able to do a fully reactive murder mystery in Zuck's metaverse, but eventually you're going to want to be intrigued and delighted by something truly fresh and human – and that can only be created by other humans.