3 ms·

> even more so if the technology has the potential to eliminate human creativity This is completely overboard. People will always be creative. There is no way

> even more so if the technology has the potential to eliminate human creativity This is completely overboard. People will always be creative. There is no way in which this stops anyone from being creative but actually allows not artists to be much more creative. It also allows the same for artists as they can now create in styles they aren't skilled in. > killing off graphic design as a profession? It likely will dramatically kill it and free up those people for other types of jobs as they can now be more productive. Humans will still continue to be creative and draw and paint. That won't change. No reason to hold society back just to hold on to some jobs

coldtea 3y ago
>This is completely overboard. People will always be creative. Just not in the fields where AI will replace them? Hardly a consolation that "people will always be creative" in e.g. interpretive dancing, if the music in our culture end ups being dominated by AI musak. And I don't just care for my own music consumption, to be consoled that "some people will still be doing human music". I also care about the role of music in society in general. I'd say the same for graphic design and illustration. Yeah, some people will be creative in those fields still. But I don't care for a world where 90% of the illustrations and graphic design we see are AI crap. And I'm not saying it because AI does great illustrations, but because it does crap illustrations cheaper - which for the undiscerning manager will be "good enough", and for spam farms and the like will be a godsend. >It likely will dramatically kill it and free up those people for other types of jobs as they can now be more productive. >Humans will still continue to be creative and draw and paint. That won't change. No, just the ability to make a living out of it, as opposed to getting a drab office or factory job will. That, and being confronted 24/7 by AI "art", would be the changes. >No reason to hold society back just to hold on to some jobs Who exactly did sign up for that, and who said this is "forward" and not following it's "holding back"? Not every BS we invent is a possitive. Nor is "increased technology" == "better".
- DoesntMatter22 3y ago
  >> People will always be creative. > Just not in the fields where AI will replace them? ... if the music in our culture end ups being dominated by AI musak. Will AI dominate music? Probably. Is there anything that can be done to stop that? No. Even if you outlawed it in the US it won't stop it. It's coming and there is nothing that can be done. If that is a good or bad thing IDK. Most modern music is so awful that to me this doesn't matter anyway. > but because it does crap illustrations cheaper The work it outputs is astounding, if it was crap no one would want to use it. >>Humans will still continue to be creative and draw and paint. That won't change. >No, just the ability to make a living out of it, as opposed to getting a drab office or factory job will. AI is coming for factor and office jobs too. But yes this will cut the ability to make money on it. > Who exactly did sign up for that, and who said this is "forward" and not following it's "holding back"? It doesn't matter what someone signs up for. That's not how the world works. More efficient processes take over less efficient ones. Paying someone 7k to work on something for 2 weeks is much less efficient than generating a similar image in 2 minutes for 25 cents. Few people are going to be so enamored with the image that it would matter if it's not quite as good (though it may be better). > Not every BS we invent is a possitive. Nor is "increased technology" == "better". Anything that increases efficiency without hurting people is a good thing and it's why we enjoy the quality of living we do now.
  - dumbo-octopus 3y ago
    > without hurting people What is your metric for "hurt" here? Direct, acute, physical pain? What about chronic depression resulting from lack of gainful employment?
    - DoesntMatter22 3y ago
      That's the price to pay for all the technological advancements we've had. These people will find other gainful employment
      - dumbo-octopus 3y ago
        Tell that to the current depression epidemic. The fact of the matter is people are sick and technology is to blame.

coldtea 3y ago

>This is completely overboard. People will always be creative. Just not in the fields where AI will replace them? Hardly a consolation that "people will always be creative" in e.g. interpretive dancing, if the music in our culture end ups being dominated by AI musak. And I don't just care for my own music consumption, to be consoled that "some people will still be doing human music". I also care about the role of music in society in general. I'd say the same for graphic design and illustration. Yeah, some people will be creative in those fields still. But I don't care for a world where 90% of the illustrations and graphic design we see are AI crap. And I'm not saying it because AI does great illustrations, but because it does crap illustrations cheaper - which for the undiscerning manager will be "good enough", and for spam farms and the like will be a godsend. >It likely will dramatically kill it and free up those people for other types of jobs as they can now be more productive. >Humans will still continue to be creative and draw and paint. That won't change. No, just the ability to make a living out of it, as opposed to getting a drab office or factory job will. That, and being confronted 24/7 by AI "art", would be the changes. >No reason to hold society back just to hold on to some jobs Who exactly did sign up for that, and who said this is "forward" and not following it's "holding back"? Not every BS we invent is a possitive. Nor is "increased technology" == "better".

DoesntMatter22 3y ago
>> People will always be creative. > Just not in the fields where AI will replace them? ... if the music in our culture end ups being dominated by AI musak. Will AI dominate music? Probably. Is there anything that can be done to stop that? No. Even if you outlawed it in the US it won't stop it. It's coming and there is nothing that can be done. If that is a good or bad thing IDK. Most modern music is so awful that to me this doesn't matter anyway. > but because it does crap illustrations cheaper The work it outputs is astounding, if it was crap no one would want to use it. >>Humans will still continue to be creative and draw and paint. That won't change. >No, just the ability to make a living out of it, as opposed to getting a drab office or factory job will. AI is coming for factor and office jobs too. But yes this will cut the ability to make money on it. > Who exactly did sign up for that, and who said this is "forward" and not following it's "holding back"? It doesn't matter what someone signs up for. That's not how the world works. More efficient processes take over less efficient ones. Paying someone 7k to work on something for 2 weeks is much less efficient than generating a similar image in 2 minutes for 25 cents. Few people are going to be so enamored with the image that it would matter if it's not quite as good (though it may be better). > Not every BS we invent is a possitive. Nor is "increased technology" == "better". Anything that increases efficiency without hurting people is a good thing and it's why we enjoy the quality of living we do now.
- dumbo-octopus 3y ago
  > without hurting people What is your metric for "hurt" here? Direct, acute, physical pain? What about chronic depression resulting from lack of gainful employment?
  - DoesntMatter22 3y ago
    That's the price to pay for all the technological advancements we've had. These people will find other gainful employment
    - dumbo-octopus 3y ago
      Tell that to the current depression epidemic. The fact of the matter is people are sick and technology is to blame.