4 ms·

> Why not both? Can you be explicit? With LLMs I use it as a tool to improve my efficiency at translating thought to code, that's good. With image generation

by aydyn 3y ago

> Why not both? Can you be explicit? With LLMs I use it as a tool to improve my efficiency at translating thought to code, that's good. With image generation, I struggle to see the value, especially relative to its harm even apart from taking jobs from artists. What I see is: * The increase in possibility of fake photos/fake news (the recent photoshopped Kate Middleton comes to mind) * A new level of degenerate coomer addiction from AI booba * Mass production of CSAM (I believe this to be a hugely underreported issue from what I've seen on reddit/civitai) Diffusion models/image transformers are incredible and fun technological marvels but as far as I can tell current usage is at best a fun toy.

dukeyukey 3y ago
It does "take jobs from artists" but it also hugely opens things up for more people. Like, a friend of mine made a parody trading card game a bit ago. Doing custom art for each card would've been completely prohibitive. Instead, she used AI art for it all. Cue lots of hilarity and a good time for all. Same for writers, another friend is writing a D&D campaign. Again, he doesn't have the skill himself to do good digital art, and dozens of custom pieces is way too much cash at this point. But some carefully-done AI pieces, they mon't be perfect, but a damn bit better than nothing!
- aydyn 3y ago
  As I said, it's at best a fun toy and all you've said confirms that. It does not help solve any of the problems facing humanity.
  - bumby 3y ago
    >It does not help solve any of the problems facing humanity. There's an argument that neither do most jobs [1], but that doesn't mean they are unaffected by automation. [1] Graeber, D. and Lou, L.I.T., 2019. Bullshit Jobs: A Conversation with David Graeber. Made in China Journal, (2).
    - aydyn 3y ago
      > There's an argument that neither do most jobs Agreed, lets not add to that pile of useless jobs
      - bumby 3y ago
        So what's your plan for people who currently have those "useless" job that need them to provide for themselves and their family? I'm all for getting rid of bull$hit jobs to allow people to pursue meaningful, creative work. And while a lot of people laude the automation aspect, I don't see many proposing ideas on how to close that gap.
        aydyn 3y ago
        You realize I fully agree with you, right? I'm not sure what you're arguing for.
        bumby 3y ago
        I think you're having a different "argument". My original post is about rejecting the false dichotomy that automating away manual jobs is inherently good and automating away knowledge jobs is inherently bad. But you chimed in to make the case that knowledge jobs aren't at risk of automation. I don't agree with that latter point, even if it's digression from the original one. Because I disagree with it, I was asking you to elaborate on what you'd suggest for those knowledge workers who eventually get displaced? To use a glib example, do we just tell every lawyer "learn how to plumb"?

by aydyn 3y ago

dukeyukey 3y ago

It does "take jobs from artists" but it also hugely opens things up for more people. Like, a friend of mine made a parody trading card game a bit ago. Doing custom art for each card would've been completely prohibitive. Instead, she used AI art for it all. Cue lots of hilarity and a good time for all. Same for writers, another friend is writing a D&D campaign. Again, he doesn't have the skill himself to do good digital art, and dozens of custom pieces is way too much cash at this point. But some carefully-done AI pieces, they mon't be perfect, but a damn bit better than nothing!

aydyn 3y ago
As I said, it's at best a fun toy and all you've said confirms that. It does not help solve any of the problems facing humanity.
- bumby 3y ago
  >It does not help solve any of the problems facing humanity. There's an argument that neither do most jobs [1], but that doesn't mean they are unaffected by automation. [1] Graeber, D. and Lou, L.I.T., 2019. Bullshit Jobs: A Conversation with David Graeber. Made in China Journal, (2).
  - aydyn 3y ago
    > There's an argument that neither do most jobs Agreed, lets not add to that pile of useless jobs
    - bumby 3y ago
      So what's your plan for people who currently have those "useless" job that need them to provide for themselves and their family? I'm all for getting rid of bull$hit jobs to allow people to pursue meaningful, creative work. And while a lot of people laude the automation aspect, I don't see many proposing ideas on how to close that gap.
      - aydyn 3y ago
        You realize I fully agree with you, right? I'm not sure what you're arguing for.
        bumby 3y ago
        I think you're having a different "argument". My original post is about rejecting the false dichotomy that automating away manual jobs is inherently good and automating away knowledge jobs is inherently bad. But you chimed in to make the case that knowledge jobs aren't at risk of automation. I don't agree with that latter point, even if it's digression from the original one. Because I disagree with it, I was asking you to elaborate on what you'd suggest for those knowledge workers who eventually get displaced? To use a glib example, do we just tell every lawyer "learn how to plumb"?