3 ms·

Wild to think we are at the final moments in human history when most art, writing, video, entertainment, speeches were created by humans. Soon the majority will

Wild to think we are at the final moments in human history when most art, writing, video, entertainment, speeches were created by humans. Soon the majority will be AI-created, and it will stay that way.

nonameiguess 2y ago
I somewhat doubt that. In many cases, the humanity is the entire point. Racing is a great example. Both horses and cars are faster than humans and have been for a long time. We have horse races and car races. We still also have human races. They didn't get replaced. Fandom just split, though I'm sure a lot of people are entertained by all of them. People still go to see cover bands when the Chuck E. Cheese band playing over a karaoke track has been just as "good" for decades if all you care about is sounding like the real thing. We still watch human combat sports even though lions are better fighters and robots probably are, too.
- crop_rotation 2y ago
  People give the same example in chess that we still watch people playing chess. However that is beside the point. In both race and chess we want to know/reward the best human. People don't listen to podcasts to reward anyone or to find the best podcaster. So listening to a random podcast that appeals to you is much easier than watching stockfish vs Alpha go. The things you are describing are activities undertaken by very few for a living and are very binary. Most things are not like that and are much more likely to be disrupted by LLM spam.
- andoando 2y ago
  Eh it depends entirely on what people enjoy. If AI makes genuinely good entertaining content, it will make human content relatively niche
preommr 2y ago
Not anymore wild than people flying, television, computers, etc. For all of human history, except for the last century, things like art were time consuming, difficult to spread, available to a select few and just altogether a different world. I would say that generative AI is in the same category as photography and digital art (e.g. photoshop).

nonameiguess 2y ago

I somewhat doubt that. In many cases, the humanity is the entire point. Racing is a great example. Both horses and cars are faster than humans and have been for a long time. We have horse races and car races. We still also have human races. They didn't get replaced. Fandom just split, though I'm sure a lot of people are entertained by all of them. People still go to see cover bands when the Chuck E. Cheese band playing over a karaoke track has been just as "good" for decades if all you care about is sounding like the real thing. We still watch human combat sports even though lions are better fighters and robots probably are, too.

crop_rotation 2y ago
People give the same example in chess that we still watch people playing chess. However that is beside the point. In both race and chess we want to know/reward the best human. People don't listen to podcasts to reward anyone or to find the best podcaster. So listening to a random podcast that appeals to you is much easier than watching stockfish vs Alpha go. The things you are describing are activities undertaken by very few for a living and are very binary. Most things are not like that and are much more likely to be disrupted by LLM spam.
andoando 2y ago
Eh it depends entirely on what people enjoy. If AI makes genuinely good entertaining content, it will make human content relatively niche

preommr 2y ago

Not anymore wild than people flying, television, computers, etc. For all of human history, except for the last century, things like art were time consuming, difficult to spread, available to a select few and just altogether a different world. I would say that generative AI is in the same category as photography and digital art (e.g. photoshop).