“Set that completely aside, what work will there be for human beings? Then what?” the “Friends” star continued. “There’ll be some kind of living stipend for people, you won’t have to work? How can it possibly be enough?”
How can it possibly be enough? Well, it’s the best-case scenario so I hope it will be…
The funny thing about the ongoing AI revolution is that we expected machines to take over menial labor and leave humans free to do creative work, but it looks like machines are going to be pretty good at creative work. The future might be a place where movies are created by AI but humans are still useful for the sorts of physical labor that robots have trouble with.
I don’t necessarily disagree with you - I think it might be a while before an AI can just make a whole movie. With that said, the idea to de-age old actors isn’t creative, but the process of de-aging them before the advent of AI would have been done by an artist and called creative work (although actually having a human artist do it was not feasible in practice).
There’s a tendency to consider something uncreative because it is done by AI and according to that logic AI cannot possibly be creative, but I try to judge AI creations by the same standards I would have used if they were human creations before AI existed.
but the process of de-aging them before the advent of AI would have been done by an artist and called creative work
There’s a tendency to consider something uncreative because it is done by AI and according to that logic AI cannot possibly be creative, but I try to judge AI creations by the same standards I would have used if they were human creations before AI existed.
by the same token you can’t consider something creative just because it is done by an artist. To me de-aging leans much closer to “menial labor” than actual creativity. It clearly requires skill, but very little imagination.
I was going to say something about “uncreative” being in the eye of the beholder, but actually I agree with you. De-aging Tom Hanks isn’t a case of creating art under constraints (which can bring out more creativity in humans). There’s a “correct” way to de-age him: the way he actually looked when he was younger. Even without that as a guide, the range of acceptable de-aged appearances is quite narrow. Too narrow to contain the space needed for creativity.
I think even some present-day AIs display creativity in a meaningful way even though they are still far from matching the full range of human creative abilities, but de-aging Tom Hanks, although amazing in its own way, is not an example of creativity.
How can it possibly be enough? Well, it’s the best-case scenario so I hope it will be…
The funny thing about the ongoing AI revolution is that we expected machines to take over menial labor and leave humans free to do creative work, but it looks like machines are going to be pretty good at creative work. The future might be a place where movies are created by AI but humans are still useful for the sorts of physical labor that robots have trouble with.
I don’t think we know that AI will be good at creative work yet. De-aging old actors isn’t exactly “creative”.
I don’t necessarily disagree with you - I think it might be a while before an AI can just make a whole movie. With that said, the idea to de-age old actors isn’t creative, but the process of de-aging them before the advent of AI would have been done by an artist and called creative work (although actually having a human artist do it was not feasible in practice).
There’s a tendency to consider something uncreative because it is done by AI and according to that logic AI cannot possibly be creative, but I try to judge AI creations by the same standards I would have used if they were human creations before AI existed.
by the same token you can’t consider something creative just because it is done by an artist. To me de-aging leans much closer to “menial labor” than actual creativity. It clearly requires skill, but very little imagination.
I was going to say something about “uncreative” being in the eye of the beholder, but actually I agree with you. De-aging Tom Hanks isn’t a case of creating art under constraints (which can bring out more creativity in humans). There’s a “correct” way to de-age him: the way he actually looked when he was younger. Even without that as a guide, the range of acceptable de-aged appearances is quite narrow. Too narrow to contain the space needed for creativity.
I think even some present-day AIs display creativity in a meaningful way even though they are still far from matching the full range of human creative abilities, but de-aging Tom Hanks, although amazing in its own way, is not an example of creativity.