Setting aside the usual arguments on the anti- and pro-AI art debate and the nature of creativity itself, perhaps the negative reaction that the Redditor encountered is part of a sea change in opinion among many people that think corporate AI platforms are exploitive and extractive in nature because their datasets rely on copyrighted material without the original artists’ permission. And that’s without getting into AI’s negative drag on the environment.

  • @Gakomi
    link
    English
    -6
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Really? Are you sure that someone that knows a lot about art can’t create better art with AI then your average Joe ? And are you sure that’s not marketable ? Cause I’m pretty sure I can make a banner or a poster my self for advertising if I wanted to but I still prefer to pay a professional to make it as it will be better! Everything is marketable so don’t give me that. This shit is pretty much the same issue that was created with automatisation when factories started using robots instead of people. It’s inevitable, it’s the future and just like then people will find other jobs!

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      89 months ago

      You are assuming that progress in AI capabilities will stall somewhere close to its present day state. Because today, a professional-made poster will still be better than one you can make yourself. But that won’t be the case forever.

      This is more akin to how there used to be elevator operators vs. people just pressing a button themselves, or how people couldn’t easily book their own airline tickets without going through a travel agent, and now they just order them through a website.

      • @Gakomi
        link
        English
        1
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Yes, it’s called progress. Some jobs will disappear but others jobs will replace those. The world population is quite bigger then what it was 100 years ago and even thought computers and robots replaced a lot of jobs we still have jobs today as a matter of fact we have more jobs. As someone has to mention and program those robots. Someone has to create programs and games, someone has to mentain the infrastructure. Youtube videos and streaming became a job. Simply put the point I’m trying to make is AI might take away some jobs but it will also open up new jobs opportunities for other people. And no matter how pissed of you are that AI is doing something that you consider wrong and think that only humans should do it you will never be able to stop AI from becoming a thing. There was a lot of push back against automatisation too and that did absolutely nothing and humans got replaced by robots on assembly lines and shit like that.

        And no I don’t assume that it will stall, it will evolve but humans will still have to give inputs to AI in order to crate those posters, and we will find more creative ways to give better inputs in order to get better art. Simply put using AI at a professional level will become a skill and a new job. I’m pretty sure that I wouldn’t be able to create better AI art the someone that does that everyday as a job. At best I will give some input like make this picture in the style of Picasso or something while someone that studied art will know more art terms and concepts then just make it like Picasso.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          3
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          As someone has to mention and program those robots.

          Why couldn’t an AI do that?

          Someone has to create programs and games, someone has to maintain the infrastructure.

          Same question.

          Youtube videos and streaming became a job.

          This will only work because of the parasocial aspect, and there will probably be strong competition from AI there too.

          For every thing you imagine, simply ask yourself - will AI be able to do it better?

          So far I haven’t heard anything convincing where the answer would be “no”.

          This whole “giving inputs” argument is 100% leaning on today’s technological limitations.

          With enough advancements, no input you could ever come up with will be able to compete with the automated ones - even if they are working from some very high level goal, like “make something people want” (to give a slightly exaggerated example).

          Nobody’s going to pay you to utter the phrase “make something people want” (and it’s not competitive as a business either).

          • @Gakomi
            link
            English
            0
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            For now it can’t, but it will in the future. Still we will always need someone that has to check on it in case something happens. And AI kinda needs to be prompted to do things if the checks say everything is fine the AI will always think it’s ok even if it’s not doing what it’s suppose to do. That’s why we still have infrastructure and monitoring teams. If everything would have been automatized for any niche and particular issues that can arise it would have been done a long time ago.