I don’t get this. AI bros talk about how “in the near future” no one will “need” to be a writer, a filmmaker or a musician anymore, as you’ll be able to generate your own media with your own parameters and preferences on the fly. This, to me, feels like such an insane opinion. How can someone not value the ingenuity and creativity behind a work of art? Do these people not see or feel the human behind it all? And are these really opinions that you’ve encountered outside of the internet?

  • CurlyWurlies4All@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    I absolutely don’t agree with your perspective.

    AI is just another way to ensure control of the means of production stays in the hands of capitalists.

    It empowers the techno-feudalist monopolies to put further pressure on more industries. Not content to own a portion of every retail purchase, every digital payment, every house, and every entertainment property. They now get to own a portion of every act of creation, every communication that could possibly challenge their power.

    They can subvert any act of independent impactful art by copying it and remanufacturing lesser versions over and over until the original’s impact is lost. And they can do it faster than ever before, cashing in on the original creative’s effort and syphoning returns away from creators into their own pockets.

    You might think it’s inevitable and inescapable, but that’s what people once thought of the divine right of kings.

    • nimpnin@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      You’re basically saying AI can’t be used in any other way than it’s being used right now. I think you are the one who’s taking the current state of things as inevitable and inescapable.

      • spujb@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        18 hours ago

        There’s nothing wrong with opposing technology as it currently stands. Maybe there’s room for nuance in language, but that doesn’t break their argument.

        As it currently stands, the user above is right, and the labor of human artists is being siphoned into corporate profit with zero compensation. In the same way, at the beginning of the industrial revolution the labor of children was siphoned into profit with low compensation and deadly work conditions.

        The way the textile industry was “fixed” was by opposition: speaking about the issues related to the technical developments and advocating for better treatment of the laborers. The only way AI as it currently stands can be “fixed” is also by opposition. Being critical of AI doesn’t mean “turn it off,” it means speaking about the issues related to the new technology and advocating for better treatment of the laborers.

      • Scubus@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        I mean, he basically said industrialization is bad. Not sure why he’s saying that online, via his computer.