I do understand why so many people, especially creative folks, are worried about AI and how it’s used. The future is quite unknown, and things are changing very rapidly, at a pace that can feel out…

I do understand why so many people, especially creative folks, are worried about AI and how it’s used. The future is quite unknown, and things are changing very rapidly, at a pace that can feel out…

  • HamartiogonicEnglish
    82·
    11 months ago

    There are also financial incentives to oppose the adoption of content generating AI. As the spinning jenny replaced hand spinning and electric trolleys replaced horse drawn streetcars, there was always strong financially motivated opposition. How is it different this time?

    • SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
      52·
      11 months ago

      Because at some point we will automate people completely out of jobs, and then they will have nowhere to go. Our system isn’t set up to handle that.

      People are already struggling to find jobs with a liveable wage.

        • HamartiogonicEnglish
          7·
          11 months ago

          Yeah, that’s pretty much what I was thinking of.

          Let’s say your borrow a bunch of books from the local library and read them in order to refine your writing skills. Later, you’ll write a book that is more or less inspired by all of the books you’ve previously read. Do you owe something to the hundreds of authors you got inspired by? Even if you bought those books, do you think the other authors would could still demand something extra because clearly those books weren’t really used for mere entertainment. Instead, they were used to train a new writer.

          If it hasn’t happened already, I’m pretty sure there’s going to be a lawsuit about this sort of thing. Then the judge would need to figure out if there’s a difference between a human reading a book for entertainment and training to become a writer.

    • donuts@kbin.social
      21·
      11 months ago

      How is it different this time?

      Mechanical inventions of the past were invented, designed and implemented by people who had a unique idea for how to better accomplish some task. If part(s) of their invention was already patented by someone else, then they would be required to either license that patent or find another novel approach.

      Machine learning AI doesn’t work that way. In order to produce any result (let alone a good one) it must be “trained” on a dataset of other people’s works, or peoples faces, or whatever (depending on the desired result). All i ask is that people (artists, writers, musicians, etc) are fairly and regularly compensated when their copyrighted work is used to train AI.

      Anything else is exploitation on an industrial scale.