• captainastronaut@seattlelunarsociety.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    It’s pretty terrifying when you think about the possibilities of deception. And also how throwaway content is going to become. We are going to generate content at a volume orders of magnitude larger than our already current excessive volume, and finding the stuff that has real meaning and a real message is going to be even harder.

    Also, artists whose work and styles fed this will be put out of business without ever being paid for their work that was used to train these models. 🫤

      • Cornpop@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        That sounds like hell, making money is a blast. If everything was truly equal we would all be living in extreme poverty. Global average income is $9,733 USD per year. I make that in a week, hard pass on that commie bullshit.

        • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Going to work so I can eat and pay rent fucking sucks, what are you talking about? The fact that you even conceptualize economic output as being all about money means you’re missing the point of an economy. Money is a representation of wealth, not wealth itself. You can’t eat money, shelter yourself from the elements with money, cure diseases with money, etc. Having access to goods and services is a blast, but money is nothing more than a mechanism to facilitate trade and the distribution of wealth.

          The “commie bullshit” is entirely your contribution. I said nothing at all about making everyone’s income equal. Not within a country and certainly not between regions with wildly different costs of living. I’m talking about actual wealth, actual labor, and the way a society decides who deserves to have access to material wealth.

          Let me spell it out for you: when a new technology makes a category of work obsolete, it sounds be a good thing because less work needs to be done to produce the same wealth. It’s like how having a washing machine is great because it saves you from doing many hours of tedious labor with essentially no downside. The reason that doesn’t work at a societal level is because our economic system is designed to funnel 100% of the benefits of labor-saving technology to a parasitic ownership class, leaving the average person poorer as a result. Our economic system is based entirely around scarcity, and introducing just a little bit of abundance breaks it and fucks over people whose labor is no longer needed by denying them access to wealth.

          Do you really think it’s reasonable that having less work needing to be done to produce the same wealth should ever make the average person less well off?

          • Cornpop@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Some kinda UBI is good, but people still need a purpose. We should still strive to build something and better ourselves.

        • illi@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          The idea behind universal basic income is that hpu get enough money to cover your basic needs - then you can do a job you like to earn more so that you have more than basic needs fulfilled. So you could still earn money if that’s what you so enjoy.

          • Cornpop@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Yea I’m with that idea. But no one working and just getting paid to exist is a strange concept for me.

        • SuckMyWang@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          Do you really cornpop? And what do that consistently makes you over half a million dollars a year in income?

          • Cornpop@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            I run a fairly large salvage company. I dismantle aircraft and Powersport vehicles (motorcycles, atvs, sxs, anything with a motor really) I do 500-700k a year in revenue.

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          Global average income is $9,733 USD per year.

          Why would you cite this fact in defense of the current system?

          • Cornpop@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            No AI is ever going to replace what I do. I salvage aircraft and motorcycles. Zero worry there.

            • Link@rentadrunk.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              The AI can be added to a robot that can salvage aircraft and motorcycles. It would be far cheaper to employ than a human as well.

              • Cornpop@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                lol no. Far far off before a robot could do what we do. The dexterity required to remove a bolt from inside a wing, or even a rusty bolt on a motorcycle, or disassemble an engine is far outside anything a robot can even come close to achieve. And everything is unique. Just not feasible in any way what so ever. Assembly is another story and yes a lot of automation can be achieved there, but that’s because it’s doing the same action over and over and very precise. Disassembly is way different, unique in every case. Extreme dexterity required. Often the stuff is crashed and bent up and requires very advanced knowledge of the exact unit being taken apart. Bolts strip out and break over time, things rust. A universal robot that do what’s needed would be insanely expensive. Not feasible at all.

                • shneancy@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  AI is not just a “universal robot”, it’s something that can have the entire database of every existing vehicle and aircraft uploaded into it to learn from, then given a robotic body (robotics are still advancing may I remind you, not as loudly as AI but certainly forward every day), it could do your job faster, better, more reliably, and cheaper in the long run, maybe you’ll even get the honour of fixing the mistakes it makes the first few weeks at your job to make it better, then you’ll become obsolete.

                  Don’t laugh at folks who are having their jobs usurped by soulless code right now, sooner or later - it’ll happen to you.

        • Apollo@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          You’re an inspiration to all out there who think intelligence is a barrier to making 9k a week.

    • wrekone@lemmyf.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      When I was a kid, I had seen, or at least heard of, nearly every TV show from my parent’s generation. Going back probably 40 years. Like, I’ve probably seen every Looney Tunes, every episode of M.A.S.H., and most episodes of The Munsters, because some days there wasn’t anything else to watch. My kids look at me crazy if I haven’t heard of the latest flash-in-the-pan influencer, but if I bring up a 10-year old movie or TV show, they have no idea what I’m talking about.

      • evranch@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        I miss the shared culture that broadcast TV and radio gave us. Is the selection today better, with more, higher quality content? Definitely.

        But all of us Millenials can quote Simpsons at each other all day even if we’ve never met. South park, Futurama, King of the Hill, James Bond and other corny action movies. We all saw them so many times, because that’s what was on.

        That shared culture is worth more than the content actually being good, IMO. Half the time now someone will ask if you’ve seen a show and you haven’t ever heard of it.

    • TimeSquirrel@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      We spent decades depicting science fiction AIs as the key to giving humanity true freedom from mandatory labor, and now we’re scared because it can do creative work too? We’ll adapt. We’ll be just fine. A new generation will crop up that will have no issues with AI-generated content. We’re too old to see it like they will. Just like a lot of our parents and grandparents didn’t understand email until they were forced to, while us kids were doing all kinds of things online.

      I mean shoot, my parents still argue with me over whether electronic music is even music or not. It’s just gonna be another tool in an artist’s arsenal.

      • demonsword@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        We spent decades depicting science fiction AIs as the key to giving humanity true freedom from mandatory labor

        Very few people benefit from automation and AI. Most of us will eventually be replaced by an IA and our only freedom will be to starve (or to rebel, who knows)

        • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          People can and have made the same argument about new technology since the dawn of the industrial revolution, but it hasn’t worked out that way. Industrialized countries are synonymous with rich countries. The problem with new technology, both now and then, it’s that the ownership of the means of production always becomes concentrated in the hands of a small class of people who have no interest in sharing their wealth. This far the benefits of technology have trickled down to the masses, but never without hurting a bunch of people in the process precisely because a few people have been allowed to hoard most of the benefits for themselves.

          • demonsword@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            The problem with new technology, both now and then, it’s that the ownership of the means of production always becomes concentrated in the hands of a small class of people who have no interest in sharing their wealth.

            Yes, I’m aware. And that’s precisely capitalism’s heart, which means that to change that we’d need to topple capitalism itself.

    • Aniki 🌱🌿@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      you raise a crazy good point - the amount of data youtube generates is staggering and that includes a high barrier to entry. if sora allows anyone to just cut shit and upload it, we’re going to outpace the rate at which data-free hardware is manufactured.

    • Emerald@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      If you are concerned about AI making “content” more throwaway, then you are already viewing creative works as something throwaway. Artists make works with meaning, AI doesn’t have a brain, it can’t make things with a meaning. That’s the job of the artist.

      • smeenz@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        So you’re saying the people who write and tweak the prompts to create the output they envisaged don’t deserve to be called artists?

        In my mind, AI just lowers the barrier required for people to be able to express what’s in their mind

        • butterflyattack@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          AI just lowers the barrier required for people to be able to express what’s in their mind

          Yeah, there’s nothing wrong with people being about to express themselves, but that’s not necessarily art. With art the barriers are things like talent, creativity, and hard work. Lowering those barriers mostly creates rubbish. Typing ‘Make a pic of an x fighting a y and make it look cool!’ doesn’t make anyone an artist.

        • shneancy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          if you actually were to try and engage in artistic expression you’d find out the whole process from conception to finishing your creation is something worth the time, and mistakes/accidents that often happen during it can bring new ideas to the surface. In that process you have the ultimate control over how good it turns out. Be it comically bad or a masterpiece there’s a charm in how you have expressed your idea.

          AI flattens all that to a button click and regurgitates what’s already been made by somebody else, oftentimes creating something you’ve most likely already seen, somewhere, and won’t remember for long.

  • danielfgom@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Instead of using robots to replace menial jobs and help humans who have physical labour jobs, they’ve invented a tool that will get rid of all white collar jobs, forcing us all into manual, low paid labour jobs.

    Taxes will fall off a cliff and life will get really bad because the state won’t have money to maintain the country. Companies making Ai content won’t be able to sell it because no one can has money to buy it. In general all product sales will fall off a cliff, except for food, and many companies will close, resulting in mass unemployment and eventually collapse of society …

    Great job morons!

    • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      forcing us all into manual, low paid labour jobs.

      Maybe we should have shown some solidarity with people in those jobs and fought for them to get paid better?

    • realharo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      If AI gets really good, manual labor automation won’t be far behind, as the AI itself will be applied to robotics and AI research.

      The only thing of value left will be natural resources.

      • danielfgom@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Sounds like good motivation for the machines to kill us off and keep the resources for themselves

        • realharo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          That’s assuming they have that goal. The goal of survival and reproduction exists because of natural selection (those that don’t have that goal simply don’t make it into the next generation, when competing against those that do).

          But that doesn’t necessarily apply to AI systems. At least while humans have a say in which systems survive and get developed further, and which ones get scrapped. When humans control the resources, the best way to get a sizable allocation of them is by being useful to humans (or at least making them believe that).

        • TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          More like, a motivation for the wealthy who control the machines to kill us off.

          AI sentience is still science fiction but AI-powered corporate exploitation is very real, right now.

    • willington@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      There’s always money/wealth in the economy. If the workers don’t have it, someone else does. Find where the money is, and tax it. Then redistribute.

      It’s not a hard concept. It’s a question of the political will. We know what to do, but will we do it?

      • captainastronaut@seattlelunarsociety.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        We already do know where the wealth is and we aren’t taxing it. I think we know the answer to that question. Systems are only still functioning because there’s a dribble of tax revenue that still comes in. But we are already seeing schools lose funding and roads crumble as tax revenue hasn’t grown as fast as costs or populations. I don’t think it’s going to get better, because you have to be rich or have rich allies to get elected, so I don’t know how we could create different tax laws.

    • squirrel@discuss.tchncs.deOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      I’ve asked Gemini for a summary and it’s pretty spot on:

      This video is about AI generated videos and how they have become very realistic.

      The speaker, Marques Brownlee, discusses a new AI model called Sora that can generate videos from text input. He shows examples of videos generated by Sora, including one of a woman walking down a Tokyo street, a car driving up a mountain road, and a litter of puppies playing in the snow. He points out that these videos are still not perfect, but they are much better than what was possible just a year ago.

      He discusses the implications of this technology, both good and bad. On the one hand, it could be used to create fake videos that could be used to deceive people. On the other hand, it could be used to create stock footage that is more affordable and accessible than ever before. Brownlee concludes by saying that this technology is still in its early stages, but it has the potential to change the world in many ways.

      • demonsword@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        I’ve asked Gemini for a summary

        man you’ve post the video and couldn’t even summarize it yourself? talk about laziness huh

        • CaffeinatedMoth@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          Let’s see. Spend several minutes composing a few paragraphs, followed by revising because of errors in composition, spelling,or grammar…or simply spend a few seconds with AI. Work smarter not harder.

        • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          Let’s see your summary of the article, then. I can’t help but notice you haven’t included one in your comment.

          (Apologies if you were being tongue in cheek.)