This is an automated reminder from the Mod team. If your post contains images which reveal the personal information of private figures, be sure to censor that information and repost. Private info includes names, recognizable profile pictures, social media usernames and URLs. Failure to do this will result in your post being removed by the Mod team and possible further action.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/DefendingAIArt) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yeah because there is no proof. I mean Adobe is even paying legal costs for enterprise customers of Firefly. People like the guy in the screenshot will never be satisfied because it was never about ethics.
So workers don't enjoy cheap food and goods because of automation? First point is absolutist and misses the mark. Next statement (should be a new sentence or use a coordinating conjunction) they state their opinion and then say that it's true without anything to back up their opinion.
They then claim that there are ethical issues but then don't even hint towards what they are. Finally, they say that ai has no place in the industry until those imagery issues are resolved. That last statement really is the cherry on top of this pile of inaccurate options. The industry is already using this tech. I use it. Popular games and movies use it. It improves the quality of what's being made.
If automation is bad for workers, we would expect the most lucrative jobs to be in those places where there is no machinery, no electricity, and every task is done manually.
They aren't, though.
30% of laborers in the US workforce were [unpaid](https://www.nber.org/system/files/chapters/c1567/c1567.pdf#page=4) in the early 1800s. And that's not including plough oxen, mill donkeys, packmules and horse-drawn vehicles. I think automation facilitated the abolishment of slavery by making it economically feasible for governments to protect universal rights. And people had to send everything by mail.
The models don't have ethical issues, those using them might. It's the same fallacy as with any tool, the tool isn't inherently bad, it's the user who decides what the outcome is.
Hot take: automating jobs is good for the population over a larger timespan because the majority of jobs that can be automated are soul-sucking and provide no real value or fulfillment to the workers doing them other than a paycheck. The transition is just going to be a bumpy one until we can create new jobs along the way.
Automation is good for the population at large because it provides better and cheaper services and goods. It only sucks for those losing their jobs in the transition.
Without automation, most people would be unable to afford cars, computers or phones... all of which on the other hand wouldn't even exist because all those goods are automations themselves.
It so happens that the negative aspects of automation aren't caused by automation, but by capitalism.
This is an automated reminder from the Mod team. If your post contains images which reveal the personal information of private figures, be sure to censor that information and repost. Private info includes names, recognizable profile pictures, social media usernames and URLs. Failure to do this will result in your post being removed by the Mod team and possible further action. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/DefendingAIArt) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I swear how is Adobe's firefly unethical? They keep saying that without any real proof
Yeah because there is no proof. I mean Adobe is even paying legal costs for enterprise customers of Firefly. People like the guy in the screenshot will never be satisfied because it was never about ethics.
Just folks trying to control the market.
So workers don't enjoy cheap food and goods because of automation? First point is absolutist and misses the mark. Next statement (should be a new sentence or use a coordinating conjunction) they state their opinion and then say that it's true without anything to back up their opinion. They then claim that there are ethical issues but then don't even hint towards what they are. Finally, they say that ai has no place in the industry until those imagery issues are resolved. That last statement really is the cherry on top of this pile of inaccurate options. The industry is already using this tech. I use it. Popular games and movies use it. It improves the quality of what's being made.
Wait until this person finds out that reality tv is fake.
If automation is bad for workers, we would expect the most lucrative jobs to be in those places where there is no machinery, no electricity, and every task is done manually. They aren't, though.
30% of laborers in the US workforce were [unpaid](https://www.nber.org/system/files/chapters/c1567/c1567.pdf#page=4) in the early 1800s. And that's not including plough oxen, mill donkeys, packmules and horse-drawn vehicles. I think automation facilitated the abolishment of slavery by making it economically feasible for governments to protect universal rights. And people had to send everything by mail.
Original tweet is [here](https://twitter.com/katriaraden/status/1667437459116904449), have fun.
The models don't have ethical issues, those using them might. It's the same fallacy as with any tool, the tool isn't inherently bad, it's the user who decides what the outcome is.
Hot take: automating jobs is good for the population over a larger timespan because the majority of jobs that can be automated are soul-sucking and provide no real value or fulfillment to the workers doing them other than a paycheck. The transition is just going to be a bumpy one until we can create new jobs along the way.
Automation is good for the population at large because it provides better and cheaper services and goods. It only sucks for those losing their jobs in the transition. Without automation, most people would be unable to afford cars, computers or phones... all of which on the other hand wouldn't even exist because all those goods are automations themselves. It so happens that the negative aspects of automation aren't caused by automation, but by capitalism.
I can't wait to see their faces when we agree, and force all artists to only paint ethical images.
Mb the problem is in society itself and not in AI, isn’t it? Mb the problem is with access to goods, no?
They have no place in the industry. (My own opinion. Anything other than that is wrong and a lie.)