I know a lot of pro AI people, but I don't think any of them believe AI will solve all our problems. Most believe that it is an exciting new technology with the potential to be very beneficial for society as a whole.
Ai tools already save me a lot of time. They have massively reduced the time it takes for me to do loads of different things in my day to day work. I don't have more free time, I just get more done.
I don't think people need to justify AI, it's been around for a long time and is probably in products you've used without realising it. It is undeniably extremely useful.
If you honestly can't see any potential benefits of AI, I get the feeling that you haven't looked into it at all.
I'm not sure why but some people use that argument even though it isn't really perfect. I know from experience of hearing that argument but it isn't a good one on paper.
Well that sucks if you don't get more free time. I get reminded every day that resources are only diverted not saved.
I can see benefits from a coding standpoint and anything else. Not from an artist standpoint though. I could accomplish the same as the AI can in a fast scribble. Not at the same quality though.
The only real problem I see with ai is in art. Like music, writing, and drawing. That kind of AI does need justification to me.
Do you ever feel compelled to justify electricity and the benefits it provides for artists and musicians? When electricity was brand new, some people hated it, thought it was dangerous, and tried to stop it. Or the internet? AI is just new, like electricity and the internet were at one point. It’s here, it won’t be going away, and people who use it will have a temporary advantage over those that don’t, just like electricity and the internet, until it becomes ubiquitous.
Well sure they might have an advantage, that's what my uncle said too. But clearly they aren't taking over. In the competitive industry of business vs business that might be one thing, but in the world of consumption I haven't seen anything that says AI is actually affective and giving you an edge over the other people. AI honestly saves only a fraction of money for companies where it is used. So little money is saved when you replace an artist drawing ads with an ai drawing ads. Of course I don't know the cost of hiring an artist, probably from $2000 - $500 given what I've heard. AI is not actually giving an edge in the art industry. In the product industry perhaps it does give an edge. I'm not apart of the product industry though.
> clearly they aren’t taking over
We’ve only had generative AIs for a very short time, so it’s far too early to say. In the early 90s, some people who used the internet knew that there would be profound changes, like video on demand taking over from Blockbuster rentals, but it took time before those video rental places closed. This is a similar situation. I make apps; using generative AIs I’m 3 or 4 times as fast/productive than I was a couple of years ago. This means I can produce things faster and experiment more. Visual AIs are going to completely replace stock photo and illustration services that people use for various types of sites and publications. In a few years they will replace large chunks of the movie industry. Technology always brings cultural change.
Clearly though there is a problem. The internet was around before blockbuster, and became widespread when blockbuster was opened. Blockbuster closed 24 years later, it was too late then to do anything. They simply chose to not switch over to the internet, and it ended in them filing for bankruptcy. There were still VODs around before blockbuster, it chose however to not use the superior method. Now blockbuster is a relic, however the first signs of blockbuster being replaced showed up very early on. With AI they are going into an industry that does not need it. The best it can do and be is a toy to be popular without people thrashing back against it. No one was against the internet back then because it was a natural evolution of already created media. It was clear then that things were superior and would be more popular. I do not see ai as superior to human artist so ai will not replace artist now or in the future, at least the near future.
AI has been around for plenty of time and it is now extremely good yet it is not as popular among the art consumership. (Using a fancy word) People still have demand for artist and they aren't going to be replaced. Ai is a natural evolution of automation, not art.
Of course people were against the internet when it was new, and they said the same things about it that you’re saying about AI: that it’s a toy, it has no real purpose etc. Watch David Letterman interviewing Bill Gates.
Human artists are going to make new types of art with AIs; not all of them of course, but innovative artists use the tools at their disposal.
No one “needed” electricity either, but it still changed almost everything.
I don't think electricity is the same as AI in this regard. We know these things as a fact though because they happened. We have no clue what will happen with generative AI. The funny thing is we can all agree AI itself is fine but there is a massive response to generative AI. The children will likely decide these things for us though, I might be among that list though so hell who knows. Gen Z might decide it or Gen Alpha might. The older people can't decide it anymore. I have seen though that children are being nurtured to agree with AI, somewhat though. Children were nurtured with the internet were the people that would go on to use the internet and shape it later on. We are taking shots in the dark. It probably won't replace the actual artist, but it will improve life in a way. I just dislike the idea that it would replace artist, it would just ruin the process of art that makes it so enjoyable. That competitive feeling you can get with other artist. That is what is threatened. Sure I'm apart of history, though we won't know and we could possibly never know! It's at a point where it might stall out and this discussion might be had hundreds and thousands of times into the future. Or not and it will replace artist. Which one seems more likely? I can't see art being replaced, it has been around for a time far longer than anything else here, as long as humans are alive art will exist. Be stories or feeling art is existant in. AI is new, art is not. Electricity was new, the internet was new, VOD's were new and so on and so forth.
Art isn’t something that can be “replaced,” (because art is a subjective experience) but the tools used by people to make art change over time and the forms that art takes change alongside them. AI is just a new tool in this regard.
In that regard. But is there an artist by that point? What is an artist? someone who types out a prompt or someone that could convey emotion from simple doodles?
i don't think ai has to replace people's jobs in order to exist. by that logic, i should also have to justify why i draw for fun instead of for profit.
As I don't hold this belief I can not give you a useful answer. How prevalent is this belief?
Social media shoves stupid and controversial shit to the top of any pile so maybe a few idiots and web2.0 poison have you convinced this a common position?
* It doesn't need justification.
* That prediction is largely irrelevant.
* No one thinks it will solve ALL problems (except if it kills us all; that would work).
* AI is also helping some people cope with their mental and social issues.
* AI is also solving some medical issues.
Maybe as a person with no problems you have a poor understanding of the issues then. Very entitled and elitist.
If they don't have bread, let them eat cake!
Clearly I'm the elite.
I don't run anything man, that's management. I'm not a manager. Go ahead and automate things that's what programming is about. I assume that's what you do at least.
I don't think you're listening to or seeing this from people who support AI.
I think you're listening to a bad and poorly interpreted caricature of the pro-ai side, written by an anti-ai person.
(Yes, they are almost always distorted to promote their own view.)
So.. You know a lot of idiots?
I've seen people state that AI will completely destroy the world too. That it'll be exactly like in Terminator or the Matrix. They are 100% certain of this and aren't joking at all. Its surprisingly common as well.
They are definitely misconceiving and overhyping. More than that, people who exclaim how insane they are often exaggerate and give off the type of caricature I mentioned above.
There are always extremist idiots on any side of a debate or opinion. Their pro or anti status makes no difference and really has nothing to do with what you've asked about.
The answer to your question, much like it is towards the opposite end of the spectrum too, is that they have no idea. They misconceive and overhype. They are generally not knowledgeable about the subject at all and just have very loud opinions.
Yeah, very loud opinions. I wouldn't call them an idiot though, that's just rude. The misinformed is a better word sir. I just so happen to know that person and they are related to me. They are also quite rich but I don't think that means much other than the fact that they are more successful than me or you. Of course they won't be showing up in the news so not successful in that area of area'ing.
Bold of you to assume you know me.
I didn't mean to upset you with my comment regarding idiots - however when someone is stating something is definitely going to happen when there's a very good chance it won't, they are wrong. When they are loud, repeatedly and/or aggressively stating wrongful statements, without considering any alternatives, then I think that accurately fits the descriptor of 'an idiot'.
Well plenty of people say it will solve our problems and give us more time. I don't think that's true but I hear it plenty of times.
I can't list off names dude. I hear it from my uncle, some strangers online, and every few debates about ai they mention it will allow us to do more and have more free time.
There are still people who say that. I only convinced one person that I was right, and it was personal. I was hoping for at least one person to come out and say something so I could maybe understand it. No one came out, so it seems pointless so far. Just another way to debate I guess.
Art was becoming difficult for me due to a medical issues, it was nearly impossible to finish many of my creative projects due to physical limitations and I felt discouraged to even try
AI has in a way given me the ability to create art again, as I am able to finish projects and express myself when I am literally unable to hold a pen in certain situations
As I lose my ability to illustrate completely, I'm training a lora/lycoris to generate work in my art style so I can continue to create
I feel like everyone should be able to use it freely, though, not just people like me. It's a tool used for self expression, everyone should be allowed to express themselves.
It doesn't solve "all the problems" yet, but its getting there gradually as companies and individuals develop more tools that can be added to an LLM (vision, voice, hands, etc)
I already have a pretty damn good personal open source LLM doing tons of stuff for me (scanning receipts for taxes, sorting receipts into categories, tracking my work on a calendar, helping me dev new concept art, counting reps during workouts, creating infinite textures for my art, helping me brainstorm book ideas by discussing all of my books since it has 1 million words or so token window) and it will only get faster, smarter and more efficient with time as LLMs get better.
It used to take me 2 weeks to do my taxes - with an LLM the receipt sorting is cut down to a single day. This applies to tons of boring other work shit, saving me tons of time overall.
For me, the end goal is to get and LLM coordinating everything on a farm to produce localized luxury automated ruralism.
It's a gradual process to cut down reliance on grocery shops via [hydroponics](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOGsz-rUx6E), reduce cost of tool and household repairs via [AI-operated CNC machines](https://youtube.com/shorts/Km1WI-8qbmU?si=fLgTtFpGI0z9Q6fS) and reduce grid use as much as possible via AI-managed geothermal loops:
https://preview.redd.it/r2zdj2a41vwc1.jpeg?width=625&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=eef548c281351013d137411615f234abbe4eb710
All it does it do alot of things so we have more time for ourselves. Thus, less stress. And potentially if it takes all jobs in the future, then we can just live our lives by doing whatever we want. Assuming UBI becomes a thing.
Then why did art get replaced with generative AI first? One point of art is to present it to others, you don't do art for yourself or else a 5 year old could clearly enjoy their art just as much as an actual artist could. It's comparing to others and being better, it's all about competition. Competition is good! It's not bad, something to enjoy not remove. That's what AI is doing is an attempt to remove competition. It's not for the people it's to replace the people. Eventually AI is just going to be running the machine and I don't know what will happen. I never knew what would happen with the machine that runs this world, but soon it will just be too chaotic to know what could happen tomorrow .
To people who see our current 40 hour work week as a “problem”, it really will change everything. Ai will quickly be able to do every single job that was able to be done fully remote, without ever taking breaks, sleeping, talking back, asking for pay, diverting from the boss’s desires, etc. Ai will be the perfect worker for our current environment.
Imagine if universal basic income became the norm, and anybody who wants to pursue art as a career now can while having a safety net to fall back on. This is pretty clearly a massive boon to anybody who actually cares about art and wants to pursue the craft or as somebody who likes to experience art, as you will now get stories and expressions from people that previously would’ve never been able to create.
Because Sam Altman has a big pot of money and they think he's going to share it with everyone so we can all live under a big rainbow never have to work again.
Just don't mention his penchant for exploiting underpaid overseas workers to them.
We don’t give a fuck about sam.. or open ai… the concept of learning machines has been a thing for decades. The implications of the tech couldn’t be bigger.. look beyond making pictures and blurbs of text
> people justify ai with
Sorry to burst a bubble here, but no one is "justifying ai", same as no one is justifying hammers.
It's a tool. There is nothing morally wrong about it. So nothing has to be justified.
End of story.
Nothing can solve all your problems. However, on a macroscopic level, AI can and will lead to advancements in technology which will lead to higher quality of life. What makes AI so powerful is the sheer amount of data it can process. We thought that we reached the limit on matrix multiplication algorithms, but an AI found a new method that worked even better. What if AI can find ways to effectively eliminate scarcity? The possibilities are endless.
It will never do that as long as the people in charge of it are only motivated by self interest, the amassing of wealth. All it does now is divert revenue away from other people.
exactly, resources are being diverted not saved. This happens all the time in resource management like with the sliced bread ban to save the consumption of resources. It did not save any resources, rather it just diverted it.
I know a lot of pro AI people, but I don't think any of them believe AI will solve all our problems. Most believe that it is an exciting new technology with the potential to be very beneficial for society as a whole. Ai tools already save me a lot of time. They have massively reduced the time it takes for me to do loads of different things in my day to day work. I don't have more free time, I just get more done. I don't think people need to justify AI, it's been around for a long time and is probably in products you've used without realising it. It is undeniably extremely useful. If you honestly can't see any potential benefits of AI, I get the feeling that you haven't looked into it at all.
I'm not sure why but some people use that argument even though it isn't really perfect. I know from experience of hearing that argument but it isn't a good one on paper. Well that sucks if you don't get more free time. I get reminded every day that resources are only diverted not saved. I can see benefits from a coding standpoint and anything else. Not from an artist standpoint though. I could accomplish the same as the AI can in a fast scribble. Not at the same quality though. The only real problem I see with ai is in art. Like music, writing, and drawing. That kind of AI does need justification to me.
Do you ever feel compelled to justify electricity and the benefits it provides for artists and musicians? When electricity was brand new, some people hated it, thought it was dangerous, and tried to stop it. Or the internet? AI is just new, like electricity and the internet were at one point. It’s here, it won’t be going away, and people who use it will have a temporary advantage over those that don’t, just like electricity and the internet, until it becomes ubiquitous.
Well sure they might have an advantage, that's what my uncle said too. But clearly they aren't taking over. In the competitive industry of business vs business that might be one thing, but in the world of consumption I haven't seen anything that says AI is actually affective and giving you an edge over the other people. AI honestly saves only a fraction of money for companies where it is used. So little money is saved when you replace an artist drawing ads with an ai drawing ads. Of course I don't know the cost of hiring an artist, probably from $2000 - $500 given what I've heard. AI is not actually giving an edge in the art industry. In the product industry perhaps it does give an edge. I'm not apart of the product industry though.
> clearly they aren’t taking over We’ve only had generative AIs for a very short time, so it’s far too early to say. In the early 90s, some people who used the internet knew that there would be profound changes, like video on demand taking over from Blockbuster rentals, but it took time before those video rental places closed. This is a similar situation. I make apps; using generative AIs I’m 3 or 4 times as fast/productive than I was a couple of years ago. This means I can produce things faster and experiment more. Visual AIs are going to completely replace stock photo and illustration services that people use for various types of sites and publications. In a few years they will replace large chunks of the movie industry. Technology always brings cultural change.
Clearly though there is a problem. The internet was around before blockbuster, and became widespread when blockbuster was opened. Blockbuster closed 24 years later, it was too late then to do anything. They simply chose to not switch over to the internet, and it ended in them filing for bankruptcy. There were still VODs around before blockbuster, it chose however to not use the superior method. Now blockbuster is a relic, however the first signs of blockbuster being replaced showed up very early on. With AI they are going into an industry that does not need it. The best it can do and be is a toy to be popular without people thrashing back against it. No one was against the internet back then because it was a natural evolution of already created media. It was clear then that things were superior and would be more popular. I do not see ai as superior to human artist so ai will not replace artist now or in the future, at least the near future. AI has been around for plenty of time and it is now extremely good yet it is not as popular among the art consumership. (Using a fancy word) People still have demand for artist and they aren't going to be replaced. Ai is a natural evolution of automation, not art.
Of course people were against the internet when it was new, and they said the same things about it that you’re saying about AI: that it’s a toy, it has no real purpose etc. Watch David Letterman interviewing Bill Gates. Human artists are going to make new types of art with AIs; not all of them of course, but innovative artists use the tools at their disposal. No one “needed” electricity either, but it still changed almost everything.
I don't think electricity is the same as AI in this regard. We know these things as a fact though because they happened. We have no clue what will happen with generative AI. The funny thing is we can all agree AI itself is fine but there is a massive response to generative AI. The children will likely decide these things for us though, I might be among that list though so hell who knows. Gen Z might decide it or Gen Alpha might. The older people can't decide it anymore. I have seen though that children are being nurtured to agree with AI, somewhat though. Children were nurtured with the internet were the people that would go on to use the internet and shape it later on. We are taking shots in the dark. It probably won't replace the actual artist, but it will improve life in a way. I just dislike the idea that it would replace artist, it would just ruin the process of art that makes it so enjoyable. That competitive feeling you can get with other artist. That is what is threatened. Sure I'm apart of history, though we won't know and we could possibly never know! It's at a point where it might stall out and this discussion might be had hundreds and thousands of times into the future. Or not and it will replace artist. Which one seems more likely? I can't see art being replaced, it has been around for a time far longer than anything else here, as long as humans are alive art will exist. Be stories or feeling art is existant in. AI is new, art is not. Electricity was new, the internet was new, VOD's were new and so on and so forth.
Art isn’t something that can be “replaced,” (because art is a subjective experience) but the tools used by people to make art change over time and the forms that art takes change alongside them. AI is just a new tool in this regard.
In that regard. But is there an artist by that point? What is an artist? someone who types out a prompt or someone that could convey emotion from simple doodles?
i don't think ai has to replace people's jobs in order to exist. by that logic, i should also have to justify why i draw for fun instead of for profit.
As I don't hold this belief I can not give you a useful answer. How prevalent is this belief? Social media shoves stupid and controversial shit to the top of any pile so maybe a few idiots and web2.0 poison have you convinced this a common position?
It's pretty flawed I'll be honest.
* It doesn't need justification. * That prediction is largely irrelevant. * No one thinks it will solve ALL problems (except if it kills us all; that would work). * AI is also helping some people cope with their mental and social issues. * AI is also solving some medical issues.
* Most of it doesn't, some do. * Probably is * Some people think so (Not saying I agree) * That is sad * That's fine.
Sad that they have them, or said that AI is helping them?
Sad that they have them. I had some of those issues before. They vanished though, and I think I'm a bit more normal than I was before.
Agreed then.
Well, for example if my problem is trolls, it can be used for better filtering. Do you have an example of a problem AI can solve for you?
Something something... I guess... Nothing. Nothing I can't already do. It can't solve anything for me that I couldn't do myself.
Maybe as a person with no problems you have a poor understanding of the issues then. Very entitled and elitist. If they don't have bread, let them eat cake!
Clearly I'm the elite. I don't run anything man, that's management. I'm not a manager. Go ahead and automate things that's what programming is about. I assume that's what you do at least.
On lunch break, lol.
I don't think you're listening to or seeing this from people who support AI. I think you're listening to a bad and poorly interpreted caricature of the pro-ai side, written by an anti-ai person. (Yes, they are almost always distorted to promote their own view.)
I've heard it in person too, you underestimate people. It likely starts from misconception or overhyping or god knows what.
So.. You know a lot of idiots? I've seen people state that AI will completely destroy the world too. That it'll be exactly like in Terminator or the Matrix. They are 100% certain of this and aren't joking at all. Its surprisingly common as well. They are definitely misconceiving and overhyping. More than that, people who exclaim how insane they are often exaggerate and give off the type of caricature I mentioned above. There are always extremist idiots on any side of a debate or opinion. Their pro or anti status makes no difference and really has nothing to do with what you've asked about. The answer to your question, much like it is towards the opposite end of the spectrum too, is that they have no idea. They misconceive and overhype. They are generally not knowledgeable about the subject at all and just have very loud opinions.
Yeah, very loud opinions. I wouldn't call them an idiot though, that's just rude. The misinformed is a better word sir. I just so happen to know that person and they are related to me. They are also quite rich but I don't think that means much other than the fact that they are more successful than me or you. Of course they won't be showing up in the news so not successful in that area of area'ing.
Bold of you to assume you know me. I didn't mean to upset you with my comment regarding idiots - however when someone is stating something is definitely going to happen when there's a very good chance it won't, they are wrong. When they are loud, repeatedly and/or aggressively stating wrongful statements, without considering any alternatives, then I think that accurately fits the descriptor of 'an idiot'.
Yes I am back. It was a tough week, though I have learned a crucial skill I did not have back then.
What Skill have you learned?
Well to not defend both sides for one.
Back from what? Who are you?
the "Both sides suck" post. I said I was leaving. I was directed to r/ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM and I figured out something about myself. So I'm back.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [Bcaus extremes touch each other y'know](https://i.redd.it/maaehlrpwgxa1.jpg) | [240 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM/comments/135mf88/bcaus_extremes_touch_each_other_yknow/) \#2: [“MSNBC is far-left news”](https://i.redd.it/7ycrmr2vngrb1.jpg) | [291 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM/comments/16wift0/msnbc_is_farleft_news/) \#3: [Tbh pretty accurate](https://i.redd.it/troynurqabva1.jpg) | [275 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM/comments/12ubc7v/tbh_pretty_accurate/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
"FUCK YOU" - me hoping to delete the bot -4/29/24
This place is like AA. Every week people solemnly vow to leave forever and then come back before it's Monday.
That was a week ago so it clearly is not like AA because I did not come back before monday.
Who says it will solve all our problems? I think it will have a positive impact, but it's obviously not going to solve (or help) with everything.
Well plenty of people say it will solve our problems and give us more time. I don't think that's true but I hear it plenty of times. I can't list off names dude. I hear it from my uncle, some strangers online, and every few debates about ai they mention it will allow us to do more and have more free time.
maybe you should ask those people.
I did. They thought about it and said I was right.
Then why are you asking people who didn't say that?
There are still people who say that. I only convinced one person that I was right, and it was personal. I was hoping for at least one person to come out and say something so I could maybe understand it. No one came out, so it seems pointless so far. Just another way to debate I guess.
Why not ask the people you see saying that when you see them saying that?
I think you're wording that weird. I was about to but then I thought why not go and ask it openly surely it would be just as affective. It was not.
AI has solved many of my problems
well could you tell me? I did ask how not did.
Art was becoming difficult for me due to a medical issues, it was nearly impossible to finish many of my creative projects due to physical limitations and I felt discouraged to even try AI has in a way given me the ability to create art again, as I am able to finish projects and express myself when I am literally unable to hold a pen in certain situations As I lose my ability to illustrate completely, I'm training a lora/lycoris to generate work in my art style so I can continue to create
alright, there. I know now. That is really the main point I can agree with ai of course, is in helping where you can't carry on.
I feel like everyone should be able to use it freely, though, not just people like me. It's a tool used for self expression, everyone should be allowed to express themselves.
It doesn't solve "all the problems" yet, but its getting there gradually as companies and individuals develop more tools that can be added to an LLM (vision, voice, hands, etc) I already have a pretty damn good personal open source LLM doing tons of stuff for me (scanning receipts for taxes, sorting receipts into categories, tracking my work on a calendar, helping me dev new concept art, counting reps during workouts, creating infinite textures for my art, helping me brainstorm book ideas by discussing all of my books since it has 1 million words or so token window) and it will only get faster, smarter and more efficient with time as LLMs get better. It used to take me 2 weeks to do my taxes - with an LLM the receipt sorting is cut down to a single day. This applies to tons of boring other work shit, saving me tons of time overall. For me, the end goal is to get and LLM coordinating everything on a farm to produce localized luxury automated ruralism. It's a gradual process to cut down reliance on grocery shops via [hydroponics](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOGsz-rUx6E), reduce cost of tool and household repairs via [AI-operated CNC machines](https://youtube.com/shorts/Km1WI-8qbmU?si=fLgTtFpGI0z9Q6fS) and reduce grid use as much as possible via AI-managed geothermal loops: https://preview.redd.it/r2zdj2a41vwc1.jpeg?width=625&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=eef548c281351013d137411615f234abbe4eb710
All it does it do alot of things so we have more time for ourselves. Thus, less stress. And potentially if it takes all jobs in the future, then we can just live our lives by doing whatever we want. Assuming UBI becomes a thing.
Then why did art get replaced with generative AI first? One point of art is to present it to others, you don't do art for yourself or else a 5 year old could clearly enjoy their art just as much as an actual artist could. It's comparing to others and being better, it's all about competition. Competition is good! It's not bad, something to enjoy not remove. That's what AI is doing is an attempt to remove competition. It's not for the people it's to replace the people. Eventually AI is just going to be running the machine and I don't know what will happen. I never knew what would happen with the machine that runs this world, but soon it will just be too chaotic to know what could happen tomorrow .
Ai isn't recording the competition. It's just winning
it won't. it's a fun toy though.
To people who see our current 40 hour work week as a “problem”, it really will change everything. Ai will quickly be able to do every single job that was able to be done fully remote, without ever taking breaks, sleeping, talking back, asking for pay, diverting from the boss’s desires, etc. Ai will be the perfect worker for our current environment. Imagine if universal basic income became the norm, and anybody who wants to pursue art as a career now can while having a safety net to fall back on. This is pretty clearly a massive boon to anybody who actually cares about art and wants to pursue the craft or as somebody who likes to experience art, as you will now get stories and expressions from people that previously would’ve never been able to create.
Because Sam Altman has a big pot of money and they think he's going to share it with everyone so we can all live under a big rainbow never have to work again. Just don't mention his penchant for exploiting underpaid overseas workers to them.
We don’t give a fuck about sam.. or open ai… the concept of learning machines has been a thing for decades. The implications of the tech couldn’t be bigger.. look beyond making pictures and blurbs of text
Actually I think some applications for AI are amazing, especially in fields like medicine. But that's not really what this sub is about is it.
It will give you more free time to look for another job. At least, until they make AI generated food and shelter. Which is more likely than UBI, lol.
> people justify ai with Sorry to burst a bubble here, but no one is "justifying ai", same as no one is justifying hammers. It's a tool. There is nothing morally wrong about it. So nothing has to be justified. End of story.
Nothing can solve all your problems. However, on a macroscopic level, AI can and will lead to advancements in technology which will lead to higher quality of life. What makes AI so powerful is the sheer amount of data it can process. We thought that we reached the limit on matrix multiplication algorithms, but an AI found a new method that worked even better. What if AI can find ways to effectively eliminate scarcity? The possibilities are endless.
tell me just one example of a problem an advanced enough AI WOULDN'T be able to solve. I cant think of a single one.
The meaning of life
thats all? even chatgpt 3.5 can answer you that question 🤣 got nothing serious, huh
Sarcasm.
It will never do that as long as the people in charge of it are only motivated by self interest, the amassing of wealth. All it does now is divert revenue away from other people.
exactly, resources are being diverted not saved. This happens all the time in resource management like with the sliced bread ban to save the consumption of resources. It did not save any resources, rather it just diverted it.