Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Dostoevsky]

Count me in a different camp, then. When it comes to stories, I prefer ones with intended arcs and actual endings.

(And in terms of potentially finishing a dead author's work, we already have attempts at that - even if AI may eventually be able to do it better, unless we digitalize the author's mind into the mainframe or something it'll still be different from authentic.)

[Eric Blank]

This is an SCP.

No, really. There is an SCP about a program/machine that spontaneously generates episodes of a show. I swear I remember reading it.

It's escaped containment

[Frumple]

Count me in a different camp, then. When it comes to stories, I prefer ones with intended arcs and actual endings.

You'd still have those, possibly even AI generated, too. There'd just be the option of other stuff existing in a way that currently doesn't, limited as it is by the weaknesses of human flesh and temporal existence. It'd be a straightforward improvement from the current state of things, y'know?

(And in terms of potentially finishing a dead author's work, we already have attempts at that - even if AI may eventually be able to do it better, unless we digitalize the author's mind into the mainframe or something it'll still be different from authentic.)

Eh, people don't care much about authenticity if the work remains enjoyable, just see the series that keep using dead author's names

There's also the general sentiment that even inauthentic is better in some ways than nonexistent. Some folks disagree, sure, but there's enough of a market for it such works continue to publish.

[McTraveller]

How would that be "inauthentic"?  It's still "the thing really made by the AI" isn't it? Wouldn't it only be inauthentic if it was made by a person and claimed to be made by AI? Or vice-versa?

[voliol]

Weed eater
I'm done in this thread.

[scriver]

Count me in a different camp, then. When it comes to stories, I prefer ones with intended arcs and actual endings.

You'd still have those, possibly even AI generated, too.

No, you wouldn't. That's not how industrialisation works.

There'd just be the option of other stuff existing in a way that currently doesn't, limited as it is by the weaknesses of human flesh and temporal existence. It'd be a straightforward improvement from the current state of things, y'know?

(And in terms of potentially finishing a dead author's work, we already have attempts at that - even if AI may eventually be able to do it better, unless we digitalize the author's mind into the mainframe or something it'll still be different from authentic.)

Eh, people don't care much about authenticity if the work remains enjoyable, just see the series that keep using dead author's names

There's also the general sentiment that even inauthentic is better in some ways than nonexistent. Some folks disagree, sure, but there's enough of a market for it such works continue to publish.

I'd rather have no GoT season 8 than GoT season 8, and measuring by how quickly GoT season 8 erased GoT completely off from the face of current culture a lot of people agree

[McTraveller]

Larry: "If at first you don't succeed, what's better than an iguana?"

I can't stop laughing at the absurdity...

And I just had a realization, is this really any different than the Mad-Libs-esque After Dark screen saver from the 1990s?

[Iris]

It's fun to watch, but what I'm worried about is taking the creativity out of creative works.

The world of A.D. 2014 will have few routine jobs that cannot be done better by some machine than by any human being. Mankind will therefore have become largely a race of machine tenders. [...] The lucky few who can be involved in creative work of any sort will be the true elite of mankind, for they alone will do more than serve a machine.

What happens when even that is taken away from us?

[Frumple]

I mean, it already is for the vast majority of the human race, y'know? Most folks, even if they tried their best they'd be outperformed by people more talented or dedicated than them. Plenty of them even go on to make a living, or just a hobby, out of creative works even when they're derivative or just plain worse than the works of others.

There being something out there that's better or more prolific or more creative than you, doesn't seem to stop people from being creative.

[anewaname]

Could you imagine the horrors of being in a room with full-wall screens, surround sound, and better versions of "AI people" including you in their sitcom production? They'll be asking you about something or responding to how you behave or what you say, being emotional when you don't behave as they want you to.

What could become an excellent system for education, skill training, and social development, is likely to also become a project to limit interaction and education, and to create a social caste system.

[King Zultan]

This future you people talk about sounds horrible, this AI generated TV stuff shit sounds awful.

[Cthulhu]

Good things and bad things will come out of it. Overall I think it's cool and hope it gets bigger. The worst impacted will be the smaller scale freelancers and such. Concept art as an industry is all about high speed low drag speedpainting techniques and pumping out variations on themes as fast as you can.  Concept artists created that paradigm and now they're fucked because computers can do it better.

Most of the sympathy I would've had for the people complaining about AI taking their jobs is dampened by all the stupid shit I see them post on twitter, completely misunderstanding how machine learning works, making absurd comparisons to sampling and collages, and most egregiously cheering on horrible megacorps like Disney trying to wield copyright against AI art.  I have no fucking sympathy for people saying shit like this. In fact I hope they lose their jobs.

Also I remember when AI art was first becoming a thing and they were all posting it and laughing about it with the rest of us until a few big accounts like that stupid-ass realistic pokemon guy told them it was bad.

Ultimately none of this matters because it's here and it's not going away. May as well get used to the idea and plan for how you'll navigate a world with ubiquitous machine learning shit, because that world's coming whether you like it or not.

Edit:  The Seinfeld show is funny.  Very coherent and understandable dialog coming from a machine that has no idea what it's actually saying gives the whole thing this undercurrent of insanity. Everything they talk about is so banal but there's something subtly fucked up about all of it.

[lemon10]

No, the worst impact  of AI artis going to be AI art destroying 75% (90%?) of all art jobs.

Of course that's terrible for artists, but like most tech advances good for everyone it doesn't screw over.
Of course all the other AI is going to screw over everyone else too in a ton of ways soooo...

Count me in a different camp, then. When it comes to stories, I prefer ones with intended arcs and actual endings.

You'd still have those, possibly even AI generated, too.

No, you wouldn't. That's not how industrialisation works.

As long as enough people want it people will have AI make it. At first it will be extremely expensive and cost a ton, but eventually people won't be required to do anything more then say they want it.

You want GOT season 8 but not crap? Done.
You want GOT but the 4th season is the final one that closes off all the plot holes?  Sure, why not.
You want a GOT style show that is just as good but only lasts 3 seasons? Done as well.
And of course eventually no humans will need to be involved at all and they can make it last 5000 seasons instead as long as there are enough people to pay the server costs to keep making it.

What won't exist is large expensive stuff done only by humans. After all no company will make a bunch of shows for 50x the price any more then they make anime these days without using computers.
Passion projects will still exist, but as a tiny niche even compared to what they currently occupy.

[Loud Whispers]

It's fun to watch, but what I'm worried about is taking the creativity out of creative works.

The world of A.D. 2014 will have few routine jobs that cannot be done better by some machine than by any human being. Mankind will therefore have become largely a race of machine tenders. [...] The lucky few who can be involved in creative work of any sort will be the true elite of mankind, for they alone will do more than serve a machine.

What happens when even that is taken away from us?

Humanity in 1900: machines will automate our suck ass jobs so we can have more free time to do creative work

Humanity in 2020: machines will automate our creativity so we can spend all of our time on suck ass jobs

[dragdeler]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

It's a shame the numbers are allready ebbing off you can sleep like a baby from this. Also.

“As generative media gets better, we have this notion that at any point, you're gonna be able to turn on the future equivalent of Netflix and watch a show perpetually, nonstop as much as you want. You don't just have seven seasons of a show, you have seven hundred, or infinite seasons of a show that has fresh content whenever you want it. And so that became one of our grounding pillars,” Hartle said. “Our grounding principle was, can we create a show that can generate entertaining content forever? Because that's truly where we see the future emerging towards. Our goal with the next iterations or next shows that we release is to actually trade a show that is like Netflix-level quality.”

JFL are we just going to pretend it's flattering to the source material? Ok ^^