How AI Takes The Artist Out Of The Art (The Jimquisition)

I think there is an interesting discussion to be had here about the essence of intelligence. You could probably make an argument that humans are just very complicated machines and that any heuristic that is sufficiently sophisticated is indistinguishable from human intelligence. Thus, I would be careful with any arguments based on human exceptionalism. They might turn out to be false. Other than that, I hope we'll deal with capitalism and copyright law rather than regulate AI to the point where only big corporations can afford to use it.

The porn thing is bizarre. Like...will there ever be a lack of demand for porn? Even if you could push a button/type a sentence and get an AI image, I can't see it running actual human beings out of the game.

On the porn thing, it boggles my mind that I, an extremely asexual person, will happily say that an independent producer of adult material would make my clichéd, "dream dinner party," list because they're a supremely interesting person and I'd find their insights into both sexuality and asexuality fascinating while the people who spend their lives jerking off to their work so often treat them with nothing but contempt.

This is how the world ends... not with a bang... not with a whimper... but with SHODAN JOI...

I'm glad you pointed out, though a bit too briefly, that AI needs to base its art generation on the existing work of human artists. Thousands, if not millions, of artists' work that is fed into a data model that informs how art is to be generated. Do you think the owners of these AIs have compensated the artists that created the original art? Yet they charge a pretty penny for people to use their service. Did every artist give their consent? The answer is no. All AIs are based on rampant intellectual property theft by big corporations. AI Generated visual arts is just one example. Another example is Microsoft's Github Co-pilot. They created an AI to generate programming source code by training the AI on the millions of lines of Open Source code hosted on GitHub. Most of that open source code has a license that says that if you create derivative work from open source code, you also have to distribute your code as open source. But Github Co-pilot offers corporations to generate code from that and they can keep it closed and proprietary. It's theft, plain and simple.

The black mirror episode of the jimquisition.

Thank you, Steph and crew! 😀

I can't help feeling there's going to be a lot of formerly blue collar workers watching this unfold and thinking "Thanks for finally giving a shit now that it affects you."

The whole AI sham thing is rumbling around the writing communities. It's every week someone starts talking about AI, and sure enough some AI fanboy shows up well within the Dunning-Kruger effect of the tech they are shilling. At this point, I've started calling anyone being Pro-AI in this way a "GPTBro". It's just the next incarnation of the CryptoBro.