Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

LuckyCSGO t1_j0mikxv wrote

Reply to comment by eikons in The Reality of Universal Basic Income Future by Prototype47

I’ve seen this argument a few times, it would make sense if AI was a similar to the camera, speaker, or a new weapon. Truthfully AI is all of the these improvements you speak of combined 100 fold. AI causes advancements in all fields and AI implementations are going to be easy and free to use. Picture the ultimate search engine, search engine doesn’t even describe it correctly. Without AI currently a student googling the answer to one of their homework questions may hope to find the answer from one a service like Chegg. With AI in the VERY near future that same student can ask AI to solve the entire 5 page homework assignment and generate a cheat sheet for the upcoming test based on the homework assignment. AI will take under 10 seconds to complete this request. ChatGPT is already capable of this although not 100% accurate. Need to build a website for your storefront? AI will generate one with entirely unique visuals. Need to understand a medical issue with your body? AI will be able to take information from you and give you extremely accurate diagnostic information. At this rate of improvement you are too confident in the human urge to independently create and have hobbies. This is not the same thing as the fine artist discovering the camera, it’s going to change everything we do.

Source: me, beep boop computer science guy using AI on the regular

−10

StingyAddict t1_j0n6zo5 wrote

There's a significant difference between 'doing something right' and 'doing something for enjoyment'.
If we need something done 'right', we can just have an AI shit that out.
However, you seem to miss the point that we are intentionally doing pointless things, not because it can be 'done better' or 'done well' by us, but because we, ourselves, want to do them.
For Art, money is not the motivation, it's the limiting factor.
Why do people go to the gym when they have cars? Because they want to feel strong and get fit.
Why do people make food when they could get it from a restaurant?
Because they want to either customize what they eat or feel the satisfaction of having made food.
Even if AI can give us 'better' everything than we, ourselves, can produce, they'll never be able to give us a better feeling of satisfaction from accomplishing something with our own two hands.

7

LuckyCSGO t1_j0nac5k wrote

Not missing any points, I didn’t say everyone won’t have hobbies. My point isn’t that we only do things and pursue hobbies with the sole purpose of efficiency. The urge to do things with our own two hands will slowly fade for the majority. Creating digital art is fun but less fun when your cohorts are able to generate better art in seconds. Hobbies will in general produce less enjoyment for humans because whether you like it or not a huge part of enjoying a hobby for most is being acknowledged for it. Custom digital art will look like the millions of generated images anyone can make and therefor there will be less acknowledgement of talent. AI will disrupt life more than a lot of you know, please listen to computer scientists. We are building these tools, 80% of us know the outcomes and heed warning against continuing.

−4

StingyAddict t1_j0nbb89 wrote

I feel that that is less so a product of AI, and more so a product of the internet in general. Comparison is the thief of joy, and all that.

However, that's just a fact of life. The best is a superlative thing. The only thing you can do is to be better than the you that existed previously. This isn't an issue that can be solved by anything, or even ruined by AI. It's an issue that stems entirely from trying to compete with others on how good what you make is. If you're only doing a hobby to be acknowledged by your peers, then your hobby is ultimately something that can be replaced by anything, since you're only doing it to 'be special'.

There's only one gold medalist in every race, and only one tallest mountain in the world. This is a fact of life that people eventually have to deal with. However, the difference is that with a future where human survival is guaranteed, not by any due paid to a corporate overlord, we will be able to live with this fact, rather than let it crush us. How many people give up on their dreams because they just don't have the time, or wouldn't make enough money doing what they actually want to do? How many would be spared from that despair?

Sure. I already accepted a long time ago that, in the grand scheme of things, I'll never be some genius inventor that turns Mars into a Gaia world or builds cities at the bottom of the ocean. I can't write or draw or sing well enough to win any awards for it.

But I sing in my car, and I write my little stories. Not because I need to. Not because I think I can do it better. Not because someone will acknowledge me for them.

I'm just doing it for fun. And in the end, that's all anything anyone wants to do.

4

LuckyCSGO t1_j0nlzov wrote

I mean you can beat around the bush of my argument by completely changing the wording of “a large part of hobbies is acknowledgment of talent” to “only doing a hobby to be special is bad”. And honestly that’s the smallest point out of all my arguments I made. Notice how you didn’t even address the points made about digital artisan hobbyists ? It’s a pretty fucking hard point to refute, an entire industry is being destroyed and the hobby will most certainly be less enjoyable (source: the millions of digital artists complaining on the internet). You don’t really see my point and you are more wrapped up by the semantics. You and most people in this thread are horribly wrong about AI and don’t know it yet but hey maybe 4-8 years in the future you can come back here and be like “oh shit that’s what he meant”

−2

StingyAddict t1_j0nn3lk wrote

The primary concerns with digital AI art isn't hobbyists, it's copyright infringement. AI Art replaces an industry "art creation" with AI that does it for cheaper, and abuses publicly available artwork in order to do so. They're stealing other people's hardwork in order to also take their jobs from them. I didn't feel the need to refute this point, because no one will care nearly as much about copyright if their livelihoods aren't being threatened.

As for "completely changing the wording of “a large part of hobbies is acknowledgment of talent” to “only doing a hobby to be special is bad”.", your entire argument is founded on humans only doing hobbies only to have their talents acknowledged.

But if you want an direct example of it all, just look at like, Youtube, or anything else. You'll never stack up to the top channels, so why bother? Because they want to create content for other people to consume, and they do want to be acknowledged, even if it isn't as being the best. Hobbyists competing against AI in a field as subjective as art probably won't feel any real pressure from AI, unless that AI is being pumped by big time corporations or something.

The threat of AI isn't AI itself, it's the people who own it. I'm not really sure where we're even standing against each other at this point, but I'm pretty sure my position is "AI is a tool in the hands of people who would abuse it" and my goals are "prevent this abuse" and "ensure everyone can benefit from AI".

4

LuckyCSGO t1_j0qie35 wrote

If you’re understanding of the greatest issue with digital AI art is simply copyright infringement then I can’t talk to you sorry. You’re obviously a digital artist and lost in the copium, goodluck my boi. The future is here

1

Ok-Crab-4063 t1_j0nns3d wrote

But they can't go outside the bounds of what you tell it right? They can't rationalize the true cause of. Medical issue that's not understood by humans yet.

For example: comedy...I haven't seen that yet but if I did I would shit myself. (I mean it would have to make something completely original, not piecing other crap together that's already funny)

2