This is kind of a dumb argument, isn't it?
I have to imagine someone centuries ago probably complained about inventors wasting their time on some dumb printing presses so smart people could write books and newspapers better when they could have been building better farm tools. But could we have developed the tractor when we did if we were still handwriting everything?
Progress supports progress. Teaching computers to recognize and reproduce pictures might seem like a waste to some people, but how do you suppose a computer will someday disassemble a ship if it is not capable of recognizing what the ship is and what holds it together? Modern AI is primitive, but it will eventually lead to autonomous machines that can actually do that work intelligently without blindly following an instruction set, oblivious to whatever might be actually happening around it.
"AI" researcher here. The only reason there are models that can "write" and "create art" is because that data is available for training. Basically people put massive amounts of digital text and images on the Internet and the companies scraped all of it to train the models. If there were big enough datasets for ship building, that would happen too...
I get the sentiment, but that is a really dumb take. Software automation is a hell of a lot easier than creating robotic automation to disassemble ships of all shapes and sizes. That's why art automation has been done, and industrial freighter recycling automation has not been.
How would that even be possible? Presumably, you'd need to break the ships down into pieces first, and even then, you'll be dealing with huge numbers of oddly shaped and sized components of varying materials. It makes a lot more sense to have people do that, though it is likely very dangerous.
Seems more like a job for unions and workplace safety regulations than for robots
Making art and writing just happens to be easy to automate with neural networks and machine learning, neither of which was originally researched for the purpose of replacing artists and writers.
Good luck disassembling a ship with a neural network. And maybe do some research about the difficulties of application-specific robotics.
Disappointed programmer here. I thought I could automate farming so that people wouldn't die of hunger. Now I realise that if you automate farming, it would just make some CEO more money because his company now makes corn syrup and destroys rural communities even faster.
I got my "contract not renewed", for the Fortune 500 B2B CRM company I worked for.
I can try to bust my ass to make my 2018 laptop try to render images I can't draw, which does give me some pleasure. It's not the AI tool's fault humanity sucks, it's the goddamn people with money.
This sort of ignores the fact that the advances in that technology are widespread applicable to all tasks, we literally just started with text and image generation because:
-
The training data is plentiful abd basically free to get your hands on
-
It's easy to verify it works
LLMs will crawl so that ship breaking robots can run.
-
The robot dystopia will not be caused by evil AI enslaving humanity.
No matter how advanced or how self aware, AI will lack the ambition that is part of humanity, part of us due to our evolutionary history.
An AI will never have an opinion, only logical conclusions and directives that it is required to fulfil as efficiently as possible. The directives, however, are programmed by the humans who control these robots.
Humans DO have ambitions and opinions, and they have the ability to use AI to enslave other humans. Human history is filled with powerful, ambitious humans enslaving everyone else.
The robot dystopia is therefor a corporate dystopia.
I always roll my eyes when people invoke Skynet and Terminator whenever something uncanny is shown off. No, it's not the machines I'm worried about.
This is a kind of bad take really. Just because AI can make art does not mean that's the only thing that it will be used for.
Realistically though it's blindingly obvious why AI isn't being used for ship breaking, and that's because it's not a purely software problem, it requires interfacing with robots and humanoid robots at that because a standard mechanical arm attached to an assembly line won't cut it in this scenario. So it's an incredibly difficult problem to solve and being angry that someone hasn't solved it yet is stupid.
If this guy is really a programmer he should know that.
You know, interesting kind of aside here, I haven't seen talked about anywhere at all, but I would like to interrogate everyone here about it to get their thoughts.
I don't think AI is generally going to just replace artists wholesale, or is going to take over without some sort of editing, and that editing will probably necessitate a kind of creative process, and that's probably going to be adjacent to what lots of artists already do. AI as a tool, rather than as a replacement. We saw this with the shift from 2d to 3d in animation. This was accompanied by lack of unionization in the 3d workforce, yes, and was incentivized by it, but the convergence of these mediums, even really only fairly recently, has bolstered artists' ability to make much smaller projects work on a larger scale than they previously would've been able to. If you really need evidence of this, you can kind of look at much earlier newgrounds stuff vs the later work. There's less people using that site now, and the userbase has probably aged up substantially over time, but I do think it's probably fair to say that the quality of the work has gone up (quality obviously being subjective). Basically, Blender is a pretty good software, it's very cool and good.
SO, to the point, if this is the case, and artists are able to substantially cut down on their workload, while still producing similar or larger outputs, or better outputs, will this actually affect art, kind of, as an industry? Is there a pre-allocated volume of art that public consciousness will allow to exist? In which case, the amount of artists would go down. Or is it more the case that there is only a pre-allocated amount of capital that can be given to art? In which case, the number of artists might be the same, and we might just see larger volumes of art in general? I think historically the latter is the case, but that might have changed, or, more realistically, I think it would be dependent on external economic factors.
Big reason why I just build cute little games as a hobby instead of writing spreadsheet software for a megacorp to optimize the lowest quarterly earners out of a job, or develop AI to optimize myself out of a job.
People are cheaper than robots, ergo they are more expendable
Because those are byproducts of trying to build AGI to help augment the white collar workforce, which as others have said purely digital work is just lower hanging fruit right now.
It may cost millions of dollars to build a model, but that can be after an exponential amount of iterations. Doing the same with IRL hardware and capital is the exception not the norm.
The next phases are better digital twins and applying these advances to them to find strategic meat space projects to put hours to.
Mentioned it in another comment already... People already do this with robotics and ai
While he's at it he should automate doctors, mechanics, contractors... It's all so easy right???
The world loves Michael Jackson and The Beatles. The problem is most of them died, but now we have Beatles Jackson. The fab 5. Billie Jean is not my Yellow Submarine! Featuring Kurt Cobain and Cab Calloway. The biggest hit of the year fellas, I’m telling you. Art is over. Art said god is dead. God is just being born!
Bow before your digital overlords!
I never even imagined a world where machines replace artists. Man.
The most automated stuff are tedious things like rotoscoping. Creative projects still require human expertise to assemble, fine-tune, and use ML tools effectively.
Repetitive Basic tasks have been continually made more manageable by technology, and thanks to that skilled professionals have been able to complete more ambitious projects that would have been impossible for individuals or small groups to take on before.
I wonder what he's a developer for?
Everything that can be digitalized, like words, music or pictures, will go through this enshittification process one day, be it by humans or by AI or both. It's not good but at the same time it's a great challenge for artists in these times to create experiences that cannot be digitalized, or displayed on a screen.
They make equipment to cut up ships from the relative safety of an excavator.
Just build one of these but fucking massive.
There you go, automated shipbreaking.
