[DH21965]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sevenlima

Why not ?

AI is complete TRASH, it has absolutely nothing to do with the artistic process, nor is it wanted or needed.
It?s as useful as an NFT

[gashatfreak]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mesnick

The benefit of AI is that it clearly highlights the injustice of the world order. The services of even the most advanced analogue of GPT chat will cost much less than a robot vacuum cleaner. Consequently, among people, cleaners should receive more money than artists for their work.

You're comparing generative AI to an AI designed for cleaning a house. The concerns with ChatGPT and generative AI is that it could be abused to churn out intellectual material based on other IP without the original creators' consent, or even outright replace people in filmmaking industries and kill creativity. This won't actually stop filmmaking or creatvity (indie productions are a thing and the internet is a valid alternative to the traditional cinema experience) but it could cheapen the impact of film and other visual/text-based mediums. And generative AI isn't just used for entertainment, it has a far-reaching influence on multiple fields. That's far different to cleaning floors.

And then there's also the chance of an AI being prgrammed to have bias, intentionally or not. There was a minor uproar a while back when it was discovered that ChatGPT refused to write a poem about Donald Trump but would do so for Joe Biden. I'm not gonna go into too much detail to avoid breaching Tokunation's policy on real-life politics, but despite many people's opinions (including mine's) on the guy with the orange hair, this was clear evidence of bias. There's also the fact that generative AI is a language learning model that uses internet content to improve itself. Unfortunately this can also include stuff like slurs, racism, etc.

Generative AI is an incredibly interesting topic to explore, especially as its so new at this point in time and we're only starting to discuss the impact it could have on human society going forward, but to compare it to a simple AI that is used to clean a house or do whatever is like comparing apples and oranges. You roomba cleans your house, not write resumes.

[Mesnick]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gashatfreak

You're comparing generative AI to an AI designed for cleaning a house. The concerns with ChatGPT and generative AI is that it could be abused to churn out intellectual material based on other IP without the original creators' consent, or even outright replace people in filmmaking industries and kill creativity. This won't actually stop filmmaking or creatvity (indie productions are a thing and the internet is a valid alternative to the traditional cinema experience) but it could cheapen the impact of film and other visual/text-based mediums. And generative AI isn't just used for entertainment, it has a far-reaching influence on multiple fields. That's far different to cleaning floors.

And then there's also the chance of an AI being prgrammed to have bias, intentionally or not. There was a minor uproar a while back when it was discovered that ChatGPT refused to write a poem about Donald Trump but would do so for Joe Biden. I'm not gonna go into too much detail to avoid breaching Tokunation's policy on real-life politics, but despite many people's opinions (including mine's) on the guy with the orange hair, this was clear evidence of bias. There's also the fact that generative AI is a language learning model that uses internet content to improve itself. Unfortunately this can also include stuff like slurs, racism, etc.

Generative AI is an incredibly interesting topic to explore, especially as its so new at this point in time and we're only starting to discuss the impact it could have on human society going forward, but to compare it to a simple AI that is used to clean a house or do whatever is like comparing apples and oranges. You roomba cleans your house, not write resumes.

The point of my statement is not the problems and features, but the price. If Chat GPT charged as much for its work as the most mediocre and hungry artist, no one would need it. AI is used in all industries because it is cheaper, faster and allows introverts to avoid unnecessary interaction with people. In all other respects it is identical to its human counterparts. This includes plagiarism, bias and impact on society. You won't deny that people of art also sin with this, right? And here we come to my statement: if a simple and reliable rumba costs much more than the problematic and unfinished ChatGPT, then why does a person doing cleaning earn so much less than a human artist, most often also very problematic? To put it simply, I am not criticizing AI here, but society.

[Mesnick]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DH21965

AI is complete TRASH, it has absolutely nothing to do with the artistic process, nor is it wanted or needed.

Speeding up the process. We live in an ever-faster world, so much so that even ?fast fashion? has gone out of fashion. Therefore, AI can help many slow writers or hobbyists with limited resources. After all, which of our recent contemporaries became famous for one work that they wrote all their lives? The last such individuals remained in the last century. Nowadays the ability to write works like a machine gun is valued, and there will always be fans.

[Sevenlima]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Talisman

I have had a thoroughly unpleasant week and the fact that I got a bunch of cool stuff in the last couple of days hasn't even put a dent in it tells me it's a lot worse than I'm letting myself believe.




Or, OR. Or. Or - and hear me out here - or, we could just

Skip AI and leave it in the garbage bin with crypto and flying cars as the technological dead end it is and just stick to proven practical effects and human-implemented-and-designed digital touch-ups.

that's the point, the lack of money to hires a great writers/producers/directors is due the CGI special effects/visuals experts.

[Mesnick]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sevenlima

that's the point, the lack of money to hires a great writers/producers/directors is due the CGI special effects/visuals experts.

But (if we are not talking about those created by AI, but those made by human experts) CGI is more expensive than practical effects. I myself don`t understand why a painted explosion is more expensive than a regular one, but film budgets indicate exactly this. I think there is corruption here.

[Talisman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mesnick

But (if we are not talking about those created by AI, but those made by human experts) CGI is more expensive than practical effects. I myself don`t understand why a painted explosion is more expensive than a regular one, but film budgets indicate exactly this. I think there is corruption here.

The Flash certainly didn't look like a movie that cost 300 Million Dollars, is all I'm saying about that.

[wentwood]

WTB?

I've seen TV episodes that look way better than movies on less budget. The fact is that if you have the tech and the programing you can put together some top notch visuals.

Farscape is a good case of this for visuals. Even Power Rangers looked good with a lot of morphing sequences and explosions.

[Sunred]

We should just do this.

Fun fact, the 2010s reboot was a blend of CGI and miniatures.

[DH21965]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mesnick

Speeding up the process. We live in an ever-faster world, so much so that even ?fast fashion? has gone out of fashion. Therefore, AI can help many slow writers or hobbyists with limited resources. After all, which of our recent contemporaries became famous for one work that they wrote all their lives? The last such individuals remained in the last century. Nowadays the ability to write works like a machine gun is valued, and there will always be fans.

You are defending a product that?s used to scrape and steal real artist?s work. YOU are part of the problem. Lazy useless TRASH for lazy untalented can?t put the effort in people, I stand by that 100%