Zompist Bboard Again

Linguoboy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 28, 2023 12:18 pmWhat it doesn't prove, however, is that consumers would actually prefer AI-written media. The studio execs think it would be passable enough that it's worth gambling on and alienating their creatives in the process, but these same studio execs have a pretty dismal record when it comes to demonstrating any understanding of the appeal of human creativity. They can--and do--make bad decisions with the goal of maximising profits all the time.

It hardly even matters if they prefer it. Corporations can simply refuse to invest in human creatives to the point that human-created media is almost impossible to find. Plenty of people theoretically prefer artisanal clothing and handcrafted furniture, but you generally won't find such things for sale in most parts of the country. There is probably not a single handmade product for sale within a ten mile radius where I live. Furthermore, even assuming such goods are available, they usually cost far more than mass-produced equivalents, making them unable to compete. Few people will pay $100 for something they can buy for only $10 just to support another human.

Given all the box office bombs of the past year, I rather suspect Hollywood executives are drawing the conclusion that human creatives are not earning their pay. If nothing else, AI could hardly do worse than the human-made films that keep crashing and burning and it would cost far less. For that matter, AI has the wonderful advantage of never making controversial political statements or committing sexual offenses that get it canceled. Hollywood executives will never have to worry about chatGPT sexually assaulting an actress and miring a film in controversy.

Travis B. wrote: ↑Thu Sep 28, 2023 12:00 pm There is much more to computer programming than simply being able to spit out code. There is design and architecture. There is documentation. There is integration. There is testing, verification, and validation. There is responding to bug reports and comments from the user. And all of these tie in closely to one another. This applies to both in the professional world and outside it (even I have to respond to comments from others in my own work, as I have actual users at this point). Even if AI's in the future generate better code than they do today, they won't be able to do all this.

So you would argue that software engineering is fundamentally much harder and more complicated than art or literature, such that automating it the same way is simply not feasible?

malloc wrote: ↑Thu Sep 28, 2023 12:38 pm

Linguoboy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 28, 2023 12:18 pmWhat it doesn't prove, however, is that consumers would actually prefer AI-written media. The studio execs think it would be passable enough that it's worth gambling on and alienating their creatives in the process, but these same studio execs have a pretty dismal record when it comes to demonstrating any understanding of the appeal of human creativity. They can--and do--make bad decisions with the goal of maximising profits all the time.

It hardly even matters if they prefer it. Corporations can simply refuse to invest in human creatives to the point that human-created media is almost impossible to find. Plenty of people theoretically prefer artisanal clothing and handcrafted furniture, but you generally won't find such things for sale in most parts of the country. There is probably not a single handmade product for sale within a ten mile radius where I live. Furthermore, even assuming such goods are available, they usually cost far more than mass-produced equivalents, making them unable to compete. Few people will pay $100 for something they can buy for only $10 just to support another human.

Given all the box office bombs of the past year, I rather suspect Hollywood executives are drawing the conclusion that human creatives are not earning their pay. If nothing else, AI could hardly do worse than the human-made films that keep crashing and burning and it would cost far less. For that matter, AI has the wonderful advantage of never making controversial political statements or committing sexual offenses that get it canceled. Hollywood executives will never have to worry about chatGPT sexually assaulting an actress and miring a film in controversy.

I bet that studio execs who would replace humans with AI would change their mind with how the products of said I would actually go over with human viewers. What we see from ChatGPT does not seem to have the fundamental qualities that would engage actual humans to want to spend their hard-earned money to view it.

malloc wrote: ↑Thu Sep 28, 2023 12:38 pm

Travis B. wrote: ↑Thu Sep 28, 2023 12:00 pm There is much more to computer programming than simply being able to spit out code. There is design and architecture. There is documentation. There is integration. There is testing, verification, and validation. There is responding to bug reports and comments from the user. And all of these tie in closely to one another. This applies to both in the professional world and outside it (even I have to respond to comments from others in my own work, as I have actual users at this point). Even if AI's in the future generate better code than they do today, they won't be able to do all this.

So you would argue that software engineering is fundamentally much harder and more complicated than art or literature, such that automating it the same way is simply not feasible?

AI may do a great job of putting out blase, milquetoast art or literature, but I very strongly doubt that it is capable of putting out great art or literature.

malloc wrote: ↑Thu Sep 28, 2023 12:38 pmPlenty of people theoretically prefer artisanal clothing and handcrafted furniture, but you generally won't find such things for sale in most parts of the country. There is probably not a single handmade product for sale within a ten mile radius where I live.

My dude, have you even been within a ten-mile radius of where you live? There's at least a half-dozen Amish and Mennonite businesses selling handmade furniture--and that's just the ones I can find online with a cursory Google search.

Seriously, get out of your bedroom and explore the damn world around you sometime.

Linguoboy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 28, 2023 1:12 pm

malloc wrote: ↑Thu Sep 28, 2023 12:38 pmPlenty of people theoretically prefer artisanal clothing and handcrafted furniture, but you generally won't find such things for sale in most parts of the country. There is probably not a single handmade product for sale within a ten mile radius where I live.

My dude, have you even been within a ten-mile radius of where you live? There's at least a half-dozen Amish and Mennonite businesses selling handmade furniture--and that's just the ones I can find online with a cursory Google search.

Seriously, get out of your bedroom and explore the damn world around you sometime.

And here where I live, we have an arts festival every year where people display and sell art they have created. The park here is absolutely jam-packed with displays - and the art has to be amazingly popular since the people selling it can do so for outrageous prices - and there are so many people wanting to sell things that many people rent out space on their lawns for people who are unable to get displays in at the park. Do you seriously think AI is going to effectively compete with these people?

malloc wrote: ↑Thu Sep 28, 2023 12:38 pm So you would argue that software engineering is fundamentally much harder and more complicated than art or literature, such that automating it the same way is simply not feasible?

"ChatGPT, write me libraries in three unrelated computer languages, with full documentation and fully comprehensive tests, which accurately model sound change in all known human languages". How well do you think that will work out?

Or how about "ChatGPT, generate three person-years' worth of derivative generic art with no discernible merits but which the sheeple will nonetheless eagerly lap up despite neither knowing or caring where it came from"?

alice wrote: ↑Thu Sep 28, 2023 2:27 pm"ChatGPT, write me libraries in three unrelated computer languages, with full documentation and fully comprehensive tests, which accurately model sound change in all known human languages". How well do you think that will work out?

Oh, alice, that's just ChatGPT as it exists now; malloc is talking about a ChatGPT that will exist at some vague but inevitable point in the near future because reasons.

"ChatGPT, generate an unfalsifiable claim about yourself."

Linguoboy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 28, 2023 3:12 pmOh, alice, that's just ChatGPT as it exists now; malloc is talking about a ChatGPT that will exist at some vague but inevitable point in the near future because reasons.

"ChatGPT, generate an unfalsifiable claim about yourself."

Unless you believe in some immaterial force behind creativity, there is literally nothing preventing AI from improving to the point that it can replace human creatives. Barring some unexpected discoveries about human cognition and the soul, we should assume that AI will eventually get there given enough resources and development. Imagine someone in 1903 claiming that airplanes could never fly as well as birds let alone break the sound barrier. Given the state of aircraft at that point, they would have sounded quite reasonable yet obviously future developments proved them quite wrong.

Linguoboy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 28, 2023 1:12 pmMy dude, have you even been within a ten-mile radius of where you live? There's at least a half-dozen Amish and Mennonite businesses selling handmade furniture--and that's just the ones I can find online with a cursory Google search.

Seriously, get out of your bedroom and explore the damn world around you sometime.

The vast majority of people around here are not buying their furniture from Amish craftsmen. They're buying it from Menards or even Walmart if possible. The practical reality is that those Amish craftsmen comprise a tiny portion of the furniture market. If human creatives are ever relegated to that kind market share in media, I would consider that a disaster for human culture. Humans should not have to content themselves with the fringes of their own culture simply because STEMlords wanted to take over the market.

malloc wrote: ↑Thu Sep 28, 2023 3:31 pmUnless you believe in some immaterial force behind creativity, there is literally nothing preventing AI from improving to the point that it can replace human creatives.

Again, there is literally no evidence for this statement. It's an article of faith, nothing more.

malloc wrote:

Linguoboy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 28, 2023 1:12 pmMy dude, have you even been within a ten-mile radius of where you live? There's at least a half-dozen Amish and Mennonite businesses selling handmade furniture--and that's just the ones I can find online with a cursory Google search.

The vast majority of people around here are not buying their furniture from Amish craftsmen.

True, but that wasn't your claim. You claim was "There is probably not a single handmade product for sale within a ten mile radius where I live." That is demonstrably false--and not just a little bit false, but majorly false. There are hundreds if you only know where to look.

malloc wrote:The practical reality is that those Amish craftsmen comprise a tiny portion of the furniture market. If human creatives are ever relegated to that kind market share in media, I would consider that a disaster for human culture. Humans should not have to content themselves with the fringes of their own culture simply because STEMlords wanted to take over the market.

But there's nothing inevitable about that kind of marginalisation. Again, it relies on a series of assumptions, any one of which could be wrong. Is a novel more like a coffee table or the bud vase on top of it? Is AI more like powered flight or more like natural language processing?

In the early part of the 20th centuries, there were a lot of predictions that the industrialisation of food production would lead to be the death of home cooking. How's that working out?

According to a 2018 report by the NPD Group, about 82% of meals and snacks are prepared at home — significantly more than a decade ago. And despite a relatively strong economy, the estimated number of per-person restaurant visits (from fast food to fine dining) dropped to a 28-year low of 185.

But those meals can't all be made from scratch, right? Most must just be folks microwaving burritos or whatever, right? Well:

Seventy-eight percent of people cook from scratch when preparing meals at home, while 45 percent heat up foods from the refrigerator or freezer and 37 percent use shortcuts such as precut vegetables or pre-marinated chicken breasts, according to Harris Poll.

Huh. Folks would still rather get their hands dirty when making food instead of letting agribusiness robots do all the work. Who'da thunk it? I dunno, maybe anyone who spends time with humans?

A gentle reminder that convincing malloc that his fears are not related to the real world has never worked.

Meanwhile, here's an amusing article that says, with even more conviction, something I've said before: the one job AIs can and should take over is CEOs.

Linguoboy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 28, 2023 3:50 pmAgain, there is literally no evidence for this statement. It's an article of faith, nothing more.

On the contrary, the assumption that computers cannot match human creativity regardless of their power or sophistication is an article of faith. That notion only makes sense if you believe humans have some immaterial essence that computers cannot replicate. Without notions like the soul, creativity is simply another algorithm like arithmetic or sorting goods by size, more complicated perhaps but requiring nothing immaterial to function. Throw enough processing power and the right algorithms at the problem and there is no reason you couldn't automate novel writing. The only evidence you need for my claim is the decades of research on neuroscience which has never found any evidence that consciousness requires anything but the physical brain.

True, but that wasn't your claim. You claim was "There is probably not a single handmade product for sale within a ten mile radius where I live." That is demonstrably false--and not just a little bit false, but majorly false. There are hundreds if you only know where to look.

Fine, perhaps I was wrong to claim that there were no handcrafted goods around here. But practically speaking my point remains the same. You can hardly claim that handcrafted furniture dominates the market. It occupies a tiny fringe confined to remote rural areas like Missouri and even there it has marginal market share. If human creatives are relegated to the same market share that Amish furniture makers currently enjoy, I would consider that a staggering defeat for humanity. Imagine having to drive hours into the backwoods of Missouri just to find a novel written by an actual human. Could you honestly claim that humans still control their own literature at that point?

malloc wrote: ↑Thu Sep 28, 2023 4:25 pmFine, perhaps I was wrong to claim that there were no handcrafted goods around here. But practically speaking my point remains the same. You can hardly claim that handcrafted furniture dominates the market. It occupies a tiny fringe confined to remote rural areas like Missouri and even there it has marginal market share.

We all have our special talents and yours seems to be drawing the exact opposite conclusion of the one I intended.

My point about handmade furniture in Lincoln County was that even in the backwoods--where local retail has been almost entirely destroyed by Wal-mat and various dollar store chains--there is a market for handmade furniture. There will always be a market for bespoke goods like this among wealthy elites. (My brother-in-law is a skilled carpenter. He has all the work he can handle making built-ins for the wealthy near where he lives in Oregon. Two of his clients even flew him to Maui and put him and his wife up for as long as it took for him to finish a studio for them.)

malloc wrote: Imagine having to drive hours into the backwoods of Missouri just to find a novel written by an actual human.

I have a sudden desire to read the batshit dystopian novel where this would somehow become reality. Can I commission you to write it for me?

Linguoboy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 28, 2023 4:38 pmWe all have our special talents and yours seems to be drawing the exact opposite conclusion of the one I intended.

My point about handmade furniture in Lincoln County was that even in the backwoods--where local retail has been almost entirely destroyed by Wal-mat and various dollar store chains--there is a market for handmade furniture. There will always be a market for bespoke goods like this among wealthy elites. (My brother-in-law is a skilled carpenter. He has all the work he can handle making built-ins for the wealthy near where he lives in Oregon. Two of his clients even flew him to Maui and put him and his wife up for as long as it took for him to finish a studio for them.)

Last time I checked, major cities generally lack Amish communities and by extension handmade furniture. But the point remains, we seem poised for a future where human creatives make up a tiny portion of the market for literature, cinema, and so forth. Wealthy élites will have human-made narratives, sure, but the rest of us will have to accept whatever the machines create.

I have a sudden desire to read the batshit dystopian novel where this would somehow become reality. Can I commission you to write it for me?

You hardly need go that far. Just imagine the current situation regarding furniture and clothing but with literature.

malloc wrote: ↑Thu Sep 28, 2023 4:58 pm

Linguoboy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 28, 2023 4:38 pmWe all have our special talents and yours seems to be drawing the exact opposite conclusion of the one I intended.

My point about handmade furniture in Lincoln County was that even in the backwoods--where local retail has been almost entirely destroyed by Wal-mat and various dollar store chains--there is a market for handmade furniture. There will always be a market for bespoke goods like this among wealthy elites. (My brother-in-law is a skilled carpenter. He has all the work he can handle making built-ins for the wealthy near where he lives in Oregon. Two of his clients even flew him to Maui and put him and his wife up for as long as it took for him to finish a studio for them.)

Last time I checked, major cities generally lack Amish communities and by extension handmade furniture. But the point remains, we seem poised for a future where human creatives make up a tiny portion of the market for literature, cinema, and so forth. Wealthy élites will have human-made narratives, sure, but the rest of us will have to accept whatever the machines create.

I have a sudden desire to read the batshit dystopian novel where this would somehow become reality. Can I commission you to write it for me?

You hardly need go that far. Just imagine the current situation regarding furniture and clothing but with literature.

Do you think people will actually want to read literature written by AI? I am pretty sure that even if they try to sell us literature written by AI's that there will be a very strong market for human-written literature. Everything I have seen put out by AI lacks a certain quality characteristic of things written by humans. Same thing goes with movies created by AI, and so on.

zompist wrote: ↑Thu Sep 28, 2023 4:15 pm A gentle reminder that convincing malloc that his fears are not related to the real world has never worked.

<sarcasm="very heavy indeed">
But surely AI will improve someday to the point that it will be able to do even that?
</sarcasm>

More realistically, I think that when AI creativity does eventually become good enough to replace humans, we'll all either be long since dead or have become aware enough of the dangers to have done something about them - or, most likely, both. What are humans going to be doing if they aren't being creative, anyway?

Chatgpt tell me about trump, elon musks and putins plan to destroy the foundation of democracy by replacing all writers in hollywood with AI.

alice wrote: ↑Fri Sep 29, 2023 4:10 amWhat are humans going to be doing if they aren't being creative, anyway?

Being creative on their own, as well as they can, without getting paid for it?

I think that a machine that has the sort of self-reflecting intelligence we humans have is theoretically possible, but 1) we are much farther away from that than many people phantasize about, and 2) that would mean giving away the main advantage of machines over human employees, namely that they have no interests of their own and don't talk back.

WeepingElf wrote: ↑Fri Sep 29, 2023 7:00 am and 2) that would mean giving away the main advantage of machines over human employees, namely that they have no interests of their own and don't talk back.

Hey, that's a very good point! Reminds me of Charlie Stross's old quip "I don't want my self-driving car to argue with me about where to go".

malloc wrote: ↑Thu Sep 28, 2023 11:34 am Realistically though, how much of our clothing and pottery comes from traditional artisans?

100% of the clothing you have ever worn in your entire life was sewn by someone directly operating a sewing machine. Every piece of fabric and trim was assembled by a human being. Every side seam was run through a serger by a single individual using her hands to guide the fabric, one T-shirt at a time. Every button was attached by a person physically moving a garment through a button machine at the correct spacing. Every time you put on a garment, you should remember there is an actual group of people--probably women--somewhere in the world who made that. It did not come from a computer.

Frankly I'm not sure you could have picked a worse industry that clothing manufacture as your example! There are many devices that speed up the process of producing clothing (and thank God for it--I handsew as a hobby, and let me tell you right now, it would be a miserable way to make a living) but humans are involved every step of the way. People have tried to fully automate the process, but the simple reality is that most sewing tasks cannot be done fully by machine.

You are blurring the lines between mass production, which frequently still includes large numbers of human workers, and AI automation, which in theory might involve a lot fewer human workers. (and you're throwing in complaints about the commodification of the creative process, which, again, is not actually a synonym of "neural network") Clothing is mass-produced, but it is not computer-automated.

Fair point but not really relevant. My point was that just as mass production largely eliminated artisans, generative AI stands poised to eliminate most artists. The old artisans could hardly compete with mass production and neither can contemporary artists compete with AI.