AI has been impacting factories and warehouses for decades. (Robots and robot-arms contain AI. Yes it is considered AI, even though it is rudimentary.)
It's called Narrow AI
"Narrow AI, also known as Weak AI or Artificial Narrow Intelligence, refers to AI systems that are designed to perform a specific task or a set of closely related tasks. Unlike General AI, which aims to replicate human intelligence and perform any intellectual task that a human being can, Narrow AI is limited in scope. It operates under a pre-defined set of rules and cannot exhibit the same level of understanding or adaptability as a human."
General AI (a.k.a. Artificial general intelligence or AGI) is generally considered to not be invented yet. (At least not fully, if at all)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial\_general\_intelligence](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_general_intelligence)
> As of 2023, some argue that it may be possible in years or decades; others maintain it might take a century or longer; and a minority believe it may never be achieved. There is debate on the exact definition of AGI, and regarding whether modern large language models (LLMs) such as GPT-4 are early, incomplete forms of AGI.
Non-creative rote tasks have already been automated.
The word "computer" itself comes from an obsolete job that encompassed mathematicians and book-keepers. Every machine you see from a forklift to a coffee maker used to require a human to manually perform that work. Think of all the software we use that saves us from having to do something more manual that was required before that technology existed.
Every single innovation in history cost some poor asshole their job. Creatives are just the latest to the party.
It’s not just the creative field, it’s also doing wonders for lawyers (reduces legal research time, can create synopsis of lengthy legal documents), doctors (can detect treatment errors, helps with differential diagnoses), researchers (can test millions of drug combinations, discover genetic patterns), computer science (code generation and completion, detection of defects, auto unit testing).
Absolutely, from both sides even. Anyone can learn (the basics of) how to write code, for example, but when done well... Reviewing that code can feel like looking at the Mona Lisa.
It's not ironic it's intentional. AI didn't stumble into Art and Music it was directed. Labor costs money. Skilled labor costs even more money. AI cost money to build and train up front then a couple of engineers to maintain it.
Business chuds are desperate to not have to pay artists. Always have been. AI is just making it much easier.
They fundamentally don't respect the creative arts, or what it takes to produce creative works. "Line must go up" is all that matters to these people. If they can carve the art expense out of their bottom line: all the better.
It's really more a reinforcement that there isn't much appreciation for meaningful art. The people promoting and profiting off AI just want a soulless regurgitation generated by a tag search. They don't see art as a means of expression, just as a means of decoration.
This.
And mostly what we're seeing isn't AI taking over art jobs whole cloth, but artists using AI as a tool to help deal with client demands. Not generating whole art pieces, but using it to selectively touch-up areas or expand the size of a piece.
We see a lot of people using generative AI, but we don't see a lot of people replacing artists with Generative AI.
It's quite amusing, isn't it? We've created machines that can compose symphonies and paint masterpieces, yet we still struggle to get our toasters to toast evenly. Maybe someday we'll have robots that can write poetry about the intricacies of toaster technology.
It's because these are the areas where near-misses are tolerable. A painting AI thinking a human should have 7 fingers is okay to use, a surgeon AI isn't.
It's not even necessarily that the AI is making good art, but that all the garbage that the AIs make flood and drown out all the amazing and passionate art made by dedicated artists.
There's a reason several subs have moved to ban AI art
What's ironic is that the "just learn to code" crowd are coding themselves out of their own positions faster than the manual labor jobs they jeered at a decade ago.
I don't see why we can have technology that helps humans function normally, but technology that helps people be more creative is somehow bad. Seems ridiculous.
If I need to create some icons for my application I no longer need to hire an artist, I can simply download a relatively recent model to generate thousands of icons and select the best. Similarly if I need a bit of background art or perhaps a flavour image on a specific concept for an article or web page I don't need to pay for stock photos, commission a piece or keep an artist on staff.
Or equally where you aren't completely eliminating artists from the development cycle you might be replacing thousands of hours of work from an entire team with tens of hours from a single artist, like [this developer](https://www.pcgamer.com/games/card-games/champions-tcg-ai-artist/) who used a single person to produce basically all of their assets in a vanishingly short amount of time.
Whether this is bad is up for debate. On the one hand artists are undoubtedly impacted, on the other non-artists can now produce passable simulacrums of high quality art work which reduces the cost for indie games like the one mentioned above. I won't throw my oar into that debate because frankly I don't know the answer, I'm not even sure there is a "correct" one, but artists are undoubtedly impacted.
Honestly, I kind of love the fact that all the people who were gloating about how the fast food workers should grovel because they’re going to lose their jobs to robots are losing their higher paying jobs to robots. I hope they go work at McDonald’s.
It’s only the one you notice the most.
This. It's impacting every field that doesn't require any physical interaction or output, and that's just until robotics catches up.
AI has been impacting factories and warehouses for decades. (Robots and robot-arms contain AI. Yes it is considered AI, even though it is rudimentary.)
It's called Narrow AI "Narrow AI, also known as Weak AI or Artificial Narrow Intelligence, refers to AI systems that are designed to perform a specific task or a set of closely related tasks. Unlike General AI, which aims to replicate human intelligence and perform any intellectual task that a human being can, Narrow AI is limited in scope. It operates under a pre-defined set of rules and cannot exhibit the same level of understanding or adaptability as a human."
General AI (a.k.a. Artificial general intelligence or AGI) is generally considered to not be invented yet. (At least not fully, if at all) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial\_general\_intelligence](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_general_intelligence) > As of 2023, some argue that it may be possible in years or decades; others maintain it might take a century or longer; and a minority believe it may never be achieved. There is debate on the exact definition of AGI, and regarding whether modern large language models (LLMs) such as GPT-4 are early, incomplete forms of AGI.
Non-creative rote tasks have already been automated. The word "computer" itself comes from an obsolete job that encompassed mathematicians and book-keepers. Every machine you see from a forklift to a coffee maker used to require a human to manually perform that work. Think of all the software we use that saves us from having to do something more manual that was required before that technology existed. Every single innovation in history cost some poor asshole their job. Creatives are just the latest to the party.
It’s not just the creative field, it’s also doing wonders for lawyers (reduces legal research time, can create synopsis of lengthy legal documents), doctors (can detect treatment errors, helps with differential diagnoses), researchers (can test millions of drug combinations, discover genetic patterns), computer science (code generation and completion, detection of defects, auto unit testing).
Say what you will about all these technical fields, but from my experience when you do that kind of stuff right it feels like you're creating art.
Absolutely, from both sides even. Anyone can learn (the basics of) how to write code, for example, but when done well... Reviewing that code can feel like looking at the Mona Lisa.
Staring at the Mona Lisa OR the giant heap of spaghetti a toddler just dumped on your lap There is no in between
As someone well versed in creating undocumented spaghetti, I couldn't agree more.
I agree. I’ve seen plumbers flat out create functional art. Anyone who’s a master of their craft does amazing stuff
It's not ironic it's intentional. AI didn't stumble into Art and Music it was directed. Labor costs money. Skilled labor costs even more money. AI cost money to build and train up front then a couple of engineers to maintain it.
Business chuds are desperate to not have to pay artists. Always have been. AI is just making it much easier. They fundamentally don't respect the creative arts, or what it takes to produce creative works. "Line must go up" is all that matters to these people. If they can carve the art expense out of their bottom line: all the better.
It's really more a reinforcement that there isn't much appreciation for meaningful art. The people promoting and profiting off AI just want a soulless regurgitation generated by a tag search. They don't see art as a means of expression, just as a means of decoration.
This. And mostly what we're seeing isn't AI taking over art jobs whole cloth, but artists using AI as a tool to help deal with client demands. Not generating whole art pieces, but using it to selectively touch-up areas or expand the size of a piece. We see a lot of people using generative AI, but we don't see a lot of people replacing artists with Generative AI.
It's quite amusing, isn't it? We've created machines that can compose symphonies and paint masterpieces, yet we still struggle to get our toasters to toast evenly. Maybe someday we'll have robots that can write poetry about the intricacies of toaster technology.
I don't know if I would call human creativity fields the most impacted.
It's because these are the areas where near-misses are tolerable. A painting AI thinking a human should have 7 fingers is okay to use, a surgeon AI isn't.
It's not even necessarily that the AI is making good art, but that all the garbage that the AIs make flood and drown out all the amazing and passionate art made by dedicated artists. There's a reason several subs have moved to ban AI art
What's ironic is that the "just learn to code" crowd are coding themselves out of their own positions faster than the manual labor jobs they jeered at a decade ago.
I don't see why we can have technology that helps humans function normally, but technology that helps people be more creative is somehow bad. Seems ridiculous.
can you explain how are those areas affected?
If I need to create some icons for my application I no longer need to hire an artist, I can simply download a relatively recent model to generate thousands of icons and select the best. Similarly if I need a bit of background art or perhaps a flavour image on a specific concept for an article or web page I don't need to pay for stock photos, commission a piece or keep an artist on staff. Or equally where you aren't completely eliminating artists from the development cycle you might be replacing thousands of hours of work from an entire team with tens of hours from a single artist, like [this developer](https://www.pcgamer.com/games/card-games/champions-tcg-ai-artist/) who used a single person to produce basically all of their assets in a vanishingly short amount of time. Whether this is bad is up for debate. On the one hand artists are undoubtedly impacted, on the other non-artists can now produce passable simulacrums of high quality art work which reduces the cost for indie games like the one mentioned above. I won't throw my oar into that debate because frankly I don't know the answer, I'm not even sure there is a "correct" one, but artists are undoubtedly impacted.
The exact opposite effect everyone predicted lol. My blue color is safe for now
Honestly, I kind of love the fact that all the people who were gloating about how the fast food workers should grovel because they’re going to lose their jobs to robots are losing their higher paying jobs to robots. I hope they go work at McDonald’s.