OpenAI’s Mira Murati: “some creative jobs maybe will go away, but maybe they shouldn’t have been there in the first place” And you stole everything from creative people who provided free texts, images, forum answers, etc. To date, your company has refused to acknowledge any credit. Rich people truly live in their bubble and have zero sympathy for fellow human or their livelihood.

Removed by mod
permalink
report
reply
10 points

”It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."

Upton Sinclair

permalink
report
reply
9 points

I mean if we’re getting rid of jobs that don’t contribute high quality, let’s start replacing CEOs with AI.

permalink
report
reply
1 point
*

CEO isn’t a job, it’s a position. And yes, the CEOs office is already the one where AI use is generally starting from in corpo environments.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

She’s the CTO, you’re just agreeing with every person who has held that role since the beginning of time. I guarantee that’s her first wish to the genie. Like, seconds after rubbing the lamp. Wouldn’t even let it get to the “crick in the neck” part.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

It’s viable for the actual work of being a CEO, but then it becomes a “who gets to prompt it” issue.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

No one gets to prompt it… let it run continuously generating output/orders from the big data about company and external environment instead of prompts. The prompts are the weekly state of affairs at the company. There is one initial prompt to set it up and running. Let’s see this company crumble

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

That already sounds like better work than most c-suite d-bags manage

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

permalink
report
reply
5 points

I like how AI has all this knowledge out of nowhere without requiring input.

Great thing AI.

permalink
report
reply
2 points

If you go down that line you’ll reach a point where you’ll also start arguing that art/literature should also be restricted for (human) educational use. And I would rather die than ever support publishers having that power.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

I fairness, that is not how knowledge works, for anyone or anything. You don’t know things without input. You had an education, you receive sensory input and are able to formulate conclusions off past experiences and information. This particular argument is simply a bad faith attempt at a jab. There are much better arguments against AI.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points
*

“that is not how knowledge works, for anyone or anything. You don’t know things without input”

That’s not the argument though. AI’s don’t “learn” in the traditional sense. Their work is purely derivative. There is no logic or creative mind. They take something that exists, simplify it into algorithms and then spit out something similar.

Tomorrow, a brand new style of whatever could become popular. Without being fed the direct reference that AI would not be able to recreate it, depending on its complexity.

If you take away the source, AI will only work in the confines of its knowledge base. If the the only other inputs AI sees, is AI outputs, entropy is inevitable.

In the same light, I think what people will eventually find is AI will net creative jobs. Which is comical. To generate enough source material for the AI to “learn” something we will end up creating more then we would have to then just creating it in the first place. And use twice the resources to do it.

Edit:

For example, ask AI to make a image in the style of into the spider verse.

Now attempt to get similar results without directly asking it to mimic into the spiderverse.

Second, using AI for creative work is by definition a down grade. It has certain capabilities but their is no comparison to actual intelligence. Good luck to the schmuck capitalists that attempt to use it as a replacement rather than a tool.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I feel as though you misunderstood. I was not defending her or AI replacing workers. I am staunchly against that and actively flight against it in my daily life. I was simply refuting the ontological basis of your argument. There are more errors in your rebuttal, but I will leave them alone.

permalink
report
parent
reply