WotC Would you buy WotC products produced or enhanced with AI?

[Morrus]

It's Schrodinger's Artist. Without an audience to view it, can it be art?

The artist viewed it.

 

[mellored]

The only way be devalued is if you insist on comparing to other people.

I think this is going to be the key in the future.
More so than it is now.

My dog is happy, even if he can't do anything of "value".

I think (hope) nobody is disputing the fact that people will still be able to create with the advent of AI. People are still able to paint despite the advent of photography or computer-assisted drawing. It's the ability to turn that ability into a job that is questionned.

Sure. But a lot more jobs are on the chopping block too.

I expect a big societal change will happen when self driving trucks roll out. That's a very large amount of people who will quickly be out of work, and unlikely to have backup skills. They will need food somehow, and have enough votes to get it (i.e. universal basic income).

So if we can support the artists for a few more years (my guess is 5 to 10), they should be free to pursuit their efforts without worrying about money afterwords.

 

[soviet]

Modern society may not have been the best choice, however many home buyers assume if it meets code it is quality, I have extensive experience in construction defect litigation to know this is sadly not the case. That said this is not the place to discuss this nor was it the point i was attempting to make. Feel free to pm me if you're interested to hear more. (The invitation goes for any that are curious)

I understand it wasn't the point you were trying to make, I was trying to use it as a vehicle to engage the point I thought you were making, which is whether such races to the bottom are driven by actual market demand from real customers as opposed to being imposed from the top down against (or ambivalent to) what people want. I submit that it is the latter.

 

[Morrus]

It's a blue dot with a smudge. And people fall all over themselves to call that art.

Sure. That happens. That doesn't obviate the existence of art. TS Eliot's The Wasteland still exists (hey I remember something from my A-Levels!)

People make war on each other and people make cake for each other. That doesn't mean cake--or human kindness--doesn't exist.

 

[kayakingpoodle]

The artist viewed it.

But did they change it by looking at it?

I know this is a poor attempt at scientific humor, but i hope it is recieved as the humor it was intended to be.

 

[kayakingpoodle]

I understand it wasn't the point you were trying to make, I was trying to use it as a vehicle to engage the point I thought you were making, which is whether such races to the bottom are driven by actual market demand from real customers as opposed to being imposed from the top down against (or ambivalent to) what people want. I submit that it is the latter.

I can see that and also agree with your assessment.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

You can copy a Ferrari or a Rolex (many do--fake watches are a big industry!) You'll get sued into oblivion if they catch you, but you can do it.

The problem comes from the lawsuit, obviously. We created an artificial scarcity (you can't imitate a Rolex without going to jail) and we then complain that not many people can have a Rolex. Adressing the root of the problem might either allow people to wear Rolex-like watches en masse, or stop people from designing innovative, luxurious designs in watches.

... like? Other than the expensive, rare Ferrari (seriously where do the R's go in that word?) model?

Right now, museums are buying contemporary art from galleries. Why should this process stop? Societies can adapt in order to promote the things they deem valuable, much like intellectual property was invented in the 18th century when it was deemed a good way to increase the overall amount of art being produced over the older system. Detailing how they might need to adapt is, however, outside the scope of this board as I understand it.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

I understand it wasn't the point you were trying to make, I was trying to use it as a vehicle to engage the point I thought you were making, which is whether such races to the bottom are driven by actual market demand from real customers as opposed to being imposed from the top down against (or ambivalent to) what people want. I submit that it is the latter.

I think it's more complex than that. The existence of regulations on house building is sending a signal to non-informed buyers that they can trust the quality of the building they buy. Depending on where you live, it might not be the case (if anything, I've only seen regulation become more stringent, to the point that half of the houses that were A-OK 20 years ago will fall under the "horribly insulated" category... but as with anything legal, it is heavily dependent on where you live), and buyers can be falsely led into lowering their buying standards, by not increasing their knowledge level on construction to become able to ask for a building really suiting their need. That's a part of the problem.

But I wouldn't classify the problem with the signal as the same as imposing lower construction standard than what was done before from the top against the will of the buyers. Buyers who want their home built traditionnally can still do. They might find that it's more difficult to become a home-owner if you want to buy something of higher quality, though.

 

[Morrus]

. Adressing the root of the problem might either allow people to wear Rolex-like watches en masse, or stop people from designing innovative, luxurious designs in watches.

People do wear Rolex-like watches en-masse. Ignoring the fakes, how many Submariner-like dive watches are there? Every brand has one. I have a Seiko clearly intended to be mistaken for a Daytona at a distance. Obviously every bit of it is far lower quality, but there’s no doubt that it’s “Rolex-like”.

Right now, museums are buying contemporary art from galleries. Why should this process stop? Societies can adapt in order to promote the things they deem valuable, much like intellectual property was invented in the 18th century when it was deemed a good way to increase the overall amount of art being produced over the older system. Detailing how they might need to adapt is, however, outside the scope of this board as I understand it.

I don’t know what any of that means.

 

[Reynard]

Yeah, the people who are really into D&D. Unlike the people at my grandma's knitting club and UFC fights.

Exactly. I think it is reasonable to think that the people really into D&D, especially the 40+ ones, are very likely to have a generally anti-AI stance as it relates to AI making D&D.