AI is stealing writers’ words and jobs…

[Ryujin]

I'm not a legal expert either but from what I can understand as a layman this looks like it should clearly be transformative use and thus covered. And if it's not transformative use than what is.

Furthermore, and as an aside, since we have this technology now it's probably time for the existence of copyright law to be reconsidered by the government anyway, as it's protecting a profession which - if the reaction of people within the profession is anything at all to go by - is now obsolete and therefore unnecessary.

Sure, except that you're claiming consensus, where none exists.

 

[Bayushi_seikuro]

Computers have been stealing our jobs for decades. We might not like it, but it is inevitable that people won't have anywhere near the kind of jobs we do in the future.

Exactly this. I don't like the assertion that somehow, automation will mean that people will not HAVE to work. It just means less opportunities.

 

[Bayushi_seikuro]

I don't know. I would imagine it depends. Perhaps not "scramble" the output, as that still is too similar to what already is happening. Perhaps I would lean more towards...LEARN more like a Human learns. Instead of regurgitation, learn and adapt to develop it's OWN style.

Of course, if we get to that point, we may also be near the point of sentience...and at that point it may be all Hail our AI overlords, or a new form of slavery is born.

Right as I got to this post, I was thinking of the TNG episode of Measure of a Man. If we get to the point where AI is every bit as good as a human in thought and able to actively create a new work, we need to address if we're enslaving it.

 

[Bayushi_seikuro]

Where do you feel the line is drawn between "using AI to help create art is bad" versus "I use a computer and digital tools to help create my art"?

Personally, I feel the line is drawn when one option is 'I use an AI to make a filter on my artwork' and the other is 'I set-it-and-forget-it to have the AI draft my legal documents'.

Not sure if anyone has seen this but it's comical. A lawyer submitted claims citing imaginary court cases in actual legal documents because of AI 'assistance'. https://www.forbes.com/sites/mollyb...dge-is-considering-sanctions/?sh=1cd6111b7c7f

 

[Ryujin]

Personally, I feel the line is drawn when one option is 'I use an AI to make a filter on my artwork' and the other is 'I set-it-and-forget-it to have the AI draft my legal documents'.

Not sure if anyone has seen this but it's comical. A lawyer submitted claims citing imaginary court cases in actual legal documents because of AI 'assistance'. https://www.forbes.com/sites/mollyb...dge-is-considering-sanctions/?sh=1cd6111b7c7f

Already sanctioned.

https://www.courthousenews.com/sanctions-ordered-for-lawyers-who-relied-on-chatgpt-artificial-intelligence-to-prepare-court-brief/

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I absolutely support this tech.

That there are crappy people out there that screw people over is not a new thing introduced by this tech. Are some people going to lose their job over this tech? Absolutely! That matters greatly to those individuals that lose their jobs, as it does every individual that loses their job. Will it replace all writers and artists? Hell no! It's a tool, tools allow you to do more with less, this is no exception. Jobs tend to require you to keep up and become proficient with modern tools, if you can't, you're screwed! But that is a 'you' problem. This happened when the computer was introduced to the workforce, the Internet, the search engine, etc.

If you get paid 40% less because they expect you to do 40% less work, you do 40% less work. #1 you either left a big hole in you contract or #2 you have no interest in keeping your client to it's contractual obligations. If you're running a business (writing) and you have either or both these issues, it's not the problem of AI that you're loosing your job... That might seem harsh, but too many people have no business running a business. And having specific job xyz isn't a right, it's a necessity and/or a privilege, if your job isn't needed anymore, why keep it artificially intact? That sounds like a very conservative point of view...

What I'm seeing, again and again, with new tech is that certain types of managers/decision-makers have hasty conclusions based on tech that they don't understand and their company haven't actually tested the use-case for their particular niche. I've been in IT for a long time, I've been making my own position obsolete for over 25 years and I've also been let go at times when I wasn't done making my position obsolete yet. What happens is after six months they call you if you could please help fix their issues again for the next couple of months. Sure, no problem! This is my new (higher) rate. Why is it higher then six months ago? I've more experience, learned new things, and my skills have become more in demand... After 25 years I'm still in IT, but I'm not doing the same thing in the same way as 25 years ago, not 10 years ago or even 2 years ago. Why would writers/artists be any different? Are manuscripts still handwritten? Or typed on a typewriter? Sure, maybe a few do, but most companies will not work with generic writer/artist who still handwrites the manuscript, unless he/she/them is a star. Anne E. Johnson is not a star.

Imho this tech is only as good as the people using it. If it's not old writers/artists using it, then new writers/artists will use it!

Do I care about artists and writers? No, not really. It's like saying, do I care about humans? Not really, most are crappy and I don't know all of them. Do I care about some artist and writers, maybe. But I'm also a realist that says, if you can't hack it in your chosen profession, maybe you shouldn't be in it...

This may be the most myopic take on things happening to other people I’ve ever seen.

callous indifference to the lives of others doesn’t make someone a “realist”.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

At least you put it succinctly at the end. Tschüss.

It’s good, if unpleasant, to be reminded once in a while.

If working a till is replaced, what of the people who cannot realistically do more? Reception, anything automated by robots, fast food, pump your own gas.

What entry level jobs did you work, and are they still around for kids to get their feet wet?

"Pick up a shovel."

No job has ever been just for kids to have a first job, as well.

Service is valuable. Providing quality service is skilled labor.
The main barista at my local coffee place is awesome, I’m always happy to see her. I want her to have a living wage because everyone has a moral right to a living.
I want her to make coffee at my local shop because she provides a valuable service.

For years my friend has fantasize about less human interaction. Fully remote work. I sort of scoffed given my profession.

Then Covid happens and I was delivering sercices/working virtually. All good. They need my brain.

But too shall pass. We will be able to program financial advisors, psychotherapists, dieticians, you name it. Then what?

I think the fallout from that isolation will be catastrophic.

 

[lynnfredricks]

I don't understand this. Teachers/professors are constantly using copyrighted materials to teach students. Why would it suddenly become illegal if the student is AI?

There are some limited conditions under fair use, which applies to humans.

 

[Cergorach]

This may be the most myopic take on things happening to other people I’ve ever seen.

callous indifference to the lives of others doesn’t make someone a “realist”.

But saying that you care about other people doesn't make it so. If people actually cared as much about other people as they say or act like, they wouldn't be here posting as much as they are, they wouldn't be 'wasting' their time with RPGs. They would dedicated their live helping people in places that need their help, I absolutely respect that kind of dedication! But the shouting on social media and in forums I do not. Especially when people try to shame you into agreeing with them.

Sorry that I don't have the emotional bandwidth to actually care about 8+ billion individuals, people who say they do are lying. Either to you or themselves. Why should I care exactly about primarily US/UK writers, people I've never met, and I don't know. The best relationship I have with them is that I pay them indirectly for their work, and maybe, just maybe I have a short chat with them on platform xyz. Not exactly a great basis for 'caring'...

Just because I have a different perspective on the world than you do, does not mean I'm myopic. Maybe we just have a very different definition about the emotional charge that the word 'care' has to each of us. I don't use that word lightly, others do... And just because I don't care about them doesn't mean I hate them, if they fell I would help them up, if they asked for directions I would give them (if I knew the directions). But even if my brother (whom I care about) would complain to me about maybe losing his job to a robot or AI/LLM, I would ask him if his job is truly that important if it can be done by a glorified calculator...

 

[Maxperson]

Personally, I feel the line is drawn when one option is 'I use an AI to make a filter on my artwork' and the other is 'I set-it-and-forget-it to have the AI draft my legal documents'.

Not sure if anyone has seen this but it's comical. A lawyer submitted claims citing imaginary court cases in actual legal documents because of AI 'assistance'. https://www.forbes.com/sites/mollyb...dge-is-considering-sanctions/?sh=1cd6111b7c7f

On the other hand there is also this.

GPT-4 Passes the Bar Exam: What That Means for Artificial Intelligence Tools in the Legal Profession | Stanford Law School

CodeX–The Stanford Center for Legal Informatics and the legal technology company Casetext recently announced what they called “a watershed moment.

law.stanford.edu