Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jfdlsjfd" data-source="post: 9771409" data-attributes="member: 42856"><p>I am not being hyperbolic. A lot of people here are adamant that AI offers absolutely no value because of low quality (AI slop), because of a purported high prevalence of problems (like the one reported in the video) or because it is simply not worth using given how more effective the other solution we have are available. I don't share these views, but if I were to be convinced by them as part of the discussion, then there would be problem at all with AI, because no sane person would ever adopt it in a professional context, and absolutely no job would be threatened. No artist would ever lose a commission to an AI if it wasn't able to draw at all, or only "AI slop" without any merit, or only six-fingered disfigured persons. I was pointing out the discrepancy between the two, incompatible discourses over AI. It can bring important change to the labor market only if it is not unusable. Claiming it is only a waste of time in the office disqualifies any claim that it might have an economic impact, and therefore I was pointing out that discussing the economic consequences of it requires to drop the idea that it is totally useless.</p></blockquote><p></p>