Disney sues Midjourney

[Scribe]

true
__

I only know one person who has what he would consider his dream job and i'm 90% sure he'd do it even if he didn't need to do it due to the nature of the job.

Sure, so it's more realistic, a more realistic goal as well, compared to some post scarcity star trek fantasy where none of us work.

Oh, and we all get land for our vineyards or is that just the Captain?

 

[overgeeked]

Sure, so it's more realistic, a more realistic goal as well, compared to some post scarcity star trek fantasy where none of us work.

Oh, and we all get land for our vineyards or is that just the Captain?

A recent study shows that “Provisioning decent living standards (DLS) for 8.5 billion people would require only 30% of current global resource and energy use, leaving a substantial surplus for additional consumption, public luxury, scientific advancement, and other social investments.”

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452292924000493

 

[The Firebird]

A recent study shows that “Provisioning decent living standards (DLS) for 8.5 billion people would require only 30% of current global resource and energy use, leaving a substantial surplus for additional consumption, public luxury, scientific advancement, and other social investments.”

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452292924000493

It is interesting to see how the conception of decent living standards evolves over time. This looks like no vineyards, but phones for all and 1 laptop per household.

There is a contrast with say, Wendell Berry's "Why I am not going to buy a computer" (1987).

Dream job or not, I think most people would choose to work even in a post scarcity utopia.

 

[Scribe]

A recent study shows that “Provisioning decent living standards (DLS) for 8.5 billion people would require only 30% of current global resource and energy use, leaving a substantial surplus for additional consumption, public luxury, scientific advancement, and other social investments.”

This feels a bit like white board DPS comparisons at a glance.

If this DLS is possible, which the article notes 80% are NOT living right now? Yet we somehow can do this by only using 30% of the current global resource/energy use?

What exactly is this DLS, because I'm going to have to question how much many of us would be giving up, when the vast vast vast majority need to brought up, and yet its 'only using 30%'.

 

[Zardnaar]

This feels a bit like white board DPS comparisons at a glance.

If this DLS is possible, which the article notes 80% are NOT living right now? Yet we somehow can do this by only using 30% of the current global resource/energy use?

What exactly is this DLS, because I'm going to have to question how much many of us would be giving up, when the vast vast vast majority need to brought up, and yet its 'only using 30%'.

It probably assumes resources are evenly distributed.

Think we are on path for Gilded age 2.0.

 

[Staffan]

People? Our whole point is that it could all be done by machines. Maybe not immediately, but soon.

Having all labor that today is done by humans done by machines instead is highly unrealistic. There are too many jobs that need actual humans doing stuff. But there's certainly some labor that could be done by machines instead, thereby freeing up humans to do other things. Exactly how much, I do not know.

In a well-functioning society, this would mean we all work less and still earn a decent wage for the work we end up doing. But this is not a well-functioning society, so what happens is that employers lay people off, pocket the extra money from increased productivity themselves, and the laid-off people will in the short term have to get unemployment benefits (which shifts the cost to tax-payers) and in the long term likely lower-paying jobs.

 

[FrogReaver]

While I don't support this personally, I do find in interesting and worthy of discussion.

Why would the onus be on the end-user? They aren't the one who collected the training material, nor are they in possession of the training material to make sure it is not doing something like reproducing paragraphs or copyrighted but little known characters or art.

Presumably the fair use expansion would only apply to the creation of the ai. It would not be fair use to use that ai to then create a copyrighted work. (Subject to normal fair use constraints).

Basically, if it doesn't target those collecting the material, there's no value in it as a deterrent.

Why? That seems like a major leap.

There's also an issue with counterfitting someone's distinctive style, which is most seen in art. Like the Studio Ghibli makeovers from a few months ago that would also need to be accounted for.

What colloquially gets referred to as style cannot currently be copyright except in the most near exact match of cases.

Maybe there needs to be a way to make and train models such that they can't reproduce the training material. But the cat's already out of the bag with that, and with how clever the community is I don't see a technological solution.

Generative ai would be great for that. As long as end users get held accountable for copyrighted materials they produce with an AI then there would be incentive for them to use ai’s that don’t produce copyrighted works, and thus incentive to create such ai’s.

For example, with generative AI art it wasn't the big companies that came up with LoRAs, which allowed duplication of specific characters or other features with a much smaller training set and footprint that was applied as well as the main model.

I think it’s worth noting that there’s currently a lot of duplication that qualifies as fair use.

 

[Umbran]

I only know one person who has what he would consider his dream job and i'm 90% sure he'd do it even if he didn't need to do it due to the nature of the job.

My wife is in her dream job right now, and it is one that robots and AI could not do until our machine overlords learn some gorram empathy.

 

[Umbran]

Having all labor that today is done by humans done by machines instead is highly unrealistic. There are too many jobs that need actual humans doing stuff. But there's certainly some labor that could be done by machines instead, thereby freeing up humans to do other things. Exactly how much, I do not know.

I signed on to the utopia in which machines do all the noxious physical labor, leaving humans free for their choice of personal or intellectual pursuits.

I am getting the dystopia where machines replace all human intellectual effort with rehashes of past human creativity....

 

[Ryujin]

I signed on to the utopia in which machines do all the noxious physical labor, leaving humans free for their choice of personal or intellectual pursuits.

I am getting the dystopia where machines replace all human intellectual effort with rehashes of past human creativity....

In Science Fiction, one of the universal tropes of a dying culture.