Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mirrorrorrim" data-source="post: 9290554" data-attributes="member: 7040132">I may have a controversial opinion.I've been struggling with the AI thing for a while. And it's not so clear cut from my viewpoint. But here are my thoughts on the matter. Disruptive technology is not inherently bad or evil. But I recognize that it can be very damaging depending on the paradigm you're dealing with. I admit that today, we are living in such a paradigm where everyone is struggling to solicit limited money from everyone else, generative AI art and writing is a threat to such artists because there is an alternative that does not require potential customers to spend their own limited funds on their services.As a corollary example of disruptive technology, I am quite confident that zero-point (quantum field) energy is a real thing, and technology to access and utilize it exists and is being used in secret, though is kept from humanity because it is disruptive to the status quo. If that technology is released, free to the public, it would destroy our existing petro-dollar-based economy, requiring us to transform everything about our lives that relies on energy. Many jobs and even industries would disappear. People would have to transform how they live. But I advocate for its release, despite its disruptive capability. I want the world to move away from the paradigm where humanity is forced to work in indentured servitude to survive. In such a world, regulated AI could be a boon. Lots of labor can be replaced, and humanity could focus on their passions, including artists.Now I recognize in the current paradigm, where artists are required to sell their services to survive (by requiring non-artists to pay artists to get what they want), that artists' livelihoods are threatened by generative AI. But on the other side of the coin, if a person does not have artistic or writing talent, why are they forced to pay an artist? Some don't have disposable income to pay for such things, even though they have needs. If they can't pay, are they to be denied? If AI generation can give them what they want, is that so bad? Artists will always have fans who enjoy their art and want to support them, even if AI alternatives exist. Just look at Etsy and other creative marketplaces. Artists will always be supported, if society values them.But in the world I hope to see, no one needs to pay anyone for anything, and if they do, it is only to support the creatives they want to support. Yeah, yeah, I hope for a "Star Trek" future.As a final thought, are there any anti-AI folks here who buy 3D printed minis? If so, isn't 3D printing a disruptive technology for sculptors because it replaces sculptor's jobs? Is that sufficiently different from the AI art situation?</blockquote>

Verification