There is way more to programming then shuffling bits around and i dont see any manager approving ai generating code to be pushed to production servers.

Also i think there is 0% there will be no musicans in 5 years

You speak too confidently on what you don't know. It's fine to speculate on potential advancements but something like this

>All jobs that basically involves shuffling bits around (3D artists, programmers, musicians etc) are effectively dead within 5 years.

tells me you have no idea what you're talking about.

programming is basically complicated shuffling very complicated bits around. You can describe anything like that; it's what defines intelligence.

Also yeah, there will still be musicians in 5 years, as will there be musicians post-singularity. Some people just really enjoy doing it themselves. Don't see your point there

AI is already responsible for dealing with around ~85% (don't remember the exact number) customer support - the "human interaction" kind of job.

AI isn't replacing doctors or lawyers anytime soon, but let's be honest, AI is going to be much better at diagnosing than real doctors pretty soon. But that will just result in improved quality of healthcare, as I'd expected the doctor will have to approve AI results.

Anyway, there's really no way to predict how AI is going to impact the world.

It's most likely to take ~95% of current jobs, but If that happens and no new jobs are created and no proper regulations are introduced, then there's no "being rich" anymore, as in such scenario the whole economy just collapses. It's not about who has more money anymore, it's about who controls the AI. So it might be in the best interest of the billionaires to introduce certain regulations, resulting in a "good" outcome for all humankind.

"Good" scenario might result in free housing, guaranteed income, and overall well-being for everyone.

No one knows which way things are going to develop.

Advances in AI Will push forward robotics. Yeah, it lags behind, But it's not because it's harder, it's because without a proper ai it was not really useful.

You life time, unless you are very old, might be a very long time. I'm not saying it Will happend This decade, But in 20 years, only god knows how things Will be. I woud not expect robotics to be a barrier at all

I would say there would be an infinite amount of musicians, but if everyone is a musician does it matter?

> This does not point to monetary value, simply artistic value.

This guy's got it completely wrong...

Of course there is "being rich", You own the properties, the AI and the robots! They may throw some bones to the dumb masses like you would pour pig food in the trough, so we can sit there, robbed of any purpose in life, glorified house cats.

What artistic value would there be in typing into a prompt "make me an electronica song"?

Making music for money will be hit hard if not gone.

money will be hit hard if not gone. Music will be made for enjoyment, not capital gain

As a major in psychology and working in tech, studying CS I disagree. Caruso in 2019 wrote about machine emotional intelligence and psychology field already discuss and think about how to apply our emotions into machines.

Chatgpt already can answer basic psychological help. Therapies works because they are structulazied on how to help, how respond and how to guide, especially behavioral one. If therapy follows steps then AI also can do it. The only problem will be the human bias that dont want to interact with AI. But it will also change, when more and more AI will be.

Really? You think people would get the same value out of talking to a computer as a human? Pretty sure only a small section of the actual human interaction is the actual words spoken. Is the AI going to fake a human face? Because that would be incredibly difficult.

Have you tried the psychologists bot on character.ai?

Well, kind of yes, that depends what you means by saying "rich".

It's just that the whole system based on money is done/money is of no value anymore if AI takes ~95% jobs.

So what "being rich" becomes redefined, and that comes with a lots of various consequences.

It would basically mean "robot battles" over the land and technology, resulting in the annihilation of most of the mankind, if no proper regulations are introduced by the government.

And I'd suppose it might be in the best interest of the rich/government to introduce regulations that stops them from killing each other, which is basically how the world is set up right now (at least to a certain degree, as no system is perfect).

Heard of it. I have gone to a psychologist in my day. I don't understand how that is a reasonable substitute.

Will you continue listening to music once AI musicians make most music? Will you only listen to human players, regardless of skill?

Anything with utilitarian value will eventually be replaced by AI. It is its sole purpose. And also all things generally have utilitarian value. Even the music we listen to is utilized to evoke certain emotions, tell a story, Etc.

Your only choices are to engage with it, or engage with less useful utilizations of all things simply because they are human.

Do you only wear handcrafted shoes right now? Or were yours mass produced by a soulless machine? And what of the cobbler from ages past? Where is his livelihood now?

Tell me the difference between the Shoemaker and the storyteller and you will have the definition of a human soul.

Yeah I will still listen to music. My argument is more, if the effort required to create a piece of art, whether it be music, books etc, is equal to zero. Then what is the artistic value of it? The world would be absolutely swamped by music, like every possible permutation of music will be created. Is the guy who typed in the prompt credited for "making" it? Is the AI?

I quite like song #4148195115ab43, what about you?

Of course, some even now show that online therapy benefice them more than real life one.

What? Deepfakes are already a thing, its absolutly not a difficult problem to artifical made face to talk with you.

Like I said, only bias would be people, which wouldnt like to speak with AI just because they dont want, even if that AI is way better and succesfull in therapy.

Of course its not only about words, but you can still mimic that. Humans are basically biological computers so its nothing strange that we will build better computers that we already are.

I foresee a future where you log into your app and literally just say "play me something in the style of '80s hair metal, and the song is about ____." And it creates it instantly, exactly to your description.

In that world, everything is customizable and specifically catered to the individual. All media is now procedurally generated and individualized. The job of the creative has shifted from the technician to the curator; people do not pay for things to be created, people pay for others opinions and curatorial decisions instead. We are not too far away from this now. Hence the rise of influencers.

>there is an ineffable quality to human interaction which an AI will not replicate in my lifetime

Ah yes, I've heard this before. I also heard that computers will never be able to replace human coders, or write a sonnet, or paint a beautiful masterpiece, or pass the Turing test, or conquer the game of go, or beat the best chess players, and many more.

Sorry but if you're betting against AI at this point, you've not been paying attention

Artistic values are what I choose them to be. They're subjective. If I enjoy a piece of music, it has some value for me.

Monetary values are what will be lost. If companies can get what they need for basically free, they won't employ artists.

Artists can choose to continue doing art, not for the money but because it has some value for themselves.

In the near future, I would think that certain jobs which can be replaced by automation will be, but I'm not convinced that's necessarily what everyone here projects.

In the music industry for instance, many live musicians in Broadway shows have been replaced by automated music in order to reduce costs of paying an entire orchestra union wages. But that doesn't mean there are no venues for live musicians. That one arena is one where they were deemed replaceable due to cost and redundancy. But at weddings, private clubs, etc. Live musicians continue to be in demand because they add to the aesthetic.

I can see how AI could help with assessments and diagnosis and surgery in the medical industry. But most patients will still prefer to interact with a human in therapy or consultation with a doctor. At least for the next ten years.

There will always be a niche market for humans in any field, it will just become more of a conscious and aesthetic choice to interact with them in professional capacities within certain circumstances. Cobblers still exist and tend to have successful businesses particularly in urban areas where people prefer to have their shoes repaired.

I have no indication of the value of the music that is created now? I put on the radio and i hear songs. Why would these be valued more to me then those created by an AI?

In the future you’re not even going to know you’re talking to an AI unless they specifically told you you’re talking to an AI.

There are new jobs to come. Look at the popular chatbot subs. See what different people do with AI. And you will see that there will be jobs for people who understand how AI works, as many people just don’t. So you won’t have AI making blockbusters, you will have whole teams of AI, engineers, actors, artists, musicians and AI whisperers making blockbusters.

I think our brain is a pretty powerful neural network. Why should we stop using it additionally to the AI? It’s actually not even more expensive, if you think that AI running on a server needs “food” (electricity, resources for repairs of hardware etc.) and “medical care” (programmer and engineer diagnostics in case of malfunction).

Edit: forgot something important. What you describe - people without real artistic skill making art - already happened in the 2000s. I used to already earn money as a school kid, doing all kinds of art jobs in my small suburban town, as I was one of the three best and most promising young artists in that silly sweet little suburbia. But alas, we were already globalised enough, and young stupid me was not happy with staying at home and making Jesus pictures for local churches. I wanted to learn, to develop my skill - and applied to several art universities. I was rejected everywhere. “We don’t need skill, we have digitalisation for that - what we need is new original ideas” was the reason. In the effing 2000s (yeah me old). So don’t worry. Art IS already made by “morons”. “Morons” with ideas - those ideas that will make you, me and others seeing this art happy and lift our souls up.

The day an AI could fool me in real life I would be absolutely amazed. Over a screen? Maybe.

In actual real life, as a robot thing? I would be absolutely amazed. If there is one thing humans are reeeeaaally good at it is telling when something is "off" with a human like face.

How would that work? I would join a zoom call and have some AI spout words at me? That frankly seems to lack a crucial part of psychology/therapy for me.

What do you mean rise of influencers? They are the same as any celebrity before them, just in a new media space.

I do agree that the only people who hold any "value" in an artist space would be the popular and famous.

>And have some AI

You would have someone on the other end of the call who appears, acts, and responds like a human. But’s it’s not a human at all, might not even be Intelligent, it’ll just be a chatbot on video call.

We’re hopeful for UBI.

Robotics are not lagging behind, why would you say that?

>It’s actually not even more expensive

Wrong. Stable Diffusion can produce thousands of dollars worth of images in a single day on a modern PC (which is obviously cheaper overall). Similar for text models and other tasks

Yeah, and how many of those images will a gallery manager want to hang in their marble halls? How many of those images can be used to wash money through donations of overpriced goods? AI art will stay worth nothing if it can be made cheaply. Art has long since lost its actual worth, its a money washing machine for rich people and those pieces of art sold for millions are often just a turd thrown on paper. Buyer, artist, gallery manager and museum as well as the buyers bank and the financial ministry of the country where the “avoiding taxes through pseudo-charity” happens are all involved and know.

Don’t worry, I can draw and paint your ten images a day in the quality of most modern artists. Is not a joke. Just give me the PROMPTS. I have no original ideas whatsoever. I am like the famous Austrian ruler who wanted to become an artist but was nothing but an artisan considering painting and drawing. I could copy every Banksy for you except the shredded one. Believe me, the quality will be amazing, but no museum will ever buy any of this.

Art has been an illusion for a long time now.

I would LOVE for AI to shatter this corrupt society of “art”.

But that isn't what we are talking about is it?

I feel like I would have a hard time dealing with that. Frankly it would yield me no value to sit there and converse with a chat bot about my troubles.

will get really crazy when the AI can produce a improvisational jam from the band Phish who has a lot of different eras in their 39 year history. "Play me a Phish concert in the 1997 style that starts with shorter songs and has a second set that is more exploratory." The AI will analyze all 1997 shows and then produce improv music that came to the band from the ether years ago.

AI will create jobs and ways to springboard new things that we cant even comprehend I think. One area I would like to focus on in the near future is AI based permaculture that decentralizes our food system in local communities.

[deleted]

Just human behaviour imo. The same way most people would probably prefer to have a human doctor to converse with when they are at deaths door as opposed to chatting to a AI.

Some may call it irrational but we are at the end of the day monkeys. There are instinctual parts deep within our psyche that both crave and need human interaction, especially when they are in distress. Think that is very hard to fake.

Only jobs I can see is random grunt work. If it were necessary with creativity or intellect, why not just let an AI do it?

It’s not hard to fake anymore, have you looked up the chat bots recently? They’re damn near human like. A few more updates and you won’t know the difference. A few minutes of talking to them and you’ll be pouring out your soul and crying about your daddy, more so than you would with a real therapist

I doubt I could really pour my heart and soul over text personally.

There’s still plenty of human interaction to be had between friends and family, we’ll simply not need our lawyers, therapists, and doctors to be human anymore.

Hey, I’m willing to bet a large that a very large portion of people will instantly and happily accept AI doctors ASAP considering how much we get ignored or misdiagnosed by human doctors.

Sounds like you are discounting the possibility of truly sentient AGI. Most experts are not. The world will change again when it arrives, maybe for the better, maybe for the worse.

You're also not accounting for possible political change. When the rich own the AI that creates everything, I hope we'll legislate for distributing that wealth.

Also, art will become meaningless to some creators, but not consumers. For us it will be better when AI makes it easier. Imagine having more, better AAA games to choose from and play cooperatively and competitively with other people. I think the meaning of life for many will be based on our accomplishments and communities in virtual worlds.

I dont how old you are but if you lived trough the 00's 2006 for example we had mail and messenger and the world was a veeeryy different place.This was 16 years ago.No social media of bilions of people , no psychological issues only you and your family.What we have now is a foundation for what is going to come and it will not be build slow I think much faster because of the simple ways of comunication and maturity of society.

I think those are precisely the jobs that will not be replaced, particularly at the highest levels.

Speaking from somebody in the field, if AI was as good at programming as OP thinks it is we would be ecstatic. So much of our field is made up of web based hack jobs to cobble together technology that was never intended to work together, and it constantly changes so no "fix" is permanent. If there was something capable of automating all of that googling and deciphering undocumented, horrible APIs we would have the time and incentive to actually work on cool shit.

If it was so advanced that any human direction was a hindrance virtually every other white collar job would already be obsolete.

>What could have value without any struggle or work after all?

aren't you forgetting about new stuff? maybe we've been sitting on our laurels telling the same nine stories, reworking the same tired imagery on slightly different mediums for ten thousand years. we need to collectively up our game. we can compete, we just aren't yet. maybe we don't need to yet.

i'm in the field too and while you're right, it won't replace them completely, it will absolutely replace the worst maybe half of the people I've had to suffer working with over the decades. and i'd welcome it.

John Henry scenario for the next few years. Human will compete against AI for the next ten years but, will increasingly end-up losing.

There's already 100000 new songs being released every single day, since anyone with basic knowledge of music can just create them with softwares now. It takes hundreds of years to listen to every song released in the world.

Having AI that automatically generates music is not going to make the world feel more swamped in music than it already is nowadays.

People who haven't actually designed medium/large systems don't understand how much is involved just keeping things working.

Writing business software is basically building better duct-tape. It works, until the next new feature, or until the next upgrade, or the next security hole.

If AI was "good", there would be no security concerns. And as someone with 20+ years working in large systems, phone systems, and networks, I can say that if you think anything is secure, you should see somebody.

All that being said, I wouldn't want to be a coder in any position that can be outsourced.
I took a few features that took a team of our folks overseas a month to do, and had them rebuilt in a few hours myself. It is already like having an assistant, who types very fast, and does exactly what you tell it.
Trick is, you need to know what to tell it.

would you pay twice as much for a service with a human component if there were no added quality ?

say you have a cold and need a prescription

ai doc costs 100

human doc costs 200

are you really gonna pay 100 dollars just to interact with someone ? Why not just get the ai doc and then spend the other 100 on onlyfans. At least then the interaction is with a cute girl.

​

​

jokes aside why do people keep pretending like human interaction is why we buy all our products/services?

[deleted]