In "Her", the protagonist gets cucked by the AI. It's a NTR romance. Change my mind

Except robots will take a decade+ before being even remotely proficient. And that doesn't take into account the massive manufacturing network needed to be built from scratch to produce enough robots to even remotely affect the world.

So that's what? 20-30 years minimum before you see any visible change to manual jobs requiring fine motor skills starting to get some automation pressure? And that's probably an optimistic scenario.

That would require you having no family, friends, or significant others lmao. That situation isn't the AI being a tool like a phone. A phone is a means to an end (talking to someone). The AI as a social replacement is the end directly.

This doesn't mean you can't use AI. But if you interact with it more than with humans, you failed at the most basic characteristic of being a human, which is being a social animal.

I'll be fine without that level of desperation, thank you very much. I'll leave the loneliness of having more interactions with AI to the social failures and people with mental deficiencies ahahah

Holy, that's just sad lmao

The only caveat to that is that the art/media industries will still need artists in the loop to direct the projects or vet the products made by AI. The industry will simply need less of them.

The commission market that isn't based on reputation will also likely fall.

The "no job is safe" is true, but it will take some time and truly never fully materialize until something like AGI and post scarcity. So not anytime soon

Now none of that should discourage someone from making art for themselves.

Based

>attracted to teenage girls or worse.

>not their thoughts or fantasies.

Wait, so which is it? Are fantasies OK or bad?

And into beastiality

Mmh, not sure I agree. A cancer that grows due to the increase of cancerous cells isn't them degrading. The diseases may cause entropy, but are they really entropy themselves?

When you fight a disease, you aren't just fighting the symptoms and the degradation of your body. You are fighting what went haywire.

Wouldn't it make sense to simply call it entropy? I mean, we fight entropy every day, so it makes sense to fight the entropy of our body. Doesn't have to be a disease, which is an abnormal condition.

Entropy is quite normal, but that doesn't mean you have to do nothing about it.

Now, a big part of the anti aging fight will be about fighting diseases that increasingly occur with age and degradation

Not sure I understand what you're saying. The "story" is fiction, right?

You understand the interesting thing isn't the story as an end, but as a mean?

The exception might be what would be considered consumer art, the bottom common denominator type?

>then describe the creative process and what influenced it in a similar way that a human would.

You mean invent, right? What "influenced" it isn't based on anything lived. So its basically just a lie.

>The only difference being one is simulated

I feel like that's a pretty big difference lmao 🤣 Again, unless you're incapable to relate to others experiences. In that case, you probably don't care. But that's a minority of abnormal humans

>I dispute the assumption many of the commentators made that they could easily distinguish AI and human art.

Well, for now, it is often VERY easy to distinguish. The tech isn't all there yet, but I think the biggest factor is who is posting AI art. It has a lot of potential in the hands of professional artists with technical skills, but the reason so much of the AI art is easily recognizable right now is that most people that post it are layman's that don't have the technical skills to either spot the irregularities nor the technical skills to fix them.

And it's also why I do have a little bit of an issue with the attempt from some to say AI art is equal to manual digital art and that it doesn't need identification. It's a scale problem.

At a quick glance from an untrained eye, a photograph of Mount Fuji might not seem far apart in quality, but upon closer examination or looked at by people interested in photography, one will be able to distinguish the photo taken during a family vacation in Japan vs the photo take as an art piece.

Despite both being photographs, most art or photo sites will usually prohibit someone from uploading his whole family vacation photo file of unfiltered snapshots. That's the scale problem.

>that a masterpiece has a whole story

You also don't need to go to masterpieces to see that phenomenon. People naturally gravitate towards artists' production because of a variety of factors, most of them unrelated to just the pretty pictures. Branding, story, style, etc.

AI art will indeed most likely disrupt the artistic production of mass market where the story isn't as important (graphic t shirt, consumer furniture design, toys, etc). But (hopefully) an artist will stay in the creative loop to fix, choose, guide what goes to market. It will simply take fewer artists for that hence the job loss.

But as soon as you are talking about books, movies, music, "high" art, etc, only AI creations will probably face a lot of natural push back. Not because they just hate the future. But because the public will have a hard time relate to it.

Now, if the AI is simply used as a tool to create an artist vision, then it might pass better.

The thing about the "soul" behind a painting is that the art piece is never created in a vacuum People are fundamentally interested in stories and narratives and, as such, are interested in who painted things, why, where, when, or even the mystery around it. That's why most museums have information cards about paintings.

While a first viewing of an AI painting might create an initial emotional response, most people will seek something more from it unless they suffer from stuff like lack of empathy, psychopathy, autism, etc.

Upon learning the art piece is created by AI, it kills nearly all possibilities for a narrative or relatability. The whole pattern construction process was done by a machine, which, fundamentally, lacks what we refer as "soul". It's the brain pattern recognition process without any of the environmental factors that influence artists. That's what people relate to.

If you kill the story, you effectively kill a very large part of the interest in art. Thinking people enjoy art just because they like looking at pretty things is... pretty socially inept

True enough. But even if (or when) it becomes economically viable, it will take decades to implement it at scale. So what happens during this transition?

An ideal scenario would be easily accessible energy through fusion, and then the AI replacement. But for now it looks like the reverse scenario is happening. Which I'm not too optimistic about.

I have a couple of issues with the concept of UBI in a heavily automated world where we see high levels of chronic unemployment (I.e. 20-30%).

The concept of UBI is one of BASIC income, but that assumes we will accept a world where a very large contingent of the population will forever live barely above survival/poverty wage if they are chronically unemployed.

I can't see that type of society as a healthy one. Realistically, what is the likelihood that a UBI implemented at the national level (pretty sure we are faaaaaaar away from any international agreement of UBI) would be much higher than welfare?

But that's also the catch with companies and seeking profits. It's one thing to be the only innovative company on the block which allows you to cut your personnel requirements and increase profit margins. But when it's all the companies that reach that level of automation, creating a macro environment of unemployment, you are effectively fucking up the purchasing power of the very population you depend on to buy your products.

A UBI will most certainly not match the median income. Meaning companies might see profit margins increase in the short term, but there's obviously going to be an inflection point where the level of unemployment will have a negative effect on buying power.

UBI is often touted as this magic pill 💊 but I can't see a healthy world where it is the solution as long as that income isn't covering all basic needs++.

And all of this is ignoring international dynamics. If a UBI was implemented equally today... it would be extremely low. The gdp per capita for the whole planet is something like $12k. AI would need to become incredibly productive to either create enough deflation and basically erase scarcity to allow a UBI to give good enough living conditions.

That might happen in the long term, but what about the transition period? Will we have to endure decades of extreme poverty and civil unrest because even an UBI would create massive inequalities?

Fundamentally, things will never become cheaper than the cost of the energy it takes to make them, even with full automation

The expectations for it to be free are with the current version. Subsequent versions will easily be marketed as premium and sold through subscriptions.

Then, this doesn't even address the whole business market where expensive licenses can be sold.

Finally, they are bankrolled by Microsoft, among others. Eye watering costs are only eye watering to small startups. It's not much of a problem when the company backing you is sitting on $110 billion in cash.

In the tech world, you can lose money for years if you can sell a good growth story. Especially with backers like Microsoft.

I fully expect people to become dumber overall and some keep overapecializing

lol

AHAHAHAHAHAHAH

Wait, I'm not sure now if you're trolling or not ahahah

And even if we engage in those insane assertions, how are they "transferring" the personality into the clone lmao.

A "clone" that is born and experienced a totally different experience will literally not be the same person and have a completely different personality. So that is kinda pointless

It's also pretty funny because he references Clonaid, but that lab was founded in 1997, but the guy was born in 1988 lmao

lol

Huh? Not sure I understand what you mean.

You mean the figment of my imagination I would see in my dream? Because that doesn't exist.

When we talk about "upload" we generally mean an identical "copy" of your brain pattern/connections that is simulated in software. The idea would be that this perfect copy would result in a copy of your consciousness.

Obviously, we don't really know because we have no real understanding of what is "consciousness".

But in that case, the scan that is uploaded isn't the you right now. It's another you that will think there was a continuity in the scanning process, but it will leave behind the consciousness stuck in the meat body.

So, if you like the idea of cloning yourself, that's cool. But your perception of reality would remain "stuck" in that body of yours. Until death.

The only scenario where your meat hardware can merge for the long term with the software would be a ship of Theseus kinda process where your synapses are gradually replaced by man made synapses that reproduce the function of your meat synapses and brain cell perfectly, until your brain is fully robotic. And then it needs to be stored safely for ever.

And I'm obviously talking out of my ass because this is all sci-fi and we have no actual understanding of how any of this would work because we haven't figured out how consciousness is created. But it's fun to think about

lol