Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

petergabriel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 167 posts

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#71

Post by intrasight »

gwoolhurme wrote: post #15

I think it's only natural to think of AI as the enemy no? Sure theoretically it means better healthcare, scientific improvement. However what nobody has really answered well is what happens to the artists, writers, programmers, scientists, maybe even doctors and lawyers. As we become potentially obsolete what happens to us. Saying that you can do art as a hobby or programming as a hobby really isn't an answer people…

> maybe even doctors and lawyers

I don't think any profession that requires a license is at risk. Software engineers resisted a licensing regiment for decades and now the profession will pay a price.

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#72

Post by JumpCrisscross »

chucksmash wrote: post #67
hackyhacky wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're technically correct, but missing the point: When technology destroys menial jobs, it's progress . When technology destroys white-color jobs, it's a threat .

When technology destroys work people don't like to do, it's progress . When technology destroys work people like to do, it's _______.

> When technology destroys work people like to do, it's _______.

Liberating. I remember enjoying laying out sheet music. Doesn't mean I scorn my iPad.

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#73

Post by Taywee »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #56
Taywee wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've had big advancements before that allow people to do more with less, but this is a staggering leap. The jump from "you need to get a whole bunch of people together to practice and play music together" to "one person can make skilled music in their bedroom" isn't even comparable to "Hey AI, make me a reggaeton darkwave album performed by Kurt Cobain and Tiny Tim". We're not talking just more art here, or some peo…

> but this is a staggering leap More than industrialization? Come on. It's staggering because it's impacting us.

Absolutely more. This takes very hard and challenging work and turns it into nearly nothing. This reduces decades of skilled labor and education into an algorithm. I'm not undervaluing industrialization, but the improvement in productivity wasn't on the same scale. We're talking reducing weeks of work to seconds in some cases, and that's not even being optimistic with what improvements we might still see in the coming years.

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#74

Post by JumpCrisscross »

Taywee wrote: post #73
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but this is a staggering leap More than industrialization? Come on. It's staggering because it's impacting us.

Absolutely more. This takes very hard and challenging work and turns it into nearly nothing. This reduces decades of skilled labor and education into an algorithm. I'm not undervaluing industrialization, but the improvement in productivity wasn't on the same scale. We're talking reducing weeks of work to seconds in some cases, and that's not even being optimistic with what improvements we might still see in the comin…

> takes very hard and challenging work and turns it into nearly nothing. This reduces decades of skilled labor and education into an algorithm

Read up on Luddism. These were multi-generational trades undone by the loom alone. The Industrial Revolution required millions of people to not only retrain, but also relocate. It changed political structures, often violently.

Even in the 1980s, skilled spreadsheets were done in by Excel. Does that mean we should ban Microsoft Office so folks can sketch out models by hand?

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#75

Post by Taywee »

RubyRidgeRandy wrote: post #64
spacephysics wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we can look at history and see how revolutionary technologies changed the landscape of society. No one knows really the magnitude of AI, but if we take the two extremes, AI takes all our jobs, and AI is just some stats that has no real utility, we’ll probably land somewhere in the middle. Personally, I’m trying to learn these technologies to augment my current work. I’m treating it like going from using Notep…

I firmly believe that once ai is in a position to replace programmers and other white collar workers, it's more of "we're all fucked" moment. Society would have to so radically change once we reach even that infantile level of post-scarcity, when a large portion of society that loses their jobs, that we have to have serious discussions about what life is supposed to be about and what our places in society are. when t…

More importantly, how do we keep everybody alive and cared for when all our systems are built around needing a job to survive when we then don't even have jobs to do for more than a quarter of our population?

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#76

Post by JumpCrisscross »

Taywee wrote: post #62
erikpukinskis wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't know how any of the proponents can pretend that this isn't an abject disaster on the horizon for anybody who depends on copyright to make their living. OK, I'll bite. How is the an abject disaster on the horizon for... let's say, novelists?

My wife is a novelist who widely participates in fiction writing communities, and a lot of competitions have had to stop taking submissions entirely due to AI work flooding all the submissions. There's been drama on and off recently with AI generated covers, too. Some waves have been made with people winning contests with AI generated short stories. Agents are absolutely inundated with AI queries, and it's only going…

> What do we do when most novels are mostly AI generated?

Much of modern fiction is farmed out or padded for page count. ChatGPT may be the death of anonymous online writing communities. It doesn't portend is the end of fiction or writing altogether.

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#77

Post by yinser »

gwoolhurme wrote: post #15

I think it's only natural to think of AI as the enemy no? Sure theoretically it means better healthcare, scientific improvement. However what nobody has really answered well is what happens to the artists, writers, programmers, scientists, maybe even doctors and lawyers. As we become potentially obsolete what happens to us. Saying that you can do art as a hobby or programming as a hobby really isn't an answer people…

If AI enables a 12 year old in India to write the code of a 2019 software developer then that is a positive for the earth. If someone is upset that they're losing their lunch to their skillset that earned them an outrageous salary then might I suggest they, and I, learn to augment your productivity with the skills or take up something with better permanence like drywall or plumbing.

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#78

Post by [deleted] »

mftb wrote: post #57
doug_durham wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m in your same demographic. However I see these technologies as career extenders, not career threats. I can learn things faster than ever and adapt to changes more easily.

That's awesome. That's exactly the kind of thinking that turns L's to W's.

[deleted]

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#79

Post by bugglebeetle »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #66
bugglebeetle wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Restating my point: prosperity for whom? The answer for the past 50 years has certainly not been “everyone” or even “most people” in wealthy countries like America.

> prosperity for whom? The answer for the past 50 years has certainly not been “everyone” or even “most people” in wealthy countries like America. The poorest state in America, Mississippi, is richer than most of the world [1][2]. (No. 19, between the U.K. and New Zealand.) The post-war era experienced the largest and most broad-based increase in material prosperity in human history. Our poorest Americans saw real ec…

I would say that someone looking at all the problems that Mississippi has, while existing inside the richest country in human history, and saying “well, it’s not as bad as XYZ poor country” is a textbook example of the nihilism and failed imagination that has led us to wealth inequality and declining lifespans.

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#80

Post by JumpCrisscross »

kennyloginz wrote: post #65

Is it not crazy, asks Mr Senior, that the piano maker is a productive worker, but not the piano player, although obviously the piano would be absurd without the piano player? But this is exactly the case. The piano maker reproduces capital, the pianist only exchanges his labour for revenue. But doesn’t the pianist produce music and satisfy our musical ear, does he not even to a certain extent produce the latter? He d…

> piano maker reproduces capital, the pianist only exchanges his labour for revenue

Literally why we have intellectual property. So you can capitalize your intellectual work.

Post reply on HN