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

91–100 of 167 posts

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#91

Post by DougN7 »

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.

Industrialization was slow - it took many decades to happen, so people could adapt. I don’t see us having that luxury of time.

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#92

Post by tshaddox »

welshwelsh wrote: post #84
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…

This comes off as incredibly passive. You are in control of how you use and adapt to AI. >if AI takes my job AI is not going to take anyone's job. People using AI will take jobs from people who don't use AI. >What happens to the doctors That's completely up to them. Some will use AI to research new treatments, to assist with their daily workload, or even to treat patients. Some doctors will stick their head in the sa…

> People using AI will take jobs from people who don't use AI.

Not really sure what point you’re making though. This almost makes it sounds like you want the reader to conclude that it’s going to be a one-for-one trade, but the whole concern is that it won’t be. If your manager uses AI to replace the job of you and 9 other people on your team, I think it’s a bit silly to say “don’t worry, AI didn’t take your job, a person using AI just took the jobs of 10 people not using AI.”

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#93

Post by Taywee »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #76
Taywee wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

That's not true of novel writing in the least, and clearly not what I was talking about. AI is already heavily impacting fiction and writing communities. How many active novelists do you hang out with? The ones I know are talking a lot about how much harder it's already making their lives, especially the ones who are still trying to get picked up by their first agent.

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#94

Post by stemlord »

yinser wrote: post #77
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.

Hundreds of millions of people cant suddenly become tradespeople and society turns out okay. There aren't that many homeowners with kitchen and bathroom projects to keep them all employed, and there would be far less such clients after the fact.

I'm also not entirely convinced that more software is by default a net positive for humanity, let alone "the earth"

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#95

Post by blargey »

bcrosby95 wrote: post #81
yinser wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A train is approaching on the tracks, on one track you create free energy, solve diseases, create a new dawn for human ingenuity and also some white collar jobs are removed, others are created. On the other track we continue to toil in the dirt.

We've been on this track before. Even more will be toiling in the dirt. Quite literally when AI takes every job that doesn't involve physical labor.

If you assume that an AI capable enough to replace all knowledge labor will simultaneously be forever incapable of designing commodity robots to let it also replace all physical labor, then sure.

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#96

Post by JumpCrisscross »

Taywee wrote: post #93
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

That's not true of novel writing in the least, and clearly not what I was talking about. AI is already heavily impacting fiction and writing communities. How many active novelists do you hang out with? The ones I know are talking a lot about how much harder it's already making their lives, especially the ones who are still trying to get picked up by their first agent.

> How many active novelists do you hang out with?

Small number. Acquaintances. Published. They complain about e.g. getting into the Paris Review or New Yorker, now. I imagine traditional gatekeepers are screwed. But not authors. Even if their job transitions to expert prompt engineering and editing, that's a niche.

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#98

Post by bcrosby95 »

blargey wrote: post #95
bcrosby95 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've been on this track before. Even more will be toiling in the dirt. Quite literally when AI takes every job that doesn't involve physical labor.

If you assume that an AI capable enough to replace all knowledge labor will simultaneously be forever incapable of designing commodity robots to let it also replace all physical labor, then sure.

Physical resources are limited and take time to ramp up regardless of how many smarts you have behind it. Knowledge work has significantly fewer barriers.

They will eventually come for it, but it will happen much slower.

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#99

Post by grugagag »

Taywee wrote: post #75
RubyRidgeRandy wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Sadly nobody seems to be giving a fk. That until we find ourselves in crisis that leads to a lot of violence and a societal collapse. Hope I’m dead wrong, really do

Re: Peter Gabriel: AI competition statement

#100

Post by huehehue »

There's a massive piece of the music scene that I can't imagine AI ever replacing. Some genres are formulaic by design, but the draw for so many others is the human experience and the inventiveness. Many people follow artists because they connect with material that could only have come from the artist.

One reasonable concern is that tech supplementation will lead to a deluge of derivative work, nullifying the efforts of the actual creators. That's always happened in some form or another, and does it really lead genuine fans away from artists they care about?

There's a comment in another thread about generating a song that includes Kurt Cobain, which is such a weird example because a computer could not have dreamed that up in a thousand years. A computer couldn't write a punk song, and mean it. It will never replace the open mic, the buskers, the songs passed across generations, the Zappas of the world, and millions of others.

Post reply on HN