Writers Strike & AI

[Fencers]

Exactly, it is a tool which can be used by writers to make their job more efficient. That's my point - blaming a tool for the state of WGA pay is stupid, irrelevant and a distraction from the real problem - pay rates for workers of all kinds.

The WGA doesn't want writing jobs done by its members to disappear to AI programs that do not need precision. Not every writer is a lead writer or a showrunner. Many work on ancillary material, that while necessary, isn't always public facing or requires a particular creative drive.

Their interest is in ensuring there are places for writers of all stripes, not just the person who pitched an idea or a lead writer willing to also be a showrunner.

That is why AI is part of this WGA strike pattern of demands.

[schwarzkopf]

The WGA doesn't want writing jobs done by its members to disappear to AI programs that do not need precision.

There is no reason they will - as many specialists in the AI industry say (the original was about lawyers) - "Writers won't lose their jobs to AI - but writers without AI will lose their jobs to writers who embrace AI".

It is just a tool, the core part of writing isn't spewing out endless reams of text ... the core part of writing is delivering awesome stories.

No-one ever thought calculators would remove engineering jobs - I'm completely unsure why people think AI will remove writing jobs.

AI is fantastic and language, it is absolute crap at story telling, emotion and continuity.

[Kaleredar]

Exactly, it is a tool which can be used by writers to make their job more efficient. That's my point - blaming a tool for the state of WGA pay is stupid, irrelevant and a distraction from the real problem - pay rates for workers of all kinds.

They aren't blaming AI as it exists now.

Rather, they're foreseeing that AI will be used at the studio's direction not in the name of "helping artists" but as a means to cut, scrap, and underpay as many positions as possible. Likely at the cost of quality as well.

And when it comes between artists and studio big whigs, I'm going to side with the artists. If "AI gets the short of the stick and is misaligned" than... oh well. It doesn't need a job or need to get paid, after all.

[schwarzkopf]

Likely at the cost of quality as well.

Then the issue is still not with AI. If viewers are happy with crap quality, then other businesses will hire good quality writers - pay them better and viewers will pay for quality.

Bringing AI into this just does a disservice to the real issue - studio power. Ultimately AI is going to help writers, it won't help studios who don't have writers.

[vizzle]

Then the issue is still not with AI. If viewers are happy with crap quality, then other businesses will hire good quality writers - pay them better and viewers will pay for quality.

Bringing AI into this just does a disservice to the real issue - studio power. Ultimately AI is going to help writers, it won't help studios who don't have writers.

One of their main talking points is that AI shouldn't be used to replace any part of the writing job -- and there's a lot more than just scriptwriting -- during development. You're kinda talking out of your ass. Look it up.

- - - Updated - - -

AI is a misdirect - the WGA issue is with studios, not with a tool writers can use.

Please stop talking out of your ass and read about the issue before assuming you know everything. AI is "not a misdirect"; it's a main point of contention.

The Writers Guild of America (WGA), a labour union representing writers who primarily work in film and television, began the work strike this month after reaching an impasse in negotiations with the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers that represents the US entertainment industry. Part of the disagreement revolves around a WGA proposal to ban the industry from using AIs such as ChatGPT to generate story ideas or scripts for films and shows – the union wants to ensure that such technologies do not undermine writers’ compensation and writing credits.

“The fear is that AI could be used to produce first drafts of shows, and then a small number of writers would work off of those scripts,” says Virginia Doellgast at Cornell University in New York.

The WGA has also proposed that any scripts covered by the union’s collective bargaining agreement cannot be used to train AIs. There has already been broader resistance against tech companies scraping online content for free to train large language models and other generative AIs on text and images originally created by humans.

Hollywood studios on the other side of the negotiating table include companies such as Walt Disney Studios and Warner Bros. Studios, along with streaming services such as Netflix, Apple TV+ and Amazon Prime Video. The industry rejected the initial WGA proposal and countered with an offer to hold annual meetings to discuss new technological changes.

“This is a pretty weak commitment – the writers would have little power in those discussions to influence how the technologies are used,” says Doellgast. “The studios don’t want to negotiate hard limits on how they will use AI.”

https://www.newscientist.com/article...riters-strike/

[schwarzkopf]

it's a main point of contention.

Incorrect, the main point of contention is the lack of residuals from streaming platforms that has occurred in the recent shift from cable/broadcast to streaming.

The writers aren't getting paid.

AI is irrelevant.

[Calfredd]

Oh no, whatever would we do without identity politics being shoved into everything?!

Maybe the AI writers can actually write a story that people would like, given they don't care about Twitter likes more than they care about writing good shit.

Way to do your username proud.

[vizzle]

Incorrect, the main point of contention is the lack of residuals from streaming platforms that has occurred in the recent shift from cable/broadcast to streaming.

The writers aren't getting paid.

AI is irrelevant.

The internet is amazing. It gives people the power to think that they can ignore what was posted right in front of their face and continue saying their wrong, stupid shit. You really want to be the kind of person who needs to be physically forced to read the words put in front of you before you accept you're wrong?

"Incorrect". Fucking idiot. Respond to the actual bolded quotes.

The writers' strike was initially about compensation in an era of streaming services. Now the role of AI has also become a major point of contention in negotiations between the Writers Guild of America and companies such as Disney and Netflix

The writers' strike was initially about compensation in an era of streaming services. Now the role of AI has also become a major point of contention in negotiations between the Writers Guild of America and companies such as Disney and Netflix

The writers' strike was initially about compensation in an era of streaming services. Now the role of AI has also become a major point of contention in negotiations between the Writers Guild of America and companies such as Disney and Netflix

https://www.newscientist.com/article...riters-strike/

Maybe you've got some other source that says the WGA is just talking shit about their demands? Somewhere there in that 20k post territory?

[Fencers]

There is no reason they will - as many specialists in the AI industry say (the original was about lawyers) - "Writers won't lose their jobs to AI - but writers without AI will lose their jobs to writers who embrace AI".

Well, that's just an opinion. I merely was relating what the WGA stated and intended to curve by their own admission and documentation. WGA's speculation AI use will diminish writer jobs is no less valid than the speculation it would not.

It is just a tool

I wouldn't argue otherwise. Though I do agree with the speculation AI, especially as it's applied more widely and robustly, will automate many ancillary tasks that don't need human oversight or multi-disciplinary precision.

[Endus]

I wouldn't argue otherwise. Though I do agree with the speculation AI, especially as it's applied more widely and robustly, will automate many ancillary tasks that don't need human oversight or multi-disciplinary precision.

For all my comments above about "it's just a tool", I'm not ignorant of the real-world impacts on workers.

But I do want to springboard off this comment here to clarify something; the root villain in all this is capitalist economics. Capitalists want to use this tool to exclude workers from employment so those capitalists can secure a greater proportion of society's wealth. Which is what capitalism is, after all. Literally the definition of the system.

I can agree that AI is "just a tool" and condemn capitalist action using that tool. I do that with a lot of other subjects, too. Part of why I take such a strong stance on AI tools is precisely because of this; people want to spend all their time arguing about the validity of the tool, rather than the system that puts all the power in the hands of those who'd use that tool to inflict harm for their own benefit. It would be bad for studios to hire fewer writers and use AI tools as replacements. But would it be "bad" if those writers used those same AI tools to make their jobs easier? I don't think it would be. This is what I've been driving at.

It isn't the tool that's the problem. It's the hands wielding those tools, and for what purpose.

I do support the WGA in all this, even if I think the specific framing of a couple of their positions in it are improperly framed.

[Fencers]

It isn't the tool that's the problem. It's the hands wielding those tools, and for what purpose.

This is it. This is the entire cause of any rational concern about AI. The implementation and by whom.

WGA, being a union, are logically and rationally concerned and has an interest in protecting the future viability of writers. That is the entire reason why AI is inclusive within their pattern of demands.

AI is just a sexy headline but the nuts and bolts of any worker strike are ensuring the interest of the workers.


Edit: I am currently working for Open Loop on the backend; which does include a number of tech companies and think tanks spearheaded by Meta. They are interested in feedback specifically on AI and perceptive responsibility for its implementation by the public.

https://openloop.org/get-in-touch/

Just dropping a link for those that may be interested or wish to take a look at things and drop feedback.

I do not profit from this, FYI.

[Linkedblade]

And despite my above post, I recognize this. I just think it's stupidly shortsighted of them, because those AI scripts are going to be garbage. It's an expression of how little they value actual writers. Which, y'know, is the problem here.

But the AI garbage is probably on par with what the humans are writing, and it's cheaper.

[Endus]

But the AI garbage is probably on par with what the humans are writing, and it's cheaper.

1> Nope.

2> Why would "it's cheaper" matter to me in any way whatsoever? The only people who give a shit about that are capitalists padding their own pockets at the expense of their workers, and to be blunt as fuck about it, I only give a shit about those workers, not the leeches who feed off their labour.

[jonnysensible]

This is it. This is the entire cause of any rational concern about AI. The implementation and by whom.

WGA, being a union, are logically and rationally concerned and has an interest in protecting the future viability of writers. That is the entire reason why AI is inclusive within their pattern of demands.

AI is just a sexy headline but the nuts and bolts of any worker strike are ensuring the interest of the workers.


Edit: I am currently working for Open Loop on the backend; which does include a number of tech companies and think tanks spearheaded by Meta. They are interested in feedback specifically on AI and perceptive responsibility for its implementation by the public.

https://openloop.org/get-in-touch/

Just dropping a link for those that may be interested or wish to take a look at things and drop feedback.

I do not profit from this, FYI.

I've sent them some of Professor Theodore John Kaczynski's work and thoughts.

[Fencers]

But the AI garbage is probably on par with what the humans are writing, and it's cheaper.

This is a grossly ignorant "internet nerd" statement. Customer satisfaction with media offerings is the highest it has ever been historically. Even in the last 20 years or so when media metric tools like QData or various firms such as 1Q and Momentive launched- which was almost 26 years ago. Well within the generational cycle of all current media.

Just ridiculous statements based on personal opinion being allowed all over this thread. Poor moderation.

- - - Updated - - -

I've sent them some of Professor Theodore John Kaczynski's work and thoughts.

I'm sure you're not alone. LOL

[Linkedblade]

1> Nope.

2> Why would "it's cheaper" matter to me in any way whatsoever? The only people who give a shit about that are capitalists padding their own pockets at the expense of their workers, and to be blunt as fuck about it, I only give a shit about those workers, not the leeches who feed off their labour.

1 Nope to what exactly?

2 Not to you, but the people paying. If an AI/robotics can do the job of a person for less cost, the business will go that way. Sorry, to burst the old idea that automation will lead to a communist paradise and focus on the arts. No one expected it would do art, too.

[Endus]

1 Nope to what exactly?

That AI-produced material is comparable to the work of actual professional writers.

2 Not to you, but the people paying.

Yes, the capitalists. Literally what I was talking about, dude.

If an AI/robotics can do the job of a person for less cost, the business will go that way. Sorry, to burst the old idea that automation will lead to a communist paradise and focus on the arts. No one expected it would do art, too.

And this is an argument that enshrines the interests of capitalists as the sole interests worth considering, and the treatment of workers' interests as irrelevant.

Which is inhumane.

Nothing I'm saying here is "communist", either, so you can stuff your McCarthy-style propagandist fearmongering.

[Kaleredar]

Then the issue is still not with AI. If viewers are happy with crap quality, then other businesses will hire good quality writers - pay them better and viewers will pay for quality.

Bringing AI into this just does a disservice to the real issue - studio power. Ultimately AI is going to help writers, it won't help studios who don't have writers.

AI is one of the tools with which studios will exert their power over actual artists. Which is why opposing it is in the artists interest. It actively fights the disproportionate power of the studios.

[baskev]

snip

I also think they are right to strike. But on the other hand. the amount of badly written drek ( star wars episode 7,8,9), star trek series ( few of them), witcher, jared leto's joker etc etc
i also question the quality of the writing. And nope, not talking political stuff etc.

Just not knowing the lore, writing plote holes. But just overal scripts that make the fast and the furious movies look like oscar movies.

[Xath]

There is no reason they will - as many specialists in the AI industry say (the original was about lawyers) - "Writers won't lose their jobs to AI - but writers without AI will lose their jobs to writers who embrace AI".

It is just a tool, the core part of writing isn't spewing out endless reams of text ... the core part of writing is delivering awesome stories.

No-one ever thought calculators would remove engineering jobs - I'm completely unsure why people think AI will remove writing jobs.

AI is fantastic and language, it is absolute crap at story telling, emotion and continuity.

AI in the past two years has had an absolutely absurd level of growth and there is nothing to imply that it won't continue. There is a reason that a lot of the people who first started the projects are worried about the future of AI and the runaway pace at which it is improving.