Writers Strike & AI

[Xath]

And, you know, a lot more jobs appearing. Like the people designing and building them, and programming them, and maintaining them, and so on and so forth.

"Oh no, automobiles are going to make a lot of jobs disappear!" cried the same people as you back in the 1880s. Or when computers came out (which, incidentally, is why George Jetson being a "button pusher" was considered an insult during the Jetsons.) Or any other time some new technology or advancement in society came about. Fuck, Nog Son of Throg lost his shit in the same way when Crog invented the wheel. And the annals of history remember well how Drog felt when Rogg made a stone knife. Fortunately for Rogg he had a stone knife on him when Drog came at him with a rock.

Yeah, outdated jobs will disappear. But a fuckton of new ones come along with it, too.

That isn't how this works lol because AI is also making massive inroads on code writing as well.

[Ivanstone]

seth rogan

He has a grand total of four adaptation credits. Green Hornet, Preacher, The Boys: Diabolical and TMNT. One miss, two hits and we’ll see if he shits the bed on the forthcoming TMNT.

He’s otherwise written some good shit and some bad shit. So far he’s got a pretty good track record as a producer.

[Xath]

The fear comes about because capitalist economic models are predicated on labor as a fundamental production tool; workers labor, and are paid for that labor, and that pay is what they use to consume the products created by the capitalist system.

When you knock out that worker compensation baseline, the entire system comes crumbling down, and the capitalists at the top will absolutely fight you the whole way if you try and implement any kind of reforms to address this, because if they have to pay workers less, they can keep more of that revenue for themselves, and any addressing of the system's imbalances will go after that revenue and get it flowing back to the consumer class. And since those capitalists have nearly all the power, it's really difficult to make meaningful headway on this issue.

So AI might lead to the complete economic collapse of capitalist systems at the same time that capitalists are fighting to maximize personal gains and furthering that collapse. Because those capitalists are, largely, absolute fuckin' morons. They're in place largely by accident, not merit.

And yeah; this is a problem, but it was always a problem, and AI's just accelerating the collapse. A lot of people have been pointing out these flaws since the days of Ford inventing the assembly line. This is just the latest automation that's putting the entire system at risk.

The difference is this time it's literally every low skill form of labor not just specific ones and it's also starting to include some skilled forms of labor with the inroads being made into coding and creative with art.

- - - Updated - - -

Except that, in the case of AI as it pertains to art at least, it isn't doing a job better like how cars are demonstrably better than horse drawn carriages or how computers are better at tabulating and storing numerical data than doing it on paper, it's just doing a subpar job faster for less.

- - - Updated - - -



Unless you have actual artists involved in the process you'd have nothing but non-artists effectively signing off on things they have no clue about the artistic veracity or cohesion of. And that's the way you get studio over-interfered bullshit without a uniting vision.

Non-artists seem to have this idea that the only hurdle to "becoming an artist" is simply learning how to paint or model or whatever, and that that is the sole barrier to being an "artist," or at least an employable one. That simply isn't the case. And trust me, I'm actually employed as an industry artist.

Hell, apply that same example to screenwriting. Most people can type out sentences. The formatting of a screenplay isn't particularly difficult to master. So really here's almost literally no barrier to entry for just writing a screenplay. But can you write a good screenplay just because you know how to type? Would you know a good screenplay from a bad one by reading it? Now apply that logic to a painting or other form of art.

Can you create a cohesive world built of individual concepts even if you knew how to paint? Would you know good concepts from bad when you saw them? And no, I don't mean in a "they're painted with pretty colors and the people have the right number of fingers" way, and if someone thinks that's what "concepting" is then their answer to my question can be taken as "no." Because an AI can show you all kinds of things, but you're basically just taking what it throws at you and trusting that the algorithm has shown you something good, because you lack the capacity beyond going "oooh, pretty" to assess any piece's actual merit.

Sure you need one artist to do the same amount of work you would previously have needed 10 for lol.

- - - Updated - - -

yea but its only a plagiarism machine. none of this AI shit can operate without its training material which is kept hush hush not because 'rivals will copy us' but because its clearly training itself on copyrighted material and trying to avoid paying for it.

None of these things have an actual business model that won't immediately explode if they weren't stealing so much data.

So 90% of hollywood? The number of non derivative shows that is created is maybe 1 or 2 a season if that. No shit it can't operate without training material but that material already exists.

[Witchblade77]

https://twitter.com/JustineBateman/s...76895972413440

and before anyone tries to justify it as a good thing - are you looking to live in Idiocracy? because that's how you get idiocracy. and no, its not going to be better entertainment. you think Marvel and Disney etc are too formulaic now? just you wait.

AI. does NOT. CREATE. ANYTHING. NEW. it just shuffles and remixes. it shouldn't even be called intelligence, because its not. (yes, I saw TV Tropes being brought up.. rebuttals: 1. humans created tropes to begin with 2. new tropes are added all the time 3. execution of the trope though individual creativity makes a difference)

The ONLY reason AI is being pushed now is because the few exacs at the top who are already getting bulk of the profits - want more profits and even fewer costs. and they don't give a fuck about anyone or anything else.


edited to add.... of all the things, I did not expect a piece of satire from 2000 to turn into an actual template.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simone_(2002_film)

[Xath]

https://twitter.com/JustineBateman/s...76895972413440

and before anyone tries to justify it as a good thing - are you looking to live in Idiocracy? because that's how you get idiocracy. and no, its not going to be better entertainment. you think Marvel and Disney etc are too formulaic now? just you wait.

AI. does NOT. CREATE. ANYTHING. NEW. it just shuffles and remixes. it shouldn't even be called intelligence, because its not. (yes, I saw TV Tropes being brought up.. rebuttals: 1. humans created tropes to begin with 2. new tropes are added all the time 3. execution of the trope though individual creativity makes a difference)

The ONLY reason AI is being pushed now is because the few exacs at the top who are already getting bulk of the profits - want more profits and even fewer costs. and they don't give a fuck about anyone or anything else.


edited to add.... of all the things, I did not expect a piece of satire from 2000 to turn into an actual template.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simone_(2002_film)

Very few people are saying it's a good thing we are just saying what we expect is going to happen.

[Witchblade77]

Very few people are saying it's a good thing we are just saying what we expect is going to happen.

defeatist attitudes help no one. this one one of the reasons writers are striking and will most likely be joined by other industry professionals. will they succeed? we shall see. but the only shots that fail 100% of the time are the shots you do not take.

and while not everyone here is saying that its a good thing? some are.

[Kaleredar]

Sure you need one artist to do the same amount of work you would previously have needed 10 for lol.

Not necessarily. As the ability to work faster evolves, truly ambitious people will use that to do more.

If 1 artist can produce the work of 10 then 10 artists can produce 10 times the amount of work they could previously. But of course, that requires not devaluing the artists, which is precisely what tools like this and the rather uninformed that make and use them both seek and desire.


As for its "inevitability..." the writers guild is actively working on disallowing its use in Hollywood. If they get their way on it... them's the brakes. Studios can't operate without the writer's guild. And needing "fewer writers" doesn't effectively mean anything, because going against the writers guild means you have no writers. Not "well they're harder to find" or "maybe you could pick up a few scabs...", you effectively have zero. And it doesn't stop there; it'd basically be a studio burning a bridge between themselves and the hollywood unions (writers, teamsters, craftsmen, actors, directors,) all of whom generally act in solidarity. You think all the studios are willing to fall on that sword? Especially when they exist as rather tumultuous institutions in an insanely competitive market, wherein their rivals would happily snatch up their creative capital (See, Warner brothers losing Nolan to Universal for example) if said capital felt spurned by the studio who tried to push against their unions.

You say it's inevitable? Well, to quote a film not generated by AI: "Nothing is written."

So let me posit the question to you in another way: Say the guild gets this concession from the studio that AI generation is not to be used in the writing process. How does AI then... become used?

[Shadowferal]

So let me posit the question to you in another way: Say the guild gets this concession from the studio that AI generation is not to be used in the writing process. How does AI then... become used?

Who cares at that point?

[Kaleredar]

Who cares at that point?

In what way?

[Shadowferal]

In what way?

It's about the writers. If AI never gets used all the better.

[PenguinChan]

AI is already in use, and at best, will be delayed for the near future. There is no stopping AI and its usage in any industry, unfortunately. Pure ignorance to think that's possible, especially a strike. The cat is out of the bag with computers and their usage to make AI, and that ain't going anywhere now. Good luck achieving that goal, lol

[Shadowferal]

I heard the same bullshit with cryptocurrency.

[Gorsameth]

I heard the same bullshit with cryptocurrency.

Crypto has no value. It does nothing and solves no problem. (other then how I can more easily launder money)

AI on the other hand creates tones of value because people are generally really inefficient by comparison. (assuming the AI becomes sufficiently advanced enough)

[Gumble]

https://twitter.com/JustineBateman/s...76895972413440

and before anyone tries to justify it as a good thing - are you looking to live in Idiocracy? because that's how you get idiocracy. and no, its not going to be better entertainment. you think Marvel and Disney etc are too formulaic now? just you wait.

AI. does NOT. CREATE. ANYTHING. NEW. it just shuffles and remixes. it shouldn't even be called intelligence, because its not. (yes, I saw TV Tropes being brought up.. rebuttals: 1. humans created tropes to begin with 2. new tropes are added all the time 3. execution of the trope though individual creativity makes a difference)

The ONLY reason AI is being pushed now is because the few exacs at the top who are already getting bulk of the profits - want more profits and even fewer costs. and they don't give a fuck about anyone or anything else.


edited to add.... of all the things, I did not expect a piece of satire from 2000 to turn into an actual template.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simone_(2002_film)

What does the human mind do, but "shuffles and remixes" until it comes up with something that seems new, or a new way to look at something? Our brains are just a collection of neurons firing ON or OFF that create our memories, ideas, thoughts. To think a computer cannot get to the point where it can mimic what we do..... you'd have to have quite the limited view on creation. If your view is a religious one, that our creation is based on some sort of divine intevention and not us simply using what we know to produce new ideas, then ok, good luck with that.

As a perfect example, a bunch of people 2000 years ago remixed an Egyptian god with Judaism and created Christianity. That seems to have grown and survived pretty well. You really think an AI couldn't have figured that out?

Just consider for a moment, that every script, idea, paper, and concept that AI comes up with adds to its "knowledge" and allows it to grow and "learn". Once someone programs it to be able to judge what ideas work and what don't, it can then learn quite rapidly.

Pretending this cannot grow exponentially out of control, and that AI isn't already past the point where writers striking to prevent its use is just loud seppuku, is foolish. This strike is telling the people that own media companies that they need to move forward with AI even more, because it will replace the people that cause them trouble, and to pretend that the AI we have now cannot easily replace the crap that's produced nowadays, and likely do a better job...... forgive me if I think you give the writers who are striking more credit than they deserve.

[jonnysensible]

What does the human mind do, but "shuffles and remixes" until it comes up with something that seems new, or a new way to look at something? Our brains are just a collection of neurons firing ON or OFF that create our memories, ideas, thoughts. To think a computer cannot get to the point where it can mimic what we do..... you'd have to have quite the limited view on creation. If your view is a religious one, that our creation is based on some sort of divine intevention and not us simply using what we know to produce new ideas, then ok, good luck with that.

As a perfect example, a bunch of people 2000 years ago remixed an Egyptian god with Judaism and created Christianity. That seems to have grown and survived pretty well. You really think an AI couldn't have figured that out?

Just consider for a moment, that every script, idea, paper, and concept that AI comes up with adds to its "knowledge" and allows it to grow and "learn". Once someone programs it to be able to judge what ideas work and what don't, it can then learn quite rapidly.

Pretending this cannot grow exponentially out of control, and that AI isn't already past the point where writers striking to prevent its use is just loud seppuku, is foolish. This strike is telling the people that own media companies that they need to move forward with AI even more, because it will replace the people that cause them trouble, and to pretend that the AI we have now cannot easily replace the crap that's produced nowadays, and likely do a better job...... forgive me if I think you give the writers who are striking more credit than they deserve.

the ai is currently garbage tho???
i mean show me one thing the AI has made that isn't the worst thing you have ever seen?

everything ive seen of it trying to do things comes off as having access to all the knowledge, understanding nothing of it and then bullshitting with made up citations or references to please the person asking it. Maybe it could replace politicians which is a low bar.

[Mush]

Crypto has no value. It does nothing and solves no problem. (other then how I can more easily launder money)

AI on the other hand creates tones of value because people are generally really inefficient by comparison. (assuming the AI becomes sufficiently advanced enough)

There is no creativity in AI though, it's all just pulled and compiled from existing sources. Granted a lot of modern tv/film is also just rehashing old things, but not everything. Media without a human touch will be trash.

[eschatological]

There's also currently an EU law being debated about AI engineers would have to disclose the use of copyrighted materials in training their AIs, which would open them up to lawsuits, and effectively make them unable to scrap much of anything without being subject to being sued into obliviion.

And without their outright theft of copyrighted works, AI engines ain't gonna get better or do even generic shit.

[Gumble]

the ai is currently garbage tho???
i mean show me one thing the AI has made that isn't the worst thing you have ever seen?

everything ive seen of it trying to do things comes off as having access to all the knowledge, understanding nothing of it and then bullshitting with made up citations or references to please the person asking it. Maybe it could replace politicians which is a low bar.

My immediate thought was "any paper in school", given that most plagarism checking software has had to be updated to catch AI generated papers. How good they are I am unaware of, but it seems as though they are hard enough to catch that professors cannot notice without help.

I'd wager quite a bit more of the media out there today had at least some assistance from AI or AI like applications. A lot of the writers who are striking have admitted to already using the software for the past few years to make drafts and garner ideas. How widespread this is..... hard to say.

But, and this is sorta a major issue, the AI most people are exposed to that you think is crap and doesn't make anything worthwhile. That is the basic mode. Both studios and, much more worrying, certain agencies and foreign governments, have much more sophisticated ones that will be considered commonplace in a few years.


Too many people are judging AI off ChatGPT, which while its very cute and quaint, is nowhere near as powerful and advanced as where AI is at right now.

- - - Updated - - -

There's also currently an EU law being debated about AI engineers would have to disclose the use of copyrighted materials in training their AIs, which would open them up to lawsuits, and effectively make them unable to scrap much of anything without being subject to being sued into obliviion.

And without their outright theft of copyrighted works, AI engines ain't gonna get better or do even generic shit.

Yea, there is very good reason to be concerned with copyright law, however I'd be curious how they will deal with connections between an AI in Germany, following copyright law, that connections to an AI in South Korea, that isn't following it at all, and prevent information sharing and learning between them.

[Soulwind]

There's also currently an EU law being debated about AI engineers would have to disclose the use of copyrighted materials in training their AIs, which would open them up to lawsuits, and effectively make them unable to scrap much of anything without being subject to being sued into obliviion.

And without their outright theft of copyrighted works, AI engines ain't gonna get better or do even generic shit.

That'd be nice. It would also slow the whole thing down a bit, which would also be a good thing.

But it would not be the end of it. With a little imagination, you can get around such rules. For instance, you could hire a bunch of cheap artists from underdeveloped countries, have them learn to imitate the style of popular artists, have them sign away their rights to their work and train new, completely legal, AI models on their art.

Robot artists powered by sweatshops. That's some Matrix shit.

[Syegfryed]

It's about the writers. If AI never gets used all the better.

Im pretty sure a lot of the writters complaining about AI were using AI themselves to soft their work