None of those examples are LLMs, which despite the topic not spelling it out, is what we are talking about here, as this discussion actually started in another thread.
AI is a broad term and was coined as a term in 1955 as a field of study. In Nov of 2022 it very quickly entered the global lexicon as a noun with the release of ChatGPT. None of those features are technically AI-powered though.
Not really true currently, but an interesting point. Because at some point we will end up using the products of LLMs. Such as a plugin that someone else makes for Godot using AI and we use it.
That’s a valid thought. That’s why we have copyright laws in fact. But sadly those laws are being challenged and in some cases upended in courts. AI companies have gotten away with a LOT more than I expected two years ago. I thought the case against Midjourney was going to put the kibash on AI-generated artwork, and here we are with Sora 2 in the news and people complaining in the news but no real legislation around AI still.
Sadly, the money goes deep and there’s only so much we can control. It’s like recycling. I separate out all my recyclables, but I know for a fact that in the last three cities I’ve lived that it all goes to the dump and I don’t have power to change that.
Yup.
I used to agree strongly with you. I’ve started to change my view. I was thinking about this last night. It is a tool that happens to be new and it is a big disruption. Like the sewing machine was in the 1800s. Back then there were labor strikes from people losing their jobs. The companies didn’t care and moved forward.
As long as companies are driving this technology, it isn’t going to stop. So I’ve decided to embrace even AI-generated art so I can understand it. Because I’m a programmer and I want to continue to be employed. Even if I’m not working on or using AI directly in my work yet, I want to stay on the cutting edge. Plus, it’s a lot easier to reject a tool in a professional setting when you’ve used it and can speak to its financial and time drawbacks.
But I’ve also been thinking about the ethics of not using AI-generated art. and the truth is that I feel my past rejection of it was performative. (Not that I’m accusing anyone else of that - to be clear.) This is because while I wasn’t using it because I am an artist who draws and paints, and musician who plays guitar and sings - and I want to support in solidarity artist friends who make a living with their art skills (which is REALLY hard btw.) But it turns out that me boycotting AI use didn’t affect the market at all. Instead, I fell behind.
Then I found Suno and I got to make music that I really enjoyed. The tool may go away because it gets too expensive to use - but it isn’t going away.
True. I’m waiting for the AI bubble to burst. But I don’t think it’s going to go away - it’s just going to be inaccessible to the non-rich, non-corporate entities of the world.
Again, agreed. But like recycling, I feel like my participation or lack of it doesn’t affect the corporate decision makers who can actually affect this. The market drives this, not whether or not we use it.
In the 1800s you were betraying people by using a sewing machine. That’s not the case now.