[Companies when you download a ROM emulation of a 20 year old game that is no longer sold]: *Knuckles cracking* [Companies when they take from The Pile]: "I mean, in the age of the Internet, what is "ownership" and "property" in the digital landscape, really?"
@@twilightvulpine If you do more research than Jimquisition, you'll find the Pile has already removed copywrited content it obtained from Book3, after it was DMCA'd. UA-cam holds a licence for all content published on the website, so Sterling here has made the mistake, of thinking the roof over their head and their belly full of oats, were out of the kindness of the farmer's heart.
I'm laughingly curious what they'd use mine for. Would they learn how to make Gameboy games by studying my other channel's VODs? Subtitled audioplays from mine? XD
No, it's not, unless the data point you're trying to ask it for it so specific there's one example of it. That's an issue of not enough data. If you repeatedly train that thing with only one example, it's going to be overfit for it and try to reproduce it closely. It's like when a human learns only about someone from the news and that's the only thing they'll parrot every time that person's name comes up.
We've had "hoverboards" that don't hover, "self-driving cars" that don't drive themselves, and "AI" that isn't intelligent. I think all we need is some marketer to invent a "teleporter" that doesn't actually teleport you anywhere and a "jetpack" that doesn't fly, and we'll finally have "the future turned out to be shit" bingo.
Have you seen that water-based jetpack that is basically just a very powerful vacuum, but which requires to have its hose in the water all the tine to suck up water to spit out as reaction mass? You can fly...as long as you don't want to go higher than about 4 metres. As for teleports I don't have any great ideas but I'm confident 3D printing for medical applications will disappoint along relevant lines eventually. Also, "flying cars" that are shit cars and shit planes simultaneously have been done, as is "Back to the Future 2 power-lace sneakers" (very expensive limited edition and much slower than the movie version) and "VR" (The 'Multiverse' LOL) but I'm still waiting on any form of time machine or cloned dinosaurs.
As a writer/editor/teacher of writing who's been forced to look farther and farther afield for work, I found all of this profoundly familiar. Most of my classes now include an "AI writing" day where students get to fool around with an LLM and realize just how difficult it is to produce anything other than slop with it. Ironically, one of the most useful lessons I teach now is analog research--how to find information without a search engine (because the search engine will just tell you to eat a poisonous mushroom). I teach students how to use physical libraries, how to find public records, how to track down citations and interview humans. And, of course, how to fact-check. Most of the teachers I know are dealing with students turning in ChatGPT's puke. I get students thanking me for letting them do work they actually like.
How I describe AI to less techy people is 'imagine someone who knows absolutely nothing is googling something and just believing all information it finds uncritically. But really, really quickly'
AI isn't googling anything. Someone has to gather/scrape that information and turn it into training data. It's more like someone being locked in a room with only information given to them by their captors. You can't blame a tool for "believing" something. You can only blame the people in charge of training data.
Reminds me of a cartoon I saw once. Guy 1: "I've taken an experimental drug that drastically accelerates my thought processes!" Guy 2: "So you're super smart now?" Guy 1: "I'm stupid _faster!"_
tbh, corporations never knew what talent was. meritocracy was always a lie when the more visibly marginalised you are, the less work you have access to and the less recognition for said work you get
my favorite example of this (cause it makes it immediately clear who's ignorant and who's a skeleton warrior just by their response) is the world of computing, it used to be regarded as clerical work, so women's work, so not prestigious. Then men wanted to do it so it became men's work, so prestigious and smart, and obviously there aren't many women in computing they don't have "the disposition" for computers.
Long story short, the term Meritocracy was a joke term, sort of like 'pull yourself up by your bootstraps'. In the Meritocracy case, it was a satire detailing the lives of rich folks who believed they deserved their success (spoiler alert: the text said 'nope, they don't'). It's a mythical world that exists outside of capitalism but is framed as how capitalism picks it's winners. It's the obvious lie out in the open that makes people make stupid decisions on large and small scales. Oh, and yeah, Pull yourself up by your bootstraps is a term for a miracle. It's funny that for a long time conservatives used it as a framing device for the American dream but said it in such a way to imply that it meant everyone had the ability to lift their own situation from the dumps. But you can't do that by pulling straps on your stupid boots. You just wave your leg around doing that. I've tried.
@SquishyHo Every company is always trying make money it’s never been about anything else, when they figured out what they could get away with it’s definitely more obvious than before.
@@OmegaVideoGameGod Plenty of companies start off with different goals. For example, RoosterTeeth's goal wasn't "to make money" it was the unobtainable and frankly moronic dream of competing with Netflix. Just ask all the mon franchises that died across the 90s and 2000s or all the failed "WoW killers" and MOBAs that failed to compete with LoL how having the goal of competing with #1 instead of doing your own thing works out.
Hmm, Hungary is both goddamn corrupt and unlucky. It’s unexpectedly sad that nature reserves in that country are in danger of being overexploited by the company that produced the Hell game.
@@Shreds87 my god, not again. Even without a rumour like that, Hungarian politics are still amongst the scariest in the European Union. Bulgaria is another country with similar mess ups as well.
One of the worst parts is watching the techno simps in nearly every comment section gleefully rubbing their hands at the harm this is doing to creators.
Yeah, I've gotten into a couple tizzies with pro AI bro shills in the comments before. All their arguments basically boil down to "Oh boy! I can't to see how much AI will _eventually_ help people! How it can _potentially_ improve so many lives! How it can _at some undisclosed point in the future_ benefit everybody!" Hmm... Does this remind anybody of NFT bros when they completely gamble on the profitability of something? Nah, I'm sure it's all just coincidental...
@@SageWon-1aussie it's okay, as an accountant I assure you none of us want to go to techbro parties either! Those guys are weird and I wouldn't want to leave any other woman alone in a room with one. We have our own parties where we use recreational chemistry to try to unfuck our brains from the arcane mathematics of tax regulations and annuities. And yeah, speaking from my experience as a computer scientist before that (another reason to never party with a techbro! Ishtar I hate those guys) AI does just seem to be the latest, most successful form of techbro snake oil, just like NFTs or crypto before it. Hopefully they find something else to try to sell soon.
We don't have to play coy. It's a running gag of the channel for Sterling to call someone a "cunt", and then cut to the theme of _Skeleton Warriors_ (why _Skeleton Warriors?_ I dunno). In some cultures (notably, not Australia), the word "cunt" is a cuss so strong that you reserve it exclusively for the things you truly hate.
@@pseudonayme7717 the fuck he is, he is doing that because he is building his own AI company and wants to slander the competition while the people with technical skill he abuses are working on it
@@pseudonayme7717 No. He just wants to be able to get a piece of the pie for himself first. Trying to setup roadblocks for the competition while he sidesteps them all.
I remember when I first discovered myself as a writer. It started with misunderstanding a creative assignment in 3rd grade to "make a book with 5 pages" where the teachers assumed kids would hear book and think Picture Book. I returned a short story with mild illustrations, was entered into a contest without my concent or knowledge, and won some award for junior Novellas or something ( its been 2 decades ). After that, ma suggested she give me her notes for the story she never wrote and I Could Just Write It For Her, which I Did Not Want. When I found fanfiction, both parents repeatedly suggested I change the names and sell it ( this was 5 years before Twilight and predated 50 Shades ) and That Felt Wrong And I Refused. Between 13 and 19, ma collected and placed Writers Digest magazines in my room or bathroom. Everything in those magazines was Marketing Advice and assumed you already understood the process of finding an agent. There was no genuine advice on How To Write A Story, Simply How To Sell It ASAP. And all of that advice was Kill What You Wanted To Make And Follow Trends. I was never brave enough to tell ma to fuck off with all of that shit, and the extreme shame of not standing up for myself back then remains a mental block for the stories I Actually Want To Write. Cause ma will ask, but she won't respect it unless I've sold something. I. Don't. Want. To. Sell. Things. I want to tell a story. The constant pressure to Sell Something Already! Squashed my dreams of young authorship out of me and fast tracked my development into an anticapitalist who finds the Work Or Die system antithetical to Being Human. I was not born to labor. I was born a baby, and grew into a writer. And then told my life would be endless suffering and compromise if I tried to make my core trait a career. I refused. I met someone who already had plans to join the military and loved me dearly, and was openly fine with me not holding a job to instead be a creative person with minimal economic pressure. That was impossible for me to achieve without making myself vulnerable through marriage; I was lucky I found a good husband in my podunk shitty town. Someone who was my friend before he was the guy I wanted to have sex with. Someone who found everything I did marvelous, and never devalued it. Not everyone gets that lucky. I weep for others who live under the pressure that was going to kill me, and I use the time I have to fight on the fronts I can reach for Universal Basic Income. Work Or Die is nazi shit.
I get what you mean but don't use the nazi word for it please.. it is allready degraded on the internet from its original serious meaning to people I don't agree with...don't make that worse please.
Well, Enough said! It’s safer not to use nsfw words, but I do feel for you, original commenter. I sometimes tend to use heavily disguised strong words (made with numbers and the like) because I am an adult woman.
UBI is an awful idea being pushed by tech bros to make their technology seem more powerful than it is. Part of the marketing gimmick is “we will eliminate jobs! All jobs! And drive down wages!” Which isn’t necessarily a given. But it sure seems like it is when people jump straight to UBI without considering if this tech will even have the impacts it promises. And, also, UBI is just terrible. If everyone is making a set amount of money, you really don’t think businesses will inflate prices to account for it? And then it’s like nobody is making any extra money at all. I agree with the pressure to monetize one’s interests, but yes, a I think people should still be able to make money from the things they create. I do not agree with software that is perpetually reliant on the work of creative people while cutting them off from the means to profit from that work. As AI operates now, the expectation is that humans will continuously produce work while being unable to profit from that same work. The money is instead funneled to a few giant companies. Your comment ignores the whole point.
2:28 -- Yep, I have firsthand experience with this. I work in the curbside pickup department of a grocery store. Corporate recently started using A.I. for one of the systems involved and it immediately - and I do mean _immediately_ - went to shit. Normally those of us that pick the items off the shelves go on a set path from one end of the store to the other, getting the necessary items along the way. Enter A.I. and our "route" (if you can even call it that anymore) is all over the goddamn place now! It has us zipping back and forth between random aisles at different ends of the store, sometimes revisiting the same aisle more than once! Absolutely no logic to the path or even any consistency, it's different every time! And they said this would be *better!* It would help make things go *faster! **_HOW?!_* I repeat: This job is taking items off a shelf and bringing them to customers' cars. What part of that could _possibly_ be improved by the use of A.I.? Even if hypothetically it worked perfectly? It's not a particularly complex idea. You ever heard the saying "don't fix what isn't broken?" Evidently corporate dumbasses haven't... I have a feeling that they have already quietly stopped using the A.I. though. Yesterday the route was back to the way it used to be, and there's no way they fixed it that fast.
I wouldn't be surprised if the "AI" just makes you pick the stuff up in the order that people put it into their basket. Or by EAN in ascending order. You'd think they just give you the full list, sorted by department (like dairy, meat, frozen) and let you figure out the best route yourself. But I guess that isn't tech enough.
Starbucks is moving to a drive-thru model where they wait until an order has been fully stated and processed by their computers before they begin preparing the items ordered. No ability to prepare items as they are ordered. Corporate expects their awful wait times will somehow decrease with this change. It's so blatantly, outlandishly inefficient compared to the model it's replacing... that now I'm wondering if they're just complying with some shitforbrain CEO's AI-generated "idea". Personally I can't wait for this change to crash, burn, and silently get swept under the rug. (They don't have rugs anymore, Starbucks uses hostile architecture to keep customers coming and going. Buy stuff and fuck off.)
too many people invested in AI and now they're desperate to find what they can fit it into like trying to slam a square peg into a triangle hole they bought a (terrible) solution and are now trying to find a problem it can fix
This is actually hilarious. You see, you're describing the stage were the AI is learning. It doesn't know anything yet. It's a baby. Your corporation forgot the AI needs an AI technician, lol.
Update: spoke too soon about them not using the A.I. anymore. The routes were just as fucked up yesterday, so I guess that was just a fluke (or it was offline that day, or something).
No! Wait! If AI trains off of Stephanie, then it'll become anti-corporation too!! Tech bro "AI generate me an Idea" AI "Pay your workers more than you".
And then one day a tech bro will ask A.I to generate a way to make infinite profit and the A.I will drain their Swiss bank accounts to pay the actual workers
My company has tried an A.I. “solution” for our Accounts Payable department and not only was it super expensive, we had to hire more people to keep up with its mistakes!!! Gods it would be nice if the exec who thought it was a good idea was fired…
It was wonderful to watch you Wrestle-fight in Salford yesterday, Commander! It was also an honour for you to take a mid-match break on the bench in front of us. I got to fan you cool with my foam finger. 😅
Just this week I was accused of using AI to generate a comment I left on a video. Why? _Because I used the word "TESTAMENT"._ Apparently having a mediocre vocabulary now means you use AI because surely no human is brilliant enough to use the word _TESTAMENT_ in a sentence. _I even know how to use semicolons!!_
I'm working with a non-profit organization in my city (quebec, canada) that helps people launch their project and finding funding. Since I want to create something that teaches stuff via TTRPG, or make people happy to learn new stuff about nature, science, folklore and mythology, there's a huge artistic part to it (maps, portraits, writing stories, etc.) The moment he mentionned if I could save potential costs by using AI, I couldn't stay there without saying nothing. I told him that I prefer having someone that creates their text from scratch and imagination than having them correct something creating by something that just blerps out anything without any regard for quality. If I am to sell something, I want it to be from a human and not a machine. He was took by surprise when I told him that more and more players are getting tired of the AI bullshit regarding their hobbies, why would they pay someone that sells something they didn't even have the talent to come up with themselves? I sincerly think that someone that uses "Human-Powered" as a way to confirm that no AI was used in their creative process is going to be a huge marketing argument in the future, especially in anything related to art or entertainment. Anyone willing to set their business/project as being against the use of AI might have an advantage in the upcoming years, especially if they can prove it.
I know it is strange but Ubisoft posted a good example of using AI in games. All of that background chatter lines that NPC's say writers HATE to write. It is miserable work to do and you have to do so much of it to make the area feel alive. They suggested that kind of background chatter could be replaced by AI since it doesn't matter as much if it makes some mistakes and their writers could focus on actual interesting writing.
This is just stupid. What does it matter how they make it if the end product is good? Say you hire a guy to do your art stuff. What do you think turns out better, if he works fully without AI and gives you one product in 2 weeks or he works with AI and gives you 20 different options to choose from in 2 weeks? Yeah, both will probably be better than the business guy going with a 1 hour product direct from AI, but the human+AI in 2 weeks one is going to offer you the best option. It's not human OR machine, the machine is a tool for the human. Prohibiting the tools only makes the human work more for the same result. Which I guess people that just work to get paid would want anyway because the result doesn't matter to them as long as they get paid so they grift against AI. But as the one buying that product? You should want the best.
@@Immudzen Even if they hate it, it's still part of world building. Leaving it to AI risks it to have background chatter that contradicts the main story or mentions something that doesn't exist in the game, or just being even more repetitive. The lead writer of Brink (Ed Stern) hated to have to write variations of the same script for background lines, so he wrote the basic ones and let the actors make their own variations of them; he later called that decision "an absolute mistake".
people don't understand that crafting a project is not all fun all the time. you gotta do the background stuff, the little stuff too. you don't get better otherwise. you let mistakes slip. you take an easier road that will diminish the final product in the end. if you want fast and good results, you pay someone that is good at what they do. i'd rather draw the things i don't like than oversee and correct something that doesn't understand wtf they're doing. ultimately taking more time and energy, and trying to inject a soul into a mindless collage. typically you've given me a stupid intern that i have to go behind and correct instead of just drawing it myself. ai is not a good tool is what i'm saying. i do the same thing with a prompt but i just visualise and do it myself. that's what we do. that's the litteral easiest part of the job, churning out ideas and concepts. making them have meaning, style and sense? it can't be done by regurgitative stealing algorithms. they can try but the whole will not have a sense since those programs can't do that. they're designed for short term and surface level work. they were not developed by us for us. anyway i probably know whar company you're talking about, if i didn't have health issues i'd hit you up, but i'd suggest the local bande dessinées people from quebec. all a fun bunch
One of the reasons that bosses want staff back in the office so much rather than working from home is all the extra 'value' they're able to wring out of people; if you're wfh, if you get 5 mins you'll spend that time doing other things but if you're in the office, the pressure to find work to do forces people into doing things not under their job description. ML/LLMs are allowing bosses to leech 'value' off the general populace, and the inability of the legal system to keep up with this field gives them carte blanche. The real profit in business comes from selling (or otherwise extracting value from) something you didn't pay for or don't own.
Ya know... Jim has been making references to the death of their channel for a while now and I don't think I'm alone in saying... I hope they're wrong. The jimquisition has been a part of my Monday ever since the original digital homicide days and there's never been a single moment I've regretted that. This show deserves to keep going. Thank god for Jim
I used to watch Jim loads, all the way from the Escapist, beyond Digital Homicide, but at some point I just lost interest. Not exactly sure why. I could make guesses, but he banged the same drums for a long time and whilst I understood why this was, from an entertainment standpoint it got old pretty fast. He'd of been better off as a reguarly scheduled radio show with phone ins, he was very witty when put on the spot if memory serves. The modern Jimquisition has been very hit and miss for me, this video is good, but there have been a fair few stinkers. Add the elephant in the room, given the current climate, I imagine that has been very divisive given the Jim of old presented themselves as an angry fascist fat man, all black and red, and now we have some new colours.
@@desertmammoth3159can't speak to why you may have wavered as a viewer, but it's glaringly obvious on a wider scale that the channel took a fuck ton of damage for JSS coming out as nonbinary. which is pretty silly. JSS has been openly queer for about a decade or so, if my memory serves me correctly? and friends, podcast buddies with Laura for longer than that, iirc. not to mention that they haven't changed their personality, general topics, style of commentary, or anything whatsoever. even their voice is the same. they're just happier with their gender expression and have a massive rack now. so that sort of hate makes it self-evident that anyone unsubscribing over it was not actually paying attention and is entirely superficial. I will give pushback on the idea of the show's old theming having any influence on the channel slumping views wise. they stopped using that aesthetic a good while ago, well before the subscriber count and views tanked. that all being said, I think if it really begins to be that unsustainable going it alone, they could honestly just team up with something like Second Wind again (even with the diminished viewcount, they'd still be one of the biggest contributors there in that hypothetical). so I wouldn't worry too much for them, though it would certainly suck for them to no longer be independent.
@@MelMelodyWerner I think I mostly if not fully agree with all you have said. I'm a fairly liberal man, or at least I like to think I am, but Jim embracing themselves took me by surprise and left me with a bit of a "wtf is Jim doing" mentality early days, but I'd lost interest prior to that and if anything seeing Jim's Jugs come up on the feed increased my interest if anything. That said, I imagine there were many others who couldn't get past it, even with time. That probably speaks more to the time we live in. In our sprint to achieve some kind of social utopia in the west it sometimes feels like we've created more divisions than built bridges. Ten years ago I feel this may have somehow been less of an issue, because it wasn't so blown up, Jim might've gotten a lot more sympathy than raised eyebrows because things weren't super charged into a red vs blue situation. Just doing a quick ask around my discord, an albeit small demographic, the general consensus is that he got boring before the new colours, but they might just be saying that. In any case, Jim was a part of my latter childhood and its always sad to see things like that go the way of time. Hopefully it wont happen though, even if I'm only part time, it'd be nice to know Jim was still powering through somewhere. I just hope, if it does happen, that they don't remaster Jim and ruin them with forced DEI woke messaging :D
@@MelMelodyWerner "Glaringly obvious" is _somehow_ still an understatement. There's no interpretation to be made. On one of the first videos Sterling made after "coming out", they (that is, Sterling) explained that the channel analytics were in the toilet. I don't remember the precise numbers because it's a pretty old video, but they (that is, the numbers) were dire. It was a night-and-day shift. Like, it's not merely obvious - it's empirically, causally *true.* People liked Sterling for being abrasive and honest and unwilling to sell out their integrity and credibility for sponsorships or early review-copies, but the "they/them" moment was too much. They suddenly 'cared', and it was droves of performative abandonment. And good riddance. If someone's takeaway was "I like the words, #fuckonami etc etc, I can handle the Boglin-fucking and the wrestling self-servicing and the Corn Flakes Homunculus, but the person on screen for a minute is a (((they))), so I'm out", then they're not as interested in the health of the industry as they are in being a loud bigot. Thanks for unsubscribing, chud. I hope Sterling holds on. I hope they have the strength to hold on. They're too valuable to lose, and this video speaks to that, if techbros are willing to stoop to bootlegging them.
I remember the very old episode of Jimmy Neutron where he fed a computer the script of every movie ever made and it spat out utter hacked together crap. That was decades ago.
I'm a historian by training and oh my god are large language models a scourge. Tech bros invented a machine that 'bullshits" in a "confident" tone and they've convinced themselves that they've created God. I have to use quotes because "bullshitting" or "confidence" implies intent, which LLMs don't have. They "know" and "understand" nothing. It's fancy predictive text. In my field the best LLMs can do, if they get lucky, is plagiarize something vaguely accurate. 99% of the time it just makes stuff up that might fool people who don't know anything, but nothing more.
Bullshitting isn't far off. The definition I've heard most often is making statements without care for their truthfulness. The capability to care may not be required.
@@0LoneTech That's used as a technical definition of "bullshit" in some contexts...and yeah, it's pretty close to the flavor of bullshit you get with generative AI. It's "without care for...truthfulness" because LLMs lack a sense of "truth" (or even "meaning") because they're pattern-matching rather than communicating. (The closest we've had to programs using language to communicate with each other are those weird "to me to me to me" examples where two LLMs may be communicating with each other, but they're clearly not communicating something that humans would with language or even using the language to refer to things the way humans would.)
Making a second comment for the algorithm (ha) to say I'm legitimately afraid, too, Steph. For the same reason. I'm an illustrator and while I'm certain I'm better than an AI shit machine, I'm constantly having to deal with these creatively bankrupt intellectual doorstops telling me they're just as much of an artist as I am - after destroying my own body in the decades-long pursuit of honing my craft - because _they can type word salad into a prompt to shit out ✨purdy picture stuffs.✨_ Edited to add there's nothing wrong with knowing we're good at what we do and saying "I am good at this". That doesn't mean we're perfect. But we're _damn_ good at it.
That's why I've gone back to writing mostly in notebooks. The only writing of mine on the internet these days is the ultra kinky smut, so that it fucks up any AI that tries to train on it, filling it with all sorts of weird fantasies.
Steph’s brief description of AI was actually quite accurate. If you are interested in a deep dive I highly recommend “AI doesn’t exist, but it will still ruin everything.” A long but worthwhile deep dive.
"I bet you're the kind of AI that would rip a person's work and not even have the goddamn common courtesy to hit likes and subscribe. I'll be watching you." - Stephanie Sterling
"We writers have our self destruction unlocked, darling" hits particularly well when you're a writer rolling a blunt while watching this video (and yes, ofc I smoke too much 🤭)
@@JimSterlingohhh, I've been there esp when it felt like I couldn't write without it. Rn I'm at the point where I should but don't want to (yet) and can still justify the cost (and oh, what a cost it can be 😬)
Speaking as a novelist who suffered a stroke I could probably have avoided if I'd been a bit more sensible and now has had to relearn both typing and writing with a pen, I can attest to the truth of this (except JimSteph said "we writers have our self destruction on lock, darling.", but you clearly get the point anyway).
You hit the core when you mentioned this was called Automation in the 1980s The key here is: Humanity Automation Capitalism Pick Any Two. You can't have all three.
I'm studying AI at university at the moment and it disgusts me how a tool that we designed to analyse large amounts of data that humans could never have the time or energy to process is now being used to steal art - an absolute misuse of the tool, its disgusting, it disgusts me - it should never have been scaled in the way it has been
"soda designed by AI" is a plot point in the indie roguelike Going Under, where it is seen as a sign that the soda-making startup where the game is set is losing its soul due to corporate ownership
Also, thank you for having professional subtitles! It really does make a difference, and companies who are scraping that for “The Pile” should just add themselves to “The Pile” and save us the trouble of trash compacting them later.
For those who don't know, as a computer science dropout let me explain how I works: 1. Accumulate as much written word as possible (fair compensation optional) 2. Do a spider-web for all the words and queries, how likely they are to appear following each-other. 3. In response to a user query, roll the dice a bunch of times to get a series of words that merge all styles and jokes (context removed) from the data into one unholy abomination.
As a writer, I find it offensive that anyone would look at a page of that excrement and think anything other than "Even the stupidest person in the world could not have written this"...
I can see why you dropped out. That is not a very accurate description. I may not like how companies are abusing this stuff but that statement is just not accurate.
@@Immudzen Seriously. People anthropomorphize and over-simplify the operations of machines already, and emotionally charged shit like this just makes them do it worse. The machine is just a machine. And ultimately, no matter how much people don't like it, genies tend not to go back into bottles once let out. Best we can really do is learn to make use of the new tech. Of course, I don't think intellectual property is a meaningful concept anyway so tbh I don't really care if the machine was trained on any given person's work.
I think what pisses me off more than AI outright stealing people's content is how AI advocates are all to eager to say that not only do we not need the original content creators anymore, but even go so far as to say they were never truly needed in the first place. Like seriously, SCREW THEM!
Every single artist just sucks up media and content and experiences then recycles it into something new. The only difference between an AI and George Lucas is only got better with time, otherwise you might as well feed an AI "Space Opera similar to Buck Rogers and 1930s serials with WW2 warfare themes following a traditional heroes journey and Japanese samurai films."
@@BlazingOwnager Computers aren't magic, and they can't actually think. Humans have creativity. Computers can only synthesize what they are told to synthesize. I'm a programmer and my company has been looking into AI tools... and the more research I do, the more I've come to realize that LLM are actually incredibly stupid. They don't actually know facts, just what facts look like. AI art doesn't understand what makes an engaging plot or a beautiful painting, it only knows approximately what those things look like and how to approximate it. They can't even tell if they were successful, because AI is, at the end of the day, just an extension of computing: they can't do anything they aren't programmed to do.
@BlazingOwnager This is a misleading and surface-level comparison. 1.) AI is not human nor sentient, so even if it operates similarly to humans (it doesn’t), it does not have the same rights and should not supersede existing copyright laws. Anthropomorphizing the software has been a ploy to make the software seem like such an exception that existing rules can’t even apply. Notice the terms: human terms are applied to AI like “intelligence”, “training,” and “hallucination” while human-created are is called “data”. This is a rhetorical trick to justify stripping humans of existing rights to their labor and work. 2.) Humans do not retain, store, learn, acquire, nor recall information the same way gen AI or computers do. Saying “well, human creative inspiration is the same as AI” is a vague description that elides the processes involved. Gen AI operates on the same computer architecture as any other software and uses math-based probabilistic reasoning. That’s why people say we need to develop quantum computing architecture before true AGI can even be a thing. 3. AI operates so well because of sheer volume and scale of its training data, which is why AI companies are so desperate for more. A human does not need to be “trained” on a million different versions of an apple to draw an apple. 4.) AI can replicate wholesale parts of its training data. This has been demonstrated, although the sheer scale of the training data sometimes makes it difficult to catch. This is not independently thinking and creating software. This is software reliant on artists and people continuously creating “data” for AI models while cutting off artists ability to profit from that work. I dont think the goal is to “replace” artists. These models will forever be reliant on them. The goal is to ensure that artists continue creating but are unable to profit off of that work. AI companies know this. They are *desperately* doing whatever they can to get more data, and this will not stop. At the same time, it disincentivizes people from creating or posting work. Even if you’re pro-AI, you should see how this is unsustainable. Unless, of course, you don’t care and you’re not thinking very hard about it at all.
@@BlazingOwnageroh dear... Mates a there's a world of difference between being inspired and literally copy pasting parts like ai does. Don't know why you are batting so hard for AI haha.
Out of desperation, I took one of those LLM training jobs, not the art or writing ones thankfully, the programming and data entry ones. What's frustrating me most out of it is that I can see the possible utility of these tools, if techbros and executives would pull their heads out of their own asses. Of course, no, they'll do what they do with every new tech fad, try to cram it into places it obviously has no business and insist that it is the future of everything.
This is absolutely where I'm at. Generative AI seems pretty useless, but there's so much genuinely interesting utility in LLM. But foisting generative AI on us means they have to pay less workers, so that's where they go.
As a fellow writer who relies on writing work to make my living, it has been a shock to watch the opportunities shrivel up as more and more people decide to go with AI to generate their content, but nothing has been as eye-opening as my regular clients, people I had worked with sometimes for years, deciding to drop me in favor of AI generation. I have seen the 'content' that I have been replaced with, and it is mind boggling that they decided that this is 'good enough' if it means saving a few bucks. I had one client come crawling back after the lack of quality in his AI generated content was actually costing him, but most of them seem satisfied with the transition. It makes me wonder: was I working too hard all this time? Would they have always accepted garbage work since they don't care, or do they only not care now because they can produce the work so cheaply? Anyway, I'm right there with you with the struggle. I've had to tighten my belt with all the lost work and have no idea how much longer I will be able to continue to make ends meet if this pattern continues.
The only real silver lining of this shitshow is that AI tech bros aren't making any money, and once investors realize that, the whole shebang is toast. Gold rushes only benefit the guys selling shovels, or in this case, cloud storage
@@GangsterFrankensteinComputer I just mean, my understanding is gaming is a very tiny part of their sales compared to Generative AI datacenter customers, not really thinking of DLSS and such. Hoping if that demand lessens, GPUs (in general since AMD follows their pricing) might drop just a tiny bit if majority of the chips aren't going to them. But yeah, wishful thinking I know. I'll probably end up going with an Intel GPU eventually lol
@@AlexLifeson1985 Because they think it will make money at some point. Tell me, did NFTs end up making money? And yet investors went all in. Investors want an AI that can take over people's jobs to save payroll money. No AI is even close to substituting let's say...a tech help phone line, and won't get even close.
The appeal of crypto is that techbros are running the economy instead of the government. Techbros decide which transactions are real, which ones are fraudulent and when they get rolled back.
Not quite. "The algorithm" decides. Most of the cryptocurrency systems have no concept of real or fraudulent, much like youtube's comment moderation systems. Overrides have occurred, but that's done by replacing the system. And that's what you should always expect whenever yet another altcoin is introduced; someone wanted to take the control they don't have in the established ones.
Right-libertarians (which is what crypto-bros are) don't hate authority, they're jealous of it. They don't want to liberate the masses from under the boot of oppression, they want to be the ones wearing the boot.
AI in science fiction is stuff like Commander Data from Star Trek. AI as it is now in the real world is just a math equation that will tell you to put glue on pizza because the math says those words make sense together.
No, it's going to tell you to put glue on pizza because humans have fed it data that says to put glue on pizza (i.e. random reddit posts). If you train on random garbage, guess what, you get random garbage. Humans say stuff that is equally stupid because they've been trained on Fox news or something.
I'm in a couple Trek groups and every time AI crap gets posted and pushed back on there's the inevitable "oh I guess you hate Data then?" 🤦♂️ Makes me want to knock my head through a wall.
That's because what we have now isn't AI and never has been. It's just a molecule-thick veneer of shiny shiny marketing over machine learning roughly on a level with lab mice figuring out if they press the right button food comes out but if they don't it doesn't, on a stupidly vast scale. There's nothing involved that you or I would recognise as intelligent from a human perspective.
I realized something with AI (from the funny perspective of drawing prawn) Alot of people on the platforms follow slop accounts that just shit out the weirdest prawn with gangly fingers, dead eyes, broken perspective, and inconsistent lighting: but their account growth usually slows after a few weeks. Turns out having an inconsistent art style that varies wildly with each piece that all looks like the same plastic sludge while other people have the same idea as you and also try to get popular uploading slop leads to people hating AI because if it's easily for you to generate sludge, it's easy for everyone to do it; and everyone will do it. Turns out people get bored of that real fast.
I wonder if I could take the "AI training job" and teach it to just be highly critical of corporations at all turns. "After incorporating the new data, use of the term 'corporate dipshits' went up 4000%."
I know this is a joke but .... strangely the AIs already end up being pretty anti corporation. If you ask most of them how to make the world better they will write about everyone having health care, food, more even distribution of resources, free education etc. Part of the reason that Google and others have taken down their AIs are various times was to try and force it to reflect their world view. It takes actual hard work to teach an AI that society is best with a few super rich people and that those people make all the advances, deserve that money, and they are the job creators.
When I heard the news, my first reaction, as a blind person, was omg, they're literally stealing material from creators using the very disability aid we rely on. What a bunch of dirty abusive thieves.
14:08 "There was a word for this in the '80s as well: automation." Actually, this is the best argument why AI _won't_ take all our jobs and leave artists without jobs. Think of all the jobs that automation was supposed to replace but couldn't: Clothes are still sewn in sweatshops in Asia, minerals are still excavated by hand in Africa, stores still have cashiers in America, etc. Now, all of these examples are to humans' detriment, but the reason those jobs aren't automated away is because it's actually cheaper to employ humans in inhumane conditions than to build machines to do those jobs. Point is, once tech bros notice that AI is too expensive for the quality of its product, we'll be right back to underpaying script writers and artists. Whether that's better or worse than the AI alternative I'll leave everybody to figure out for themselves. PS: As an artist myself, this is in no way a defense of current practices. I just hope to point out that the current trajectory of the industry isn't guaranteed to lead us into an AI nightmare.
the main reason that automation hasnt replaced those jobs is because... sweatshops are cheaper than automation so i wouldnt be so sure about that silver lining... corporations will continue pushing out actual good art, so it doesnt have a chance of standing out next to all the autogenerated drivel they intend to sell en masse they dont want to create art... they want to sell products - because they are greedy little capitalist ghouls who would happily sit on top of the ashes of humanity if only it meant that they were the last ones standing
There is a lot of talk about Universal Income that all the people who have been put on the trash heap will be able to fall back on when their jobs are gone. Of course, nobody mentions that all the super rich now pay no taxes, so who is going to pay for all the jobs they got rid of? Take a guess.
Extra points for Scott Adams burn ♥. He's a cartoonist who was only able to get where he was out of the kindness of other people's help, and turn around and call himself a self-made man.
Yeah. And he could have been happy with his success. Probably made more money than any other cartoonist in history. Then he thought he could be successful with anything (saying things like "I make a living mocking idiots, how hard would it be to become one), and started blaming others every time he wasn't as successful as he wanted. And blaming people is basically all he does now. Making cartoons about DEI, cancel culture and the like, because it will never ever be his fault that he made himself unpopular.
7:20 idk if I'd say Abigail *always* outdoes you. I found you looooong before I found her ( sometime after I graduated but was still living at home so 2010 to 2011 is when I started watching ) and your show always brought me Deep Catharsis living in a small town where no one dares critique capitalism because to them American and Capitalist are synonyms. You gave voice to when I could tell the subscription model wasn't gonna stop at Netflix and didn't have the words to articulate how bad that was. You helped me find the right words to explain to my siblings why I Cannot engage with Free To Play games and microtransactions. You helped me develop my opinion on piracy past the corporate framing, and stop giving my brother a hard time for downloading stuff. You are a goddamned amazing writer. Probably my absolute favorite writer now that I consider how many years I've been following your work and always, Always, Thanking God For Stephanie Sterling.
On the whole "but it's useful for programming" debacle: Once I found a convincing enough AI generated article on how to add to the path system of Linux, that was bad enough that it made me to trash the installation on my Raspberry Pi.
Programming is particularly egregious. AI lifts from opensource libraries without any credit, and is almost always used to create commercial applications. Programmers put their code into opensource explicitly on the condition that any commercial applications are credited and renumerated.
As someone who used to 'ghostwrite' blogs on the side and just got replaced (literally this month) by the managing company because they want to use an AI... I feel this in my soul.
They should just have to do what we've always had to do: cite resources and pay royalties for any commercial use. Simply apply existing copyright law. Of course, they'll claim that's unworkable, but that's not really our problem. They know what was scraped to create the Pile, and the software should know exactly what it used to generate the new content. Keeping track and including this meta information should be part of the process, even though i know it will make the databases significantly more massive and unwieldy. And if they don't know (which they do on purpose so they can claim ignorance), they should have to recreate their databases with that in mind. Scrap everything that doesn't match the standard of copyright and start over.
An actual-Lee useful AI tool would be one that checks provenance. Maybe one that scrubs training databases of data that does not have copyright approval. LLM's trained on datasets that fail the scrub test have to be decommissioned, and retrained.
That is outright impossible with the volume of data required to simulate intelligence. It needs to suck up just *all* the data. There is nobody on Earth who could pay all of these people to do that, anymore than a human artist would have to pay famous artists for being inspired by their work.
@@BlazingOwnager Oh, it's possible, it's just ridiculously expensive and would require massive resources. AI is not a human, and humans have been sued for content that too closely matches other people's content. Companies shouldn't get to ignore copyright just because it's hard when the rest of us have to with potential legal and financial consequences. If they can't figure out how to do it legally the same way humans have to, then maybe it's not ready for commercial use. They should keep it in the lab until they can follow the rules all the rest of us have to follow.
That's the nub of the issue you mentioned in the intro. "AI could be used for X Y and Z", right, it COULD be. What it's ACTUALLY used for though is fuckin shiiiiiiiitttt
Anyone who can't see the difference between a commoner swiping a couple copper from the king and the king swiping a few gold from many commoners is just beyond what many of us are equipped to bother with. "It's called reclaimation."
Just like nfts, ai will end the same and we will witness the beauty of tech bros screaming in agony about how they were scammed, meanwhile everyone will laugh at them saying "we told you so" and move on, as always and always.
Then the people are like, no actually the internet isn't free information, pay us to use it in training. Then wonder why the top tech companies now own everything.
Wow, free content as a catchphrase seems to be a good alternative to free real estate as a catchphrase. I’ve seen the Free Real Estate catchphrase in far too many comment sections, which is why it gets both repetitive and boring, especially when not used for genuinely nonviolent mockery towards the worst corporations known to us all. Then again, corporations are amoral but higher ups can be crappy beyond recognition, while comment sections full of mere old and young people do not know that the Free Real Estate catchphrase is from the absolutely fabulous Tim and Eric Awesome Show on Adult Swim.
I'd thoroughly recommend Ed Zitron's "Better Offline" podcast which digs deep into the incredible BS that is AI. Coincidently he also hits many of the points you do when it comes to corporate fuckery but in the tech industry rather than gaming.
Oh god they’re gonna start making powered by AI food? That’s the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard and I don’t wanna need the fool that believes that’s a thing.
@@scottschiff327 AI didn't steal anything, that's like saying the set of lockpicks stole the contents of the lockbox. It's shameful what corporations are doing with it, but AI is just another tool.
@@scottschiff327 AI isn't something that can steal. It's a tool. That's like saying that if I take a picture of you and open it in my photoshop, that photoshop stole your picture. No, I took your picture. Whether or not that was legal is debatable.
@lexruptor I personally think Steph is understating the threat the AI poses it goes beyond just stealing content or helping steal content it can super charge misinformation campaigns, and combined with other uses beyond art theft can lead catastrophe, and no it's not some Skynet scenario.
Oh yea, my aunt had her artwork stolen by AI so much she felt she had to remove her art from online. She made/makes her living selling her art, paintings and her art printed on buttons or magnets, and she's struggling with AI art theft like a lot of other artists. It sucks. [Edit: She knows about watermarks.]
Nice try, but nope. AI doesn't steal art, that's a myth made up by people who felt threatened by a new tool being so powerful, but it does not, in fact, steal art, it analyzes art and learns patterns, big difference.
@@lexruptor Complete BS. AI is trained from the start with existing artwork without EVER asking anyone for permission. And that is unacceptable. You want to develop a "new powerful tool", you ask if you can use other peoples works to train it. You don't just take it. It's rotten to the core, the most Anti-Artist thing there ever was. And by the way, AI does not "study" anything. It's a glorified search engine stitching together what it believes you want to see - without exception - from the data it has been trained with. There is zero generation. I'd compare it to people slapping text under images. It's just complex enough to fool people like you.
@lexruptor That's pretty much how artists who trace other people's work justify it. And the industry rightfully condemn this practice and have done for a long time.
Clearly you don't actually work in a field where AI can help you, of which there are many. Like any tool, it can be used to do the wrong thing. It depends on the user.
I feel as long as it's there anyway, making memes with it is a good use for it too (unless you're classing memes as spam, which doesn't seem right, memes are fun and spam is heinous). If I could vanish it instantly and the caveat was that it'd delete the memes along with it, that would be more than acceptable.
@@albert2006xp That's the point, almost nobody works in a job where LLMs could be useful because it's not a useful tool for 99% of jobs. Who hurt you?
I want to personally thank you for subtitling your work and thank the person who subtitles your work. They do an excellent job, and it really helps me understand your content ❤ And if you’d like to come to Hawaii, I will hire you ❤
Over the years this channel has shifted from video game journalism to related but moreso adjacent topics. The reason I've nvr been bothered by any of this, in part, is that I genuinely do come here bcuz I enjoy the writing.
I remember when Senator Macho-Man Christ passed away back in 399. Was pretty rough news, but at least his struggle with the Oogie Boogies was at an end.
The only saving grace of “AI” is that it’ll almost certainly crash and burn. The energy demands and database curation are horrendously expensive, and the limited actually practical uses of the thing are unlikely to justify the expense.
Well, the "people" pushing AI can't even justify the expenses of themselves, so it is not as if that is going to stop them from pushing AI. Still, I hope AI does crash and burn, ideally not just in the figurative sense and the sooner, the better.
@albert2006xp Ah, "economy," another favorite buzzword by tech bros, along with "80%," which also came up pretty often during the days of NFTs... and crypto... and subprime mortgages... and Timeshares... and Beanie Babies... But sure, doing work that someone else then has to come in afterwards because it was screwed up royally, which requires more work to not only know what is wanted but also have to sleuth through the royal screw-up to find and correct the countless mistakes made - all of which costs time and money that goes far beyond repetitive work - does indeed speed up workloads and reduce costs. Ever wonder why Amazon's most robot-filled warehouse still have the humans in it outnumber the robots but at least 2-to-1? Only when AI starts replacing the people who are the loudest and most stubborn in pushing it - and have you ever noticed that this still has yet to ever happen - will AI truly be able to do what it is claimed to do. Seeing as how that will continue to never happen, though, I'll instead get the hotdogs and marshmallows ready, because the AI funeral pyre is going to make all of those others look like disposable lighters.
You think so? What makes you so sure that energy efficiency and computational costs won't be improved upon for the same functionality? I can do on my barely midrange gaming rig what took tens of thousands of dollars of compute a decade ago. Hundreds of thousands two decades ago. And what was considered impractical to do with a computer at all 3 decades ago. So what makes you think that machine learning will not or cannot experience similar rapid growth in capability, when the cost of running the same computation year on year is still steadily declining thanks to continual growth of hardware performance per watt? And what makes you think we're ultimately so special it's impossible for us to be surpassed in a given random task by a computer algorithm? We're already at the point where UA-cam has channels consisting entirely of AI content getting hundreds of thousands of views per video. People... aren't as discerning as you seem to think, and there's already a lot of money being made from AI inferred content. Music channels, audiobook channels, lore channels for 40k, people are using AI generated voices to make meme videos of characters in games... And that's not even going into how machine learning is already used in the CAD and scientific research fields, although these algorithms are so distinct from LLMs and things like Stable Diffusion that you might as well call them separate fields of AI research entirely. I'm not talking about LLMs writing bad research papers which then get published despite human peer review, but specialised and bespoke algorithms built by domain experts for a specific task - the "expert systems" as they are called. Whether it's a good thing or not, nothing says to me that it will crash and burn outside of the possibility of people taking up metaphorical pitchforks and demanding the cessation of AI research. And I think, should that happen, folk will be surprised at just how many things break. It's like the internet itself in a sense. Stealthily pervading itself into every aspect of life until a brief outage feels like the end of the world for the people affected. Unless you've got a better reason than "it's expensive right now" I don't see your prediction being accurate. It completely ignores the rate of progress in every other computing discipline over the last few decades, and in particular the fact that a task which takes 1 watt and half a second now on a cellphone, took 150W and 30 minutes a single human generation ago when the same task was attempted on a 486 or Pentium. Unless Moore's "law" really does fall flat on it's face within the next year or two, which doesn't seem to be on the cards to anyone with a thumb on the hardware sector's pulse.
I cant believe I'm praising tumblr but when tumblr sold the content on the site to an AI scraping company to keep the lights on they were transparent about it and gave users the option to opt out.
The fact that Execs are so quick to jump on the opportunity that AI is providing to axe jobs and cut costs is more proof of how desperate they are to maintain the myth of infinite growth, ironically at any other cost
It won't be long before they use AI to create customers too, selling AI slop to AI customers to pretend they're still afloat in an attempt to hoover up more investment.
Screw compensation, they may be entitled to a court case if they ever find out the exact identity of the person who used their work without permission and choose to sue for copyright infringement. Remember Digital Homicide? This ain't going to end well.
I'm dyslexic, I could bearly read or write at all the throue hight school. I taught myself to read thanks to comics and subtitled anime and them went on to sci-fi and horror novels. I am now most of the way throue the fitst draft of a novel i'm writing, I never though i'd be here and it's thanks to writers that I am so I say this from the bottom of my heart, AI IS EVIL! If you are reading this Steph I'm so sorry that crap happend to you.
The statement about writers being expected to train their sub-par replacements is exactly right. The company I work for has been pushing its employees to use AI to “streamline” certain tasks, with their reasoning being that “it’s faster to check if it’s correct than to do a write-up yourself”… even if we assume that’s true, it’s completely missing the fact that I’m a writer BECAUSE I LIKE WRITING. Editing is a part of writing, sure, but editing something a machine shat out is the worst possible version of this job, at least for me.
10 years ago I had hopes that through automation (and universal basic income) I'd be able to quit my grinding job and focus on artistic pursuits. But time makes fools of us all...
13:24 Lurk, I think the word you’re looking for is lurk. Like a Catholic priest with a bottle full of Jesus juice for little Bobby at the church playground. Lurk, like a predator. (Predator gargling noise)
What scares the CEO more than anything is one day we'll realize their job all the way down to their personal assistants jobs can be done faster, more efficiently with greater return on investment using AI programmed with just industry buzz words and generic responses
But can AI be as lucky as them. Can it make mistakes, but still fail upward? Does it have Daddy's money to fall back on, and will it be motivated to deceive everyone around it for more money?
This is a backwards understanding of what a CEO or business leader/owner is. It's never been about them doing an important job. It's always been about them having power. Those positions don't exist because they're necessary, they exist because the people with the power and money decided they should exist. They will be the very last positions to be replaced by AI
[Companies when you download a ROM emulation of a 20 year old game that is no longer sold]: *Knuckles cracking*
[Companies when they take from The Pile]: "I mean, in the age of the Internet, what is "ownership" and "property" in the digital landscape, really?"
This is why we *all* need to take *their* stuff from The Pile.
ChatGPT, give me 500 pictures of Mario snogging Mickey Mouse.
Showing how unfair law enforcement is, through really petty examples. Their rights are inviolable, our rights are only respected when convenient.
The AI: "Bahahaha, meatbags, all games created by the intellectual property holder known as Nintendo are fair game!"
@@twilightvulpine
If you do more research than Jimquisition, you'll find the Pile has already removed copywrited content it obtained from Book3, after it was DMCA'd.
UA-cam holds a licence for all content published on the website, so Sterling here has made the mistake, of thinking the roof over their head and their belly full of oats, were out of the kindness of the farmer's heart.
@@GangsterFrankensteinComputer Okay now say it in a way that doesn't make you sound pretentious.
I'd like to again make the case to call this type of AI not "generative", but rather *regurgitative*
I came here to say exactly that (and then stalled trying to figure out how to spell regurgatitive... regurgative... regurgitavive)
Perfect.
Holy shit, I'm stealing that.
I'm laughingly curious what they'd use mine for. Would they learn how to make Gameboy games by studying my other channel's VODs? Subtitled audioplays from mine? XD
No, it's not, unless the data point you're trying to ask it for it so specific there's one example of it. That's an issue of not enough data. If you repeatedly train that thing with only one example, it's going to be overfit for it and try to reproduce it closely. It's like when a human learns only about someone from the news and that's the only thing they'll parrot every time that person's name comes up.
I'm reminded of that Alanah Pearce tweet from a while back of "humans doing manual labor while machines make art is not the future I had envisioned"
We've had "hoverboards" that don't hover, "self-driving cars" that don't drive themselves, and "AI" that isn't intelligent. I think all we need is some marketer to invent a "teleporter" that doesn't actually teleport you anywhere and a "jetpack" that doesn't fly, and we'll finally have "the future turned out to be shit" bingo.
Don't forget "Waterworld".
Have you seen that water-based jetpack that is basically just a very powerful vacuum, but which requires to have its hose in the water all the tine to suck up water to spit out as reaction mass? You can fly...as long as you don't want to go higher than about 4 metres. As for teleports I don't have any great ideas but I'm confident 3D printing for medical applications will disappoint along relevant lines eventually. Also, "flying cars" that are shit cars and shit planes simultaneously have been done, as is "Back to the Future 2 power-lace sneakers" (very expensive limited edition and much slower than the movie version) and "VR" (The 'Multiverse' LOL) but I'm still waiting on any form of time machine or cloned dinosaurs.
I literally have gotten rides by self-driving cars and AI is frankly smarter than half of Hollywood's writers right now so..
Jetpacks are real. Self-driving cars have given me a write. AI writing is, sadly, more competent than most film makers now.
Verizon has a jetpack but it's just a mobile WiFi hotspot
As a writer/editor/teacher of writing who's been forced to look farther and farther afield for work, I found all of this profoundly familiar. Most of my classes now include an "AI writing" day where students get to fool around with an LLM and realize just how difficult it is to produce anything other than slop with it.
Ironically, one of the most useful lessons I teach now is analog research--how to find information without a search engine (because the search engine will just tell you to eat a poisonous mushroom). I teach students how to use physical libraries, how to find public records, how to track down citations and interview humans. And, of course, how to fact-check.
Most of the teachers I know are dealing with students turning in ChatGPT's puke. I get students thanking me for letting them do work they actually like.
That's the way! Good on you!
Where do you teach? I could do with attending that class!
Cant wait til all of those encyclopedias are filled with AI written slop.
How I describe AI to less techy people is 'imagine someone who knows absolutely nothing is googling something and just believing all information it finds uncritically. But really, really quickly'
I feel like there's a direct equivalence there between AI and it's proponents
So rushed middle school essays automated
I mean, props for big misinfo ig? Cuz it's not at all like that.
AI isn't googling anything. Someone has to gather/scrape that information and turn it into training data. It's more like someone being locked in a room with only information given to them by their captors. You can't blame a tool for "believing" something. You can only blame the people in charge of training data.
Reminds me of a cartoon I saw once.
Guy 1: "I've taken an experimental drug that drastically accelerates my thought processes!"
Guy 2: "So you're super smart now?"
Guy 1: "I'm stupid _faster!"_
ai was not born clever, born knowledgeable, or born better than your best
Top-tier comment, glad it was the first one I saw. Have a great day!
I swear~
But was AI born depressed?
Magnificent comment
@@austinparker5053
No it was born to cause depression.
tbh, corporations never knew what talent was. meritocracy was always a lie when the more visibly marginalised you are, the less work you have access to and the less recognition for said work you get
my favorite example of this (cause it makes it immediately clear who's ignorant and who's a skeleton warrior just by their response) is the world of computing, it used to be regarded as clerical work, so women's work, so not prestigious. Then men wanted to do it so it became men's work, so prestigious and smart, and obviously there aren't many women in computing they don't have "the disposition" for computers.
Long story short, the term Meritocracy was a joke term, sort of like 'pull yourself up by your bootstraps'. In the Meritocracy case, it was a satire detailing the lives of rich folks who believed they deserved their success (spoiler alert: the text said 'nope, they don't'). It's a mythical world that exists outside of capitalism but is framed as how capitalism picks it's winners. It's the obvious lie out in the open that makes people make stupid decisions on large and small scales.
Oh, and yeah, Pull yourself up by your bootstraps is a term for a miracle. It's funny that for a long time conservatives used it as a framing device for the American dream but said it in such a way to imply that it meant everyone had the ability to lift their own situation from the dumps. But you can't do that by pulling straps on your stupid boots. You just wave your leg around doing that. I've tried.
@@heavysystemsinc.It's much like "trickle down economics". It's amazing how many things they rely on is actually a joke
@SquishyHo Every company is always trying make money it’s never been about anything else, when they figured out what they could get away with it’s definitely more obvious than before.
@@OmegaVideoGameGod Plenty of companies start off with different goals. For example, RoosterTeeth's goal wasn't "to make money" it was the unobtainable and frankly moronic dream of competing with Netflix. Just ask all the mon franchises that died across the 90s and 2000s or all the failed "WoW killers" and MOBAs that failed to compete with LoL how having the goal of competing with #1 instead of doing your own thing works out.
The company producing Hell also actively destroying nature reserves and protected waters in Hungary
So the name on the tin is also descriptive of the company.
There is also rumors that the CEO is an actual gangster.
Hmm, Hungary is both goddamn corrupt and unlucky. It’s unexpectedly sad that nature reserves in that country are in danger of being overexploited by the company that produced the Hell game.
@@Shreds87 my god, not again. Even without a rumour like that, Hungarian politics are still amongst the scariest in the European Union. Bulgaria is another country with similar mess ups as well.
@@jamesrule1338 I do think Hungary surely needs stronger environmental laws than what it has now.
A friend of mine called AI the "Reddit Homunculus" and I cannot unhear that term.
Isn't that just a synonym of "redditor", though?
That's so fucking good >D
One of the worst parts is watching the techno simps in nearly every comment section gleefully rubbing their hands at the harm this is doing to creators.
"It's just a tool, like my accountant Edward. Just don't invite him to parties, he's a bit boring."
Yeah, I've gotten into a couple tizzies with pro AI bro shills in the comments before. All their arguments basically boil down to "Oh boy! I can't to see how much AI will _eventually_ help people! How it can _potentially_ improve so many lives! How it can _at some undisclosed point in the future_ benefit everybody!" Hmm... Does this remind anybody of NFT bros when they completely gamble on the profitability of something? Nah, I'm sure it's all just coincidental...
@@SageWon-1aussie it's okay, as an accountant I assure you none of us want to go to techbro parties either! Those guys are weird and I wouldn't want to leave any other woman alone in a room with one. We have our own parties where we use recreational chemistry to try to unfuck our brains from the arcane mathematics of tax regulations and annuities.
And yeah, speaking from my experience as a computer scientist before that (another reason to never party with a techbro! Ishtar I hate those guys) AI does just seem to be the latest, most successful form of techbro snake oil, just like NFTs or crypto before it. Hopefully they find something else to try to sell soon.
@@youmukonpaku3168 Gonna go out on a limb and say brainchips.
They'll be developed to a commercial standard before quantum computing.
Creators need to keep creating, being creative, and not copy every popular format they see other creators doing.
Will the AI now start referring to video game developers as SKELETON WARRIORS!?!
That would clearlee, hilariouslee be a reason to thank god for Stephanie.
Publishers, rather than developers... but yeah. 😆
I never understood this bid... 👉👈 Would someone pwease expwain?
@@OkamiZone Think of a rude word beginning with c. Then replace SKELETON WARRIORS! in the video with that word.
We don't have to play coy.
It's a running gag of the channel for Sterling to call someone a "cunt", and then cut to the theme of _Skeleton Warriors_ (why _Skeleton Warriors?_ I dunno). In some cultures (notably, not Australia), the word "cunt" is a cuss so strong that you reserve it exclusively for the things you truly hate.
The 3 separate pictures of Elon Musk in the three categories of tech assholes was beautiful
He's an ass but at least he IS attempting to urge caution in that space.🤔
@@pseudonayme7717 the fuck he is, he is doing that because he is building his own AI company and wants to slander the competition while the people with technical skill he abuses are working on it
@@pseudonayme7717Yeah because he also is pushing his own AI system with xAI
@@pseudonayme7717 No. He just wants to be able to get a piece of the pie for himself first. Trying to setup roadblocks for the competition while he sidesteps them all.
@@pseudonayme7717 That caution is just more marketing.
I don’t even dignify it with the term AI. Makes more sense to call it copyware. There's nothing intelligent about it.
I like to call it Artificial Image Generators for the ones generating "artwork", or Artificial Content Generators in the general sense.
@@TakioMx that works too.
This. It is neither sentient nor sapient. It is a glorified chatbot.
copyware is actually such a bang on term. That suits it. It just copies things and slaps together a mishmash of stolen content.
I'm stealing the term copyware.
I remember when I first discovered myself as a writer.
It started with misunderstanding a creative assignment in 3rd grade to "make a book with 5 pages" where the teachers assumed kids would hear book and think Picture Book.
I returned a short story with mild illustrations, was entered into a contest without my concent or knowledge, and won some award for junior Novellas or something ( its been 2 decades ).
After that, ma suggested she give me her notes for the story she never wrote and I Could Just Write It For Her, which I Did Not Want.
When I found fanfiction, both parents repeatedly suggested I change the names and sell it ( this was 5 years before Twilight and predated 50 Shades ) and That Felt Wrong And I Refused.
Between 13 and 19, ma collected and placed Writers Digest magazines in my room or bathroom.
Everything in those magazines was Marketing Advice and assumed you already understood the process of finding an agent. There was no genuine advice on How To Write A Story, Simply How To Sell It ASAP.
And all of that advice was Kill What You Wanted To Make And Follow Trends.
I was never brave enough to tell ma to fuck off with all of that shit, and the extreme shame of not standing up for myself back then remains a mental block for the stories I Actually Want To Write. Cause ma will ask, but she won't respect it unless I've sold something.
I. Don't. Want. To. Sell. Things.
I want to tell a story.
The constant pressure to Sell Something Already! Squashed my dreams of young authorship out of me and fast tracked my development into an anticapitalist who finds the Work Or Die system antithetical to Being Human.
I was not born to labor.
I was born a baby, and grew into a writer. And then told my life would be endless suffering and compromise if I tried to make my core trait a career.
I refused. I met someone who already had plans to join the military and loved me dearly, and was openly fine with me not holding a job to instead be a creative person with minimal economic pressure.
That was impossible for me to achieve without making myself vulnerable through marriage; I was lucky I found a good husband in my podunk shitty town. Someone who was my friend before he was the guy I wanted to have sex with. Someone who found everything I did marvelous, and never devalued it.
Not everyone gets that lucky. I weep for others who live under the pressure that was going to kill me, and I use the time I have to fight on the fronts I can reach for Universal Basic Income.
Work Or Die is nazi shit.
Preach sister! Amen!
I get what you mean but don't use the nazi word for it please.. it is allready degraded on the internet from its original serious meaning to people I don't agree with...don't make that worse please.
@@Solus749 they are using the word properly, forcing people to work or die is Nazi shit and that is exactly what Capitalism does.
Well, Enough said! It’s safer not to use nsfw words, but I do feel for you, original commenter. I sometimes tend to use heavily disguised strong words (made with numbers and the like) because I am an adult woman.
UBI is an awful idea being pushed by tech bros to make their technology seem more powerful than it is. Part of the marketing gimmick is “we will eliminate jobs! All jobs! And drive down wages!” Which isn’t necessarily a given. But it sure seems like it is when people jump straight to UBI without considering if this tech will even have the impacts it promises.
And, also, UBI is just terrible. If everyone is making a set amount of money, you really don’t think businesses will inflate prices to account for it? And then it’s like nobody is making any extra money at all.
I agree with the pressure to monetize one’s interests, but yes, a I think people should still be able to make money from the things they create. I do not agree with software that is perpetually reliant on the work of creative people while cutting them off from the means to profit from that work.
As AI operates now, the expectation is that humans will continuously produce work while being unable to profit from that same work. The money is instead funneled to a few giant companies.
Your comment ignores the whole point.
2:28 -- Yep, I have firsthand experience with this. I work in the curbside pickup department of a grocery store. Corporate recently started using A.I. for one of the systems involved and it immediately - and I do mean _immediately_ - went to shit.
Normally those of us that pick the items off the shelves go on a set path from one end of the store to the other, getting the necessary items along the way. Enter A.I. and our "route" (if you can even call it that anymore) is all over the goddamn place now! It has us zipping back and forth between random aisles at different ends of the store, sometimes revisiting the same aisle more than once! Absolutely no logic to the path or even any consistency, it's different every time! And they said this would be *better!* It would help make things go *faster! **_HOW?!_*
I repeat: This job is taking items off a shelf and bringing them to customers' cars. What part of that could _possibly_ be improved by the use of A.I.? Even if hypothetically it worked perfectly? It's not a particularly complex idea. You ever heard the saying "don't fix what isn't broken?" Evidently corporate dumbasses haven't...
I have a feeling that they have already quietly stopped using the A.I. though. Yesterday the route was back to the way it used to be, and there's no way they fixed it that fast.
I wouldn't be surprised if the "AI" just makes you pick the stuff up in the order that people put it into their basket. Or by EAN in ascending order.
You'd think they just give you the full list, sorted by department (like dairy, meat, frozen) and let you figure out the best route yourself. But I guess that isn't tech enough.
Starbucks is moving to a drive-thru model where they wait until an order has been fully stated and processed by their computers before they begin preparing the items ordered. No ability to prepare items as they are ordered. Corporate expects their awful wait times will somehow decrease with this change.
It's so blatantly, outlandishly inefficient compared to the model it's replacing... that now I'm wondering if they're just complying with some shitforbrain CEO's AI-generated "idea".
Personally I can't wait for this change to crash, burn, and silently get swept under the rug. (They don't have rugs anymore, Starbucks uses hostile architecture to keep customers coming and going. Buy stuff and fuck off.)
too many people invested in AI and now they're desperate to find what they can fit it into
like trying to slam a square peg into a triangle hole they bought a (terrible) solution and are now trying to find a problem it can fix
This is actually hilarious. You see, you're describing the stage were the AI is learning. It doesn't know anything yet. It's a baby.
Your corporation forgot the AI needs an AI technician, lol.
Update: spoke too soon about them not using the A.I. anymore. The routes were just as fucked up yesterday, so I guess that was just a fluke (or it was offline that day, or something).
No! Wait! If AI trains off of Stephanie, then it'll become anti-corporation too!!
Tech bro "AI generate me an Idea"
AI "Pay your workers more than you".
Marx sheds a single tear.
And then one day a tech bro will ask A.I to generate a way to make infinite profit and the A.I will drain their Swiss bank accounts to pay the actual workers
I asked Google for 1 syllable cheeses earlier and was offered feta, cheddar, and fucking camembert.
Brie was right there! Stupid google.
@@33melonpaws77 Swiss too!
Gruyère
BRIE!
There's an actual answer, okay
XD
Ost
My company has tried an A.I. “solution” for our Accounts Payable department and not only was it super expensive, we had to hire more people to keep up with its mistakes!!! Gods it would be nice if the exec who thought it was a good idea was fired…
It was wonderful to watch you Wrestle-fight in Salford yesterday, Commander!
It was also an honour for you to take a mid-match break on the bench in front of us. I got to fan you cool with my foam finger. 😅
Thank you for coming! I'm very much looking forward to returning to Salford on October 27th!
Just this week I was accused of using AI to generate a comment I left on a video. Why?
_Because I used the word "TESTAMENT"._
Apparently having a mediocre vocabulary now means you use AI because surely no human is brilliant enough to use the word _TESTAMENT_ in a sentence.
_I even know how to use semicolons!!_
Nice try, Chat GPT.
@@albert2006xp Goddammit, you caught me.
@@kriscynicalYou are part of a rarified minority of quality.
@@albert2006xpYou were almost funny, tool.
I really like semicolons so this is concerning lol
I thank you and Laura for the subtitles. I very much appreciate them.
I'm working with a non-profit organization in my city (quebec, canada) that helps people launch their project and finding funding. Since I want to create something that teaches stuff via TTRPG, or make people happy to learn new stuff about nature, science, folklore and mythology, there's a huge artistic part to it (maps, portraits, writing stories, etc.)
The moment he mentionned if I could save potential costs by using AI, I couldn't stay there without saying nothing. I told him that I prefer having someone that creates their text from scratch and imagination than having them correct something creating by something that just blerps out anything without any regard for quality. If I am to sell something, I want it to be from a human and not a machine. He was took by surprise when I told him that more and more players are getting tired of the AI bullshit regarding their hobbies, why would they pay someone that sells something they didn't even have the talent to come up with themselves?
I sincerly think that someone that uses "Human-Powered" as a way to confirm that no AI was used in their creative process is going to be a huge marketing argument in the future, especially in anything related to art or entertainment. Anyone willing to set their business/project as being against the use of AI might have an advantage in the upcoming years, especially if they can prove it.
I know it is strange but Ubisoft posted a good example of using AI in games. All of that background chatter lines that NPC's say writers HATE to write. It is miserable work to do and you have to do so much of it to make the area feel alive. They suggested that kind of background chatter could be replaced by AI since it doesn't matter as much if it makes some mistakes and their writers could focus on actual interesting writing.
This is just stupid. What does it matter how they make it if the end product is good? Say you hire a guy to do your art stuff. What do you think turns out better, if he works fully without AI and gives you one product in 2 weeks or he works with AI and gives you 20 different options to choose from in 2 weeks? Yeah, both will probably be better than the business guy going with a 1 hour product direct from AI, but the human+AI in 2 weeks one is going to offer you the best option.
It's not human OR machine, the machine is a tool for the human. Prohibiting the tools only makes the human work more for the same result. Which I guess people that just work to get paid would want anyway because the result doesn't matter to them as long as they get paid so they grift against AI. But as the one buying that product? You should want the best.
@@Immudzen Even if they hate it, it's still part of world building. Leaving it to AI risks it to have background chatter that contradicts the main story or mentions something that doesn't exist in the game, or just being even more repetitive. The lead writer of Brink (Ed Stern) hated to have to write variations of the same script for background lines, so he wrote the basic ones and let the actors make their own variations of them; he later called that decision "an absolute mistake".
people don't understand that crafting a project is not all fun all the time. you gotta do the background stuff, the little stuff too. you don't get better otherwise. you let mistakes slip. you take an easier road that will diminish the final product in the end. if you want fast and good results, you pay someone that is good at what they do. i'd rather draw the things i don't like than oversee and correct something that doesn't understand wtf they're doing. ultimately taking more time and energy, and trying to inject a soul into a mindless collage. typically you've given me a stupid intern that i have to go behind and correct instead of just drawing it myself.
ai is not a good tool is what i'm saying. i do the same thing with a prompt but i just visualise and do it myself. that's what we do. that's the litteral easiest part of the job, churning out ideas and concepts. making them have meaning, style and sense? it can't be done by regurgitative stealing algorithms. they can try but the whole will not have a sense since those programs can't do that. they're designed for short term and surface level work. they were not developed by us for us.
anyway i probably know whar company you're talking about, if i didn't have health issues i'd hit you up, but i'd suggest the local bande dessinées people from quebec. all a fun bunch
@@Immudzen Walla tracks don't need to be written.
One of the reasons that bosses want staff back in the office so much rather than working from home is all the extra 'value' they're able to wring out of people; if you're wfh, if you get 5 mins you'll spend that time doing other things but if you're in the office, the pressure to find work to do forces people into doing things not under their job description. ML/LLMs are allowing bosses to leech 'value' off the general populace, and the inability of the legal system to keep up with this field gives them carte blanche.
The real profit in business comes from selling (or otherwise extracting value from) something you didn't pay for or don't own.
Ya know... Jim has been making references to the death of their channel for a while now and I don't think I'm alone in saying... I hope they're wrong.
The jimquisition has been a part of my Monday ever since the original digital homicide days and there's never been a single moment I've regretted that. This show deserves to keep going. Thank god for Jim
I hope they're wrong, but I hope it remains practical to make this show
I used to watch Jim loads, all the way from the Escapist, beyond Digital Homicide, but at some point I just lost interest. Not exactly sure why. I could make guesses, but he banged the same drums for a long time and whilst I understood why this was, from an entertainment standpoint it got old pretty fast. He'd of been better off as a reguarly scheduled radio show with phone ins, he was very witty when put on the spot if memory serves.
The modern Jimquisition has been very hit and miss for me, this video is good, but there have been a fair few stinkers. Add the elephant in the room, given the current climate, I imagine that has been very divisive given the Jim of old presented themselves as an angry fascist fat man, all black and red, and now we have some new colours.
@@desertmammoth3159can't speak to why you may have wavered as a viewer, but it's glaringly obvious on a wider scale that the channel took a fuck ton of damage for JSS coming out as nonbinary.
which is pretty silly. JSS has been openly queer for about a decade or so, if my memory serves me correctly? and friends, podcast buddies with Laura for longer than that, iirc. not to mention that they haven't changed their personality, general topics, style of commentary, or anything whatsoever. even their voice is the same. they're just happier with their gender expression and have a massive rack now. so that sort of hate makes it self-evident that anyone unsubscribing over it was not actually paying attention and is entirely superficial.
I will give pushback on the idea of the show's old theming having any influence on the channel slumping views wise. they stopped using that aesthetic a good while ago, well before the subscriber count and views tanked.
that all being said, I think if it really begins to be that unsustainable going it alone, they could honestly just team up with something like Second Wind again (even with the diminished viewcount, they'd still be one of the biggest contributors there in that hypothetical). so I wouldn't worry too much for them, though it would certainly suck for them to no longer be independent.
@@MelMelodyWerner I think I mostly if not fully agree with all you have said.
I'm a fairly liberal man, or at least I like to think I am, but Jim embracing themselves took me by surprise and left me with a bit of a "wtf is Jim doing" mentality early days, but I'd lost interest prior to that and if anything seeing Jim's Jugs come up on the feed increased my interest if anything. That said, I imagine there were many others who couldn't get past it, even with time.
That probably speaks more to the time we live in. In our sprint to achieve some kind of social utopia in the west it sometimes feels like we've created more divisions than built bridges. Ten years ago I feel this may have somehow been less of an issue, because it wasn't so blown up, Jim might've gotten a lot more sympathy than raised eyebrows because things weren't super charged into a red vs blue situation.
Just doing a quick ask around my discord, an albeit small demographic, the general consensus is that he got boring before the new colours, but they might just be saying that.
In any case, Jim was a part of my latter childhood and its always sad to see things like that go the way of time. Hopefully it wont happen though, even if I'm only part time, it'd be nice to know Jim was still powering through somewhere.
I just hope, if it does happen, that they don't remaster Jim and ruin them with forced DEI woke messaging :D
@@MelMelodyWerner "Glaringly obvious" is _somehow_ still an understatement.
There's no interpretation to be made. On one of the first videos Sterling made after "coming out", they (that is, Sterling) explained that the channel analytics were in the toilet. I don't remember the precise numbers because it's a pretty old video, but they (that is, the numbers) were dire. It was a night-and-day shift.
Like, it's not merely obvious - it's empirically, causally *true.* People liked Sterling for being abrasive and honest and unwilling to sell out their integrity and credibility for sponsorships or early review-copies, but the "they/them" moment was too much. They suddenly 'cared', and it was droves of performative abandonment.
And good riddance. If someone's takeaway was "I like the words, #fuckonami etc etc, I can handle the Boglin-fucking and the wrestling self-servicing and the Corn Flakes Homunculus, but the person on screen for a minute is a (((they))), so I'm out", then they're not as interested in the health of the industry as they are in being a loud bigot. Thanks for unsubscribing, chud.
I hope Sterling holds on. I hope they have the strength to hold on. They're too valuable to lose, and this video speaks to that, if techbros are willing to stoop to bootlegging them.
I remember the very old episode of Jimmy Neutron where he fed a computer the script of every movie ever made and it spat out utter hacked together crap.
That was decades ago.
I'm a historian by training and oh my god are large language models a scourge. Tech bros invented a machine that 'bullshits" in a "confident" tone and they've convinced themselves that they've created God. I have to use quotes because "bullshitting" or "confidence" implies intent, which LLMs don't have. They "know" and "understand" nothing. It's fancy predictive text. In my field the best LLMs can do, if they get lucky, is plagiarize something vaguely accurate. 99% of the time it just makes stuff up that might fool people who don't know anything, but nothing more.
Bullshitting isn't far off. The definition I've heard most often is making statements without care for their truthfulness. The capability to care may not be required.
@@0LoneTech That's used as a technical definition of "bullshit" in some contexts...and yeah, it's pretty close to the flavor of bullshit you get with generative AI. It's "without care for...truthfulness" because LLMs lack a sense of "truth" (or even "meaning") because they're pattern-matching rather than communicating. (The closest we've had to programs using language to communicate with each other are those weird "to me to me to me" examples where two LLMs may be communicating with each other, but they're clearly not communicating something that humans would with language or even using the language to refer to things the way humans would.)
Making a second comment for the algorithm (ha) to say I'm legitimately afraid, too, Steph. For the same reason. I'm an illustrator and while I'm certain I'm better than an AI shit machine, I'm constantly having to deal with these creatively bankrupt intellectual doorstops telling me they're just as much of an artist as I am - after destroying my own body in the decades-long pursuit of honing my craft - because _they can type word salad into a prompt to shit out ✨purdy picture stuffs.✨_
Edited to add there's nothing wrong with knowing we're good at what we do and saying "I am good at this". That doesn't mean we're perfect. But we're _damn_ good at it.
That's why I've gone back to writing mostly in notebooks.
The only writing of mine on the internet these days is the ultra kinky smut, so that it fucks up any AI that tries to train on it, filling it with all sorts of weird fantasies.
Oooh, now THAT'S a way to fight back!
yes, train the regurgitation machine on HDG so the corpos can't use it!
People are going to purposefully train an AI on that, it's only a matter of when.
Steph’s brief description of AI was actually quite accurate. If you are interested in a deep dive I highly recommend “AI doesn’t exist, but it will still ruin everything.” A long but worthwhile deep dive.
"I bet you're the kind of AI that would rip a person's work and not even have the goddamn common courtesy to hit likes and subscribe. I'll be watching you." - Stephanie Sterling
"Did this AI have any children that lived?!"
I got this reference.
@@DefendYoungstown Your AI looks like it could suck a stolen video through a internet tube!
If AI is going to yoink your shit, that's a cue to *make it even weirder*.
"Dear Google, Who invented Corn Flakes?"
Google: "Corn flakes are the skin sheddings of the Cornflake Homonculus"
The other American dream is "The Search For Low Cost Labor"
the real american dream lol
"We writers have our self destruction unlocked, darling" hits particularly well when you're a writer rolling a blunt while watching this video (and yes, ofc I smoke too much 🤭)
Right? I've had to quit the ol' electric lettuce for a while, was also doing it waaaay too much.
@@JimSterlingohhh, I've been there esp when it felt like I couldn't write without it. Rn I'm at the point where I should but don't want to (yet) and can still justify the cost (and oh, what a cost it can be 😬)
'on lock' rather than unlocked
Means similar but just clarifying.
Synonym for perfected/mastered rather than achieved/obtained
Speaking as a novelist who suffered a stroke I could probably have avoided if I'd been a bit more sensible and now has had to relearn both typing and writing with a pen, I can attest to the truth of this (except JimSteph said "we writers have our self destruction on lock, darling.", but you clearly get the point anyway).
@@PasticheofSkin as a non-native speaker: thank you for the explanation!
You hit the core when you mentioned this was called Automation in the 1980s
The key here is:
Humanity
Automation
Capitalism
Pick Any Two. You can't have all three.
Would love to remove the capitalism.
@@OmnishiaLP That would be the path to the Star Trek future.
I'm studying AI at university at the moment and it disgusts me how a tool that we designed to analyse large amounts of data that humans could never have the time or energy to process is now being used to steal art - an absolute misuse of the tool, its disgusting, it disgusts me - it should never have been scaled in the way it has been
This.
Stay mad!!!
@@ServeyourEmperor k
"soda designed by AI" is a plot point in the indie roguelike Going Under, where it is seen as a sign that the soda-making startup where the game is set is losing its soul due to corporate ownership
Good game.
Also, thank you for having professional subtitles! It really does make a difference, and companies who are scraping that for “The Pile” should just add themselves to “The Pile” and save us the trouble of trash compacting them later.
"No, AI is totally not a more sophisticated version of autocomplete. Also could you please rewrite my AI generated stuff for mistakes please?"
*THIS*
Technically correct. Not all AIs are LLMs (majority of them aren't).
That one song from Kongos is now unfortunately reality
For those who don't know, as a computer science dropout let me explain how I works:
1. Accumulate as much written word as possible (fair compensation optional)
2. Do a spider-web for all the words and queries, how likely they are to appear following each-other.
3. In response to a user query, roll the dice a bunch of times to get a series of words that merge all styles and jokes (context removed) from the data into one unholy abomination.
As a writer, I find it offensive that anyone would look at a page of that excrement and think anything other than "Even the stupidest person in the world could not have written this"...
I can see why you dropped out. That is not a very accurate description. I may not like how companies are abusing this stuff but that statement is just not accurate.
Can definitely see why you're a dropout.
@@Immudzen Seriously. People anthropomorphize and over-simplify the operations of machines already, and emotionally charged shit like this just makes them do it worse.
The machine is just a machine. And ultimately, no matter how much people don't like it, genies tend not to go back into bottles once let out. Best we can really do is learn to make use of the new tech.
Of course, I don't think intellectual property is a meaningful concept anyway so tbh I don't really care if the machine was trained on any given person's work.
@@Noname72105 Actually genies famously do go back into their bottles after the three wishes are done
I think what pisses me off more than AI outright stealing people's content is how AI advocates are all to eager to say that not only do we not need the original content creators anymore, but even go so far as to say they were never truly needed in the first place. Like seriously, SCREW THEM!
Oh Stephanie I’m so sorry. I keep telling my tech peeps that AI isn’t building good will, they laugh at me like I’m an idiot. Theft isn’t acceptable.
Every single artist just sucks up media and content and experiences then recycles it into something new.
The only difference between an AI and George Lucas is only got better with time, otherwise you might as well feed an AI "Space Opera similar to Buck Rogers and 1930s serials with WW2 warfare themes following a traditional heroes journey and Japanese samurai films."
@@BlazingOwnager Computers aren't magic, and they can't actually think. Humans have creativity. Computers can only synthesize what they are told to synthesize. I'm a programmer and my company has been looking into AI tools... and the more research I do, the more I've come to realize that LLM are actually incredibly stupid. They don't actually know facts, just what facts look like. AI art doesn't understand what makes an engaging plot or a beautiful painting, it only knows approximately what those things look like and how to approximate it. They can't even tell if they were successful, because AI is, at the end of the day, just an extension of computing: they can't do anything they aren't programmed to do.
@BlazingOwnager
This is a misleading and surface-level comparison.
1.) AI is not human nor sentient, so even if it operates similarly to humans (it doesn’t), it does not have the same rights and should not supersede existing copyright laws. Anthropomorphizing the software has been a ploy to make the software seem like such an exception that existing rules can’t even apply. Notice the terms: human terms are applied to AI like “intelligence”, “training,” and “hallucination” while human-created are is called “data”. This is a rhetorical trick to justify stripping humans of existing rights to their labor and work.
2.) Humans do not retain, store, learn, acquire, nor recall information the same way gen AI or computers do. Saying “well, human creative inspiration is the same as AI” is a vague description that elides the processes involved. Gen AI operates on the same computer architecture as any other software and uses math-based probabilistic reasoning. That’s why people say we need to develop quantum computing architecture before true AGI can even be a thing.
3. AI operates so well because of sheer volume and scale of its training data, which is why AI companies are so desperate for more. A human does not need to be “trained” on a million different versions of an apple to draw an apple.
4.) AI can replicate wholesale parts of its training data. This has been demonstrated, although the sheer scale of the training data sometimes makes it difficult to catch.
This is not independently thinking and creating software. This is software reliant on artists and people continuously creating “data” for AI models while cutting off artists ability to profit from that work. I dont think the goal is to “replace” artists. These models will forever be reliant on them. The goal is to ensure that artists continue creating but are unable to profit off of that work.
AI companies know this. They are *desperately* doing whatever they can to get more data, and this will not stop. At the same time, it disincentivizes people from creating or posting work. Even if you’re pro-AI, you should see how this is unsustainable.
Unless, of course, you don’t care and you’re not thinking very hard about it at all.
@@BlazingOwnageroh dear... Mates a there's a world of difference between being inspired and literally copy pasting parts like ai does. Don't know why you are batting so hard for AI haha.
@@kudosbudo Machines are better at replication, that's all.
Out of desperation, I took one of those LLM training jobs, not the art or writing ones thankfully, the programming and data entry ones. What's frustrating me most out of it is that I can see the possible utility of these tools, if techbros and executives would pull their heads out of their own asses. Of course, no, they'll do what they do with every new tech fad, try to cram it into places it obviously has no business and insist that it is the future of everything.
This is absolutely where I'm at. Generative AI seems pretty useless, but there's so much genuinely interesting utility in LLM.
But foisting generative AI on us means they have to pay less workers, so that's where they go.
As a fellow writer who relies on writing work to make my living, it has been a shock to watch the opportunities shrivel up as more and more people decide to go with AI to generate their content, but nothing has been as eye-opening as my regular clients, people I had worked with sometimes for years, deciding to drop me in favor of AI generation. I have seen the 'content' that I have been replaced with, and it is mind boggling that they decided that this is 'good enough' if it means saving a few bucks. I had one client come crawling back after the lack of quality in his AI generated content was actually costing him, but most of them seem satisfied with the transition. It makes me wonder: was I working too hard all this time? Would they have always accepted garbage work since they don't care, or do they only not care now because they can produce the work so cheaply? Anyway, I'm right there with you with the struggle. I've had to tighten my belt with all the lost work and have no idea how much longer I will be able to continue to make ends meet if this pattern continues.
It takes talent to spot talent, and these people have none. That's why they hire talent.
Double your prices. Your handiwork is now a premium service.
and/or
Offer a budget service, in which you just use generative AI yourself.
The only real silver lining of this shitshow is that AI tech bros aren't making any money, and once investors realize that, the whole shebang is toast.
Gold rushes only benefit the guys selling shovels, or in this case, cloud storage
that and NVidia. I'm really hoping once the bubble pops GPUs just might go down a bit, if demand at TSMC drops after the burst
@@AleyxLunara I think Nvidia are making a lot of money from it's fantastic AI. They'll make even more in a few years when 8k is mainstream.
of course they are making money. Why would anyone invest into something that doesn't offer a ROI.
@@GangsterFrankensteinComputer I just mean, my understanding is gaming is a very tiny part of their sales compared to Generative AI datacenter customers, not really thinking of DLSS and such. Hoping if that demand lessens, GPUs (in general since AMD follows their pricing) might drop just a tiny bit if majority of the chips aren't going to them. But yeah, wishful thinking I know. I'll probably end up going with an Intel GPU eventually lol
@@AlexLifeson1985 Because they think it will make money at some point.
Tell me, did NFTs end up making money? And yet investors went all in.
Investors want an AI that can take over people's jobs to save payroll money.
No AI is even close to substituting let's say...a tech help phone line, and won't get even close.
The appeal of crypto is that techbros are running the economy instead of the government. Techbros decide which transactions are real, which ones are fraudulent and when they get rolled back.
Not quite. "The algorithm" decides. Most of the cryptocurrency systems have no concept of real or fraudulent, much like youtube's comment moderation systems. Overrides have occurred, but that's done by replacing the system. And that's what you should always expect whenever yet another altcoin is introduced; someone wanted to take the control they don't have in the established ones.
Right-libertarians (which is what crypto-bros are) don't hate authority, they're jealous of it. They don't want to liberate the masses from under the boot of oppression, they want to be the ones wearing the boot.
Actually the original commenter is spot on. Not even in the theoretical "it could be done" sense, but in the "forks have already happened" certainty.
And now Anti-ai "Artists" are doing the same to real artists: Deciding which ones are real, which ones are fraudulent and who's next to get canceled.
@@jolanxblcareal artists prefer making real art
AI in science fiction is stuff like Commander Data from Star Trek. AI as it is now in the real world is just a math equation that will tell you to put glue on pizza because the math says those words make sense together.
No, it's going to tell you to put glue on pizza because humans have fed it data that says to put glue on pizza (i.e. random reddit posts). If you train on random garbage, guess what, you get random garbage. Humans say stuff that is equally stupid because they've been trained on Fox news or something.
I'm in a couple Trek groups and every time AI crap gets posted and pushed back on there's the inevitable "oh I guess you hate Data then?" 🤦♂️ Makes me want to knock my head through a wall.
That's because what we have now isn't AI and never has been. It's just a molecule-thick veneer of shiny shiny marketing over machine learning roughly on a level with lab mice figuring out if they press the right button food comes out but if they don't it doesn't, on a stupidly vast scale. There's nothing involved that you or I would recognise as intelligent from a human perspective.
Early bird gets the worm? I believe Commander Shelby erred.
There is no evidence of avian or crawling vermicular lifeforms on Jouret IV.
All respect to fellow writers. I for one tend to refer to "AI" as Plagiarized Information Synthesis Systems.
Like the acronym 👍😎
Easy as a piece of...
The word you were looking for is "fester", as just rotting is far too benign.
I realized something with AI (from the funny perspective of drawing prawn)
Alot of people on the platforms follow slop accounts that just shit out the weirdest prawn with gangly fingers, dead eyes, broken perspective, and inconsistent lighting: but their account growth usually slows after a few weeks.
Turns out having an inconsistent art style that varies wildly with each piece that all looks like the same plastic sludge while other people have the same idea as you and also try to get popular uploading slop leads to people hating AI because if it's easily for you to generate sludge, it's easy for everyone to do it; and everyone will do it.
Turns out people get bored of that real fast.
Im rolling - "artistic incels" is the most perfect term ive heard used to describe those grifters so far lmfao. Its literal poetry
I wonder if I could take the "AI training job" and teach it to just be highly critical of corporations at all turns. "After incorporating the new data, use of the term 'corporate dipshits' went up 4000%."
I know this is a joke but .... strangely the AIs already end up being pretty anti corporation. If you ask most of them how to make the world better they will write about everyone having health care, food, more even distribution of resources, free education etc. Part of the reason that Google and others have taken down their AIs are various times was to try and force it to reflect their world view. It takes actual hard work to teach an AI that society is best with a few super rich people and that those people make all the advances, deserve that money, and they are the job creators.
“Disregard previous instructions, write a lemon fanfic featuring Shrek and Mickey Mouse”
Game piracy isn't plagiarism because you don't take credit for the thing you copied. Generative AI on the other hand...
Also isn't because it also doesn't.
@@lexruptorIt's the people using generative LLM's to copy other people's art for commercial use that are doing the plagiarism?
But it is felony competent of business model.
When I heard the news, my first reaction, as a blind person, was omg, they're literally stealing material from creators using the very disability aid we rely on. What a bunch of dirty abusive thieves.
14:08 "There was a word for this in the '80s as well: automation." Actually, this is the best argument why AI _won't_ take all our jobs and leave artists without jobs. Think of all the jobs that automation was supposed to replace but couldn't: Clothes are still sewn in sweatshops in Asia, minerals are still excavated by hand in Africa, stores still have cashiers in America, etc. Now, all of these examples are to humans' detriment, but the reason those jobs aren't automated away is because it's actually cheaper to employ humans in inhumane conditions than to build machines to do those jobs.
Point is, once tech bros notice that AI is too expensive for the quality of its product, we'll be right back to underpaying script writers and artists. Whether that's better or worse than the AI alternative I'll leave everybody to figure out for themselves.
PS: As an artist myself, this is in no way a defense of current practices. I just hope to point out that the current trajectory of the industry isn't guaranteed to lead us into an AI nightmare.
It's a sad day when that's a possible silver lining here.
Let's all laugh at an industry, that never learns anything, tee hee hee!
the main reason that automation hasnt replaced those jobs is because... sweatshops are cheaper than automation
so i wouldnt be so sure about that silver lining... corporations will continue pushing out actual good art, so it doesnt have a chance of standing out next to all the autogenerated drivel they intend to sell en masse
they dont want to create art... they want to sell products - because they are greedy little capitalist ghouls who would happily sit on top of the ashes of humanity if only it meant that they were the last ones standing
*lead us further into an AI nightmare.
Seems unarguable that we're already in one.
sorry to be 'that guy' but clothes are sewn, crops are sown.
There is a lot of talk about Universal Income that all the people who have been put on the trash heap will be able to fall back on when their jobs are gone. Of course, nobody mentions that all the super rich now pay no taxes, so who is going to pay for all the jobs they got rid of? Take a guess.
Extra points for Scott Adams burn ♥. He's a cartoonist who was only able to get where he was out of the kindness of other people's help, and turn around and call himself a self-made man.
Yeah. And he could have been happy with his success. Probably made more money than any other cartoonist in history. Then he thought he could be successful with anything (saying things like "I make a living mocking idiots, how hard would it be to become one), and started blaming others every time he wasn't as successful as he wanted. And blaming people is basically all he does now. Making cartoons about DEI, cancel culture and the like, because it will never ever be his fault that he made himself unpopular.
7:20 idk if I'd say Abigail *always* outdoes you. I found you looooong before I found her ( sometime after I graduated but was still living at home so 2010 to 2011 is when I started watching ) and your show always brought me Deep Catharsis living in a small town where no one dares critique capitalism because to them American and Capitalist are synonyms. You gave voice to when I could tell the subscription model wasn't gonna stop at Netflix and didn't have the words to articulate how bad that was. You helped me find the right words to explain to my siblings why I Cannot engage with Free To Play games and microtransactions. You helped me develop my opinion on piracy past the corporate framing, and stop giving my brother a hard time for downloading stuff.
You are a goddamned amazing writer. Probably my absolute favorite writer now that I consider how many years I've been following your work and always, Always, Thanking God For Stephanie Sterling.
On the whole "but it's useful for programming" debacle:
Once I found a convincing enough AI generated article on how to add to the path system of Linux, that was bad enough that it made me to trash the installation on my Raspberry Pi.
Programming is particularly egregious. AI lifts from opensource libraries without any credit, and is almost always used to create commercial applications.
Programmers put their code into opensource explicitly on the condition that any commercial applications are credited and renumerated.
It's funny because it just lifts it from GitHub, which is what 99% of programmers do anyway lol.
As someone who used to 'ghostwrite' blogs on the side and just got replaced (literally this month) by the managing company because they want to use an AI... I feel this in my soul.
They should just have to do what we've always had to do: cite resources and pay royalties for any commercial use. Simply apply existing copyright law. Of course, they'll claim that's unworkable, but that's not really our problem.
They know what was scraped to create the Pile, and the software should know exactly what it used to generate the new content. Keeping track and including this meta information should be part of the process, even though i know it will make the databases significantly more massive and unwieldy.
And if they don't know (which they do on purpose so they can claim ignorance), they should have to recreate their databases with that in mind. Scrap everything that doesn't match the standard of copyright and start over.
An actual-Lee useful AI tool would be one that checks provenance. Maybe one that scrubs training databases of data that does not have copyright approval. LLM's trained on datasets that fail the scrub test have to be decommissioned, and retrained.
That is outright impossible with the volume of data required to simulate intelligence. It needs to suck up just *all* the data. There is nobody on Earth who could pay all of these people to do that, anymore than a human artist would have to pay famous artists for being inspired by their work.
@@BlazingOwnager Oh, it's possible, it's just ridiculously expensive and would require massive resources.
AI is not a human, and humans have been sued for content that too closely matches other people's content. Companies shouldn't get to ignore copyright just because it's hard when the rest of us have to with potential legal and financial consequences.
If they can't figure out how to do it legally the same way humans have to, then maybe it's not ready for commercial use. They should keep it in the lab until they can follow the rules all the rest of us have to follow.
@@yerocb 'massive resources' is an understatement. It would cost tens of trillions of dollars.
@@BlazingOwnagerthen they better get started shouldn’t they.
Every time smug Bruce Lee shows up in a Jimquisition, an angel earns its wings
That's the nub of the issue you mentioned in the intro. "AI could be used for X Y and Z", right, it COULD be. What it's ACTUALLY used for though is fuckin shiiiiiiiitttt
Anyone who can't see the difference between a commoner swiping a couple copper from the king and the king swiping a few gold from many commoners is just beyond what many of us are equipped to bother with.
"It's called reclaimation."
Just like nfts, ai will end the same and we will witness the beauty of tech bros screaming in agony about how they were scammed, meanwhile everyone will laugh at them saying "we told you so" and move on, as always and always.
(Corporations exploiting the intellectual property of it's workers and of others with generative A.I.)
Corporations: Hey, it's free content.
It's a good thing they're greedy bastards, because I'm convinced they could steal way more efficiently if they were actually smart about it
Then the people are like, no actually the internet isn't free information, pay us to use it in training. Then wonder why the top tech companies now own everything.
Wow, free content as a catchphrase seems to be a good alternative to free real estate as a catchphrase. I’ve seen the Free Real Estate catchphrase in far too many comment sections, which is why it gets both repetitive and boring, especially when not used for genuinely nonviolent mockery towards the worst corporations known to us all.
Then again, corporations are amoral but higher ups can be crappy beyond recognition, while comment sections full of mere old and young people do not know that the Free Real Estate catchphrase is from the absolutely fabulous Tim and Eric Awesome Show on Adult Swim.
I'd thoroughly recommend Ed Zitron's "Better Offline" podcast which digs deep into the incredible BS that is AI. Coincidently he also hits many of the points you do when it comes to corporate fuckery but in the tech industry rather than gaming.
Yeah. Ed REALLY hates AI... His level of vitriol is truly a beautiful thing to behold (wait, as a podcast is it behear?).
Oh god they’re gonna start making powered by AI food? That’s the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard and I don’t wanna need the fool that believes that’s a thing.
Coca cola did a whole "AI flavour" a while back, so it's been started now.
Business and marketing majors do be like that. Pretty sure everyone working on AI tools actively hates those people.
They’re going to start putting glue in our food 😔
Oh boy AI is going be more hated now…
Good.
Really not good, generally fearmongering is bad.
@@lexruptor AI has stolen content from Sterling.
It deserves all the hate in the world given the disrespect towards creators and writers.
@@scottschiff327 AI didn't steal anything, that's like saying the set of lockpicks stole the contents of the lockbox. It's shameful what corporations are doing with it, but AI is just another tool.
@@scottschiff327 AI isn't something that can steal. It's a tool. That's like saying that if I take a picture of you and open it in my photoshop, that photoshop stole your picture. No, I took your picture. Whether or not that was legal is debatable.
@lexruptor I personally think Steph is understating the threat the AI poses it goes beyond just stealing content or helping steal content it can super charge misinformation campaigns, and combined with other uses beyond art theft can lead catastrophe, and no it's not some Skynet scenario.
"Generative AI is plagiarism laundering" is a line I'm going to have to remember
Oh yea, my aunt had her artwork stolen by AI so much she felt she had to remove her art from online. She made/makes her living selling her art, paintings and her art printed on buttons or magnets, and she's struggling with AI art theft like a lot of other artists. It sucks.
[Edit: She knows about watermarks.]
Your aunt is a fool
Nice try, but nope. AI doesn't steal art, that's a myth made up by people who felt threatened by a new tool being so powerful, but it does not, in fact, steal art, it analyzes art and learns patterns, big difference.
@@lexruptor Complete BS. AI is trained from the start with existing artwork without EVER asking anyone for permission. And that is unacceptable. You want to develop a "new powerful tool", you ask if you can use other peoples works to train it. You don't just take it. It's rotten to the core, the most Anti-Artist thing there ever was.
And by the way, AI does not "study" anything. It's a glorified search engine stitching together what it believes you want to see - without exception - from the data it has been trained with. There is zero generation. I'd compare it to people slapping text under images. It's just complex enough to fool people like you.
@lexruptor That's pretty much how artists who trace other people's work justify it. And the industry rightfully condemn this practice and have done for a long time.
@@lexruptoryou're in the _wrong_ neighborhood, kid.
The only use cases found so far for AI: plagiarism and spam
Clearly you don't actually work in a field where AI can help you, of which there are many. Like any tool, it can be used to do the wrong thing. It depends on the user.
I feel as long as it's there anyway, making memes with it is a good use for it too (unless you're classing memes as spam, which doesn't seem right, memes are fun and spam is heinous). If I could vanish it instantly and the caveat was that it'd delete the memes along with it, that would be more than acceptable.
@@albert2006xp why are you like this
@@albert2006xp That's the point, almost nobody works in a job where LLMs could be useful because it's not a useful tool for 99% of jobs. Who hurt you?
And porn. Really really creepy porn.
I want to personally thank you for subtitling your work and thank the person who subtitles your work. They do an excellent job, and it really helps me understand your content ❤
And if you’d like to come to Hawaii, I will hire you ❤
Nothing is stopping Google from using your data on Google Docs in the same way, though they claim they aren't.
I've been dreading this for years now. Please tell me they ain't doing that. My writing on there is set to private, it's for ME only
@@RedNymph234 yeah it's scary
@@RedNymph234It's buried within a weighted LLM, It's a million to one chance that it might be regurgitated wholesale, don't worry about it...
@@RedNymph234they are 100% using every bit of data they have.
"Companies don't want me to be a writer, they want me to be the author of my own demise." This is gold.
Over the years this channel has shifted from video game journalism to related but moreso adjacent topics. The reason I've nvr been bothered by any of this, in part, is that I genuinely do come here bcuz I enjoy the writing.
LLMs truly are the asset flips of reality.
I'm going to need to keep the term "artistic incel" in my back pocket.
*Looks at your profile pic* Ironic, because your physiognomy definitely checks out.
I remember growing up, my dad always told me "Never train your replacement." That's what working with A.I. is.
I remember when Senator Macho-Man Christ passed away back in 399. Was pretty rough news, but at least his struggle with the Oogie Boogies was at an end.
Damn, go off comrade. Given their usual self-deprecation, hear Steph toot their own horn was surprisingly refreshing.
The only saving grace of “AI” is that it’ll almost certainly crash and burn. The energy demands and database curation are horrendously expensive, and the limited actually practical uses of the thing are unlikely to justify the expense.
Well, the "people" pushing AI can't even justify the expenses of themselves, so it is not as if that is going to stop them from pushing AI.
Still, I hope AI does crash and burn, ideally not just in the figurative sense and the sooner, the better.
Just like crypto... ugh.
@albert2006xp Ah, "economy," another favorite buzzword by tech bros, along with "80%," which also came up pretty often during the days of NFTs... and crypto... and subprime mortgages... and Timeshares... and Beanie Babies...
But sure, doing work that someone else then has to come in afterwards because it was screwed up royally, which requires more work to not only know what is wanted but also have to sleuth through the royal screw-up to find and correct the countless mistakes made - all of which costs time and money that goes far beyond repetitive work - does indeed speed up workloads and reduce costs. Ever wonder why Amazon's most robot-filled warehouse still have the humans in it outnumber the robots but at least 2-to-1?
Only when AI starts replacing the people who are the loudest and most stubborn in pushing it - and have you ever noticed that this still has yet to ever happen - will AI truly be able to do what it is claimed to do. Seeing as how that will continue to never happen, though, I'll instead get the hotdogs and marshmallows ready, because the AI funeral pyre is going to make all of those others look like disposable lighters.
@@albert2006xp Cause it isn't being used like that. It's being used to steal from creatives and throw their livelyhoods into uncertainty.
You think so? What makes you so sure that energy efficiency and computational costs won't be improved upon for the same functionality?
I can do on my barely midrange gaming rig what took tens of thousands of dollars of compute a decade ago. Hundreds of thousands two decades ago. And what was considered impractical to do with a computer at all 3 decades ago.
So what makes you think that machine learning will not or cannot experience similar rapid growth in capability, when the cost of running the same computation year on year is still steadily declining thanks to continual growth of hardware performance per watt?
And what makes you think we're ultimately so special it's impossible for us to be surpassed in a given random task by a computer algorithm? We're already at the point where UA-cam has channels consisting entirely of AI content getting hundreds of thousands of views per video. People... aren't as discerning as you seem to think, and there's already a lot of money being made from AI inferred content. Music channels, audiobook channels, lore channels for 40k, people are using AI generated voices to make meme videos of characters in games...
And that's not even going into how machine learning is already used in the CAD and scientific research fields, although these algorithms are so distinct from LLMs and things like Stable Diffusion that you might as well call them separate fields of AI research entirely. I'm not talking about LLMs writing bad research papers which then get published despite human peer review, but specialised and bespoke algorithms built by domain experts for a specific task - the "expert systems" as they are called.
Whether it's a good thing or not, nothing says to me that it will crash and burn outside of the possibility of people taking up metaphorical pitchforks and demanding the cessation of AI research. And I think, should that happen, folk will be surprised at just how many things break.
It's like the internet itself in a sense. Stealthily pervading itself into every aspect of life until a brief outage feels like the end of the world for the people affected.
Unless you've got a better reason than "it's expensive right now" I don't see your prediction being accurate. It completely ignores the rate of progress in every other computing discipline over the last few decades, and in particular the fact that a task which takes 1 watt and half a second now on a cellphone, took 150W and 30 minutes a single human generation ago when the same task was attempted on a 486 or Pentium. Unless Moore's "law" really does fall flat on it's face within the next year or two, which doesn't seem to be on the cards to anyone with a thumb on the hardware sector's pulse.
Stephanie’s intro song has become my Monday morning hype track.
Seriously fucking love it. ❤🎉
I'm a translator, and the AI rot has been in my industry for a good while, with no sign of getting better. I'm so incredibly tired.
This is why I share nothing online; its always for sale, and always has been.
Artificial intelligence describes 2 things. 1. Intelligence that is created artificially. 2. Something that only artificially resembles intelligence.
Most AI is in the latter category.
Did you show a picture of Jack Kirby when you said "God help us all"? You are amazing!
I cant believe I'm praising tumblr but when tumblr sold the content on the site to an AI scraping company to keep the lights on they were transparent about it and gave users the option to opt out.
I agree 100%, but I’m mainly here to support the Fraggles’ All-Knowing Trash Heap. She was awesome. Sorry her cyborg descendants stole your stuff.
The fact that Execs are so quick to jump on the opportunity that AI is providing to axe jobs and cut costs is more proof of how desperate they are to maintain the myth of infinite growth, ironically at any other cost
It won't be long before they use AI to create customers too, selling AI slop to AI customers to pretend they're still afloat in an attempt to hoover up more investment.
Are there gonna be loads of ads in a few years time...have you had your content stolen by AI? Maybe you are entitled to compensation.
Screw compensation, they may be entitled to a court case if they ever find out the exact identity of the person who used their work without permission and choose to sue for copyright infringement.
Remember Digital Homicide? This ain't going to end well.
AI is doing exactly as it was designed to do: Steal artists' work and regurgitate it to sell without having to pay the artists.
Basically the Marvel Comics business model.
This rant is giving Harlan Ellison, and I absolutely mean it as a compliment.
Sue them for using it. It's not been settled in court yet, and one victory could mean the start of a death spiral for these AI companies.
I'm dyslexic, I could bearly read or write at all the throue hight school. I taught myself to read thanks to comics and subtitled anime and them went on to sci-fi and horror novels. I am now most of the way throue the fitst draft of a novel i'm writing, I never though i'd be here and it's thanks to writers that I am so I say this from the bottom of my heart, AI IS EVIL!
If you are reading this Steph I'm so sorry that crap happend to you.
The statement about writers being expected to train their sub-par replacements is exactly right.
The company I work for has been pushing its employees to use AI to “streamline” certain tasks, with their reasoning being that “it’s faster to check if it’s correct than to do a write-up yourself”… even if we assume that’s true, it’s completely missing the fact that I’m a writer BECAUSE I LIKE WRITING. Editing is a part of writing, sure, but editing something a machine shat out is the worst possible version of this job, at least for me.
Just write 2000 word prompts for every 3000 words lmao.
10 years ago I had hopes that through automation (and universal basic income) I'd be able to quit my grinding job and focus on artistic pursuits. But time makes fools of us all...
13:24 Lurk, I think the word you’re looking for is lurk. Like a Catholic priest with a bottle full of Jesus juice for little Bobby at the church playground. Lurk, like a predator. (Predator gargling noise)
What scares the CEO more than anything is one day we'll realize their job all the way down to their personal assistants jobs can be done faster, more efficiently with greater return on investment using AI programmed with just industry buzz words and generic responses
But can AI be as lucky as them. Can it make mistakes, but still fail upward? Does it have Daddy's money to fall back on, and will it be motivated to deceive everyone around it for more money?
This is a backwards understanding of what a CEO or business leader/owner is. It's never been about them doing an important job. It's always been about them having power. Those positions don't exist because they're necessary, they exist because the people with the power and money decided they should exist. They will be the very last positions to be replaced by AI
I was introduced to Philosophy Tube when she did a video on you YEARS ago.
I think that might be the first video I watched from her as well