I think they fail to see that it doesn't matter. As long as it reduces cost capitalism doesn't really give a shit what happens to them. In a normal society you'd expect government regulation to step in to either alleviate or ease this change of jobs into becoming fully AI automated, along with some safe guards. But I just don't see that happening in America.
this post was submitted on 23 Jul 2023
29 points (100.0% liked)
Gaming
2160 readers
5 users here now
founded 1 year ago
And that’s why the writers and actors are on strike right now.
Why should the government step in for a private business? Especially if it's one that can be done better and more effectively without humans in the loop? Other jobs get automated - weavers, construction workers, and more. We shouldn't surrender to Luddism.
Because we need a safeguard for people? We should as a society alleviate suffering. We shouldn't surrender to dehumanizing, or ignoring them. Although as your comment suggests, we shouldn't give a shit either way
I question the proposition that any creative work is done "better" without humans being involved. Cheaper, faster? Yeah, and that is why executives are all for it. But it's not better. Expression and communication are important aspects of art. To substitute that with thoughtless automated content slop is no improvement.
It's not like cheap t-shirts which, as long as you are clothed, the aesthetics and craftsmanship is a secondary consideration. The aesthetics and craftsmanship of media are everything in it.
We can't forget that even the original Luddites only wanted to protect their livelihoods and working conditions, and though they were defeated, those fights didn't end with them. Because it isn't about hating technology. It's about the right for a decent life. Unfortunately the benefits of automation are inequitably distributed. Executive profits soar, but the people which used to be employed in those roles struggle.
It isn't even Luddism from artists to demand approval and compensation when it comes to having their work and likeness used to train AIs. These AIs we see today relied on massive disregard towards smaller creators' intellectual rights to get off the ground. It's telling and revolting how considerations towards intellectual property only seem to matter when the affected parties are massive media companies.
Find out how to do AI generated content without infringing people's personality rights, infringing people's intellectual property rights over their creations, and exploiting workers, and we won't have a problem.
Humans need jobs in order to be able to pay for things and keep the economy running. AI is going to cause job loss on a scale we've never seen before. These people are not going to simply retrain into a new career and find new jobs. Those hypothetical new jobs are soon going to be automated away as well.
The economy and how we view income generation needs be rethought entirely. We're headed towards a society where most people will not be working meaningful jobs, if they have jobs at all.
I play a foreign-developed live service game in which one of the native-language voice actors has been under investigation for the better part of a year and has been unable to work. The dev has, with the VA's consent, had AI covering him the entire time so that his character wouldn't go unvoiced.
It's scary how you forget it's AI sometimes. I think the only complaint I've heard is the fact that sometimes his tone is wrong, because 80% or so of the content is side story with a nice, sweet tone while the main story content is serious, so sometimes the voice in the main story sounds side story sweet.
Which is to say: it really sucks, but the time of bootleg VAs is upon us. The AI is just too good already.
(Someone will ask: the game is Tears of Themis, and the VA being covered is the prolific Jiang Guangtao.)
Cool. If the AI voices are an acceptable quality, cheaper for production, and faster to implement, then I'm in favor. I'm not super attached to a person or a specific voice in new animation or voice-acted media. Reducing costs and speed of media creation is a good thing.
I'm not super attached to a person or a specific voice in new animation or voice-acted media.
If you cared about any work of animation in the last century, I find that hard to believe.
His viewpoint is just like the producers the writers and actors are striking against; that it's all a commodity to be consumed and he's not invested in the creative process or supporting the talent that creates movies & television. As long as Hollywood churns out media (regardless of its quality), this guy is all there for it.
Yeah there viewpoint is honestly a bit too much about the cold indifference of the creative process but there is a bit of a middle ground where having hobbyist being able to use it for non commercial use isn't a horrible thing. Its far more problematic when a big corporation are allowed to use them freely and will snuff out these creatives to save a few bucks.
I've cared about animated works, and I still care a little bit about the product/franchise/etc.. I have never cared about the specifics of the people behind the microphones, or the artist drawing it or using CGI/CAD to create it. The "human factor" is totally unimportant to me, only the end product.
I'm not one to keep fawning over celebrities either, but when it comes to art and media, the end product is only possible because of the human factor. It's the inspirations, experiences and values of the people behind a work that lead to them to try to express themselves as well as they can.
I just hope that the actors, writers and studios completely destroy the Hollywood machine. We can catch up on our DVDs for a year or two and then hopefully something new will come up with no affiliation with the existing studios and unions. Let the whole thing burn.