Okay so can you explain when or how the invention of anything spontaneously destroyed all demand for labor in one area without subsequently creating any new need for labor in any other area? All you've really stated is that scribes are out of a job because we made printing presses, without acknowledging that demand for metal working and manufacturing have gone up proportionally due to the operating requirements and resource costs of these new fangled printing presses.
Yeah, they can also be a lot of things, like a consumer, labor, owner, researcher, or any other participants of the economy. Humans can adapt, horses don't.
I just don't see which opportunities for work will the mass adoption of neural networks create.
Yes, adapt to losing your white-collar job by becoming an uber driver. Or getting an education at a trade school and becoming an electrician. But don't ask how it will affect blue-collar wages when millions of others that lost their jobs to AI, decide to do the same.
If you think like this, hard reboot your brain immediately. Owning the Libs Syndrome is a gateway to losing every gram of sincerity you have.
Classic thought terminating cliche, politicians like this argument because they never had to get into the numbers of how new tech "creates jobs".
So where is Jobageddon? How come we haven't run out of jobs yet? Is it just about to happen? Is it far off? Are we in a golden age right now where demand is relatively perfectly met by supply, just before the fall? Is this a new phenomenon or in the olden days was there simply not enough labor to ever suffice demand, as though this issue is a downtrending line that started way up high but is soon to intersect and fall below the job/available labor ratio threshold? You point out graphic artists and concept designers being replaced with a guy with AI, but you don't acknowledge that increased AI demand means increased power consumption, computer production, IT work, etc. I never said these new jobs were related or could be filled by the same people or that it was somehow perfectly equivilant, but they are making new jobs by virtue of shifts in demand in other fields nonetheless. The production line being automated introduces a plethora of new demands related to the very production, design, and maintenance of that production machinery, not to mention potential avenues of research and development to improve that machinery, and there are inevitably many more ways other fields will be affected, large and small that we simply aren't considering. You're proposing that this is an unsustainable cycle that forecasts an inevitable and unavoidable hard logistical problem we are going to run into simply by the natural advancement of technology. This has never been the case.
Its inevitably some artust shithead whining that AI used their art to train without permission despite their art being drawn without permission of the IP owner. I'd love to see fanart & fanfic crushed by big companies just to see idiots rage.
(not AI seething but still funny)
Its funny to see all the retards on Reddit trying to ban AI to thinking it will make a difference.
Average troon experience.
Why do NPC's hate AI so much
Chance makes people uncomfortable especially when it threatens an industry that the left dominates.
Frankly something using AI is a selling point to me now. Just so I can stick it to these fucking retard luddites. Total Anti AI Death
Otaku culture is shit, though.
Most of the ones complaining steal other people's copyrighted characters and get commissioned to make disgusting porn of them for repulsive gooners to splooge over.
Followers of Ned Ludd NEVER end up on the right side of history. Just left dead in a ditch by the side of the road.
Like @Air support says, change is scary and AI is something very new and different.
Are you really expressing yourself creatively if you're having a computer draw it for you?
