When I consider this issue, the analogy looks more like someone has invented a robot to do contractor work. Of course it’s true that it will put many human contractors out of work.
But no, I don’t think using the robot is malicious - it is, after all, hugely convenient. I would love to have access to those kinds of skills without all the trial, effort, and investment it would take for me to pick them up myself.
I could even rationalize it by thinking, why shouldn’t I? Pandora’s box has been opened and my participation won’t make a difference by this point. I may even be right.
I don’t have a whole lot of use for art in May day to day, so it doesn’t cost me much to decide not to use AI for it. When I think of all the atrocities in the world taking place to enable me to live a comfortable North American life up to this point, I find I can live without this one.
I guess I’m trying to make the point that I don’t want to guilt anyone for using AI for this or anything, but I encourage everyone to truly understand the consequences of the technology we’re using and do some self-reflection. Do you have space in your moral convictions for this? Does this cross any of my values? If you can stomach it, go crazy, but do so without blinders.
Well spoken thoughts, but tbh it all feels like moralizing in search of a sin. Or cops arresting you because their gut says you’re guilty of something, they just aren’t sure what. The vast majority of inventions in human history have put somebody out of work, because most inventions produce things people already use, that are already being made by somebody, and the invention competes with them.
The art world participates in that whole continuum. When somebody buys a sketchpad or a tube of paint, they’re using inventions that put people out of work who used to make those items by hand. Those particular transitions happened so long ago nobody thinks about them anymore, but they should if they’re trying to honestly examine the ethics of change.
When I consider this issue, the analogy looks more like someone has invented a robot to do contractor work. Of course it’s true that it will put many human contractors out of work.
But no, I don’t think using the robot is malicious - it is, after all, hugely convenient. I would love to have access to those kinds of skills without all the trial, effort, and investment it would take for me to pick them up myself.
I could even rationalize it by thinking, why shouldn’t I? Pandora’s box has been opened and my participation won’t make a difference by this point. I may even be right.
I don’t have a whole lot of use for art in May day to day, so it doesn’t cost me much to decide not to use AI for it. When I think of all the atrocities in the world taking place to enable me to live a comfortable North American life up to this point, I find I can live without this one.
I guess I’m trying to make the point that I don’t want to guilt anyone for using AI for this or anything, but I encourage everyone to truly understand the consequences of the technology we’re using and do some self-reflection. Do you have space in your moral convictions for this? Does this cross any of my values? If you can stomach it, go crazy, but do so without blinders.
Well spoken thoughts, but tbh it all feels like moralizing in search of a sin. Or cops arresting you because their gut says you’re guilty of something, they just aren’t sure what. The vast majority of inventions in human history have put somebody out of work, because most inventions produce things people already use, that are already being made by somebody, and the invention competes with them.
The art world participates in that whole continuum. When somebody buys a sketchpad or a tube of paint, they’re using inventions that put people out of work who used to make those items by hand. Those particular transitions happened so long ago nobody thinks about them anymore, but they should if they’re trying to honestly examine the ethics of change.