When, not if, such a robot exists, do you imagine we'll pay everyone who'd ever published a roleplaying game? Like a basic income exclusively for people who did art before The Training?

Or should the people who want things that couldn't exist without magic content engines be denied, to protect some prior business model? Bear in mind this is the literal Luddite position. Weavers smashed looms. Centuries later, how much fabric in your life do you take for granted, thanks to that machinery?

'We have to stop this labor-saving technology because of capitalism' is a boneheaded way to deal with any conflict between labor-saving technology... and capitalism.

[–] Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I know this is shocking to people who have never picked up a brush or written anything other than internet arguments after the state stopped mandating they do so when they graduated high school, but you can just create shit without AI. Literal children can do it.

And there is no such thing as something that “couldn’t exist” without the content stealing algorithm. There is nothing it can create that humans can’t, but humans can create things it can’t.

There’s also something hilarious about the idea that the real drag on the artistic process was the creating art part. God almighty, I’d rather be a Luddite than a Philistine.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Fuck off.

If that sounds needlessly blunt, no, it's far kinder than your vile opening insult, which you can't even keep straight - immediately noting that everyone, even children, has done an art at some point.

So maybe this discussion of wild new technology versus 17th-century law and the grindstone of capitalism isn't about individual moral failings of people who disagree with you.

[–] Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 year ago

Ooh, hit close to home to point out AI guzzlers are talentless hacks? Take a nap bro, you seem to need it.