We are on the cusp of being bypassed. Everyone of us needs to consider our role in the machine takeover. Are you with them or are you against them? What can you do to maintain human agency? Will you go quietly into irrelevance? The official narrative is acceptance. You are being led to believe that artificiality is inevitable. Fight it! We did not evolve and struggle for millennia to be sidelined into redundancy. The human spirit will be silenced and overtaken by our own creation. It is not too late. Fight the machine takeover. Create! Rise up! The soulless automata regime is not the future we struggled against nature and survived to build. Our voices have worth. Be vigilant. Be angry. Resist! FIGHT!

I agree but how?

Me too. I don't know how, either, but talking about it to keep up everyone's awareness of it is certainly better than just letting it happen without any fight at all.

Came here because I've just found this article, which is a year old already but really hammers home why every thinking person should be very, very nervous and ready to fight these days, so I thought I should share it: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/29/opinion/ai-internet-x-youtube.html

I used to like this invention called the internet, and I used to trust scientific method, but this shit is ruining literally everything these days!

I'm as mad as hell and i'm not gonna take this anymore

lothar wrote:
I'm as mad as hell and i'm not gonna take this anymore

That scene in the film always seemed a bit undirected, especially when people were yelling it from open windows XD

It reminds me of businesses wishing people a “nice day” or when I talk to my google home and it says “It's a pleasure to be of service to you”, or when people post an image on instagram that says “stop scrolling, someone here loves and supports you”
It's this American trend of meaningless, pretend and ineffectual personal communication that can ONLY ever makes sense in a direct one and one 1st person context where both people have an existing relationship and know each other but they stick it in a second person context where it's utterly meaningless XD

Empathy does exist between strangers. It's often an empty courtesy but sometimes it is meant. Not everyone is an alienated individual. That may in fact be a product of the modern world and modern thinking where everyone is an individual as opposed to a member of a family or community. The rugged individual was a myth.

As far as Network it was the film makers intention that it look undirected. It's very 1970s even if it does resonate today.

bravo1102 wrote:
Empathy does exist between strangers.

I know it does but what I meant was that it's impossible in a generalised second person form when it's meant as first person empathy.
And I realise that's my fault because I expressed myself badly.

Like if my bank wishes me a “nice day” for example, I find that offensive because some moron PR idiot wrote that as the thing the bank should have in its communications and it's LESS than meaningless-
i.e. the bank doesn't wish anyone anything and the people working there also don't wish me a nice day because they're not involved in those automatic communications from some email server or whatever ad it's on.

It becomes a con: nice sounding words designed to fake a personal, friendly relationship where none is needed and can exist.

It's a totally different matter if you're dealing with a bank employee personally and after your communication they wish you to have a nice day. That might be considered too personal for such an interaction, it could also be simply facile and routine, but either way a real person said it to you so you can also take it as something sincere if you like.

-if that makes sense?

lothar wrote:
I'm as mad as hell and i'm not gonna take this anymore

And this scene, ladies and gentlemen, is what eventually inspired the character Gary Gnu from THE GREAT SPACE COASTER.

The empty sentiment of the corporate entity. A corporation legally viewed as a person. So why can't it extend empathy too? Except it can't because there's actually no one behind it. It's like someone's imaginary friend wishing you a nice day. It's not real. It's just so many words with no feeling. Courtesy without intent.

i SAW THIS VIDEO THE OTHER DAY


SAD

J_Scarbrough wrote:

lothar wrote:
I'm as mad as hell and i'm not gonna take this anymore

And this scene, ladies and gentlemen, is what eventually inspired the character Gary Gnu from THE GREAT SPACE COASTER.

I know I watched some of this show but for the life of me I can only remember the theme song. probably because where I grew up it signaled time for me to go to school so I never saw a whole episode.

lothar wrote:
i SAW THIS VIDEO THE OTHER DAY


SAD

I get where he's coming from, but he's a bit misguided I reckon. Capcut gives you super basic premade tools and templates but NOT the fine tune control that any pro has as a basic.
ANyone with any real skill and the right tools could make a WAAAAAAYYYYYYY better thing that anyone with Capcut.

Beleive me. I learned video editing on Premier back in the late 90s and I've done video editing on and off over the years using various tools, some for pro-work, and I have used capcut heaps too and recorded video on the phone- Capcut can't approach the accuracy and customisation of real edit tools or expert work.

If he thinks people with capcut are unfairly levelling up then I HONESTY have to wonder at his skillset XD
It can make a cool video but NOT a great one unless you realllly f-ing KNOW what you're doing AND you have great source material. Mosty the cool vids you make with capcut will be the luck of the draw because you don't have the absolute control you need, especially for an amature who doesn't know HOW to get the cool effects they want.

A Pro like him should know how to get exactly the effects he wants, and be able to get it, no matter what tools he uses. A normal schulb using Capcut still won't be able to do that.

c'mon, the folks from the industrial revolution had more grits than any millennial and even they failed to win against the machines.

ksteak wrote:
c'mon, the folks from the industrial revolution had more grits than any millennial and even they failed to win against the machines.

I'm not a millennial

Less of a fight and more of a cope but I spend an awful lot of time pretending it's the 20th century as I draw analogue tech on my graphics tablet.

Ozoneocean wrote:

…
If he thinks people with capcut are unfairly levelling up then I HONESTY have to wonder at his skillset XD
…

The problem is not just the skillset, but if he can make money on the difference between his skillset and other people “levelling up”.

With the AI the problem happens, for example for people good at illustration, not because I want some ultra-high quality work done and I use the AI, but because I need some cheap quality work done and in the past I still needed to pay someone to do it, now I can use the AI: it is the low-quality tier of work that goes away.
I work on the website of a small private university, and we often have to pop-out newspages or brochures for this or that event or course; up yo last year we would use stock photoes from sites like Adobe Stock or Freepik (so already quite cheap), recently they sent me various AI produced images.
Since the previous image were already free or almost free, this IMHO didn't change much for people who want to be illustrators or professional photographers, but on the long run this is going to kill all the low level creative jobs, and the high lebvel jobs, there aren't that many.

ksteak wrote:
c'mon, the folks from the industrial revolution had more grits than any millennial and even they failed to win against the machines.

Actually since the Luddites mostly wanted redistribution of profits, they partially won in the 20st century with the welfare state/communist revolutions, although we rolled that back in the ‘80s and ’90s, but at least in terms of income there is still hope.

If on the other hand the hope is to make money on creativity, I fear this is similar to the hope of making money by playing in a rock band: it is not literally impossible but given how the economy works only a very small number of people can really be professionals in that field.
But I suspect it already was like that before the AI.

marcorossi wrote:

The problem is not just the skillset, but if he can make money on the difference between his skillset and other people “levelling up”.

With the AI the problem happens, for example for people good at illustration, not because I want some ultra-high quality work done and I use the AI, but because I need some cheap quality work done and in the past I still needed to pay someone to do it, now I can use the AI: it is the low-quality tier of work that goes away.
I work on the website of a small private university, and we often have to pop-out newspages or brochures for this or that event or course; up yo last year we would use stock photoes from sites like Adobe Stock or Freepik (so already quite cheap), recently they sent me various AI produced images.
Since the previous image were already free or almost free, this IMHO didn't change much for people who want to be illustrators or professional photographers, but on the long run this is going to kill all the low level creative jobs, and the high lebvel jobs, there aren't that many.

Generative AI should be full on banned. That just steals copyrighted works and removes the c0pyright by making pretend transformative works.

CapCut doesn't do that, it just gives people templates and stuff to use. The guy really was being a bit over dramatic because it's the same template sort of stuff you could always get in edit programs whether on phones or pro edit software. And like those it will only produce something decent if you know what you're doing.

Even if you do your own editing in it (which is more advanced and something you have to pay commercial rates for now to access any decent tools!), you still have to know what you're doing to make anything decent and the edit options you have with pre-made transitions and effects are all the stuff you have available in any modern edit program anyway.
And now they're charging for them (it used to all be totally free, now only basic features are free), it costs the same as any commercial edit program so the whole contention is spurious. :/

It's the same tools as what he uses with the same barrier for entry.