undefined

points

[-]

This has happened with other accelerants in various media/fields:

1. easy access to video recording and editing equipment has made it a lot easier to produce videos on sites like YouTube;

2. easy access to audio recording and editing (Audacity, etc.) has made it a lot easier to produce podcasts and other audio content (via LibriVox, Apple Podcasts, etc.);

3. easy access to writing software and self-publishing (Amazon, fan fiction sites, blogging platforms) has made it a lot easier to produce stories and books;

4. easy access to game engines and tools (Unity, Unreal, Godot, Twine, RenPy, etc.) have made it a lot easier to produce games.

by zbentley4 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Yes, and as Howey explains in TFA those things might be good for consumers and creators who create for fun, but they are not good for people who create in order to earn a living.

by argentinian3 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

you are not taking into account that creators can be funded in different ways. For example like in Patreon.

You can give part of your money to fund a creator that wants to create in order to earn a living.

I believe that is better when people create for fun. If they need to create to earn a living they are forced to create and that is not the best incentive to create. Fun is a better incentive

by zbentley3 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

> I believe that is better when people create for fun. If they need to create to earn a living they are forced to create and that is not the best incentive to create. Fun is a better incentive

I'm not sure that's true (thousands of famous creative works from the Sistine Chapel to the Benin Bronzes were created on commission/for remuneration), but even if it is, how are creators gonna eat? If the answer is "get a day job", I think that excludes a lot of folks from practically being able to create things. Patreon is not a great way to pay the bills for all but the most famous and popular people on it.

by argentinian3 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

With IA, creation is cheap. It's inevitable that automation would make some jobs disappear. There's no solution, less people will be able to earn a living for creating art, I think.

What do you think about this?

by zbentley3 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

I think that's probably at least somewhat true, and regrettable/something to be worked on in your community, and a very different statement from

> [it] is better when people create for fun. If they need to create to earn a living they are forced to create and that is not the best incentive to create. Fun is a better incentive

by argentinian2 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

There will be less creators that earn a living by creating. But I believe there will be more art.

E.g. after Michelangelo created his style, then IA can mimick it almost for free. Imagine people with great talent like him, expressing their ideas and also being able to use IA to create, plus thousands of less talented people basing their AI art on them.

by fidotron7 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

What if other LLMs were charged to read the work as well? And those other LLMs were actually in the persona of aspiring authors hoping to learn so they can later sell their work?

There's an entire potential economy there without humans necessarily involved at all, kind of busted by recent Anthropic precedent admittedly.