I agree with your Stephen King analogy. Back in the 90s a recording artist named Beck hit the scene with a very unique sound and style, with the song Loser. Shortly there after a band named The butthole surfers (smh) released Pepper, which sounded identical to Beck’s sound, but wasn’t a copyright violation. In poor taste, maybe, but not illegal. I think AI is a similar situation. It can be inspired at a faster pace than humans, but it’s still fundamentally the same process.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Exactly.
We could do the same thing with painting. Many study the works of a particular artist in great detail and end up mimicking that. That does not mean the artist is suddenly the next Monet.
My biggest gripe about AI is people who whine about AI taking their jobs. It's not a new issue, as you've pointed out time and time, again, but everyone acts like is it when it impacts their industry. I find it to be in poor taste to whine about the tech that's making (not you personally) your job obsolete while using tech that put someone else out of work, and no one in modern society can honestly claim they aren't guilty of it.
The problem isn't that tech is taking jobs. The problem is that the distribution of the resources generated by technological advancement isn't distributed in a manner that upholds the promises of a better life for humanity, but is horded by a few powerful entities while everyone else gets left behind or swept away.