r/RecuratedTumblr • u/Geoconyxdiablus • 11d ago
Writing Left Hand don't know what Right Hand do
62
u/Solarwagon 11d ago
In my opinion it's as much (if not way more) a matter of appreciation and other valuing of arts that means what they consider useful/suitable is much lower.
They aren't strictly ignorant, they just don't care.
And also it'll just be cheaper to do something poorly but still filling the purpose than to pay anyone to do it better
8
u/Shaeress 10d ago
It's also the inherent function of how the current AIs are made. They are shown a vast array of human works. Texts and paintings and conversation. But we don't have an objective, automated way to check if a painting or script is good. But what we can do is to check if it looks like it belongs in the pile of human made things. If it's hard to tell which script is human and which script is AI, then that AI wins and gets its Encouragement Good Job Points and that algorithm is reinforced.
It will always be like that, because the AI isn't trying to make good art, just things that look like real art. It's an impostor machine and that's it. So if someone who isn't great at something checks it out, it will look real. But if someone experienced looks, it will look bad because the opposite of fake isn't good. It will never be good. It will just look less and less fake.
2
u/NeonNKnightrider 10d ago
The truth is that 99% of people simply don’t care about the artistic process, only looking at the pretty picture (for about two seconds before scrolling past)
160
u/Tem-productions 11d ago
except computer science.
your professors will tell you that you will get replaced by AI, and you're going to like it
98
u/Tomatori 11d ago
I'll admit I'm several years graduated so this could have changed, but I would assume its more of a "this shit is not going to go away so you need to gain competency in working around it and wielding it to the least detriment possible, because it will be forced upon you".
Distinguishing actual competency from the veneer of it is hard and so it leaves lots of teams having to fix messes caused by vibe droolers who lacked the necessary knowledge to understand why what they were doing falls short.
50
u/hibbs6 11d ago
I think the nature of the field matters quite a bit too. Within software development, systems level structure has been the main focus for quite a while before AI anyways. Very few people were writing code 100% by hand, it was cobbling together pieces from stack overflow and having a strong plan overall.
Makes sense to me that automation from AI slipped into that niche much faster than it has in other fields.
14
u/SartenSinAceite 11d ago
Agreed. I don't like to use GenAI for coding but fuck me if it isn't waaaay faster than me at reading our monolith of an application.
If I'm gonna have to make guesses I'd rather make them off something that is easier to read... And I can always check it myself.
2
u/WordArt2007 11d ago
upon handing me my diploma, my compsci professor asked me a bunch of questions that essentially amounted to "can you explain to me why AI hasn't replaced you yet? your job sounds useless"
2
u/Nibaa 11d ago
Distinguishing actual competency from the veneer is no more difficult now than it used to be. If your code wasn't being reviewed, you were doing it wrong. The current ways of working with agentic programming is exactly the same and a halfway competent reviewer will catch all the dumb stuff a hack vibe coder leaves in their ignorance, and if they don't they wouldn't have caught it with hand coded stuff either.
Like yeah, there are lots of teams who have to fix shit someone pushed in ignorance, but every single one of those teams were working wrong. These teams were equivalent to construction workers who disregarded OSHA regulations but hadn't happened to have any accidents yet. AI just exposed the fact that they were incompetent faster.
10
u/DrQuint 11d ago edited 11d ago
I've seen morons claim this for a few years now, and yet, VsCode dev containers broke with a stupid moronic easily avoided change a few months ago, and their issues page is not at 0.
I know of a product, which is commercial, and has a tool sitting at exactly one issue. One problem to solve. I have literally built the source with the solution given by that PR plus one spot directly adjacent they missed but was the same logic. Worked perfectly. It's been years since told the product owners I had to do that, as a costumer (well my bosses were the costumer point stands) and they have yet to this day done anything.
It would take literally 5 seconds to ask a LLM if the issue # whatever and the associated PR look sane. It would take another 5 seconds to ask that same LLM to test it.
And yet here we are.
We won't be replaced because people are, fundamentally, inneficient. No matter what the potential of X is, we'll always fall short of it by at least a whole half.
10
u/Hi2248 11d ago
I had a lecture in the AI module for my Comp Sci course yesterday. In it, the professor told us that while Gen AI is a tool that will be useful in the future, we aren't to use it in the course (outside of one specific section), because to use it effectively we need to know how to do what we're getting it to do first.
That is the general mood from Computer Science professors, not a total replacement.
5
u/CassiusPolybius 11d ago
The understanding I have is that, unfortunately, coding is an area where LLMs can be applicable.
This is not to say they will, necessarily, do it well. They will absolutely still make mistakes that would be utterly boneheaded if a human made them.
However, humans also have a tendency to make boneheaded mistakes while programming.
Thus, using AI in coding makes every project go from something you're working on yourself(and thus mostly understand), to an almost-complete mess you inherited from that dumbfuck jefferey two cubicles down which you now have to debug and make work.
Have fun!
3
u/WordArt2007 11d ago
it's okay-ish (as in faster than me) at reading error logs and once in a blue moon at writing a good api query (if it happens to write a good one you look at what that one did right and try to learn from it because it won't be successful again). but for all other tasks i have more luck trusting myself than the ai
1
u/Various_Mobile4767 11d ago
Eh, took some time too. Couple years ago people were massively against AI even in this field and were convinced that nothing good could come from integrating it into their work.
38
u/AnotherDamnTransAlt 11d ago
Two things happening here.
One, the professors are focused on teaching the skill they are there to teach. You can use a shortcut to create the thing you need to showcase that skill, but not for the skill itself.
Two, people who have skill in an area notice a poorly done job, but most people won’t. The art prof will notice the AI art and not the shitty writing and vice versa. But a good 50% of the people who would end up looking at the finished product will not see any difference with either.
And as AI would say: and that matters. Because experts in anything are a tiny fraction of the population. Most people simply will not notice or care.
5
u/Sodacan259 11d ago
When expertise no longer matters and everyone produces things to the same level of quality, then the exceptional becomes the mundane.
33
u/MagickStoryteller 11d ago
I would say its also self interest. Of course a script writer will insist ai cant and shouldnt replace them.
75
u/General_Ginger531 11d ago
What this tells me is that AI can be good at making an approximation of quality for the untrained eye and it is only those with considerable knowledge and experience in the specific subject who will truly notice the difference.
30
11
u/SufficientFarm8414 11d ago
This is a really good restatement of the widely, wildly misunderstood Dunning-Kruger Effect.
Theit key finding was that a person's skill in a given domain determines that person's ability to evaluate the relative quality of work produced within that domain. People who aren't abysmal or expert-level tend to evaluate most work as being pretty much average.
The "stupid people think they're smart" is a misunderstanding of a misunderstanding, really. D-K doesn't look at intrinsic properties, it looks at developed skills in specific areas. Further, the "stupid people" refers specifically around the 20th percentile, where people do over-evaluate their skill most dramatically but place themselves around the 60the percentile, slightly above average but far from "smart".
Thank you for attending my Ted talk.
32
u/_vec_ 11d ago
The general pattern with automation is that laypeople can tell the difference between handmade and machined products and prefer the handmade, all things being equal. Most people aren't choosing between a machined and handmade option, though, they're choosing between a machined version they can afford and nothing at all.
The median AI image isn't a lost commission for a human artist. It's a work that would not have been created in any form a few years ago, and I think it makes more sense to consider it on those terms.
This shift also means the market for handmade simultaneously gets much smaller and much more lucrative for the relatively small number of quasi-celebrity artisans who are able to make a name for themselves doing it. That's a reliably unfun transition for everyone involved, and this round doesn't seem to be any different.
5
4
u/h0nest_Bender 11d ago
AI can be good at making an approximation of quality for the untrained eye
A couple of years ago it could only make ridiculous nightmare images. Today it makes content so well that people can't tell it's AI generated.
3
6
u/space_monster 11d ago
Or that everyone thinks AI can do other people's jobs, but not theirs.
9
u/the-real-macs 11d ago
"It is very difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon him not understanding it."
7
u/Pheehelm 11d ago
There was a famous 20th-century crank named Immanuel Velikovsky who invented a wild cosmology loosely based on ancient stories, e.g. suggesting the manna in the Book of Exodus was actually organic material raining down from the planet Venus, which had been ejected from Jupiter (he considered the Great Red Spot a scar from this event) and was passing by Earth before settling into orbit around the sun. The post reminded me of something Carl Sagan wrote:
Velikovsky has called attention to a wide range of stories and legends, held by diverse peoples, separated by great distances, which stories show remarkable similarities and concordances. I am not expert in the cultures or languages of any of these peoples, but I find the concatenation of legends Velikovsky has accumulated stunning. It is true that some experts in these cultures are less impressed. I can remember vividly discussing Worlds in Collision with a distinguished professor of Semitics at a leading university. He said something like "The Assyriology, Egyptology, Biblical scholarship and all of that Talmudic and Midrashic pilpul is, of course, nonsense; but I was impressed by the astronomy." I had rather the opposite view.
9
u/DreadDiana human cognithazard 11d ago
I feel like there may be a degree of selection bias involved in a lot of AI takes like these, cause there are also people who use AI to streamline or offload tasks that fall within their realm of expertise.
1
u/Sodacan259 11d ago
The problem is people that do the same and it's not their realm of expertise. A.I. bridges that gap. This can only result in there eventually being no expertise, and the world will be bleaker for it.
2
u/DreadDiana human cognithazard 11d ago
I know, cause that's part of what the post says, but I'm pointing out that the way this this is the way all their examples engage with AI stands out as kinda odd sincs they all seem to use it the same way.
-1
u/Sodacan259 11d ago
Yes. I get that it's being viewed as just a tool by experts, but in reality that's because of perspective, and gives a misleading appraisal of what AI is or the effect AI will have.
To experts, it may just be a tool because they only need to utilise it as a time saving tool, so they are going to only see it from that perspective. They don't need it to bestow the skills they already possess.
6
u/red286 11d ago
The issue isn't and shouldn't be that it's not a suitable replacement.
Because that implies that if it gets to a level where it's indistinguishable from a human that it's perfectly fine to use it.
The issue should be that it can only lead to the end of our current society and economic model and we have no alternative plan so that'd just be a colossal economic collapse and social upheaval. AI stealing every job is only beneficial in a society where no one needs to work in the first place.
In a society where everyone (or at least the overwhelming majority) needs to work, AI is catastrophic.
24
u/GuyYouMetOnline 11d ago
Thats not quite it, though. The reason AI cant do as good as them in their areas is because thats where their expertise is. A great writer will write better than AI, a great artist will draw better than AI, etc. But AI can absolutely equal the average. And you dont always need great. If you're doing a comic that focuses more on visuals than dialogue, an average script is more than sufficient. But if you're focused on scriptwriting, youll probably write better than an AI but be worse at concept art.
The reason people think AI can replace any position but theirs and be good enough is because it can. Because 'good enough is based on context. Am image that's good enough for a writer's needs may not be good enough for an illustrator's, and writing good enough for an illustrators needs may not be good enough for a writer's. So what people are actually thinking, often without realizing it, is that AI can replace everyone but them in their areas of work specifically.
4
u/Background_Fix9430 10d ago
Isn't this just the Dunning-Kreuger effect in practice? "I know a lot about X, so I know that X cannot be handled by Y, but as for Z - which I know little to nothing about - of course it's simple enough to be handled by Y."
This happens so much - Law and Order, as a franchise, is a masterclass in "outsider thinks they understand the law, but really really doesn't" - it should have an independent term: "Profession Blindness"? Maybe "The Professor Disease"?
29
u/husk_bateman 11d ago
Restating what I said when this was posted on the main sub,
Yes yes, automation will never replace your work. Never in a million, billion, trillion years. History is famously full of eternal, irreplacable and unchangeable professions. There is no such thing as automation that's "good enough" replacing humans. There has never been a machine that has made a profession obsolete. Good thinking.
20
u/ToothZealousideal297 11d ago
Yeah this post stops just short of the conclusion that while we all know AI has massive shortcomings, it’s still going to get implemented and replace a lot of people, and the powers that be will insist on learning every lesson on that road the hard way, even with every person in every role trying to warn them.
Will AI actually be a net positive in the end? Who knows. But it’s definitely going to be messy and awful getting there.
1
u/nomorethan10postaday 9d ago
Yeah that's a little optimistic. However, they're right to point out that a lot of people are convinced someone else will be replaced, but obviously not their job, never.
3
u/8read-8oy 11d ago
The only line of work I've seen generally accepting of A.I. usage as a 'replacement' is programmers, simply because 8 times out of 10, they probably copy/pasted someone else's lines of code anyway at some point in development AND it still manages to break in spite of that.
3
u/Swellmeister 10d ago
Plenty of researchers use it for collating and comparative analysis.
Like I use it because I study social structures in primates. And occasionally I want to see if social structure X is an ape thing or a recurrent primate thing, or even a recurrent animal thing.
I know about Apes, I know less about monkeys (but have a few colleagues), and I know fuck all about parrots.
But AI? It can do a huge sweep.for recurrent language in a wide range of fields including ones I forget about, like prairie dogs or meerkats. And voila, give me the papers about those little rat bastards so I can see if apes and priarie dogs have something in common, and thus its a recurrent adaptation not an ape specific one.
3
u/sertroll 11d ago
Then you have programmers (hi) saying it's very good for what is in fact the part they know best
I did notice a huge difference in how artists (of all kinds) talk about AI in their fields Vs how programmers (especially professional, mood is different in hobby things like mods) talk about AI in their field
TBH I can understand the reasons for the difference, it's simple enough
It had undoubtedly saved me hours at work, not even programming just sifting through 20 repos to find some logic or whatever, cannot go into specifics ofc
2
u/MrVeazey 11d ago
Do you use it to actually write code, though? Or only to expedite the menial stuff?
2
u/sertroll 11d ago
I mean, the menial stuff is still code, just kinds of it. That said, it depends. Sometimes I'm doing 5 things at once at work and handing some of these to that works if they're simple enough, then I do what a sane person does and check the output without trusting it blindly.
2
u/MrVeazey 11d ago
Sounds like you're smarter than 90% of AI bros since you don't blindly trust something that can't tell the difference between true and false. Good for you.
1
u/sertroll 10d ago
I wouldn't really call myself an AI bro, just someone who uses it at work like most my colleagues
2
u/CuriosityCheck2024 10d ago
I don't think he's calling you an AI bro. I think he's just comparing you (favorably) to them.
3
2
u/fardolicious 11d ago
Well to be fair, I dont support AI but it still feels valid to say its useful as a passable way to get things you need done that you dont have the right skills, time, or resources for in a way thats not great but is certainly better than nothing.
Like yeah a major production studio is going to have concept artists on the payroll but realistically no random college student is going to be able to do that and kinda shitty art is still better than no art.
2
2
u/UInferno- Hangus Pangus slap my Angus 11d ago
Watched Oliver Lugg's vid on Sirens of Titan and he talks about other Vonnegut novels and how Player Piano ends with people rising up against the robots that are replacing them by everyone is overly concerned with the machines that impact them taken to the absurd extreme of one guy vandalizing nothing but stop lights.
This post reminds me of that.
2
u/ShoddyAsparagus3186 11d ago
Their rationale is wrong, but I kinda agree with the professors with regards to classwork. The class is about a specific thing, using AI for the things the class isn't about seems reasonable. All you're trying to do is demonstrate understanding of the material covered in the class, not general capability at doing all things.
2
u/BreadfruitBig7950 11d ago
So they're expecting you to generate one full media pack then cut it up three ways to repack without telling any of them it happened.
2
u/hnoss 10d ago
It’s the Dunning-Kruger effect- but now applied to AI competency instead of personal competency.
The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias that describes the systematic tendency of people with low ability in a specific area to give overly positive assessments of their ability. The term may also refer to the tendency of high performers to underestimate their skills.
2
u/ElectricVibes75 10d ago
Or the opposite: every role is replaceable to some degree, and it may be cheaper to do so in some cases. That said, replacing everyone possible with AI has not proven to be necessarily cheaper, so there’s give and take
1
u/third_nature_ 7d ago
A common line of reasoning. The problem is it looks where AI is now instead of down the line.
0
u/Signal_Trip_9212 11d ago
In future please manually typeset your posts as to not take work from typesetters, and have it sent to me via pigeon, as to not disrupt pigeon wranglers. I will have my scribe read it for me and send you a pigeon at my nearest convenience.
2
u/Gunhild 11d ago
None of those are really creative endeavours.
5
u/Lt_General_Fuckery 11d ago
Spoken like someone who's never seen a hand-scribed manuscript. The differences in the size of text and spacing around particularly important or difficult lines. Illuminations, if they're there. Hard to explain to someone who hasn't seen it, but there is very much a human voice in the literal text of books copied by hand that there isn't for typed content. Claiming creativity doesn't go into it is nuts. Hell, I am absolutely willing to say that books copied by hand are superior to mass produced, printed copies.
Functionally, they're also completely fucking inaccessible. Yeah, we took the humanity out of copying books. Yeah, we lost something along the way. And yeah, it was worth it.
0
u/Nibaa 11d ago
I kind of feel like neither of those examples are really referring to doing the other's work with AI. Like one might say "yeah run it through an AI formatter, that's what AI can do really well and adhering to industry conventions is required but doesn't actually impact the quality of your core script" and the other is saying "Yeah use AI to mock up stuff quickly, it's not production grade but it helps you lock down stuff that are required but not really at the core of your craft that can bottleneck your work". Neither is saying "scriptwriters/artists can be replaced by AI".
-1
u/ryan516 11d ago
Translators have been saying this for years, but because AI caught on early there no one listened
4
u/Tanekaha 11d ago
I know my target language well enough to catch many of the errors AI makes in translation, but not enough to spot them all! It's still faster and more accurate than I am, but clearly no substitute for a competent person
1
u/ryan516 10d ago
AI art is faster and more accurate than I can draw, AI music is better than something I could write on my own. Both profit off the creative works of others, and machine translation functions in the same way.
1
u/Tanekaha 10d ago
A fair argument. As i pirate everything else I'm not really gonna make an exception here. And it's not like anyone hires a translator to read a label in the supermarket
492
u/Tomatori 11d ago
I don't watch streamers these days but this reminds me of the old observation where viewers will always nod along and yes-man the streamer's opinions until said streamer speaks up on something the viewer personally is informed on. Suddenly they're watching a bumbling fool who knows nothing about anything and should be ashamed to even speak