Backlash against generative AI is growing
AI-generated media (images, music, text, video) is steadily becoming more prevalent on the web, and the internet is getting stranger by the day.
Dead internet theories are coming true, and the rise of deepfake images and videos is fueling the rise of conspiracy theories.
The AI hype cycle has reached an interesting new stage, with investors pouring money into the technology, but with the Taylor Swift deepfake scandal, Glasgow’s Willy Wonka fiasco, and AI-generated Negative stories dominate the discourse, including backlash against assets. Until late at night with the devil and Doctor Whoand numerous copyright lawsuits.
Billy Cole, the organizer of the Willy Wonka debacle in Glasgow, was named and shamed by Rolling Stone as a “horn-cutting fraudster” who used generative AI to publish 16 books on Amazon. Ta.
Cole has since been nicknamed “Willy Wanker” on the internet, but he’s not the only one trying to make a quick buck using generative AI.
This technology is emboldening scammers to flood online marketplaces with AI-generated images and text. Authorless and meaningless content is polluting the waters of the world wide web.
Much of the AI-generated art looks lifeless and eerie, peppered with disturbing “hallucinations” such as twisted fingers, distorted furniture, and crowds of distorted faces.
Recent reports have shown that public trust in AI is plummeting, and this shift is highlighted by a clip from the SXSW festival that went viral, championing the wonders of generative AI. The crowd is shown booing in response to the enthusiastic support of tech leaders.
The initial promise of generative AI to bring greater creative freedom has been overshadowed by harsh realities. This technology is being used to reduce costs and replace workers.
Amid the tsunami of curvaceous anime girls and hazy fantasy art created by AI, some artists are experimenting with AI as a tool and successfully creating visually striking and thoughtful works.
However, many artists have spoken out against this technology, pointing out that the creative process, however cumbersome, is not an inconvenient obstacle.
Most creators don’t want machines pumping out content for them. Art is created by humans. Like fast food, it’s not ordered by impatient consumers with the push of a button.
Self-expression takes time and effort, and the story behind the creation of a work of art is often just as interesting as the final product and essential to the discussion surrounding it. Creating art is a form of self-expression, not a burden.
How can art generated by AI, which inherently has no meaning, perspective, or intent, have value beyond novelty?
Does the average consumer really want a landscape filled with media that no one bothers to produce?
Beyond the philosophical debate, many artists claim that generative AI models are being “trained” on their work without their consent, and that the models are already being used to cut corners in the creative industries.
Many artists were in a precarious and precarious position before this technology arrived and were unable to benefit from the rise of this technology.
The threat of generative AI is not limited to the creative arts. A recent report from the Institute for Public Policy Research estimates that over the next five years in the UK he 8 million jobs could be lost to generated AI.
Assuming that the output of AI models is dynamic, reliable, and cost-effective enough to replace human workers, the general public could rejoice at the arrival of the so-called “jobs apocalypse.” The sex will be low.
Silicon Valley technology leaders consistently promise that AI will eventually outperform all expectations. Some even believe that technology will become so advanced that we will become sentient.
Today’s generative models do not even provide a path to perception or understanding. But people, especially those leading generative AI companies, love to anthropomorphize machines.
In a 2023 article, Open AI CEO Sam Altman speculated that sentient AI, known as AGI (artificial general intelligence), is not only possible, but inevitable.
Altman writes: “The benefits of AGI are so great that we do not believe it is possible or desirable for society to permanently halt its development.”
Despite Altman’s claims, AGI remains the stuff of science fiction.
With “hallucinations” still unresolved and current models consuming water and energy at alarming rates, Altman believes a “breakthrough” in nuclear fusion is needed for an AI-powered world. ing.
All this water, energy, infrastructure, online fraud and spambots help sustain technologies that threaten workers’ livelihoods and erode creative industries.
The backlash against generative AI persists, and in the long run AI may be seen as another Silicon Valley fad, like NFTs, that never quite lives up to the hype.
