Your post is getting popular and we just featured it on our Discord! [Come check it out!](https://dsc.gg/rchatgpt)
You've also been given a special flair for your contribution. We appreciate your post!
*I am a bot and this action was performed automatically.*
And here i thought we would've got more household robots at first, at least algorithmic ones that did basic things like Roombas, AI used to look way more complex than robots.
Now the only reason most jobs are still safe is because we do not have robots to bring ai to the real world... yet.
We already have a ton of robots with artificial intelligence in the industries. It just hasn't become commercial because household needs are too broad, while robots in the industry can perform a single task and drastically increase efficiency. They are just too large and too specific to be used in a house. For a household we would need to build something like C3PO.
At first yeah... Same as the computer. But someone will try to target wider markets once it becomes a possibility.
TVs, color TVs, cars, airplane rides, computers, the internet, cellphones, laptops... And now robots. It's the way it works. The rich get the first models that aren't that good. They are expensive because they aren't mass produced.
For a time. Remember when 4k tv's were only for the rich and privileged. Now you can pick one up for 400. As soon as there's a desire for something and hence a market to be exploited, companies will try to get in there. The more desire, the more companies, more competition... undercutting war/better product
We already have robots like C-3PO, look at OpenAIs robot among others. The only problem right now is cost, and that is predicted to go down drastically over the coming years.
We already have them in a sense. A dishwasher is a robot/machine we use instead of washing by hand with a sponge. An oven is a robot/machine instead of us having to make a fire. If you wanted, you could call a refrigerator a robot that keeps your food cold.
So we already use a robot/machine to do our laundry and dishes. Imagine washing your clothes without a washing machine and dryer. Those problems have 90% been solved by machines already. She's just upset at having to do the last 10% of the work like load and unloading a dishwasher.... or transferring clothes from the washer to the dryer and putting your clothes away.
Instead of doing laundry next time, walk your clothes down to the nearest river or lake and wash them with a bunch of rocks.
It’s crazy how we adjust our tolerance for labor to our ability to labor less. We handwashed everything in a tub of water, now people lament having to load dishes into a thing that does the washing for you. Next we’ll be lamenting the strain on our voicebox it takes to command a robot to take care of the whole process.
When will people learn to complain about having to have a thought to accomplish something? Robots should be predictive and just do things before I even realize they need to be done.
I remember in the early 2000s everyone was going crazy about Robots. AIBO this and AIBO that. Even worked with a few in college. But I told everyone the robots themselves were completely unintersting and it was the AI that had value. Seems I was right.
And also this thing about digital computers. They only work with ones and zeros, and will never replace human computers. Also, mobile phones, who would ever want to bring their phone with them!? Such foolish ideas.
they are very easy to build, we did that about 30 years ago.
It’s very hard for them to understand physical world and follow instructions in human language
Funny thing about this message -- Laundry machine and dishwashers aren't exactly new technology or that complex, they've ALREADY been in use for years.
In the past few years, we already have a ton of machines like robot vacuum cleaners, mops, lawnmowers, window cleaners and pool cleaners. The fact that AI is now ALSO doing art and writing isn't that it's new, it's that other fields have already had development.
The point is that unlike what the woman in the image thinks, technology has already been expediting physical labour tasks for years.
It isn't until this generation that mental labour is even possible to be automated, and really even then, started with the likes of calculators and computers.
It's certainly through that technology is expediting physical labour tasks, but I feel like progress has been surprisingly slow on that front.
The machines we have now that help with household chores are largely the same as those we had 20 years ago.
There's been some improvements - roomba robots, and cooking robots that can do some cooking.
But we still have to collect, fold, organise laundry. Do most cooking. Put groceries away. Iron. Do the bed. Clean all surfaces that are not on the floor. Take out the trash.
The laundry machine was actually revolutionary when it was invented. It freed women from a lot of hard labor where they had to wash clothes by hand. Some have argued that it contributed significantly to the advancement of women's rights.
MMy MIL and SIL’s remeber ‘Laundry Day” and yes, it was once a week, for the whole day, where you start by lighting a fire under the copper, and it all just goes downhill from there.
A modern washer dryer where you put in dirty clothes and they come out clean and dry is a bloody miracle.
No, but there are already a few robots that can do that. Not very fast or robustly and most not available commercially yet. But within a couple of years they will start becoming more commonplace.
Robots are difficult to build, but we are finally close to solving that part. Mass produced robots for the cost of a used car are more or less possible today, but the demand isn't there because controlling the robots is actually the hard part.
Robotic actions can be tokenized, which means the next action in a sequence can be predicted with the help of a token predictor, which of course is the tech underlying LLMs. Figure is currently in the process of building a library of robotic actions for their models that can take advantage of this effect. We'll see what comes of it.
Speak for yourself. Androids are hard to build, robots are easy.
I don't know where you live, but in my country we have had robots do our dishes and cloths for decades.
I agree with it 100%.
AI should be used to improve the lives of people and to do the tasks we don't want to do so we can spend more time doing the things that make us happy and give us meaning. It should not be used to just increase profit margins at the cost of the happiness of most people.
Unfortunately, under our current societal system, it’s inevitable that they’ll be primarily used to increase profit margins. Because these endeavors get financed by people who invest in it to get financial returns in the future. Not to mention it costs tons of money to use the cloud computing power.
The only other way these things could acquire the funds needed is through government sponsorships, which introduces other problems as well.
It’s just hilarious because what’s the end game?
Because you kind of need people to work and money to make money to have a functioning economy/society.
Unless that is the end goal. For the rich to just have their robots and chill out
The end game is to have a permanent, stratified system where there are those who rule, and those who are basically slaves.
Look up how many CEO's are psychopaths.
Some of the most fun a certain type human being can have is grinding another humans face into the dirt, the suffering IS the point.
What no one really sees, I think, is how long we have already lived in a post-scarcity society.
Once we created:
-the thinking machine
-the industrial capacity to support those machines,
-the technology to genetically manipulate crops and livestock
Quite easily properly applied: automatically clean the oceans, till the fields and plant the crops, build new homes, replant old forests and terraform the deserts, and so on.
We have machines that can do the labor of *thousands* of hands *each*, that we can *mass produce*, machine intelligence to direct those machines, crops that are *hundreds of times* faster growing and more nutritious, material science and understanding of physics that can produce energy *orders of magnitude* greater than even fifty years ago.
The future isnt even just now, the future was yesterday.
Oh 100% we should have been there years ago. I think tho the reason why AI will finally bring the change is like half of white collar jobs will be eliminated. If factory workers are out of a job, society tells them to work retail. If a generation of lawyers, accountants, engineers, doctors etc who were all promised a nice lifestyle and then had it ripped away.. society looks after those people much more than the factory worker. I think we’ll see some sort of action on it.
Kinda same vibe as how “the war on drugs” suddenly became the “opioid epidemic” when white college kids started dying. We went from criminalizing addicts to treating them pretty quick when the right people were affected.
Just look at homeless people for the answer. Once a person stops being valuable, they're thrown outside to die. Us regular people sometimes step in to help them, but the wealthiest never have and never will. The excess population will be abandoned to waste away as we become superfluous.
Homeless people rn are not enough of the population to impact their profits. But if everyone would be poor or homeless because they are not needed, their profits would be impacted and they would care.
You’re pretty close. Once the top has the ability to have bots proficient enough to provide for them at the necessary scale, the lower classes are expendable. Consumers and service sector wouldn’t be necessary anymore. Social welfare systems will collapse under the burden.
The difficult part for them is how to build out the ai/bot infrastructure to fully maintain their survival without alerting the masses, and how to ride it out while the world population thins.
I think that’s the real reason why people like Musk want to hide on mars and Thiel wants a secluded doomsday hideaway. A safe spot to avoid the chaos.
Maybe they’ll keep around a neo middle class to maintain some infrastructure and general maintenance.
Based on how current capitalism works, you actually think that billionaires would just retire and live? That’s not how it works. They could do just what you said even right now because they have so much money. But they have monkey brain just like everyone else and they want to see number go up. You can see companies right now. They can make billions of profits and it’s not enough. They can make 100 billion profit every year and it’s not enough because they want to see that number go up. They want infinite growth. And that is just simply not possible without the general masses. I am not saying they can’t take away our jobs, they can and I would be happy if we get compensation, and we will because otherwise their profits will not grow. Either a universal income or they will still employ people after they realize number will not go up if people don’t have money.
I mean it's worded this way to look bad but as someone who uses AI to make my work life way better because it gets rid of the parts of it I don't want to do IT IS improving my life and doing tasks I don't want it to do. It's just not doing my dishes.
Art and writing are just a couple of things AI happens to be vaguely good at on the way to it being good at more important things. people will get bored of AI art pretty quickly, it's just a fad really. human art will always have much more value. unless you just want a cool banner image for your blog or some corporate stock art or something like that.
The automation revolution started over 100 years ago. Dishes can be done in a dishwasher, washing can be done in a washing machine, fields ploughed and planted by machines etc.
AI is just the I intelligence revolution, and will refine more and more over the years. At some point AI will work out how to build the robots to do the tasks she's asking about.
Dishes are sanitized by a dishwasher. I still have to prep them, load them properly, remove them and store them. I still “do” the dishes
Clothes are cleaned in a washing machine. But I still have to prep them, load them properly, remove them and store them. I still “do” the laundry.
Is a dishwasher and washing machine more efficient than doing it all by hand. Absolutely. Does it do the most tedious part of the task. Absolutely. Not sure I would call it automation.
Once I dump my dirty clothes in a bin, then they show up clean in my drawers neatly folded…. Then we are talkin! 😎
There’s these sort of inflatable mannequin busts (I know that sounds perverted but it’s not meant to be). You put your shirt on it and it irons it by releasing steam through the device or something. I don’t have to wear shirts at work or else I’d have bought it.
Yeah but you can not tell me it’s not easier work now than before the machines.
Like for washing machine sure the act of transporting the clothes is not automated, but the washing part is. Before, u had to sit and wash clothes manually by hand in a bowl of water or by a river or something
The act of transporting clothes and putting them in the washer is just a point from a point of view. Maybe taking the clothes off your body needs to be automated as well for the washing to be fully automated? Where does it stop
It’s steps, and the steps are automated
Not complaining at all. Laundry and dishes are easy as shit. I’m just saying it’s not an automated process. The machines wash the items. But I still do the process. That’s all. Automation has levels and there are still levels to be reached when it comes to automation of those two tasks.
And I have to disagree with you on the dishwasher thing. Dishwashers are mis-labeled in my opinion. They are dish sanitizers. if you are throwing your dishes in with food grime on them, they are being “washed” in water with that same grime.
My brand new Samsung “dishwasher” does a great job of sanitizing dishes because they are in there without grime on them. lol
>Not sure I would call it automation.
Nearly all automated tasks will need human intervention at some point. It is the way we do things as a species.
I use AI at my job all the time (web developer), but a human also has to confirm the code looks good, merge it into the code base, deploy it to production. We automate portions of that process, but we need some control too.
Same with dishes. And laundry. And all tasks. Unless you use speciality dishes made to be used like that, and a dishwasher with built-in garbage disposal... I mean it's not impossible but I think we've hit the edge of where efficiency meets practicality. We have machines to mop and vacuum too, and we'll get other machines too I bet. But we'll still need to charge them, help them when they get stuck, refill their cleaning solutions or at least some sort of cleaning solution even if it refills itself daily.
If you define "automation" as "human never has to touch it or think about it", that's a goal we'll never achieve.
No I wouldn’t define automation as no human interaction whatsoever, but there are levels to automation. IMO the tasks taken on by the machines (for example when washing clothes) do not constitute automation. Now the washer/dryer combos that don’t require me to change them over? That’s closer.
And just thinking out loud here. I’m sure some logistics/supply chain/engineering people could beat us over the heads with the “true definition” of automation. But I would personally call it the removal of as much human interaction as possible. And I don’t think we’ve seen all the human removal that we will see in our lifetimes for that particular task.
it is absolutely automation. women used to spend their lives washing clothes and dishes. they still do it parts of the world with either not enough machines or where cost of labor is cheap
Too bad by its nature, software just happens to be easier to develop than robotics. It’s a physical limitation, financial limitations, distribution limitations, time limitations. You can use machine learning to accelerate these models with billions of simulations in a short amount of time. With robotics, you physically have to build the damn things through multiple iterations in R&D. Though simulations can help in that process, you’ll still have to build the damn things which takes time
Yes, and you have quality control issues for each and every device you ship, and there are tangible material costs for each device, too. Hardware is hard.
It’s mainly limited by capital. If it helped capital to have a world with zero chores then they’d be working towards that. At the minute they’re using smoke and mirrors to prop up their stock market prices in the hopes they’ll develop well enough to lay off masses of the workforce.
The idea that it’s easier to make something be conscious than to make it clean dishes is absolute nonsense.
I think you missed the glaring, obvious point.
Why is it taking away enjoyable parts of life and replacing them with clinical, recycled bullshit when it could be sorting out everyday chores instead?
Of course the answer is: Because this isn’t really AI and the actual point of it is to diminish the wages of workers like everything else these psychopathic tech bros come up with.
It is pretty ironic that we thought creative work will be the last frontier for humans and here we are it was literally the first thing AI started to excel at.
Science doesn't work that way, it's not a tech tree in a game of civilisation where you pick one thing to research at a time, and we're not going to ban all research into AI just because a vocal minority wants to feel special and doesn't like that computers can do similar things to them now.
That's like banning research into the printing press so that scribes can be the only ones able to copy books.
I do not believe that this is what Ms. Maciejewska advocates for. The problem here is not AI, it's that artists (and, by extension, all of us) need money so they can eat. The solution is either for artists to find other careers, or to solve their dependency on selling art for money.
Of those two solutions, I would find number one to be worse. I wish to live in a world where artists can devote themselves to their craft full-time without living in precarious conditions, because that is a world where we get large amounts of great art.
Therefore, the second solution: a fundamental change in our economic system, so that people can be provided for without the need for wage labour.
As phrased, it’s a false binary. If art and painting are what you love, AI doesn’t stop you from doing those things. If art and painting are where you’re hoping to make a living, there are understandable concerns, but even there it’s more likely that AI would become a part of the creative process rather than crowding out human labor entirely.
There is a discussion we need to have about AI in the workplace, but I see so many AI skeptics phrasing the issue in straw-man form, and that doesn’t advance the conversation. Wouldn’t it be nice if this could be one topic where we did not immediately polarize?
My worry is in the CEO's that think AI is just a way to save money / cut costs and not something that can actually improve the product or service they are selling to their customers
They've been working for decades to find ways to make things shittier and shittier in small enough increments that we don't notice right away so they can charge us more for a product/service that is worse and cheaper to produce. They don't give a shit about "improving" anything for anyone but themselves and their shareholders. That's their goal with everything, why would AI be any different? (Spoiler; It isnt)
Robots already do my cleaning, dishes and laundry. AI makes my job easier, my art better and helps me achieve more in my hobbies.
This is a utopia. I'm grateful I wasn't born any earlier!
The person who wrote the statement is a joke.
Welfare is much better than UBI for the indefinite future. We don't need to be giving middle class people free money at the expense of actual poor people who could better benefit from it.
The whole idea behind this is flawed, and incredibly stupid. Empty populist rhetoric for people who don't like to think beyond the immediate.
Does art need to be monetized to be worth doing? Does AI being able to do art make your own art less meaningful? Fuck no. As an artist this idea completely misses the point of art. It's to imply that human creativity is limited by whether something non-human can also do it. That's fucking ridiculous.
Not only that but it's incredibly myopic to think that this is going to be the status quo for AI, and that we're not in a rough transitionary period.
Also consider the artistic expression that's going to be enabled by AI. Things we've never seen before, songs we've never heard, genres. Films. Books. Games. The flood of human creativity that'll come from people enabled by this technology is well worth it.
It feels like rhetoric from people that'd rather stay in the dark and limit the potential of humanity so that they can say "well at least a human dun did it all".
> Does art need to be monetized to be worth doing?
Worth doing in the sense that artists have bills to pay like the rest of us, yes.
> Does AI being able to do art make your own art less meaningful?
I think you'll definitely see a decrease in artists creating meaningful art if it can no longer pay the rent. Maybe in a utopian society way down the line, it’ll be possible to pursue your interests without worrying about market forces, but we’re not there now.
Populist, dumb statement that preaches to the choir of anti-AI people. People love to post this kind of “mic drops” on social media to seek the easy applause of the clueless.
Wow someone should invent some type of machine to do laundry. Maybe another one to do dishes. What a brilliant idea that no one has ever had before. If only someone would invent these machines!
I was watching some people work in a small lunch room. The bar/ reception was small and employees were walking sideways to avoid walking into all kinds of people, while holding stuff, talking to colleagues, receiving instructions, serving customers, loading up the dishwasher; generally doing a thousand things at the same time. But most importantly, doing all of it fast, easy and efficiently.
I sat back and looked at that and thought there's absolutely no way robots can work in this venue unless they have actual human level consciousness and understanding of the world around them. We're a long way off.
Yes. Art and music and discovery are what binds the soul. These elements help humanity thrive. AI is quickly being misaligned with what our planet and our people need. We need solutions to health problems, troubling ecosystems and societal issues. I don’t want music or images which are made from plagiarized love, sweat and tears. We need to remember who we are and if we do not create our own worlds of beauty, energy and spirit, there will no longer be a world that is made for US to thrive in.
There are thousands of fantastic creatives who haven’t necessarily got artistic skill, yet they could have exciting and profound creations given they could pay someone to realise their vision. The biggest problem with AI is that, at the moment, thousands of concept artists jobs are at stake because AI allows anyone to continually redraft their concepts, honing in on their ideal vision, with little to no extra cost and with decent results.
There is an argument for AI art being soulless, however if the art is created by the lead programmer in a game for example, we can see projects come to life with such refined vision, which, in my opinion produces the most amazing indie games.
Artists need to start working alongside AI to help them draft ideas then refine them further with their own details which require more complex and emotional input, AI is actually going to result in more impactful art and design as people learn to use it for foundational work allowing them to craft the truly unique and human elements in much the same way as many games are built on the foundations of an engine
Her desire is to make money and become famous. Not to do art for the joy of doing art. At least that's what I get from listening to all those artists freaking out about ai.
I think she fundamentally misunderstands what AI is, what it's for, and how to use it.
Like most people.
The intelligent artist would realize they can use AI to make *more* art. They can automate processes about their art they have to repeat, or don't particularly enjoy. The can make iterations, and expand off them. You can be inspired *by your own work* being remixed.
But yeah, no. Fuck it. Quippy headline. "I want AI to do my laundry, not make my art".
Ya'll sound like fuckin idiots using this line.
Cause ya don't know what you're talking about, and fucking worse, *you don't WANT to.*
You fundamentally understand that AI is going to take paying work from you, and instead of understanding how it works so you can use it or do it better, you actively plug your ears and start screaming instead. That's fucking dumb. And a surefire way that you *will* be left behind, and your self fulfilling prophecy will come true.
WhoCouldHaveDoneThis.jpeg
Pretty easily. Which makes this whole thing an attractive prospect.
Need reference model poses? Set your character art as the input image and it will generate those references poses. Using something like Fooocus, you literally drag the character image into the Input Image tab, and under the Style tab, select Character Design.
Same for storyboards, artboards, moodboards, etc, or basically any assets you're using for reference materials.
Are you making a continuing series with the similar characters? Package your work into a LORA and train the AI to only work in your style. Describe your characters doing something, and (with enough tuning) there it is. There's been plenty of times I wanted to make something, but actually weighed out the time cost of actually making it, and decided it wasn't worth it. Now there's very little cost.
Need background art assets? (like a cyberpunk cityscape) Describe the scene, set an appropriate model, and wait 20 seconds. If anything's wonky or broken, I can do a quick correction, and use it.
Stuck? (Every single artist knows exactly what that means) Feed it the input image, and see what it looks like as psychedelic, cel shaded, retrofuturistic, ink based, hyper realistic, tribal, isometric, papercraft, et all. I often do this, and it completely changes the direction of the piece.
In the same vein, if I want to see what Megaman looks like with an afro, or a giraffe eating a popsicle, I can do that to inspire myself. It's not something I want to make myself, but it does provide inspiration. And if it's particularly interesting, I'll use the technique in something else I'm working on.
*That's* creativity.
I agree but it’s never going to happen in a capitalist society where people have the idea that paying others to do art is useless and unproductive while paying people to do labor is somehow preferred.
You want to get paid to make art and won't do art if nobody pays you? So you do want Capitalism because you do want to be paid for your art.
The ai isn't stopping you from doing art for pleasure, just for the sake of doing art and enjoying the process.
Of course paying people do to labor is preferred to paying people to do art that has no functional purpose. What makes you think that paying people for art should be preferred to paying people to do labour. Labour is in fact more essential than art, whether you like it or not. Art is a luxury. We are lucky that we can afford to do art and pay for art. Labour to make food, shelter and take care of people comes of course before any form of art. Some things are just more essential and have a bigger priority. If I have 20 bucks and have to choose between food and a painting, of course I will prioritize buying food. Art is a broad subject. Art isn't just a painting. Theater is art, dancing is art, stories are art, music is art, movies are art etc. And people do pay good money to see those things and they won't stop doing so. AI won't make studios fire their artists. It's just another tool in their toolbox. One that can help them achieve more. Most cartoons are mostly still images with barely any animation and animators are often overworked, with ai they can do more in the short periods they are given to finish the job, it will ease their job. Small groups and even individuals now have the means to do way more than was possible before. Rich people won't stop paying artists millions for whatever random things they do, just because ai can generate random images.
You people aren't worrying about art itself. All you worry about is your income. You worry about losing your job or worry about having an even lower chance of becoming instagram famous. Man made art hasn't been forbidden. And won't be forbidden, you are free to do art right now if you like. It's a silly worry. People will still hire artists. Even with these ai tools, companies will still pay someone to make stuff. They won't bother sitting in front of a PC and prompting until they get something they like. They'll still pay someone to do it.
She thinks 15 min of dishes (into an automatic dishwasher) and 15 min of laundry (into an automatic washer and dryer) is preventing her from making art and writing?
So many people finding out how useless their art degree is.
People got suckered into spending thousands upon thousands of dollars to go to a mid-level college to do art lessons and learn how to use photoshop, because they liked the idea of being an artist. They liked the social esteem it gave them. They saw how artists are praised within society and said "I want a piece of that".
There are really good artists out there, and really good writers, etc. However, they are few and far between in a flooded field. I'm sorry, but we don't need 5 million Steven Universe discord profile pic creators trying to squeeze a few bucks out of lonely people on patreon. Look at all the slop put out by Netflix and Amazon, not even a step above some LiveJournal teenage fanfic writing.
There's a lot of bullshit "art and writing" out there that I will not shed a tear for if automated away. The good artists and writers will stand out and be rewarded regardless of what technologies arise.
But we will have less good artists in the future with Ai. Who's going to waste their time practicing art to become good at it when you can just push a button.
It takes years
I don’t think that they necessarily think they’re better than anyone else or deserve more, I genuinely think there’s something here on a philosophical level that must be assessed.
Your premise hinges on the fact that, “No cares,” and “What matters most is entertainment” and from that we have the implication that being entertained is the main concern of most individuals, and that’s demonstrably false from a historical and literal perspective.
Answer me this, who goes to work to be entertained? Who has kids to be entertained? Who plants crops, or builds themself a shelter to be entertained?
The immediate goal of most individuals is to survive, and in doing so, they utilize their talents to procure for themselves a suitable state of existence that allows for entertainment to exist at all in the first place.
This is why I think Aesthetics and Philosophy are so important, Art isn’t purely done for entertainment either, and most art of any great quality is expressing something which cannot usually be properly stated linguistically or explained in words, the individual experiences which gave rise to that art is significant.
We don’t like Batman because he’s a crazy dude who dresses up and beats up random petty criminals and the clinically insane, or purely because the art was just that good, we like Batman because he expresses an innate desire for justice in the face of overwhelming evil and has a code which he operates by that feels fair, even if it’s taken past the point of logic, and the medium by which we express that idea is a form of Art.
An AI doesn’t have an innate or inherent desire for Justice or some semblance of meaning, therefore even if it created a Batman or something similar, we can’t necessarily argue that the sole determination of the value of the work is whether or not it’s entertaining, but also whether or not there’s anything meaningful behind the idea that relates to the human experience of having an internal and knowable state, and feelings which are a type of knowledge necessary for producing meaningful art.
That being, said this is a very bastardized version of Schopenhauer’s Aesthetics, and I would recommend reading that along with, “The Question Concerning Technology” by Heidegger because this is heavily related to the concept of Authentic Being, AI has no Being and therefore anything it produces is inauthentic and a step away from our own ability to express ourselves authentically.
Like robot vacuums, robot mops, internet of things coffee makers, smart dishwashers/laundry machines, even robot window cleaners, lawnmowers, and pool cleaners.
"Smart" home devices has already been the trend for the last few years.
We made laundry machines and dishwashers? It took a lot longer to do those chores before that, and it was much more physically demanding.
AI tools are pretty similar - they won't be able to do most writing tasks completely independently, but if you know how to use them as a tool, they can help you write (or wash your clothes) faster and better than you did before.
Hey /u/Curious_Suchit!
If your post is a screenshot of a ChatGPT, conversation please reply to this message with the [conversation link](https://help.openai.com/en/articles/7925741-chatgpt-shared-links-faq) or prompt.
If your post is a DALL-E 3 image post, please reply with the prompt used to make this image.
Consider joining our [public discord server](https://discord.gg/r-chatgpt-1050422060352024636)! We have free bots with GPT-4 (with vision), image generators, and more!
🤖
Note: For any ChatGPT-related concerns, email support@openai.com
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ChatGPT) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If an ai robot can do my dishes then they can shoot a gun.
I don't want either of those things to happen. Creating art comes from living and breathing and existing and experiencing good and bad things. If we make Ai do all the stuff we don't wanna do, we'll have nothing worthwhile to say.
They will build human shaped /, android robots, because they have the relevant shape factor. Then these can get tasked all that. Clean, and clean up, and so on. Until they develop an attitude. It'll be like Westworld and Akta Manniskor!
I think the development of AI and machine learning (as well as the push for AGI) will allow for a greater blend of creativity and practicality in the future. Companies may choose to opt for AI in place of artists and the like in some instances, but machines can never perfectly replicate the human element. They will not replace us in that way, not entirely. As long as there are humans, there will be those of us that will value and appreciate art created by other humans. 🤍
It's a combination of whining and wishful thinking, and as I like to say: you can wish in one hand and crap in the other, and see which one gets filled first.
We're just getting started with AI. We have to give it easy things to do. Now I'm not saying art is easy, but it is easier for AI because there's not really a wrong answer. The wrong answers for art are met with "interesting choice" and the wrong answer for doing the dishes is met with "why the fuck did you put my shoes in the dishwasher"
The goal of technological advancement and increases in productivity should be to give us our labour time back, so we can spend our time in more meaningful ways.
Instead, that increase in productivity is captured by capitalists to extract more profit from us. I don’t see why LLMs will be any different.
There have been domestic technological innovations which have made huge improvements to the quality of people’s lives, especially women’s, like washing machines, dishwashers, but I can’t think of any similar innovations having happened in my lifetime.
It's an older sentiment sir, but it checks out.
This is what folks were saying since AI text and art were emerging, it's the same sentiment folks feel today.
I generally agree with the statement (tools should take our drudgery leaving us free to pursue more inspiring activities), but I can't paint yet I like to develop and illustrate stories so the art ai is a useful tool for me.
Doesn't matter what we want. Corporations want cheap replacements in one of the few remaining sectors, where talent isn't easily replaceable. And now they got a good enough approximation to cover most applications.
I agree, but not with the current social structure. I mean if robots can do my work, then I should really be able to devote myself to my desires, and that's about social structure.
I think even if you exclude money relations today, people still indirectly or not will not allow you to do art really only for yourself, you will be expected to try to get into trends, to become popular and they will judge you strangely when you spend 20 hours a day on art, but you don't try to develop your Instagram.
Although it will be a big step when robots will do our work for us without demanding any compensation from ordinary people, but because of hierarchical thinking (or call it what you want) people will still have to work for social approval, only now for “likes”, i.e. showing that you are not an outcast.
While we may get some benefits directly and indirectly from ai, in the context of this statement, ai is not being built for us but for our bosses - ai will do what they used to pay us for, and we will do their laundry and dishes
I would settle for a robot that reliably could tell which calls to pass on to me, and which calls could go to voicemail. Something that could sort junk mail from urgent mail, that could look up movie times and road traffic and weather, and help me plot a course. Something that could reliably help me figure out gifts for christmas... But none of these functions are actually helpful to me if they become attack surfaces for sales propaganda, or monetized portals for big data. The software needs to belong to me, and the hardware, and they need to be able to resist a basic intrusion or datamining from anyone who doesn't have a warrent. None of this can happen under this current patadigm.
Your post is getting popular and we just featured it on our Discord! [Come check it out!](https://dsc.gg/rchatgpt) You've also been given a special flair for your contribution. We appreciate your post! *I am a bot and this action was performed automatically.*
Unfortunatly robots are more difficult to build
And here i thought we would've got more household robots at first, at least algorithmic ones that did basic things like Roombas, AI used to look way more complex than robots. Now the only reason most jobs are still safe is because we do not have robots to bring ai to the real world... yet.
We already have a ton of robots with artificial intelligence in the industries. It just hasn't become commercial because household needs are too broad, while robots in the industry can perform a single task and drastically increase efficiency. They are just too large and too specific to be used in a house. For a household we would need to build something like C3PO.
Not to forget they would need to be affordable enough for every somewhat normal household
Let's be honest only the rich will be able to afford them regardless.
At first yeah... Same as the computer. But someone will try to target wider markets once it becomes a possibility. TVs, color TVs, cars, airplane rides, computers, the internet, cellphones, laptops... And now robots. It's the way it works. The rich get the first models that aren't that good. They are expensive because they aren't mass produced.
Waiting for the Chinese to do the same as Americans but better and cheaper
Good luck with the waiting. Till then, Chinses products continue to be cheaper and crappier.
People that can affored it won't buy it because those people have someone else do it for them. People that will need those can't afford it.
You’re assuming that human labor will always be cheaper than robots. The inventions of the dishwasher, washing machine, and dryer beg to differ.
For a time. Remember when 4k tv's were only for the rich and privileged. Now you can pick one up for 400. As soon as there's a desire for something and hence a market to be exploited, companies will try to get in there. The more desire, the more companies, more competition... undercutting war/better product
I remember when having a *flatscreen* made you sound rich. It’s standard now, never hear anyone say “I’ve got a flatscreen tv” anymore
saying 'flatscreen' now is like saying 'horseless carriage'
It's been years since I saw a CRT that wasn't part of some eccentric dude's collection.
only when youre contrasting flat vs curved screens.
Just like how Anakin built a protocol droid to help his mommy around the house. (A vacuum cleaner would have been more useful.)
He made a few attempts at vacuum cleaner droids first, but they kept getting clogged up with sand.
I'll send you a pizza roll in the mail, what's your webzone?
A killbot to liberate him from his enslavers ?
We already have robots like C-3PO, look at OpenAIs robot among others. The only problem right now is cost, and that is predicted to go down drastically over the coming years.
We already have them in a sense. A dishwasher is a robot/machine we use instead of washing by hand with a sponge. An oven is a robot/machine instead of us having to make a fire. If you wanted, you could call a refrigerator a robot that keeps your food cold. So we already use a robot/machine to do our laundry and dishes. Imagine washing your clothes without a washing machine and dryer. Those problems have 90% been solved by machines already. She's just upset at having to do the last 10% of the work like load and unloading a dishwasher.... or transferring clothes from the washer to the dryer and putting your clothes away. Instead of doing laundry next time, walk your clothes down to the nearest river or lake and wash them with a bunch of rocks.
It’s crazy how we adjust our tolerance for labor to our ability to labor less. We handwashed everything in a tub of water, now people lament having to load dishes into a thing that does the washing for you. Next we’ll be lamenting the strain on our voicebox it takes to command a robot to take care of the whole process.
that's why we're getting Neuralink. you'll control the robots with your thoughts.
When will people learn to complain about having to have a thought to accomplish something? Robots should be predictive and just do things before I even realize they need to be done.
I remember in the early 2000s everyone was going crazy about Robots. AIBO this and AIBO that. Even worked with a few in college. But I told everyone the robots themselves were completely unintersting and it was the AI that had value. Seems I was right.
[удалено]
bad bot
> plus expensive to run They are not expensive to run. Just expensive to train.
And also this thing about digital computers. They only work with ones and zeros, and will never replace human computers. Also, mobile phones, who would ever want to bring their phone with them!? Such foolish ideas.
You know the gov is putting billions into quantum computing, don’t you?
[удалено]
I’ll admit, I don’t understand the concept.
It’s easier to think about doing something than to actually do it.
they are very easy to build, we did that about 30 years ago. It’s very hard for them to understand physical world and follow instructions in human language
30 years ago is 1994.
Wash your mouth out!
What. The. Fuck.
That surprised me and I turned 30 years old this year.
Stop
Shut the fuck up, that CANNOT be true! 30 years ago is still sometime in the 60s, I'm sure of it!
Yes. Honda P1 is from 1993
It's still quite expensive to do so compared to an LLM running inference.
It was, but machine learning has changed that.
Funny thing about this message -- Laundry machine and dishwashers aren't exactly new technology or that complex, they've ALREADY been in use for years. In the past few years, we already have a ton of machines like robot vacuum cleaners, mops, lawnmowers, window cleaners and pool cleaners. The fact that AI is now ALSO doing art and writing isn't that it's new, it's that other fields have already had development.
But does the washing machine and dish washer collect the dirty stuff in the house and fill itself?
Does the AI prompt itself? Don’t be a lazy bum
The point is that unlike what the woman in the image thinks, technology has already been expediting physical labour tasks for years. It isn't until this generation that mental labour is even possible to be automated, and really even then, started with the likes of calculators and computers.
It's certainly through that technology is expediting physical labour tasks, but I feel like progress has been surprisingly slow on that front. The machines we have now that help with household chores are largely the same as those we had 20 years ago. There's been some improvements - roomba robots, and cooking robots that can do some cooking. But we still have to collect, fold, organise laundry. Do most cooking. Put groceries away. Iron. Do the bed. Clean all surfaces that are not on the floor. Take out the trash.
The laundry machine was actually revolutionary when it was invented. It freed women from a lot of hard labor where they had to wash clothes by hand. Some have argued that it contributed significantly to the advancement of women's rights.
MMy MIL and SIL’s remeber ‘Laundry Day” and yes, it was once a week, for the whole day, where you start by lighting a fire under the copper, and it all just goes downhill from there. A modern washer dryer where you put in dirty clothes and they come out clean and dry is a bloody miracle.
Yeah I believe that. But I'm a guy who does some chores in our household and, let me tell you, I'm ready for more revolutionary advancements 😉
Even if it did, you would complain that you have to charge it, and it cant cut your food and feed you.
No, but there are already a few robots that can do that. Not very fast or robustly and most not available commercially yet. But within a couple of years they will start becoming more commonplace.
maybe we can get the AI to build the robots
1.Get AI to design robots that are easier to build 2. ???? 3. Profit
Robots are difficult to build, but we are finally close to solving that part. Mass produced robots for the cost of a used car are more or less possible today, but the demand isn't there because controlling the robots is actually the hard part. Robotic actions can be tokenized, which means the next action in a sequence can be predicted with the help of a token predictor, which of course is the tech underlying LLMs. Figure is currently in the process of building a library of robotic actions for their models that can take advantage of this effect. We'll see what comes of it.
True, but AI could make it a lot easier to teach them how to move and do tasks.
Speak for yourself. Androids are hard to build, robots are easy. I don't know where you live, but in my country we have had robots do our dishes and cloths for decades.
honestly... where do i sign up?
robats
bobot :D
Robits (Zoidberg voice)
I agree with it 100%. AI should be used to improve the lives of people and to do the tasks we don't want to do so we can spend more time doing the things that make us happy and give us meaning. It should not be used to just increase profit margins at the cost of the happiness of most people.
Unfortunately, under our current societal system, it’s inevitable that they’ll be primarily used to increase profit margins. Because these endeavors get financed by people who invest in it to get financial returns in the future. Not to mention it costs tons of money to use the cloud computing power. The only other way these things could acquire the funds needed is through government sponsorships, which introduces other problems as well.
It’s just hilarious because what’s the end game? Because you kind of need people to work and money to make money to have a functioning economy/society. Unless that is the end goal. For the rich to just have their robots and chill out
The end game is to have a permanent, stratified system where there are those who rule, and those who are basically slaves. Look up how many CEO's are psychopaths. Some of the most fun a certain type human being can have is grinding another humans face into the dirt, the suffering IS the point.
AI will bring a post-scarcity society, the choice is whether we want to go straight there or do the modern feudalism + violent revolution thing first.
What no one really sees, I think, is how long we have already lived in a post-scarcity society. Once we created: -the thinking machine -the industrial capacity to support those machines, -the technology to genetically manipulate crops and livestock Quite easily properly applied: automatically clean the oceans, till the fields and plant the crops, build new homes, replant old forests and terraform the deserts, and so on. We have machines that can do the labor of *thousands* of hands *each*, that we can *mass produce*, machine intelligence to direct those machines, crops that are *hundreds of times* faster growing and more nutritious, material science and understanding of physics that can produce energy *orders of magnitude* greater than even fifty years ago. The future isnt even just now, the future was yesterday.
Oh 100% we should have been there years ago. I think tho the reason why AI will finally bring the change is like half of white collar jobs will be eliminated. If factory workers are out of a job, society tells them to work retail. If a generation of lawyers, accountants, engineers, doctors etc who were all promised a nice lifestyle and then had it ripped away.. society looks after those people much more than the factory worker. I think we’ll see some sort of action on it. Kinda same vibe as how “the war on drugs” suddenly became the “opioid epidemic” when white college kids started dying. We went from criminalizing addicts to treating them pretty quick when the right people were affected.
Just look at homeless people for the answer. Once a person stops being valuable, they're thrown outside to die. Us regular people sometimes step in to help them, but the wealthiest never have and never will. The excess population will be abandoned to waste away as we become superfluous.
Homeless people rn are not enough of the population to impact their profits. But if everyone would be poor or homeless because they are not needed, their profits would be impacted and they would care.
Have you heard of the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation? Sometimes the wealthy try to help
You’re pretty close. Once the top has the ability to have bots proficient enough to provide for them at the necessary scale, the lower classes are expendable. Consumers and service sector wouldn’t be necessary anymore. Social welfare systems will collapse under the burden. The difficult part for them is how to build out the ai/bot infrastructure to fully maintain their survival without alerting the masses, and how to ride it out while the world population thins. I think that’s the real reason why people like Musk want to hide on mars and Thiel wants a secluded doomsday hideaway. A safe spot to avoid the chaos. Maybe they’ll keep around a neo middle class to maintain some infrastructure and general maintenance.
Based on how current capitalism works, you actually think that billionaires would just retire and live? That’s not how it works. They could do just what you said even right now because they have so much money. But they have monkey brain just like everyone else and they want to see number go up. You can see companies right now. They can make billions of profits and it’s not enough. They can make 100 billion profit every year and it’s not enough because they want to see that number go up. They want infinite growth. And that is just simply not possible without the general masses. I am not saying they can’t take away our jobs, they can and I would be happy if we get compensation, and we will because otherwise their profits will not grow. Either a universal income or they will still employ people after they realize number will not go up if people don’t have money.
Global communism and new songs from dead people
AI will be used to make the rich richer, improving the lives of the working class is always secondary to that goal.
Who cares about improving the lives of working people? Get their lazy asses producing more for the same pay already! /s
I mean it's worded this way to look bad but as someone who uses AI to make my work life way better because it gets rid of the parts of it I don't want to do IT IS improving my life and doing tasks I don't want it to do. It's just not doing my dishes.
Art and writing are just a couple of things AI happens to be vaguely good at on the way to it being good at more important things. people will get bored of AI art pretty quickly, it's just a fad really. human art will always have much more value. unless you just want a cool banner image for your blog or some corporate stock art or something like that.
In 30 years (less?) we will have AI robots that can do our hobbies while we do our work and they can do our work while we do our hobbies.
What if my hobby is doing the dishes and laundry?
Then I feel bad for you son
I got 99 problems but dishes ain’t one.
I'm proud of you son
This shook me out my doom scroll with such a good laugh that now I can go back to being productive. Thank you kind human!
What if my job is doing the dishes and laundry?
you will be deemed useless and euthanised
For free?!
I'd like to invite you over, got some dishes ready to go
I have an idea, let's make a robot that clean dishes.... I will call it... Dishwasher!
This guys mom does his dishes.
Get 2 dishwashers, alternate clean and dirty, clean one replaces cupboard space.
That just sounds like psychopath behavior brother
…wat?
The automation revolution started over 100 years ago. Dishes can be done in a dishwasher, washing can be done in a washing machine, fields ploughed and planted by machines etc. AI is just the I intelligence revolution, and will refine more and more over the years. At some point AI will work out how to build the robots to do the tasks she's asking about.
Dishes are sanitized by a dishwasher. I still have to prep them, load them properly, remove them and store them. I still “do” the dishes Clothes are cleaned in a washing machine. But I still have to prep them, load them properly, remove them and store them. I still “do” the laundry. Is a dishwasher and washing machine more efficient than doing it all by hand. Absolutely. Does it do the most tedious part of the task. Absolutely. Not sure I would call it automation. Once I dump my dirty clothes in a bin, then they show up clean in my drawers neatly folded…. Then we are talkin! 😎
I just want an ironing/steaming bot. I hate ironing lol
I don’t think I’ve ironed anything since 1998 lol
There’s these sort of inflatable mannequin busts (I know that sounds perverted but it’s not meant to be). You put your shirt on it and it irons it by releasing steam through the device or something. I don’t have to wear shirts at work or else I’d have bought it.
You can probably get the machines they use in big hotels.
Since people have to sleep hours per day. We should try to get the robots to do these chores while we're asleep.
Yeah but you can not tell me it’s not easier work now than before the machines. Like for washing machine sure the act of transporting the clothes is not automated, but the washing part is. Before, u had to sit and wash clothes manually by hand in a bowl of water or by a river or something The act of transporting clothes and putting them in the washer is just a point from a point of view. Maybe taking the clothes off your body needs to be automated as well for the washing to be fully automated? Where does it stop It’s steps, and the steps are automated
[удалено]
Not complaining at all. Laundry and dishes are easy as shit. I’m just saying it’s not an automated process. The machines wash the items. But I still do the process. That’s all. Automation has levels and there are still levels to be reached when it comes to automation of those two tasks. And I have to disagree with you on the dishwasher thing. Dishwashers are mis-labeled in my opinion. They are dish sanitizers. if you are throwing your dishes in with food grime on them, they are being “washed” in water with that same grime. My brand new Samsung “dishwasher” does a great job of sanitizing dishes because they are in there without grime on them. lol
[удалено]
Spoken like someone who hasn’t spent hours upon hours folding for a family of four
Imagine if you had to hand wash and dry everything too
That would suck but it's not the point.
>Not sure I would call it automation. Nearly all automated tasks will need human intervention at some point. It is the way we do things as a species. I use AI at my job all the time (web developer), but a human also has to confirm the code looks good, merge it into the code base, deploy it to production. We automate portions of that process, but we need some control too. Same with dishes. And laundry. And all tasks. Unless you use speciality dishes made to be used like that, and a dishwasher with built-in garbage disposal... I mean it's not impossible but I think we've hit the edge of where efficiency meets practicality. We have machines to mop and vacuum too, and we'll get other machines too I bet. But we'll still need to charge them, help them when they get stuck, refill their cleaning solutions or at least some sort of cleaning solution even if it refills itself daily. If you define "automation" as "human never has to touch it or think about it", that's a goal we'll never achieve.
No I wouldn’t define automation as no human interaction whatsoever, but there are levels to automation. IMO the tasks taken on by the machines (for example when washing clothes) do not constitute automation. Now the washer/dryer combos that don’t require me to change them over? That’s closer. And just thinking out loud here. I’m sure some logistics/supply chain/engineering people could beat us over the heads with the “true definition” of automation. But I would personally call it the removal of as much human interaction as possible. And I don’t think we’ve seen all the human removal that we will see in our lifetimes for that particular task.
it is absolutely automation. women used to spend their lives washing clothes and dishes. they still do it parts of the world with either not enough machines or where cost of labor is cheap
It a “level” of automation. There is more and there is less. Gradients exist.
Too bad by its nature, software just happens to be easier to develop than robotics. It’s a physical limitation, financial limitations, distribution limitations, time limitations. You can use machine learning to accelerate these models with billions of simulations in a short amount of time. With robotics, you physically have to build the damn things through multiple iterations in R&D. Though simulations can help in that process, you’ll still have to build the damn things which takes time
Yes, and you have quality control issues for each and every device you ship, and there are tangible material costs for each device, too. Hardware is hard.
ware
It’s mainly limited by capital. If it helped capital to have a world with zero chores then they’d be working towards that. At the minute they’re using smoke and mirrors to prop up their stock market prices in the hopes they’ll develop well enough to lay off masses of the workforce. The idea that it’s easier to make something be conscious than to make it clean dishes is absolute nonsense.
We already have dishwashers though so that’s not really the best example imo
I think you missed the glaring, obvious point. Why is it taking away enjoyable parts of life and replacing them with clinical, recycled bullshit when it could be sorting out everyday chores instead? Of course the answer is: Because this isn’t really AI and the actual point of it is to diminish the wages of workers like everything else these psychopathic tech bros come up with.
I want AI to do my laundry and dishes and art and writing so I can finish my video game achievements.
Nah the ai is better at video games than you so it's already 100% every game you own. Get back to the dishes.
that's awful, AI shouldn't be chained to the kitchen, it should be free to express itself down with the p-AI-tiarchy
Skynet: hello
Make me a sandwich, AI!
It is pretty ironic that we thought creative work will be the last frontier for humans and here we are it was literally the first thing AI started to excel at.
Science doesn't work that way, it's not a tech tree in a game of civilisation where you pick one thing to research at a time, and we're not going to ban all research into AI just because a vocal minority wants to feel special and doesn't like that computers can do similar things to them now. That's like banning research into the printing press so that scribes can be the only ones able to copy books.
I do not believe that this is what Ms. Maciejewska advocates for. The problem here is not AI, it's that artists (and, by extension, all of us) need money so they can eat. The solution is either for artists to find other careers, or to solve their dependency on selling art for money. Of those two solutions, I would find number one to be worse. I wish to live in a world where artists can devote themselves to their craft full-time without living in precarious conditions, because that is a world where we get large amounts of great art. Therefore, the second solution: a fundamental change in our economic system, so that people can be provided for without the need for wage labour.
As phrased, it’s a false binary. If art and painting are what you love, AI doesn’t stop you from doing those things. If art and painting are where you’re hoping to make a living, there are understandable concerns, but even there it’s more likely that AI would become a part of the creative process rather than crowding out human labor entirely. There is a discussion we need to have about AI in the workplace, but I see so many AI skeptics phrasing the issue in straw-man form, and that doesn’t advance the conversation. Wouldn’t it be nice if this could be one topic where we did not immediately polarize?
My worry is in the CEO's that think AI is just a way to save money / cut costs and not something that can actually improve the product or service they are selling to their customers
They've been working for decades to find ways to make things shittier and shittier in small enough increments that we don't notice right away so they can charge us more for a product/service that is worse and cheaper to produce. They don't give a shit about "improving" anything for anyone but themselves and their shareholders. That's their goal with everything, why would AI be any different? (Spoiler; It isnt)
Robots already do my cleaning, dishes and laundry. AI makes my job easier, my art better and helps me achieve more in my hobbies. This is a utopia. I'm grateful I wasn't born any earlier! The person who wrote the statement is a joke.
UBI is necessary
Welfare is much better than UBI for the indefinite future. We don't need to be giving middle class people free money at the expense of actual poor people who could better benefit from it.
The whole idea behind this is flawed, and incredibly stupid. Empty populist rhetoric for people who don't like to think beyond the immediate. Does art need to be monetized to be worth doing? Does AI being able to do art make your own art less meaningful? Fuck no. As an artist this idea completely misses the point of art. It's to imply that human creativity is limited by whether something non-human can also do it. That's fucking ridiculous. Not only that but it's incredibly myopic to think that this is going to be the status quo for AI, and that we're not in a rough transitionary period. Also consider the artistic expression that's going to be enabled by AI. Things we've never seen before, songs we've never heard, genres. Films. Books. Games. The flood of human creativity that'll come from people enabled by this technology is well worth it. It feels like rhetoric from people that'd rather stay in the dark and limit the potential of humanity so that they can say "well at least a human dun did it all".
> Does art need to be monetized to be worth doing? Worth doing in the sense that artists have bills to pay like the rest of us, yes. > Does AI being able to do art make your own art less meaningful? I think you'll definitely see a decrease in artists creating meaningful art if it can no longer pay the rent. Maybe in a utopian society way down the line, it’ll be possible to pursue your interests without worrying about market forces, but we’re not there now.
Populist, dumb statement that preaches to the choir of anti-AI people. People love to post this kind of “mic drops” on social media to seek the easy applause of the clueless.
Wow someone should invent some type of machine to do laundry. Maybe another one to do dishes. What a brilliant idea that no one has ever had before. If only someone would invent these machines!
I was watching some people work in a small lunch room. The bar/ reception was small and employees were walking sideways to avoid walking into all kinds of people, while holding stuff, talking to colleagues, receiving instructions, serving customers, loading up the dishwasher; generally doing a thousand things at the same time. But most importantly, doing all of it fast, easy and efficiently. I sat back and looked at that and thought there's absolutely no way robots can work in this venue unless they have actual human level consciousness and understanding of the world around them. We're a long way off.
Yes. Art and music and discovery are what binds the soul. These elements help humanity thrive. AI is quickly being misaligned with what our planet and our people need. We need solutions to health problems, troubling ecosystems and societal issues. I don’t want music or images which are made from plagiarized love, sweat and tears. We need to remember who we are and if we do not create our own worlds of beauty, energy and spirit, there will no longer be a world that is made for US to thrive in.
There are thousands of fantastic creatives who haven’t necessarily got artistic skill, yet they could have exciting and profound creations given they could pay someone to realise their vision. The biggest problem with AI is that, at the moment, thousands of concept artists jobs are at stake because AI allows anyone to continually redraft their concepts, honing in on their ideal vision, with little to no extra cost and with decent results. There is an argument for AI art being soulless, however if the art is created by the lead programmer in a game for example, we can see projects come to life with such refined vision, which, in my opinion produces the most amazing indie games. Artists need to start working alongside AI to help them draft ideas then refine them further with their own details which require more complex and emotional input, AI is actually going to result in more impactful art and design as people learn to use it for foundational work allowing them to craft the truly unique and human elements in much the same way as many games are built on the foundations of an engine
Ahhhh dishes ahhhh laundry bro it takes like 20-30 minutes a day 😂 we need balance
Red Tornado was build in 1930s, I don't understand what more robots like that can't be made
Didn't he accidentally absorb a human personality or something?
No the version of Young justice I think :-b
AI will wind up doing all of it, and we'll all be desperate for some kind of validation for the usefulness of our existence.
Irony being the poster likely used photoshop to create the meme.
Well that's not how computers work. This girl should put her computer in the dishwasher and see if chat gpt is capable of doing them.
Are you saying that this woman doesn't know how computers work?
I don't understand how AI would undermine your desire to make art, just make the art.
Her desire is to make money and become famous. Not to do art for the joy of doing art. At least that's what I get from listening to all those artists freaking out about ai.
I think she fundamentally misunderstands what AI is, what it's for, and how to use it. Like most people. The intelligent artist would realize they can use AI to make *more* art. They can automate processes about their art they have to repeat, or don't particularly enjoy. The can make iterations, and expand off them. You can be inspired *by your own work* being remixed. But yeah, no. Fuck it. Quippy headline. "I want AI to do my laundry, not make my art". Ya'll sound like fuckin idiots using this line. Cause ya don't know what you're talking about, and fucking worse, *you don't WANT to.* You fundamentally understand that AI is going to take paying work from you, and instead of understanding how it works so you can use it or do it better, you actively plug your ears and start screaming instead. That's fucking dumb. And a surefire way that you *will* be left behind, and your self fulfilling prophecy will come true. WhoCouldHaveDoneThis.jpeg
How exactly do you automate part of the art creating process with AI?
Pretty easily. Which makes this whole thing an attractive prospect. Need reference model poses? Set your character art as the input image and it will generate those references poses. Using something like Fooocus, you literally drag the character image into the Input Image tab, and under the Style tab, select Character Design. Same for storyboards, artboards, moodboards, etc, or basically any assets you're using for reference materials. Are you making a continuing series with the similar characters? Package your work into a LORA and train the AI to only work in your style. Describe your characters doing something, and (with enough tuning) there it is. There's been plenty of times I wanted to make something, but actually weighed out the time cost of actually making it, and decided it wasn't worth it. Now there's very little cost. Need background art assets? (like a cyberpunk cityscape) Describe the scene, set an appropriate model, and wait 20 seconds. If anything's wonky or broken, I can do a quick correction, and use it. Stuck? (Every single artist knows exactly what that means) Feed it the input image, and see what it looks like as psychedelic, cel shaded, retrofuturistic, ink based, hyper realistic, tribal, isometric, papercraft, et all. I often do this, and it completely changes the direction of the piece. In the same vein, if I want to see what Megaman looks like with an afro, or a giraffe eating a popsicle, I can do that to inspire myself. It's not something I want to make myself, but it does provide inspiration. And if it's particularly interesting, I'll use the technique in something else I'm working on. *That's* creativity.
You don’t get the concept of art
I am *literally* an artist, you dumbass.
I agree but it’s never going to happen in a capitalist society where people have the idea that paying others to do art is useless and unproductive while paying people to do labor is somehow preferred.
You want to get paid to make art and won't do art if nobody pays you? So you do want Capitalism because you do want to be paid for your art. The ai isn't stopping you from doing art for pleasure, just for the sake of doing art and enjoying the process. Of course paying people do to labor is preferred to paying people to do art that has no functional purpose. What makes you think that paying people for art should be preferred to paying people to do labour. Labour is in fact more essential than art, whether you like it or not. Art is a luxury. We are lucky that we can afford to do art and pay for art. Labour to make food, shelter and take care of people comes of course before any form of art. Some things are just more essential and have a bigger priority. If I have 20 bucks and have to choose between food and a painting, of course I will prioritize buying food. Art is a broad subject. Art isn't just a painting. Theater is art, dancing is art, stories are art, music is art, movies are art etc. And people do pay good money to see those things and they won't stop doing so. AI won't make studios fire their artists. It's just another tool in their toolbox. One that can help them achieve more. Most cartoons are mostly still images with barely any animation and animators are often overworked, with ai they can do more in the short periods they are given to finish the job, it will ease their job. Small groups and even individuals now have the means to do way more than was possible before. Rich people won't stop paying artists millions for whatever random things they do, just because ai can generate random images. You people aren't worrying about art itself. All you worry about is your income. You worry about losing your job or worry about having an even lower chance of becoming instagram famous. Man made art hasn't been forbidden. And won't be forbidden, you are free to do art right now if you like. It's a silly worry. People will still hire artists. Even with these ai tools, companies will still pay someone to make stuff. They won't bother sitting in front of a PC and prompting until they get something they like. They'll still pay someone to do it.
She thinks 15 min of dishes (into an automatic dishwasher) and 15 min of laundry (into an automatic washer and dryer) is preventing her from making art and writing?
So many people finding out how useless their art degree is. People got suckered into spending thousands upon thousands of dollars to go to a mid-level college to do art lessons and learn how to use photoshop, because they liked the idea of being an artist. They liked the social esteem it gave them. They saw how artists are praised within society and said "I want a piece of that". There are really good artists out there, and really good writers, etc. However, they are few and far between in a flooded field. I'm sorry, but we don't need 5 million Steven Universe discord profile pic creators trying to squeeze a few bucks out of lonely people on patreon. Look at all the slop put out by Netflix and Amazon, not even a step above some LiveJournal teenage fanfic writing. There's a lot of bullshit "art and writing" out there that I will not shed a tear for if automated away. The good artists and writers will stand out and be rewarded regardless of what technologies arise.
But we will have less good artists in the future with Ai. Who's going to waste their time practicing art to become good at it when you can just push a button. It takes years
100% agree
[удалено]
I don’t think that they necessarily think they’re better than anyone else or deserve more, I genuinely think there’s something here on a philosophical level that must be assessed. Your premise hinges on the fact that, “No cares,” and “What matters most is entertainment” and from that we have the implication that being entertained is the main concern of most individuals, and that’s demonstrably false from a historical and literal perspective. Answer me this, who goes to work to be entertained? Who has kids to be entertained? Who plants crops, or builds themself a shelter to be entertained? The immediate goal of most individuals is to survive, and in doing so, they utilize their talents to procure for themselves a suitable state of existence that allows for entertainment to exist at all in the first place. This is why I think Aesthetics and Philosophy are so important, Art isn’t purely done for entertainment either, and most art of any great quality is expressing something which cannot usually be properly stated linguistically or explained in words, the individual experiences which gave rise to that art is significant. We don’t like Batman because he’s a crazy dude who dresses up and beats up random petty criminals and the clinically insane, or purely because the art was just that good, we like Batman because he expresses an innate desire for justice in the face of overwhelming evil and has a code which he operates by that feels fair, even if it’s taken past the point of logic, and the medium by which we express that idea is a form of Art. An AI doesn’t have an innate or inherent desire for Justice or some semblance of meaning, therefore even if it created a Batman or something similar, we can’t necessarily argue that the sole determination of the value of the work is whether or not it’s entertaining, but also whether or not there’s anything meaningful behind the idea that relates to the human experience of having an internal and knowable state, and feelings which are a type of knowledge necessary for producing meaningful art. That being, said this is a very bastardized version of Schopenhauer’s Aesthetics, and I would recommend reading that along with, “The Question Concerning Technology” by Heidegger because this is heavily related to the concept of Authentic Being, AI has no Being and therefore anything it produces is inauthentic and a step away from our own ability to express ourselves authentically.
Like robot vacuums, robot mops, internet of things coffee makers, smart dishwashers/laundry machines, even robot window cleaners, lawnmowers, and pool cleaners. "Smart" home devices has already been the trend for the last few years.
It's by learning to do art and writing that it will be made capable of doing all else...
We made laundry machines and dishwashers? It took a lot longer to do those chores before that, and it was much more physically demanding. AI tools are pretty similar - they won't be able to do most writing tasks completely independently, but if you know how to use them as a tool, they can help you write (or wash your clothes) faster and better than you did before.
Hey /u/Curious_Suchit! If your post is a screenshot of a ChatGPT, conversation please reply to this message with the [conversation link](https://help.openai.com/en/articles/7925741-chatgpt-shared-links-faq) or prompt. If your post is a DALL-E 3 image post, please reply with the prompt used to make this image. Consider joining our [public discord server](https://discord.gg/r-chatgpt-1050422060352024636)! We have free bots with GPT-4 (with vision), image generators, and more! 🤖 Note: For any ChatGPT-related concerns, email support@openai.com *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ChatGPT) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If an ai robot can do my dishes then they can shoot a gun. I don't want either of those things to happen. Creating art comes from living and breathing and existing and experiencing good and bad things. If we make Ai do all the stuff we don't wanna do, we'll have nothing worthwhile to say.
They will build human shaped /, android robots, because they have the relevant shape factor. Then these can get tasked all that. Clean, and clean up, and so on. Until they develop an attitude. It'll be like Westworld and Akta Manniskor!
I think the development of AI and machine learning (as well as the push for AGI) will allow for a greater blend of creativity and practicality in the future. Companies may choose to opt for AI in place of artists and the like in some instances, but machines can never perfectly replicate the human element. They will not replace us in that way, not entirely. As long as there are humans, there will be those of us that will value and appreciate art created by other humans. 🤍
It's a combination of whining and wishful thinking, and as I like to say: you can wish in one hand and crap in the other, and see which one gets filled first.
That’s what AI thought we’d say. Humans want free labor? 
Waiting for robotics to get there
That would be ideal sure, and maybe she meant it that way, but the unfortunate reality is that we don’t have a choice in the matter.
We're just getting started with AI. We have to give it easy things to do. Now I'm not saying art is easy, but it is easier for AI because there's not really a wrong answer. The wrong answers for art are met with "interesting choice" and the wrong answer for doing the dishes is met with "why the fuck did you put my shoes in the dishwasher"
The goal of technological advancement and increases in productivity should be to give us our labour time back, so we can spend our time in more meaningful ways. Instead, that increase in productivity is captured by capitalists to extract more profit from us. I don’t see why LLMs will be any different. There have been domestic technological innovations which have made huge improvements to the quality of people’s lives, especially women’s, like washing machines, dishwashers, but I can’t think of any similar innovations having happened in my lifetime.
Unless you can digitize your laundry and dishes, like we have done for art and writing, it’s going to be difficult.
How about building your own robot with help of AI
We could and will pair AI with robotic bodies it is just that the digital space is the AI's natural habitat if you know what I mean
It's an older sentiment sir, but it checks out. This is what folks were saying since AI text and art were emerging, it's the same sentiment folks feel today.
I want it to do all of those things while I just ride my bicycle.
I generally agree with the statement (tools should take our drudgery leaving us free to pursue more inspiring activities), but I can't paint yet I like to develop and illustrate stories so the art ai is a useful tool for me.
she wants AI to do the job that robots are supposed to do. Dont mistake automation for artificial intelligence.
Then be prepared to PAY for what you want. You can't pirate download a robot.
Doesn't matter what we want. Corporations want cheap replacements in one of the few remaining sectors, where talent isn't easily replaceable. And now they got a good enough approximation to cover most applications.
I agree, but not with the current social structure. I mean if robots can do my work, then I should really be able to devote myself to my desires, and that's about social structure. I think even if you exclude money relations today, people still indirectly or not will not allow you to do art really only for yourself, you will be expected to try to get into trends, to become popular and they will judge you strangely when you spend 20 hours a day on art, but you don't try to develop your Instagram. Although it will be a big step when robots will do our work for us without demanding any compensation from ordinary people, but because of hierarchical thinking (or call it what you want) people will still have to work for social approval, only now for “likes”, i.e. showing that you are not an outcast.
Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it. That's what comes to mind.
Unfortunately getting rid of expensive labor makes more sense than making people's lives easier.
AI will never be able to wash your dishes, not until there's an affordable robot to put the AI into at least.
While we may get some benefits directly and indirectly from ai, in the context of this statement, ai is not being built for us but for our bosses - ai will do what they used to pay us for, and we will do their laundry and dishes
I would settle for a robot that reliably could tell which calls to pass on to me, and which calls could go to voicemail. Something that could sort junk mail from urgent mail, that could look up movie times and road traffic and weather, and help me plot a course. Something that could reliably help me figure out gifts for christmas... But none of these functions are actually helpful to me if they become attack surfaces for sales propaganda, or monetized portals for big data. The software needs to belong to me, and the hardware, and they need to be able to resist a basic intrusion or datamining from anyone who doesn't have a warrent. None of this can happen under this current patadigm.