Will A.I. Crush Us (In Our Sleep?)_0017

 

  

 

Not understanding how Artificial Intelligence worked, most people treated it like a genie that granted wishes. Not understanding what power had been unleashed against them by governments and tech giants, they wished for a pile of Big Bills, hoping that AI would somehow conjure every material thing they could ever want for free - at the push of a button and at the cleverness of a prompt. Note: The girl in the middle figures out that she is NOT getting a pony. Photo collage by CoPilot Designer (2024_0602) with additional work added by a human.

"Yeah, we're kinda doomed."

Before I begin talking about Artificial Intelligence, I need to confess that I am of two (or more) minds about it. When I think of AI, I think of my dog. She is currently just a few weeks away from being 19-years-old and is losing all of her brain power, sight, smell, and hearing. Her hips and spine hurt. She naps a lot. Soon, a decision will have to be made to put her down to keep her from suffering. It is a hard choice. I love that dog. We communicate primarily through body language and a few voice commands which are mostly dependent on my tone. I speak. She "listens." While I have spent a good deal of time with my dog, love my dog, and am invested in her happiness, comfort, and success, my dog definitely evolved from wolves. She will always have that as her prime background and context. She has physical and behavioral limitations. By comparison, what are the physical and behavioral limits of machines using artificial intelligence?

Artificial intelligence. Computing power sufficient to "understand" people. What was once long relegated to pulpy science fiction novels has now become a reality that will be rapidly changing every single aspect of life on the planet in real time. Machines "learn" to be more independent, and humans "teach" themselves to become more dependent. This shift in the balance of power is something that is happening right before our eyes.

The first chunk of this post is copied from a response to a discussion I recently had to my pal Ben who is a gifted filmmaker and runs Runic Films in Los Angeles (Hashtag, Cowboy Creed). The discussion was about the use of seals or logos to indicate "Human-Made" products or services in the film industry. As follows -

Benito,

I might go for the "real" approach. No QR code. Definitely not. If I look at the rest of the world and ask myself what really means anything, a seal of approval is a form of social proof.

Think about it.

What is more compelling? A signed document OR a signed document with a picture of a group of people standing around it (think Declaration of Independence)?

You will have to come up with clear instructions that are easy to follow for someone to apply to use the seal. You will have to come up with clear rules about how, when, and where the seal can be used and in what manner. You will need to devise a way to make the process as self-sustaining as possible and work at scale - probably the most impossible task.

Your best bet is simple.

Use an internal seal. This is branding that you ALONE use to distinguish your products and services. You may even want to incorporate it into your mission statement or even parse it out as its own manifesto. You use the seal whenever and wherever you need to remind people that products made by real, creative humans are a damn good idea.

Now if someone approaches you about your seal and wants to use it, you will have to come up with a permission system and go case by case. In this manner, the best way to go is to convince an organization or group to adopt the seal system that you are ALREADY using and extend it to their members. It is easier for the group to see how it works after you have been first with it. Plus, they can take on the role of administering the seal and enforcing it with their members. Seals don't mean anything unless they are used, understood, and stand up to economic and social challenges. Seals only carry value if they stand the test of time.

"The purpose of the seal IS SOLELY to create awareness."

I recall when the words - Made in USA were added to most clothing. It was in direct response to floods of knock offs from foreign shores. Consider the "AI wave" to be the knock offs. The Made in USA label worked, until it didn't. Longer term, there is nothing to hold AI back. Nothing. It will be used and abused in ways we cannot imagine and generally follow the trend of the big subjugating the small. AI is inherently anti-Democratic and anti-competitive.

In the case of "Made in USA", that pivot by business made cheap foreign brands look exciting, low cost, and grab market share. Consumers held up two blouses. liked them, and then looked at the price tag - a comparison of fanciful wishes that is then checked by the terminal reality of cost (and then instantly justified in real time to create or negate a purchase). It is happening right now with the clothing site Temu for example. Market share is a nasty way of saying - we do NOT want competition. Business is about DOMINANCE. Period. And look where that got us in the world.

Back to AI. BACK to film and other creative tasks.

It is important to understand what AI can and cannot do in terms of filmmaking. Currently, AI is not put in charge of every aspect of the creative pipe. Comprehensive use can only be afforded by those rich enough to pay for the inlay of infrastructure. This is where we will find shocking, disturbing, and swift change if AI builds a total pipeline, ideation to financing to work product to marketing to merchandising.

"...the directive is simply to "maximize profits"..."

Imagine a "studio" where the directive is simply to "maximize profits" when making films and the AI is left to figure everything out. It will build a process that is dedicated to that principle, and we can expect marketing that pitches movies that are not even made yet and then creates them in almost real time to get "feedback" from consumers. It will do away with film as an event, a block of time, and turn it into a personal, mutable lifestyle. And suppose YOU like happy endings.... you will get those. AI will cram them down your brain. Most likely, this power will be used to generate CONTENT that makes you CRAVE CONTENT - psychologically driven wedges that manipulate you at every turn. This is real nasty mind "control" type stuff, and we are just at the edge of it.

To this, I reflect on the decision to prop up the corn market and win votes in fly over states. Corn, the history of corn, and must notably corn syrup is public record. The government subsidizing corn production has had the consequence that products were introduced that target the consumer's cravings and we have an epidemic of people addicted to sugar made from corn syrup. This is what the AI will bring - among other unintended, unforeseen consequences.

On the other hand, AI is a tool.

How many times have you had shots or sequences that you wanted to do but could not figure them out, couldn't make them practical? I am not even talking about special effects. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to explain a movie shot to an AI tool, have it understood, and then map out or even create the shot? No lost time in pre-production or post-production. It can suggest the best ways to shoot the live principles and live sound. It would be an enormous step in the storytelling process. 

"The tool could act as a gigantic, untiring, assistant."

The tool could act as a gigantic, untiring, assistant. I think that computers were actually meant for this role - as servants and assistants. They are not equals. Why are we trying to make them "create?" For what reason?

On the engineering side, making machines that think and create is a natural extension of searching for how the brain works and what life means. To put this in Star Wars context... we should be designing R2D2 and C3PO rather than the Death Star. We should be designing AI as an assistant. That should be the default role. It should not be designed to be a "smart tool" that comes to life and crushes us.

"A.I. as a tool in artwork..."

Since AI art generating tools have been trained in an illegal and unethical manner, they should not be used for any reason. Human color flatters for comics exist. I have met a few in my time. I know that the pressure to use the new tools is enormous, but I am not in favor of stepping on the backs of artists who had no choice or consent in allowing their copyrighted materials to be batch sampled. I have spoken with several artists and creators in different fields including print, music, and film who want to use a seal to indicate that works are 100% human made. Not sure if this will catch on but the sentiment is that "dirty tools" should not be accepted by creative industries. Not now. Not ever. Pay for a human colorist or painter.

"we should not accept these tools until "clean" versions can be made from scratch using only public domain or compensated images as source material."

Part of the great appeal of artwork - even artwork prepared for mass consumption - is that it is authentic and the result of a creative process. The copyright offices are correct to not to want to protect AI generated works. As creators, we should not accept these tools until "clean" versions can be made from scratch using only public domain or compensated images as source material. If material cannot be protected against unapproved use, no intellectual property is safe.

"How does the use of AI imagery corrupt the art marketplace?"

One - illegal sampling, called scraping, of copyrighted material. The base images AI is trained on and regurgitates are scraped-without-permission-or-payment artworks created by flesh and blood creators. Not from public domain or "free to use."

TWO - floods the market - Human-generated content will get pushed out by AI-generated content in the marketplace just by sheer speed/volume alone. This is achieved because images can be generated in fractions of a second compared to the time it may take a human to create an equivalent image.

T H R E E - the ubiquity of images will coat the market and warp the expectations of audiences and viewers will not be sophisticated enough to tell the difference.

FOUR - FREE STUFF (not free at all...). AI-generated images will become so instant and so "free" that real artists and creators will be unable to compete financially. The audience does not realize that they are being roped into an "engagement" environment where they will be force-fed advertising and have digital psychological profiles built (and sold and re-sold) out of their behavior online. The use of AI images, video, chat, etc., is just the crack/fentanyl used by the corporations and governments to control minds and persuade passions.

If you don't think this is a real concern, ask yourself how often you get pop-up windows now that beg for your attention. How bad will this be in five years' time or less? Is AI-generated imagery unethical? YES. Anything that scrapes copyright materials without permission for any reason is BOTH unethical and illegal. Is it here to stay? Will it crush us in our sleep?

Just my opinion. Just a thought.

Buy HUMAN-MADE, now and for the future!

RICK

Billion Hero Studios

The Power of Storytelling

If you love storytelling, be involved, engaged, and informed.

Subscribe to the Billion Hero Studios email newsletter - send an email with "subscribe" in the description to billionherostudios@gmail.com.

Share your favorite posts with those who might be interested.

Comment and ask questions or make requests for post topics - below.

Thank you for visiting, participating, and collaborating in the storytelling experience.