My team of research software engineers at the University of Oxford has three new vacancies, if anyone's interested...

https://my.corehr.com/pls/uoxrecruit/erq_jobspec_details_form.jobspec

@amarand Oh, it'll be a balance, in the end: something that enough people will accept in terms of effect. It may also be an increasing rejection of AI in the cultural sphere and an increasing acceptance of it in the industrial one. Who knows. I would rather people thought first, though.

@amarand Which, I recognise is an ideal, and not wholly functional in reality. However, some sense of that as a part of the shape of things seems true.

@amarand I think we differ there, despite agreeing with you that government and other organisations are woefully slow to address technological change. There are ways in which things do need to be regulated, and at it's most fundamental level, it comes down to a basic tenet of liberty, which, very loosely worded is something like: we should be free to do as we choose as long as what we choose to do doesn't damage someone else's ability to do as they choose. The cost of true freedom is restraint.

@amarand I think it depends where and how people are replaced.

I'm not convinced it's as simple as moving forward or complaining: it's more about moving forward with a critical eye on the good and bad aspects of the thing and how it can be used best to help people rather than the reverse.

@amarand Oh, I don't deny that. I am simply questioning the underlying value and culture. Oddly, there will also be a counter to it, in which human made things increase in value - but they will have to be more obviously crafted, more distinctively unique, to have that value.

@corlin Sharp!

@Zevon @corlin Absolutely this. I'm lucky to work with people who have been working on AI (both in a broad sense, and in the 'generative' sense we use it in a lot at the moment) for decades: they are as filled with realism about its capabilities as you would wish, and are mainly resistant to the 'cool-aid'.

@corlin I very much agree with this: its real place is as a tool, something in the box to help us approach our work. I suppose, and this is loose thinking, that there is an angle that might look like the hype around 'NFT art', and recognise that it may all dissipate very quickly; certainly, 'AI creations' will very quickly become obvious and unconvincing (up to a point). But how much mess will it make in the meantime.

@Zevon I think this is exactly it. I write and play music, I photograph, I occasionally draw, I occasionally write. In every one of those spheres, there is a flood of generative machine material that is broadly 'bad', when considered within the art cultures to which they belong. I genuinely find creative use of the tools interesting, even inspiring; but I struggle to engage with it because of the cheap side of it.

@Zevon I think so, too. It is humanity by averages.

@Zevon I agree, it's about disruption and take-over and breaking one thing to pour money out of another. In terms of average users, I agree with that too. I think, though, there is something strange about seeing adverts on social media and things, offering a sort of 'Get an AI tool to write your book, and then use this other AI tool to lay it out and sell it, with people responding excitedly at the prospect of income from ... what? Perhaps faint hope on their part, but it is ... hollow seeming.

It risks a downward cycle, a spiral into the quite literally average - into the statistical reduction of what we have already created into what we believe we want to see and hear because we have heard and or seen something like it before, and of course we have: it is the unfocussed average of something else. 4/4 (I think?)

Which is not to say that none of the creative uses of AI are valid - I would argue, quite strongly, that there are highly creative users of digital and AI tools who are adapting them and doing truly fascinating things with them. The concern arises at imitative nonsense, pale shadows of deep artistry being peddled as an acceptable replacement. It reduces not only artistic integrity, but the quality of appreciation. 3/4]

What is sad about some - not all, by any means - of the current growing uses of 'AI' (I think of it as II (intelligence imitation) is the extent to which these are breaking the promise of technology: rather than removing the tasks that are grindingly damaging, freeing people to less constraining labour, to greater personal creativity and growth, one of the uses is to replace that creativity with something economically cheaper and artistically less human. 2/3

Mulling over some of my ongoing conversations about AI and its place, and, more broadly, 'digital' and other technologies and their places, I think it boils down to a fairly simple thing: in general, these should be tools for helping people rather than replacing people. 1/2

@voltronic It's an interesting one and I'll look for a link. Essentially, someone used generative tools to write songs, and then bots to play them repeatedly on various platforms, netting something like $10m (actual number may be very, very different, as this is something glanced at a few weeks ago) in royalties by doing so. It's fraudulent and the law will do its work, but it's extraordinary to see how 'AI writes my work and then sells it for me' stuff is becoming more and more widespread.

It’s the time of year (passed time, possibly!) when choral directors are looking for music for Advent and Christmas. I have a few things in that area, so, if anyone’s reading and interested, let’s start with something written nearly 15 years ago: There is no rose.

https://youtu.be/CkxGJxi37G0

@voltronic @hanse Thank you, I’ll find my headphones, now!

@voltronic I think one of the challenges is that the concerns around AI cut across different (and differently valued) areas: economy, skills, creativity, human attainment, cultural nuance, quality, and so on. Some of these are already things that are under attack in prevailing culture (the idea that there is 'better quality' music caused me an hour long argument with someone a few months ago). It is indeed troubling.