Hacker News Reader

Comment by SpaceManNabs | Hacker News Reader

Top two comments are creatives wondering about their future jobs. Ai ethicists have brought up concerns regarding intentional misuse like misinformation.

The technology is super cool. Cat is out of the bag. Just like we couldn't really make cryptography illegal, this stuff shouldn't be either. But I dislike how everyone is pretending that AI ethicists and others are completely unfounded just because it is popular to hate on them nowadays. Way too many people supported Y. Kilcher's antics.

The paper itself has more details.

View on HN

It’s impressive that the small videos are generated this way but the videos themselves are obviously ML generated as they are distorted, a lot like the other art, you can kinda tell it’s the computer. I’m not seeing the ethical issues. I mean cameras disrupted lots of jobs. In general that’s what all technology does everyday. What’s different about this technology?

If you don't see the ethical challenges, then you are choosing not to see them. If you are truly interested, the paper has a good section on it and some sources.

> I mean cameras disrupted lots of jobs.

Yes, this technology can be used to augment human creativity. It is difficulty to see how disruptive these tools could be, as of now. But it is pretty clear that they are somewhat different than previous programmer as an artist models.

The difference with this technology are the unlimited possibilities to generate any type of video content with low knowledge barrier and relatively low investment required. The ethical issue is not about how this technology could disrupt the video job market, but how powerful content it can create literally on the fly. I mean, you can tell it's computer generated ... for now.

> Way too many people supported Y. Kilcher's antics.

What antics are you referring to exactly? That he called out 'ai ethicists' who make arguments along the lines of "neural networks are bad because they cause co2 increase which hits marginalized/poor people"?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com