diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'content/blog/2023/generative-content.md')
| -rw-r--r-- | content/blog/2023/generative-content.md | 186 |
1 files changed, 186 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/content/blog/2023/generative-content.md b/content/blog/2023/generative-content.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..471b733 --- /dev/null +++ b/content/blog/2023/generative-content.md @@ -0,0 +1,186 @@ ++++ +title = "On generative content" +author = ["Michał Sapka"] +date = 2023-12-20T22:47:00+01:00 +categories = ["blog", "update"] +draft = false +weight = 3002 +abstract = "I don't believe that AI will kill us, but I strongly believe it will lessen us. Here I try to describe that by looking at impact on art, culture, tech, and potential benefits." +aliases = ["/articles/generative-content/"] ++++ + +It seems that generative content from "modern" AI models has been with us forever. +In reality this is still a new fad. +The feeling is here because it seems that every few days we hear new product or controversy. + +However, I still remember that computers were to be unable to replace humans in _creative_ work. +That the _human_ part is irreplaceable, and machines can only reproduce. +I think it still the case. +But, somehow, artists, techies, and all kinds of other folks all over the world are afraid of loosing their means of living. +Rightfully so. +But why? + + +## 1. Mass-art market {#1-dot-mass-art-market} + +When I was younger, I was very into cinematography. +We had so many directors with their voices - Jarmush, Lynch, Smith, Tarantino, Cronenberg, Carpenter, Boyle, Ritchie, Anderson, or Fincher. +And that's just the USA! +They had the voice - even when imitating, the movies were distinctly _theirs_. +They got chances, so we all knew them. +It is no longer the case. +The mid-budget movie is almost non-existent, and that's where the creativity strived. +The popular movies, the ones that make all the money, are indistinguishable copies of each other. +What earns the money is the same, big budget CGI fest without any real meaning or personal touch. + +In photography the end product is so removed from the original, that often it is impossible to see similarities. +Everything that is not perfect is corrected and removed. +We don't see people from posters on the street because they don't exist in the same reality we do. +This is what we call _content_, this shapeless blob filling platforms. + +The mass-market "art" (and I use the term here very loosely) was removed from the _human_ a long time ago. +Why take chances, when we know what will work? +And if you know what will work, why even bother with humans? +An AI can create the script, and we can reuse that 3d model of Bogart - because why not? +What we see and what we pay for is no longer _human_. +It's more machine than that - endlessly modified to be as close the blob of mass appeal as possible. +Indistinguishable from each other. + +And this is where generative algorithms strive. +When we exactly know what we want to produce, where there is a mathematical equation of beauty, we're no longer in **human** creativity. + +Since the most popular _content_ is made from the same mold, LLM models can create it as well. +In fact, it can create it better, as those _imperfections_ that a human might have missed, an AI can easily remove. + +All the Dall-E pictures are perfect. They are impossibly complex and complying to the popular norms. + +They are also boring. +It's the imperfections that make _art_, well, _Art_. +No human creation is perfect and this why computer generated _content_ can not be called art. +It's too studied, too ideal, too perfect. + +But the mass market pulp is what allows _artists_ to live. +This is where they make the money. +This is what pays the bills, what puts the food on the table. +Why pay 50EUR and wait 2 weeks for a Fiver order? +You can get just as good result in 10 minute chat with a bot. + +LLMs have reversed humanity. +I fear that we are getting back to the state where _art_ may come only from _suffering_; +where artists live to create that one piece which may immortalize them, but this life is not what modern world promises. +We are to no longer see _hungry_ people in developed countries. +We are to no longer experience _pain_ in pursue of _happiness_. +Why would anyone choose it? + +Therefore, I am afraid that this will decrease the number of people who choose creativity as their living hood. +Without them, we will be destined to status-quo of mediocrity +It will be perfect, but it will be soulless. + +Just as the mass market is now, just without anyone pushing it forward. +And with us, running the hamster wheel of never ending _content_. + + +## 2. Tech market {#2-dot-tech-market} + +The other, very popular, use case is code generation. + +GitHub Copilot can translate a short query into an evaluable code. +It is sold as a mean to automate the _boring_ and _repetitive_ tasks - creating boilerplate, configurations, loops, or simple algorithms. +But are those really lesser tasks than the big ones? + +I've been a professional Software Engineer for 10 years now. +My journey has not been the typical, one where one finishes either IT college, or a boot camp. +I'm self-thought, and I joined It Crowd from other occupation by sheer luck. +The company needed _Ruby_ developer and boom - there I was. +Not the perfect candidate, but I was capable, eager and hungry. + +I've made a lot of mistakes, I've wasted a lot of time, I've taken down the production on a few occasions. +All of those could have been avoided if I used a code generation. + +But it's impossible of overstate how important those menial tasks were in making me into a real _Software Engineer_. + +With every mistake, I learned. +With every issue, I became swifter to jump into action, +With every boring, repetitive task[^ruby] I gained insights into how stuff works. +[^ruby]: with _Ruby_ and _Ruby on Rails_ there aren't many of those but still, you do the same things from time to time. + +But the biggest growth came from the most hated task of all - writing tests. +It is there where I learned how to write a usable contract; it is there where I learned the value of documentation-as-a-code[^cdac] +Would I learn anything from "hey copilot, write tests for this class"? +I doubt. +[^cdac]: very often the best documentation of a contract is the test for it. + +This was what every intern/junior would do - the dirty work. +With the dirty work comes the realization that the real world is not perfect, not every code is good and not every developer is good at being a developer. +And with Copilot we are loosing it. + +We are losing it two ways: first, juniors will not learn; second junior will not be hired. +We are already seeing that there are much fewer offers for sub-senior positions. +Why would it be different? +A senior aimed with code generation can do the work of many junior and one senior. +It makes _perfect_ economic sense. + +But this is also the suicide of the industry. +Without new blood, the tech crowd will shrink. +Companies want infinite growth, and will not stop at anything to accomplish it. +We've seen all the visa scandals, the inclusivity actions, the offshoring[^contr]., +It's clear that all those had only one goal: to increase the pool of _cheaper_ candidates. +The typical programmer is expensive; someone fighting to leave poverty is not. +But now the competition is no longer _someone_ cheaper, but rather something that's never tired, and can create infinite number of creations, but is still _cheaper_ than a human can ever be. +When was the last time you tried to outrun a train? +When was the last time you tried to fight a machine to give your children a better start? +[^contr]: this is not the place where I want to address those subjects, but their existence is important for this article. + + +## 3. Maybe I am wrong {#3-dot-maybe-i-am-wrong} + +But what if I am wrong? +We've seen similar things before. +Ever since the beginning of industrial revolution, more and more industries were mechanized and automated. +The machines needed someone to take care of them, to design them. +And the rest of the populi moved to other areas. + +Will it be the same? +Well, how much work does an _algorithm_ need to operate? +We are still in development phase, so we see a lot of people working there. +But when we will reach plateau? +There will be a time when it will be good enough. +A moment when companies will buy it and not expect it to be better. +How many people will be needed then? +What will be left to do? + +Will Universal Basic Income be enough? +It assumes infinite growth, and this may be in the hands of very few, gigantic companies. +We already see how big influence Altman and Open AI has. +There will still be rich, the 1%, so money will still be an issue. +Will we simply do yet another October Revolution? + + +## 4. Utopia that is false {#4-dot-utopia-that-is-false} + +The best case scenario is that humanity, as a whole, will ascend. +Free from the shackles of menial task, we will all be poets and explorers. + +This is what _Star Trek_[^old] is all about - a world where we no longer need to create and work to survive. +In place of that, we are free to pursue adventure, knowledge. +With nothing to gain, why one would need power? +Money? +We can focus on the humanity as one entity, to make it better. +[^old]: old Trek, at last. + +In _Star Trek_ this was not created by removing jobs but by presence of _replicators_ - a device capable of creating virtually anything. +No longer food is scarce, we can simply create it. + +Replicators are like LLM, but they create things of intrinsic value. +This is what removed the shakles. +And this is the biggest difference: LLM don't create anything that will actually free us. +It will never make our lives better and freer. +It will make it easier for _few_ on the cost of _many_. + + +## 4. Summary {#4-dot-summary} + +I believe that LLMs will steal of us younger talent, who has yet to make a dent. +They won't have the chance to learn and earn on the basic stuff, so they will not be in position to create the big thing. +The cost of using LLMs is so low (and will only become cheaper), that there will be no place for them. +And I am afraid that the post-LLM market can find worthy place for them. |