Today's technology news comes from an unlikely location: the Colorado State Fair and its "digitally manipulated photography" competition.
The winning image can be seen here.
The big news? It was created entirely using an artificial intelligence tool called Midjourney, as the software followed hundreds of hours of prompts from the "artist." The entry won first place and has sparked lots of arguments about what art is, what is fair, and what might even be frightening.
In almost all science fiction that includes AI, the software turns out to be harmful to humanity. In the reporting I have read recently, many people assume that AI will take over the majority of human jobs in the next few decades. There are predictions of chaos and drug use and loss of the will to live (which would not help our plunging life expectancy rates).
Our initial worries about "what will people DO all day?" have been answered by claims that people will have more time to pursue art, to study languages, to create beautiful music or cuisine or... whatever they might like. But what happens when computers and software that eventually teaches itself can create better art than most humans? What happens when even the creative arts are no longer the domain of the lofty human race?
I have occasionally thought about the problem of "what are humans to do in the future?" in "retirement," as I suddenly didn't really have to do much of anything other than basic home maintenance and bringing home food from King Soopers. I have heard of people wasting away after retirement, victims of not planning well or not being willing to fully embrace their new status.
But I often fill significant hours assessing essays and student publications, writing extensive advice to individuals and to entire media staff with ideas and new challenges and picky comments about when to properly use past tense in a yearbook. I'm not sure there is much of a limit to how much of this online teaching I do other than my choice.
After all, I'm experienced. I'm prompt, since I have fewer distractions that fully employed people. I'm cheap, since I don't require extensive benefits beyond what the federal government provides in health and social security (plus PERA each month).
BUT... I have been reading more and more stories about computers writing entire news and sports briefs, about programmers fiddling with building machines that can construct entire narratives. We know there is software that can fool most viewers into thinking an image on their phone is real... not a fake with words inserted seamlessly.
How long until universities realize they can invest in sophisticated AI software that can eliminate most of the flesh and blood instructors? And what if AI provides excellent advice and even can mimic having a caring personality? And if a machine mimics somethings perfectly, maybe the matter of difference is moot.
What happens when humans look at post after post of famous figures speaking directly to them, spouting whatever outrageous or enticing message the creators can imagine?
I heard a guy on a TV news segment last night say he really appreciated the chance to work with his hands creating folk art in downtown Denver for a few hours each week. Then he added, "It's nice to get away from the real world, to put down the phone, and work with my hands and head."
Wait! So our phones are the "real world"?
BTW, that state fair artist sold two copies of his winning work, for $900 each. They will be worth much more, very soon, since they are among the first examples of a new order in the art world.
All hail our new masters.
No comments:
Post a Comment