The illogic of banning Generative AI

In our daily lives we’re literally surrounded with technology that at some point or another in history took somebody’s job. Why should generative AI be banned? I mentioned the sewing machine in another thread. The exact same ‘logic’ applies to that. Think of all the seamstresses who lost their jobs when the sewing machine was invented in the early 19th century. What about all the people employed in the 8-track tape business, or scribes displaced by the printing press, or those employed in the horse and buggy industry, or Pony Express riders? Etc, etc, etc. The list could go on and on indefinitely if I had enough coffee. Should all of those technological advances be banned? If that ‘logic’ was applied to all of the technology in our lives we’d all have to become flint-knapping hunter gatherers again.

Oh, but wait…didn’t Homo Sapiens take away all the jobs from the Neanderthals…?


I don’t really think anyone seriously is talking about banning generative AI with the exception of some of the wackiest doomers. I mean, there are people who think the chance of AI wiping out humanity is well over 99% and the only way of avoiding it is to just shut it all down. I think that’s crazy talk.

Is anyone else seriously talking about banning it? I know some people hate it, and I get that. But you can’t just stop technology. You just can’t.

In a lot of ways you could say it similar to the invention of atomic/nuclear weapons, which, in a sense we might’ve been better off if nobody invented them. But once we realized it was possible, we had no choice. Good thing the Allies got there before the Nazis or Japan.

But this is unlike those weapons in that it obviously creates a lot of value. Like so many things, it will replace human labor. But so did figuring out how to put a harness on a horse… people whose job was to carry heavy things were out of a job. Photography may not have killed all art, but it sure replaced 99% of practical uses of drawing and painting. (portraits, etc) The only way art stayed around was for stupid shit like this:

(yes I know that there are other uses of drawing and painting, such as for things that can’t be photographed because they don’t actually exist. I majored in industrial design and learned to do product renderings, for instance)

There is one difference, though, between AI, and those other inventions. I quoted Jon Stewart in my post where I shared his segment on AI: “At least those other disruptions happened over a century, or decades. AI’s gonna be ready to take over by Thursday”

Maybe not literally Thursday, but seriously… this is happening really, REALLY fast. I don’t think most people get that yet. I would not be surprised if in 3 years or so, everyone who still has a job will start to come to the realization that it isn’t going to last for long at all. I have a kid in 4th grade, and I don’t know what to tell her, because by the time she graduates high school I really don’t think there will be any jobs. I may not be an AI doomer, but I’m sure there are plenty of people who will call me crazy for that belief.

Maybe there aren’t many explicitly stating outright that it should be banned, but there isn’t much daylight between “Nobody should be allowed to use it because it’s wrong, immoral, cheating, thievery, and piracy” and “Let’s ban it”.

As far as AI Doom goes, I think it’s practically inevitable. Not because the AI will want to kill us, but because just like the internet did, AGI will concentrate, amplify, enable and propagate humanity’s innate stupidity, except many, many orders of magnitude more than the internet was able to. The internet revolution polarized and tribalized society, and next, the AGI revolution will fully arm all of the tribes.

I think that tends to be restricted to certain forms of it. For instance, any claims that it is thievery / piracy falls apart if it is only trained on things that aren’t created by humans, or at least the humans are licensing it. For instance, a diffusion model could be trained purely on photos taken by robots / drones, and 3d renders of licensed stuff. It wouldn’t be able to do a drawing in a style of some random artist, but it would be able to do photorealistic quite well, and it could easily be tweaked to make it’s own styles. It would still put artists out of work (similarly to photography), but you can’t claim it is stealing artists’ styles.

AlphaGo essentially “stole” from Go masters by looking at tons of games they had played, and learning their tricks. But then AlphaZero proved that that was completely unnecessary, since it could invent
Go tricks on its own, just by playing against itself. Similar things can happen elsewhere.

But yeah, people are understandably frustrated. If you were a talented illustrator, and you had spent a decade honing your craft so you could get a great job drawing realistic character designs for animated movies, and then suddenly people can come along and do stuff like this with just a few dozen words, for free, you wouldn’t be happy.

So you think it will wipe out the human race? That’s, ummm… actually a pretty good argument for banning it, isn’t it? :slight_smile:

Lol, well, I doubt that millions of heavily mouth breathing basement dwellers flooding the internet with images of anime pixie girls with impossibly large breasts and tiny waists is going to doom us (although that might be a strong argument for why it should). Banning generative art won’t prevent the weaponization of AGI in general, and it’s use by national militaries, small fanatical groups, and even just demented individuals. And no, AI can’t be banned, the genie is out of the bottle.


I do not think anyone can seriously ban AI even if they want now. they would have to end internet and even i am pretty sure with open source model there is probably some people training model in their basement just for fun to know if they can =P

Human care wont change much , people will need plumber and nurse , a psy , resto and so on…
it is the value of the human work that might evolve or devolve. perhaps we would turn into more simple life, buy less useless things and fix those that make us happy with the help of our robot assistant at home =)

1 Like

Jeez, I wish AI would help me correctly post this!

I think once AGI, full automation and robotics becomes the new normal, it’s very likely that art of all kinds, created and performed by humans, will become the new novelty, and be highly prized. Even in the rapidly approaching AGI future, being an exceptionally talented human could still be very rewarding, in every way.

1 Like

A lot of people mention plumbers as a job people will still have to do. Even in the absence of robotics, I don’t think that is a safe job either.

The thing is, the main thing that plumbers charge for isn’t that they can twist a wrench or whatever. They charge for their knowledge and training.

But what happens when you can just point your phone camera at your pipes, describe what is going on, answer any questions it asks you, look at the video it makes for you that shows you what you’ll have to do, follow the link to an app where you can order the exact parts you need as well as rent some tools, wait for the self driving truck to drop off the parts, and then just do exactly what it shows you needs to be done while it watches your work via the camera?

Do you still need a plumber? If you don’t have the time, couldn’t a high school kid do the job for you for dirt cheap, since it really takes no skill at all as they are being walked through the process step by step?

Maybe, but they aren’t a novelty if a lot of people are doing it. So it’s not super helpful in the sense of “there will still be artists making money!”

I suspect art in the future will be like those people today that do art that looks like a photograph. Impressive, sure, but a little of that goes a long way. If you want a photograph, take a photograph, which will be better and cheaper. If you want a nice looking image of something that doesn’t already exist, or is in a non-photographic style, just use AI, which will be better and cheaper.

Damn, i though about porn/plumber =p joke, I got your point.

Artist of future will do what they want.
specially if there is no market =P

It’s different this time. All those jobs that disappeared coincided with new jobs appearing. What do we do when all jobs can be automated?

Also job losses is but one of the dangers and far from the biggest one. Nobody is asking for a pause on development in order to protect jobs. There are more compelling reasons

1 Like

I think actors and writer in Hollywood did this. protecting their numeric right or something like that.

It’s true, all jobs will be disappearing, not just in the creative arts. If anything, I think creative people will be in a better position than most because good art is good art, talent is talent. And human art is human art, and I think that’s going to be increasingly valued as the world becomes awash in mediocre, at best, ‘art’ generated by untalented non-artists with zero artistic sensibility.

No matter what though, it’s very clear that there isn’t going to be a pause of any kind. The times they are a-changin, and we’re just going to have to fasten our seat belts.

1 Like

The world is already awash with bad art. Just look on the refrigerator of someone with preschoolers.

AI simply allows creative people with a good visual sense to make good art, even if they aren’t good at the tedious details that you previously had to master to make good art. The fact that there are people who are using AI to make bad art doesn’t mean that people will suddenly value old-school human made art so much.

Look at it this way. Once, if you wanted a picture of someone that closely resembled them and made them look good, you had to hire a portrait painter. Now, anyone can create a very realistic image of anyone that is in front of them, by just taking a photo on their smartphone.

But some people have no sense of composition or lighting, have bad timing, have shaky hands, and so on. There are millions of bad photos of people taken every day.

Does that suddenly make painted portraits more valuable? Personally, I have zero desire to have portraits painted of anyone. I just try to take care to take nice photos, take a bunch of them so I have more to pick from, and if I was truly terrible at it, I’d get someone else to hold the camera. At the most extreme, I could get a professional photographer. But there is simply no need to go back to oil on canvas.

Some people may value painted portraits for one reason or another, but most people are like, “nah, I’ve got this, I’m good.”

Same thing here, right?

1 Like

but you got those prompts ai is for make money right ?

So they can develop something else.((that is the most interesting part if it is about save world))
you could sit in casino and got the same dopamine at every bet.

It’s not that some people will be/are producing crummy art, it’s that anybody who knows how to type can do it, right now, and every day more people discover it and are doing it. It’s an ongoing flood. When everywhere you turn you’re confronted with awful, or at best, subpar art (in commercial art, as well) , which all looks very similar, don’t you think people will start seeking out talented human old-timey style artists?

And btw, don’t get me wrong, I love generative art, I do it on the daily. It’s my latest favorite hobby.

I think that may be an initial reaction, but I don’t think it will last.

For one thing, it’s moving on quickly from just being able to create one shot images. DALL-E in ChatGPT can now edit images, and while its not great yet (I prefer DALL-E on Bing but unfortunately it doesn’t have it yet), and Sora does video which a typical “artist” (i.e. someone who makes images, whether on canvas or paper or as still digital images) can’t do something comparable.

But also, what do you mean by “seeking out”? Like looking for art that they can purchase and put in a frame and hang on their wall? That seems like a tiny use case. If you need to illustrate an article, or you need to design a character for an animated movie, or design a set for a live action show, or you need to make a rendering of a proposed new product or building, etc… no one cares if it is AI. And generally no one will even know.

I mean, sure, there’s that kind of person who laments that Disney movies aren’t hand drawn anymore, but those people are a vocal minority and typically aren’t in the main market for Disney movies anyway. I think it is the same here. Busybodies will go online and complain about AI, but the regular people that have better things to do will just see an image and judge it by its quality, not by how it is made. Partly because they won’t even be able to tell.

well pretty sure soon we wont have to type prompt for generate art anyway =)
probably we will think or make a face expression and boom it will be there =P

It is why we should not ban it =)

1 Like

Lol, yeah I think you’re absolutely right. Text prompting is very ‘right now’. That’s what we do today. But 20 years from now? Probably very much like what you’re describing.

1 Like