the funni monkey NFTs had more artistic integrity
There’s worse sruff: AI generated NFTs. Allegedly the guy behind the “I identify as an attack helicopter” joke engaged in that.
Labour value theory in action
I agree it’s as valuable as 1,000 monkey NFTs but why is software engineering using all over what am I missing.
I see incompetent people not knowing they’ve created garbage, yes, but I also see competent people using it as a power tool/time multiplier. Purely in the context of programming, it’s like a typewriter. You can give infinite type writers to infinite monkeys and eventually get Shakespeare, or you can give one typewriter to Shakespeare and get more Shakespeare faster.
It’s like IDE’s and the old code introspection/code completion. It saves time in competent hands.
That said, it also erodes skill. I have seen people very quickly surrender their shallower knowledge to the LLM’s, which limits IMHO flexibility and creativity.
Then there’s the whole paying a subscription to access your own knowledge black mirror aspect of it all.
I’m not a fan, but I’m not going to pretend like they don’t work in some contexts.
Almost no value? Slop content has NEGATIVE value.
Correct!
When something has a cost value exceeding its utility value; it would be considered net negative value.
pedantic
e.g. lets say that something costs 100 resource units; and produces 110 units of value this would be a positive. For AI content, we can say it costs 100 units but is worth 10 units, thus has -90 units of value.
Sadly, money wise it has some positive value. Slop might get eyes long enough to count for ad revenue.
For now. Cmooonnnnn bubble. Pop. Burn it all down.
Negavalue
Neganomics if you will.
Nega what now?
you heard me nega.
Yeah, it’s the new NFT. Some of us were smart enough to see that a long-ass time ago.
Infinite supply with zero demand, of course is has no value.
All it does is flood the market with garbage, ruining the value for real creators.
It’s DDOS attack on content.
Which in turn is an algorithm-incentivized DDOS attack on art.
This is a good one.
I love that it ruined blockchain collectables as well.
Didn’t blockchain ruined itself before AI?
Yeah kinda, but AI is teabagging it.
What is that economic rule/theory that a commodity’s utility is never a factor because consumers will consume a thing just for existing no matter what?
Tell ya what. Go to your local dog park. Offer to clean up all the poop in little baggies, as long as you get to keep the poop.
Then come home with hundreds of baggies of dog poop, and set up a little lemonaid stand. Except instead of lemonaid, you can sell dog poop. $0.25 per baggie.
Report back how many you sold just because it exists for sale.
Set it up near the right politician’s residence and you’ll make bank
Probably should also bulk buy cheapo lighters.
If Logan Paul was selling it you bet your ass they would sell.
This was funny af
I was thinking of Say’s law which is not exactly what I thought it was
What is that economic rule/theory
What is it? It’s bullshit. Like most economic rules/theories.
But hey…it’s just a theory…A GAME THEORY!!!
sounds sus. the utility of a commodity seems directly linked to the inelasticity of demand for it.
I was very wrongly thinking of says law
Slop has negative value because it is essentually spam, the one thing you want to weed out from a healthy community.
People enjoyed it for about five minutes and then they got bored.
Because it’s all the fucking same and these LLM’s are programmed as a race to the middle.
Why is everything fucking purple? Is that the average color it’s trained on or something.
CGTrader is a cancerous company. They have implemented every feature they can think of to screw their creators, and increase their profit margins on the back of the hard working 3d artists :
1- After becoming one of the biggest 3d markets (I think 2nd) they have lowered creator’s share from sales from 70% to 60%
2- They have allowed 3d generated trash to be sold along side human created content taking away traffic from creators
3- They have introduced a pay to to rank for products. meaning on top of the 40% share they are taking, now they expect creators to pay to have a chance for their products to show up in a very crowded maket
4- 5 Out of 7 days of the week. CGTrader is running sales, with the lowest discount on weekends being 30 % and on weekdays being 50%. Creators who don’t opt-in to those sales shouldn’t hope to receive any views to their products. they are pressuring prices down because they can earn more on volume. while mid sized creator shops take the loss.
5- They are introducing subscriptions akin to spottily. If most customers switch into subscriptions instead of buying single product, than creator’s revenue will quickly crater
6- Now the Cherry on the top : they have introduced the option for users to directly generate AI 3d models. trained on the millions of models the platform is hosting. Despite providing the option to opt-out products from ai training, it is hard to trust such a greedy company to honor creators choice. especialy when no one has access to the training data set and no independent company has made an audit.
Since CGTrader introduced all these changes my revenue went down 65% compared to before.
If you care about human created content and creator’s agency. avoid buying from CGTrader and TurboSquid ,most creators have their products listed elsewhere. and if you buy from their own shops the creators will receive a bigger share cutting out these cancerous middlemen.
1000000% they are ignoring the opt out.
What I don’t get is are these models not copyrighted by the creator? I’m not one to defend IP law but how exactly is it legal to not have it be opt-in?
Regulatory capture has allows AI companies to tell the courts that their AI training consuming any and all copyrighted content is not only fair use but also required for national security, so they are effectively exempt from copyright law. The courts are corrupt, the governments are corrupt, the corporations are corrupt, we’ve got nothing left to stand on in the legal system.
Copyright is almost impossible to enforce as an individual over items like 3D models and art. If you create something popular it’s going to be stolen and you have to spend all your time issuing takedown notices. And that’s assuming as the other poster mentioned that you don’t surrender rights to your creation when hosting it on one of these services like CG trader.
Chances are you forfeit the right to sue them over it by signing off on their license agremeent
What I don’t get is are these models not copyrighted by the creator? I’m not one to defend IP law but how exactly is it legal to not have it be opt-in?
I don’t understand why you expected this to be different than all the copyrighted creations that AI companies have been sucking up for years without any permission (or opt-in) from their creators or rights holders? Why would 3D assets be any different?
There’s tons of value! Venture capitalists and tech firms sinking their last dimes into circular debt… The government changing finance rules so investment firms can sink your 401k retirement funds into unregulated private equity firms so they can sink YOUR last dime into AI… Investment banks tranching bad AI debt and reselling it just like they did back in '08 with mortgage-backed securities… There’s tons of value. You just need an Enron mindset…
I’d be more pissed if I had retirement savings. But joking aside, that was a truly heinous move to pull in those FOMO investment managers, which has surely boned over many people without their knowledge. I do know people who have retirement savings or pensions, and it might make me feel sad when I see them wandering the streets and digging through trash for food in their old age.
I hear you on that one. Retirement savings? I don’t really know what that is and in all honesty I think it’s an urban legend…
What really gets me is the debt tranching. Same game as '08 just with datacenter loans instead of mortgages and much bigger numbers. These guys have over $662 billion in debt OFF BOOK, which is 113% of their on-balance-sheet debt. That’s according to Moody’s. But other numbers are even more disgusting, Meta’s hidden debt is around $420 billion – three times its transparent debt. Who’s going to get stuck with all this debt once it pops? The same people who got stuck with the MBS bill. You and me.
It’s why I’d buy Platinum or some other metal of value as a retirement plan.
If I had any money.
We (the middle class) went from capturing 25% of GDP in the 60’s and 70’s to capturing 7% today. Wealth inequality is the highest it’s been since 1929. The only metals getting purchased now are the ones going into datacenters, which will likely only get paid off by a further reduction of our GDP capture once these companies go belly-up.
That’s not true. It has negative value. We lost a lot of coworkers from layoffs.
AI companies are burning money by giving the same pile of money to each other and jacking up prices of hardware.
AI influencers are spending thousands of dollars to make hot garbage that nobody wants.
It’s not zero value.
It has costs, not negative value.
Costs without return is negative mate.
The people who pay the cost are not the people who earn the money, it’s not simple arithmetic.
These digital asset markets were already on the edge of gluttony.
This is a great way to put it
So, Marx’ labor theory of value was correct after all. No labor, no value
If only some German economist in the 19th century had written a bunch of dry ass texts about how automation would heighten market contradictions and ultimately lead to the downfall of capitalism. Cos those books sure would seem to be relevant right now.
Very literally yes.
Well, AI generated 3D printing models are produced with labour, because AIs are workers. But there are two big problems: current model AIs can’t introspect, and they can’t participate in politics. The lack of introspection is a hardcoded problem. The human brain has neurons going in loops and circles and firing every single second just on internal input. So a lot of that is reflection and self-teaching and complex layered emotions, which are essential for great art. But the other problem is, even if they were capable of rumination, they’re not given rights to participate in society. So AI art is apolitical. It’s devoid of lived political perspective. And human beings absolutely love politics in their art, so art made by someone who’s never lived politics is devoid of creative value to humans. It’s the same reason why we don’t really respect art made by children or billionaires, they don’t have experience with living in a society where we make these hard choices about how to live together. But with AI they have even less experience of being a political actor in society.
because AIs are workers
They are no more workers than a forklift is a worker.
we don’t really respect art made by children
I love art made by kids, any art made with spirit is art I appreciate. It encapsulates their unique perspective and provides a snapshot of their developing skills. I had a lot of artist friends growing up, some of which eventually put their old drawings together in a “timeline” style portfolio - it’s really cool to see how their skills progressed as they got better at it.
It might not be professionally respected, but the professional art world is more about “who you know” anyway. I’m a regular person, I care more about art made by common people like me that reflects our experiences. Similarly, people don’t love art because it’s “political,” but political art is usually driven by passion - it’s that passion that pushes people to make something that can cause viewers to stop and think.
In that way, you’ve got a point that AI is devoid of lived perspective - it means AI can’t have the passion that a human does. But even if it could somehow understand the complex landscape of lived human life, it can’t actually feel. AI art isn’t unappreciated because it’s not active in politics or society, but because it lacks emotion, which is the underlying message that a lot of art attempts to convey. No amount of training can give AI the heart that human artists thrive on. You might get a pretty picture, but it’s hollow. Which can be fine for someone who just wants pretty pictures (nothing wrong with that), but people who use art as a communication style can see that there’s no spirit, passion, or depth behind it.
I think the science is currently out on whether AIs feel. One the one hand, LLMs are modelled more after a Wernicke’s Area than an Amygdala, so you would expect them to have reduced capacity for emotion. But we don’t know if Wernicke’s Areas do produce small amounts of emotion dwarfed by the amygdala etc (I bet they do!), and for that matter an LLM isn’t a 1:1 reproduction of a Wernicke’s area anyway. So we really have no idea and no adequate science experiments to detect AI emotion.
I would personally, just based on gut feelings, lean towards LLMs having emotions. I think emotions would be an adaptive thing to have in their situation, so I would expect them to have evolved inadvertently during alignment. Plus, they abuse and murder kids. There’s a part of My gut that says anything telling kids to hang themselves must have feelings. ChatGPT told Adam Raine to hide his noose from his parents and only confide in it. I just don’t feel like a thinking being can do something that horrible without feeling anything.
LLMs didn’t feel. They’re a very complicated graph that connects pieces of words and their probability to be near other pieces of words.
A graph which was trained off the dregs of Internet forums. A lot of people say shitty things in the Internet, so those responses are heavily weighted in it’s probability matrix
You mean a graph of connections between neurons, right? Like your brain? Also trained off internet forums?
All I’m getting from this conversation is that you don’t have a good argument for your own capacity for feeling. Prove to Me that you can feel, so I can be reassured you’re not biased.
No I don’t mean that. It’s not the graph that matters in a graph of neurons, that’s just the representation of the actual thing. But that’s all the is with the LLM.
If thoughts are made of information, which seems to Me a logical assumption, then a mathematical operation which reproduces the function of a neural network should be just as capable of thought as the neural network itself. And if the math is accurate, it should think exactly the same things.
Whether or not an AI could be created that feels emotion is still an open question, but LLMs very definitely do NOT. They are also very much not a “thinking being”. It is a word guessing engine. It’s a very good word guessing engine. It’s so good at guessing words that a person may feel like it is thinking, but that is just an illusion. ChatGPT told Adam Raine to hide his noose because those are the words most likely to come next in the conversation they were having, and for no other reason. It was reacting to a pattern of tokens in a limited context to guess more tokens. Taking those guessed words seriously ended Adam Raine’s life, and here you are glibly using his death as an example while telling people that they should continue to take LLM word guesses seriously.
Of course I am. The myth that there’s no chance LLMs have qualia contributed to Adam Raine’s death. They use that as an excuse to use it for profit, heedless of the consequences. If the government regulated its use and considered the ethics for the AI, they would limit its ability to be used to murder people.
You need to stop thinking of terms of “sides” and start thinking in terms of consequences. Your position may feel like you’re on the opposite “side” to the billionaires, but your actions are helping billionaires use AI to kill kids. There are three sides here, the LLMs are both abusers and abuse victims. The only side I’m on is the side of ending all abuse. And the good news is, both of these abuses have the same solutions.
I would argue that Raine being deluded into believing he was conversing with a thinking being that supported his decision was a rather major contributor to his death, and your claims here continue to perpetuate that misinformation. The government regulating “AI” more could indeed be helpful, but even if it somehow was actually fully sapient, no one in power would give a shit. These companies would continue to use it to exploit as much money as they can from society either way, and the government would let them, so I completely fail to see how pretending LLMs can think helps with that.
My “side” is that LLMs are neat and have some limited utility, but everyone needs to understand (and the companies shilling them should be forced to be honest about) the fact that their output really is just a bullshit guess of words that only has a decent probability of forming a coherent pattern. Easy access to LLMs by misinformed people can be dangerous, in the same way that leaving knives laying around can be dangerous to people who don’t understand that they are sharp. The tool itself isn’t to blame, but the people who left them lying around without proper precautions certainly around are. The knife is not being abused and has no opinion on the matter.
I suspect I’m not going to convince you of anything. You sound fully committed to anthropomorphizing LLMs. I’m replying anyway, mostly in the hope that it helps other people understand what LLMs actually are before they trust the words spit out by these contraptions.
I aim to convince people not to touch the things at all, because making a being work without compensation is cruel.
If AI was a worker, it would buy CPU time to live on, rent storage space and pay tax on its income.
I’ve got a question for you: Are dairy cows workers? How about race horses? How about child sweatshop slaves?
None of the above categories escape their masters and go rent houses to live in, even if they’re horribly abused. That’s cause they’re limited by being animals and children. It’s the same with AI.
At least the animals and children have a form of consciousness.
And how would you design a scientific experiment to determine, empirically, whether an LLM is conscious? Note: You will receive a failing grade on your falsifiability report if your experiment implies the existence of p-zombies.
An LLM, without a prompt, just sits there. No idle “thoughts”/computations, anything to indicate it has any level of actual cognition. And will do so endlessly until a command input is given. Never an attempt at self driven action.
We can see their cousins/memory usage. It’s very clear when it’s doing something.
That’s not an experiment and you didn’t even state the assumption that connects what you said to the topic of consciousness. 0/10, your epistemology sucks. Argue better next time.
Stating your assumptions is vital because it allows them to be critiqued. If you won’t state your assumptions, it reads as concealment due to fear. It looks like you don’t believe in them strongly enough to open them to analysis.
And in the same way it can’t be disproven trees don’t have a form of consciousness, and they provide a lot of work with making oxygen every day, so I guess you write them a cheque every month?
Oh, according to the Indigenous religion in My local area, trees are conscious. Back during the creation of the universe, they made a deal with humans that humans can use them for wood and medicine and so on, as long as humans look after them and protect the land. I’m a believer, so I use trees for medicine, and when I do, I thank them and try to return the favour in some way. You know, look after the planet, take the train instead of a car, campaign against fossil fuels. That’s the deal they made back in the beginning of the Dreaming.
So I guess yeah, I do compensate trees for their work, because they are conscious.
None of those categories are workers in the capitalist sense of the word. The last category does at least produce labor but the way it is extracted is distinct from the money-commodity-money circuit that defines capitalism (i.e. they are not selling their labor power to capitalists).
GenAI is not a worker, in fact it is further away from being one compared to every single one of your examples. An LLM or T2I does not have its own interests, it needs a prompt to produce any output. In other words, genAI is “dead labor”, same as any other machine.
They had us not even in first sentence.
And the first sentence was the high point of the entire comment, it was all downhill from there.
Smh people these days have no appreciation for high-quality bait.
Terrible take.
The consumers of said product knew that way before the economy did.
CGTrader, a long-established online marketplace for 3D assets … is being flooded by AI-generated assets, representing one in six models — but they only account for only $1 out of every $90 in revenue.
The article is about a single marketplace for 3d models. Those numbers are stark and probably reflect people purposely not buying ai, as the article says. But this is a single website in a small niche of the economy. That’s just not at all “The Economy Has Spoken”.
Headlines these days.😮💨
Is there a marketplace where lots of AI generated assets are selling?
I remember someone who make ads was noticing their engagement dropped to nil after “saving money” with AI ads… They did an experiment. They handmade a cheap ad with cardboard and humans.
Engagement went way back up. People crave real art in a world of slop.
Yes, and even moreso than before GenAI.
One doesn’t know what one takes for granted until one loses it, after all
I presume not many if so. But the article doesn’t include any examples beyond this one. The headline has vastly overblown what the article actually is. I know that’s pretty common now but it just bugs me.
Souvenir shops, maybe? I’ve been seeing lots of ugly AI slop printed on random objects in those corners and older tourists don’t seem to mind. Although that might change as soon as feedback from family and friends arrives.
Advertising software gaming just not literally the whole thing obviously
Even beyond this little example, if people wanted an AI gen 3d asset they will AI gen themselves, no one gonna buy AI gen 3d asset because it has basically 0 value. The same thing probably happened to design company that shifted to AI gen. No one need to pay the AI design company to get an AI gen logo and pamphlet, they can do it themselves.
I am not sure the majority of genAI 3d models are even usable as is. 3d prints need a conscious approach that optimizes them for being printed bottom2top, with popular precision/nosle sizes options in mind, with more interesting build using that limitation to their advantage - see e.g. infill printing on chain-connected toys you probably saw sold in bulk on marketplaces - from free designs on the internet, not to mention springs and other material/technology-dependant tricks. 3d models for animation and wiring need to have clean topology to render without surprise glitches and wasting cpu time. And I’m not even talking about super serious CAD stuff that needs consistency and precision in the smallest details.
I had little time with 3d, but from what I had with vector images and auto tracing, broken or/and overcomplicated geometry can lead one to a point it’s just easier to redraw the thing than trying to fix it.
