... When I was much younger I adapted to CAD from velum and lead. I was told that CAD was going bury draftsmen out of a job. I CADed a house into an optical illusion impossible to exist in reality and the caption read "just because an idiot has a CAD program, it doesn't mean the idiot is a draftsman." CAD is just another drafting tool like a lead holder or a compass. It allowed me to become a 3D drafter and increased my value as a Draftsman.
There are ethical uses of AI. And AI can be abused to steal jobs and violate other peoples intellectual property. That's not the fault of AI any more than Ford is responsible for having it's autos used as getaway cars in bank robberies.
It's time to have a rational discussion about the ethical use of AI and the unethical use of AI. There's movie coming out that uses an AI Val Kilmer that the director claimed was necessary because Val Kilmer was a great actor and there was no time to recast the part. That was pure bullshit because that cinematic simulacrum was a con to make people come to see Val Kilmer. Now that is unethical and a con. I will not be seeing it.
Demonstrate where any of this piece was scraped off the net from other's work or some other unethical use of AI in that video, or even that it was AI vs some other form of production like Animator or CGI or whatever else and I will take this post down.
It is aggravating that you use my OP to promote your absolute hatred of anything you think is AI regardless of the source of the material, ethically, or not. And not just once but twice in the same thread, when what the discussion should be about the difference between ethical and unethical use of AI. They don't make buggy whips anymore and cars put black smiths and livery stables out of business, too. Computers put people out of work, too. CNC machines put machinists out of work. It's called progress. We need to be looking for ways to separate the good from the bad. Or at least label it AI work.
= new reply since forum marked as read