Wholeheartedly agree. What's more, it seems to me like there's a large segment of the art industry that's very much in denial right now about this transition. You see stuff like "the human touch can't be replicated" or "but the algorithm will never [thing xyz] like a human", and then when it does do thing xyz like a human, the goalposts just get moved again. A lot of my wonderful art friends are in this kind of denial right now, and it makes sense, to be honest -- losing your job to a machine sucks and is scary!
Eventually art for the people will become art for the individual. Our AI partner (I assume we will all have one) will serve up an entirely curated world. Art will be generated on the spot, just for you. Entertainment, just for you. Imagine having a TV show no one else ever sees because it was synthesized from your likes, experiences, interests, just for you, on demand. This will of course start with AI writing short stories, then books, but there is no limit really.
Already AI is being used for comic book backgrounds. It's just a matter of time before all of this becomes commonplace.
When you look at AI and what it does, it is no different to what humans do. We are trained on a model (experiences and other minds), and we make derivative decisions based on the model. If you can do this in software and take advantage of light speed learning then of course all we can do will be done by AI faster and better. In time humans and AI will be the same, AI will design all the tools and tech to make this possible. It's the only natural conclusion to humanities' ultimate goals.
> Already AI is being used for comic book backgrounds. It's just a matter of time before all of this becomes commonplace.
That doesn't mean that it will make artists obsolete. It will give them more time to e.g. actually think about what kind of background would fit there best. It's a tool, not a replacement.
Existential threats tend to drive religious sentiment.
To say this revolution is not going to happen is to say humans have hit a hard technological limit, and I don't see any evidence to support that.
If I was less enthused I might make my opinions more philosophical than religious, but I feel overwhelmed by the possibilities of real world changes. This is no longer a philosophical thought experiment, it's happening. We are careering toward surpassing a Turing test for goodness sake. Uncanny valley apex of animation; go look at what cutting edge AI can do in terms of producing lifelike animated avatars, it's so close you have to double take.
CGI artists have been trying to get to this level of realism for as long as the industry has existed.
Unlike a religious pamphlet, this god is tangible, it's here, and dismissing it because it sounds too spectacular is putting your head in the sand. AI is so out of this world it is a religious moment for humanity.
Civilization has seen people like you sitting comfortably and scoffing at the very idea of an aeroplane being remotely viable, and yet within 50 years of the first powered flight we had international airports.
The sad part is you don't even realize how unhinged in a quasi david koresh style you sound. The observation that kurzwelians have substituted AI (as a deux ex machina) for god is still spot on, maybe more than ever.
Singulatarians really are funny until it becomes tragic.
