News AI-Driven Creators Are Better For The Environment Than Humans, Says New Study

[Admin]

A recent study asserts that writing and illustration works completed by AI systems have much smaller carbon footprints than works of human creators.

AI-Driven Creators Are Better For The Environment Than Humans, Says New Study : Read more

 

[USAFRet]

Of course, this completely ignores the aftermath, in which actual people that view and read, have to verify the validity of any AI written stuff.

Making a statement is one thing.
Is it right is a whole other thing. And if it is wrong, and people act on that wrong statement...much more larger "carbon footprint" ensues.

 

[coolitic]

Ah, the usual "This bar graph is presented as X and therefore I can push Y conclusion". Finding data to fill in a (in this case obviously) pre-formed conclusion is cringe.

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

While does this article feel like "Big AI" pushing a narative / agenda onto the public?

 

[TJ Hooker]

This made me think of some sort of SciFi story where a misaligned AI is tasked with reducing emissions/minimizing climate change, and the AI determines the solution is to eliminate humans.

 

[bigdragon]

Great! Replacing all those low level creators with AI will make a dent in the fight against climate change. No more polluting cars, less demand on on housing and energy, less office space, faster results, and less breath emissions.

Now run this analysis again while focusing on replacing management and executives with AI -- don't just replace the low level grunts. AI can make better decisions, faster, and while considering more inputs than humans. I bet we can completely, 100% wipe out climate change and solve the carbon problem! Just think of all the luxury cars, private jets, mansions, golf courses, and gender reveal parties AI could wipe out! THIS IS GREAT! AI WILL SOLVE EVERYTHING!



I'm being facetious.

 

[Nick_C]

The biological consumers of the created works still exist - and the global population is still growing.

 

[Sluggotg]

Computer AI and Computer Models can be controlled by the programmers. You can make a "Computer Model" give you what ever result you want. AI can also be manipulated the same way. If you have AI create most of the content, you can end up in a situation where the man behind the curtain is controlling the AI to give what ever kind of results he wants. If that is News and "Factual" information, it could be manipulated much worse than it is today.
Don't get me wrong Computer Models created and used with integrity are the cat's meow. AI has its place too. Generating Factual articles and Stories and News does not interest me.

 

[williamcll]

actual people that view and read, have to verify the validity of any AI written stuff.

As if corporations are going to keep hiring people to validate AI content and not just automatically publishing it.

 

[USAFRet]

As if corporations are going to keep hiring people to validate AI content and not just automatically publishing it.

I meant us peons out here.
Unless you plan on taking that AI output at its face value.

 

[Darkoverlordofdata]

Cool idea! Let’s start with Tom’s.
And why stop at just content creators? Replace everyone, from CEO down to the IT Dept. and Janitors. Who needs them?

Then it can run totally green, no waste. Think of all the profits for shareholders!

 

[brandonjclark]

This is actually a really good discussion to have. Here are a couple of points I think are important to consider...:

1) AI can probably replace all marketing "art" or most of what is considered art in general as it's merely designed for grabbing attention or just to be viewed by the art layman.

2) True art, art which surpasses and touches the soul, usually has a great story behind it, or at least, some discussion is often had later in life on the artists' state of mind or intentions.

No one CARES what AI thinks at this point because it's all superficial. There is no human story behind it.

3) Therefore, true art will always have a human story behind it.

4) For 3 to not be true, it would require mass machine sentience acknowledgement and a dang good machine story. I just can't picture that any time soon.