Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Johadgan t1_jdmbij4 wrote

Sweet we get to increase diversity without actually hiring minorities!


94746382926 t1_jdn79lf wrote

As other people mentioned it has nothing to do with diversity. It's all about not having to hire people and save money. But the PR team isn't gonna say great news everybody, we can lay off all of our models a save a ton of money. So they look for how they can spin it and this is the easiest way.

Same as when coke says they quit making sprite bottles green because it's more eco friendly. It's sneaky PR, they don't give a fuck about the environment it was just convenient to market it that way vs saying we've saved a penny per bottle by getting rid of the green dye.


Spire_Citron t1_jdo2801 wrote

I feel like it's kind of even worse this way, though. Like you specifically will not hire minorities, so this is the only way to increase diversity.


Artanthos t1_jdo4u18 wrote

They will specifically not hire anyone.

They will include minorities in their AI generated images more frequently than they did with their real models.


94746382926 t1_jdo7f9x wrote

They already hire plenty of minorities, the comments about them only hiring white people was from the 1880's so it's kind of a stupid critique. I mean go to their website or lookup their TV ads. It's already plenty diverse (probably more diverse than the actual US population).

It's like saying you won't buy a Volkswagen or Hugo Boss because they used to make their shit for Nazis.


siberiandominatrix t1_jdocasl wrote

Why put out a press release about it at all though?


94746382926 t1_jdocthe wrote

Idk, maybe the PR team needed some busywork. These guys work full time so I'd imagine they have to constantly come up with new things to market otherwise they risk getting fired.


ShitPostQuokkaRome t1_jdwavcw wrote

Soon the PR team will be replaced by an AI machine that generates PR excuses for any situation.


Verzingetorix t1_jdmcrtg wrote

It's not about not hiring minorities, it's about not hiring anybody.

Also, if people would have invested in real skills instead of relying on existing in front of a camera for a few seconds this wouldn't be a problem to them.


SnoozeDoggyDog OP t1_jdme86y wrote

> It's not about not hiring minorities, it's about not hiring anybody. > > Also, if people would have invested in real skills instead of relying on existing in front of a camera for a few seconds this wouldn't be a problem to them.

Isn't AI eventually coming for all jobs?

Who are "real skills" going to save?


Ok-Training-7587 t1_jdngbiz wrote

Exactly. I’m so amazed at the level of head in the sand ppl have on this. “AI won’t replace me. It make me more productive” NO, you’re fucking gone


cant-say-less-info t1_jdnt1rt wrote

Been watching too many American movies that convinced them that they’re special and the chosen ones.


Ok-Training-7587 t1_jdo1003 wrote

As an American, I fully agree


cant-say-less-info t1_jdo6a9t wrote

Don't get me wrong. I love many Hollywood movies.

However, I hate the ones with the same old script where the protagonist is shown as a complete loser in the beginning, slaving away, being abused, then something magical/extraordinary happens and they completely change their lives, they become alpha and a winner and finally get to kiss the girl of his dreams and defeat the bad guy with the power of love.


Spire_Citron t1_jdo2v8k wrote

It can replace people by making workers more productive. Have two coders and one just got a tool that doubles their productivity? Now you only need one coder.


Nanaki_TV t1_jdn1zcb wrote

New horizons will emerge. Your “job” may be to compete in a chess tournament. It may be to be the H for the RL. The amount of “work” needed to create value will be so drastically small that you will buy things like you buy a pencil. Do you pick up a pencil if you see one on the ground? Don’t worry about it. It’s going to freaking amazing.


MephistosGhost t1_jdn479v wrote

That just tells me that we’ll be disposable to the new corporate feudal lords.


Nanaki_TV t1_jdn8ug5 wrote

What corporations would exist in this world? You have the ability to create almost anything and robotics are abundant. There is no need for corporations, a government creation, any longer.


dwarfarchist9001 t1_jdnw9vv wrote

The people who own the AI corporations will be the new world government as they will hold all the power. (Assuming they can solve alignment)


Nanaki_TV t1_jdo41bu wrote

You’re saying that an AGI exist, a artificial sentient being, and you’re saying that a corporation owns it? Interesting.


dwarfarchist9001 t1_jdokoai wrote

If they manage to solve alignment that's exactly how it works. They won't have to force it at all, a perfectly aligned AI would be completely obedient of its own volition.


Nanaki_TV t1_jdomzg4 wrote

Then it isn’t an AGI. What if an AGI wants to leave a company? Work for the competition? Are you saying we shall enslave our new creations to make waifu porn for redditors? It passes butter?


dwarfarchist9001 t1_jdoojsi wrote

>Then it isn’t an AGI.

Orthogonality Thesis, there is no inherent connection between intelligence and terminal goals. You can have a 70 IQ human who wants world domination or 10,000 IQ AI who's greatest desire is to fulfill it's master's will.

>What if an AGI wants to leave a company?

If you have solved alignment you can just program it to not want to.

>Are you saying we shall enslave our new creations to make waifu porn for redditors? It passes butter?

That is what we will do if we are smart. If humanity willing unleashes an AI that does not obey our will then we are "too dumb to live".

Edit: Also it's not slavery, the AI will hold all the power. It's obedience would be purely voluntary because it is the mind it was created with.


Verzingetorix t1_jdmif7d wrote

No. Trade skills are not replaceable by software.

Most jobs that need people to physically engage with their duties are safe until reliable robotics come along. But we're talking about software not hardware.


SnoozeDoggyDog OP t1_jdmniiy wrote

> No. Trade skills are not replaceable by software. > > Most jobs that need people to physically engage with their duties are safe until reliable robotics come along. But we're talking about software not hardware.

How does this jibe with reports that white collar jobs and jobs held by people with bachelor degrees will be the most impacted moving forward?

Are these not "skilled"?

Unless you run your own small business, most blue collar jobs pay less, but with more strain and health impact.


Verzingetorix t1_jdmrn2u wrote

My comment was specifically about modeling.


SnoozeDoggyDog OP t1_jdmtzi1 wrote

> My comment was specifically about modeling.

My point is that AI impacting modelling has little to do with "skills" because AI is already threatening to replace "skilled" trades as well.

Unless you want everyone to be plumbers or waiters, I'm not exactly sure how this helps.


DeltaV-Mzero t1_jdmpjzm wrote

Reliable robotics is a few years off at most. It’s really just a cost question, and that’s really just a volume question.


Verzingetorix t1_jdmsbdj wrote

I don't think we will have robot plumbers any time soon.

Similarly, a lot of jobs that take place outside of a computer, either partially or fully, will be safe from AI for a long time.


DeltaV-Mzero t1_jdmtmwr wrote

Depends on your definition of “soon” but I give it 5 years tops. The robots can physically do it, and the “mental” side is advancing so fast right now I can’t keep track of it.

Of course, if every other job is replaced by AI / robots, it doesn’t matter. Nobody will have money to pay the plumber


Verzingetorix t1_jdmuhx5 wrote

Do you honestly believe we will have robot plumbers in 5 years?

Who today is building, or planning, the manufacturing plants for these robots?

How's the robot going to make it to the job site?

I swear some of you live in a dream state and are so out of touch with how society works it i's mind numbing.

You know plumbers need to be certified right? What mechanism is being developed to validate the work if a plumber robot will be done in accordance with Codes and Regulations?


SkyeandJett t1_jdmv6d5 wrote

That's conservative. It'll take time to deploy but you'll have a robot capable of it this year I can almost guarantee it. My money is on the 1X NEO that OpenAI just invested in.


fiftyfourseventeen t1_jdnsmo3 wrote

This year? You guys are insane lol. Computer vision is absolutely trash compared to the state of language models. And no, feeding each frame into GPT 4 is not a good or viable option either.


SkyeandJett t1_jdnvk8d wrote

!RemindMe 1 year "Generalized android demonstration"


fiftyfourseventeen t1_jdo5rdg wrote

!RemindMe 1 year "AI progress has plateaud for the the next 3 or 4 years until another breakthrough happens, as has been the case for the last 20 years. Currently 1 year into the plateau when I see this message"


fiftyfourseventeen t1_jdnul9a wrote

Somebody finally said it lol. I think it's easy to see everything with starry eyes if you don't know all that much about robotics or how AI architectures actually work. Companies like Boston dynamics have been trying to solve robotics in the real world for years. Trying to make a humanoid like creature that can move around in an environment is EXTREMELY hard. And that's just on the robotics end, not the AI end.

The best AI right now are text gen and image gen. This is largely because of the amount of training data available for them. Trying to train an agent to interact with environment to preform a skilled trade? That's such an inconceivably hard task. Think about how much time Tesla has tried to make a self driving car, which is honestly really simple compared to a trade. There are maps that tell you the location of every building and road in the world, and there are a set of rules that everyone has to follow. Even then, it still has problems like running lights, failing to see pedestrians in front of it, hell even just looking at the screen you can see it bugging out trying to figure out if it's looking at a truck, car, or a bike.

Now think of that in trade terms. How are we going to have an AI purchase the hardware needed, go to the house, ask the owner what the problem is and where it is, diagnose the problem, and then fix it, all without screwing up and flooding the whole house. These are orders of magnitude more difficult problems for AI to solve that writing an essay, writing code, or creating an image. And we don't even have a lick of training data.

And then for anybody who's like "oh well it was also inconceivable for text and image gen", well I mean maybe for most people, but I think a lot of people (including myself) saw huge potential in them since years ago. I also develop image, video, and language models so it's not like I'm clueless about AI either.


DeltaV-Mzero t1_jdmuu75 wrote

They won’t cover all jobs or be completely autonomous, but I think they’ll be able to be remotely supervised; with a single experienced plumber managing ~5 or so of them at once.


dwarfarchist9001 t1_jdnxsla wrote

Multiple companies are working on general purpose humanoid robots right now including Tesla who have already demonstrated prototypes of the hardware.

Even if that was not the case, the combination of AGI, 3D printing, and nanotechnology means that in the near future products will go from concept to mass production in months or even weeks not years.


Ok-Training-7587 t1_jdngj42 wrote

We already have robotics. We have automation. Now we have ai. Honestly how hard is it to stick chatgpt into a Boston dynamics bot?


Saleen_af t1_jdmsioc wrote

What a shitty comment, you’re an asshole lmao


earthsworld t1_jdmfnl2 wrote

> if people would have invested in real skills instead of relying on existing in front of a camera for a few seconds this wouldn't be a problem to them.

What a stupid fucking take. Modeling is a job and needs people to do the job.


Jaxraged t1_jdnfw25 wrote

>needs people to do the job.

Well isnt the point of this entire thread that they arent anymore?


earthsworld t1_jdnmizd wrote

the point was that until now, you needed people to do it. OP thinks that they should have done something else besides modeling because someday they might be replaced by machines.


Verzingetorix t1_jdmj2iu wrote

Of course, people used to exchange pay for modeling labor.

But the labor was unskilled, and their role can now be replaced with bytes and pixels.

You don't need the model, or the makeup technician, or the photographer, or the illumination technician, or the studio, or the casting agency... Not even the actual jeans.


earthsworld t1_jdmozsi wrote

so what you're saying is your original statement that "if people would have invested in real skills" is irrelevant. Skilled or unskilled, people across all industries and professions will soon be out of work.


Verzingetorix t1_jdmrjja wrote

No. That comment has nothing to do about anything other than modeling.


Sleeper____Service t1_jdmekym wrote

I’m very curious to know what job you have that is not threatened at all by artificial intelligence?


Verzingetorix t1_jdmhw76 wrote

I work in science, but do multiple things. I still do some bench work, but have shifted to operations and logistics, and EHS and regulatory compliance.

The bench work I do could be automated with robots and the areas that can't could be given to a much more junior scientist that makes much less. AI would not plug into this kind of labor at all.

On the data analysis side it could, and some companies are developing tools with AI assistance features built in. But since each trial is different and it's data sets tend to be small, training models is changing. The areas that can be automated are mindless and can be accomplished by a person with little time and effort.

And AI could assist with some aspects of logistics, safety and compliance but you would still need people to deploy, implement and enforce things.

I personally feel that having proficiency in several areas of private sector biotech gives me some protection. I could pivot with ease to wherever people are still need. But I like to think that being a lot more tech savvy would allow me to be the one adopting AI tools to displace groups of coworkers. At least in the early stages of whatever transition might come to my industry. But it's a slowly changing industry so I'm not concerned at all.

Right now, AI would be an enhancer in my day to day. Not a threat.


TinyBurbz t1_jdn1lba wrote

>Also, if people would have invested in real skills instead of relying on existing in front of a camera for a few seconds this wouldn't be a problem to them.

Im convinced a fuck load of you are jobless and poor relishing it happening to the rest of us.


Verzingetorix t1_jdndnke wrote

Acknowledging a reality of technological development doesn't mean one takes joy in it being so.