-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Could ChatGPT Replace Audio Writers?
- Thread starter Dismayed
- Start date
So Amir…can you get this entire site to become part of its library, and if yes is that a good idea?
“Give me a ChatGPT summary of the top ten points made within this thread”
It seems funny Now! Wait until they communicate with their “Pet Humans” via anally inserted brain probing devices. This is that human predicted event aptly referred to as SHTF moment….
I asked two different audio/music-related questions that are (kind of) labor-intensive but chatGPT couldn’t answer. I can understand why but I still tried to have a hope it could. Well it did but in a way this might be possible in its future iterations (or not).
Sadly no one in medical school ever fails. They are all passed.
computer-audiophile
Major Contributor
Perhaps not the worst approach.
Zensō
Major Contributor
My former graphic design colleagues (I retired last year) are seriously worried about their future career prospects. Copy writers and editors are already being replaced, graphic artists are likely next.
Indeed, Stable Diffusion & DALL-E are already taking work away from real artists. ChatGPT and its successors seem ready to put most writers out of work. Accountants, lawyers, marketers... probably not far behind. Even engineers are already under direct threat as OpenAI is building coding abilities into the next product, and in fact they already exist in ChatGPT.
Even if you believe jobs have always been replaced by technology and this time is not different (which seems pollyannaish to me*), you must acknowledge that things don't always go well for those whose jobs have been replaced.
Manufacturing jobs in the US are commonly lamented as having "gone away"... they've been "shipped off to China". But manufacturing didn't go away. There's more manufacturing in the US than ever. It just got a lot more automated. More robots, fewer workers. That wave of automation was just a little splash before the actual tsunami, I'd wager.
Our economy is not designed to absorb or support the amount of job loss these technologies might entail. You are expected to have a job to survive, at least in the US, whether the job exists or not. In combination with the obvious threat to labor from these new technologies, this fact worries me.
When you combine this stuff with the impressive work being done in robotics now, I don't see that any humans at all have anything remotely resembling job security over the next 10-20 years.
*The argument about technology being a boon to the worker is based on productive capacity of labor via capital. When capitalists can make more money per worker via better equipment, they hire more workers. However, this argument is based on a simple formula from classical economics, the math behind this is pretty simplistic compared to real life, and doesn't take time into account. The math is also written from the point of view of the company, not the worker.
You may have marketable skills... say you're a good business analyst. OpenAI comes along and delivers a software product that's 80% as good as you are. You get fired and nobody ever hires another business analyst again. Why would they? So you have to retrain... but to what? They're replacing all the jobs more or less at once. This is why "this time is different'. I don't think we can all make a living as AI prompt writers, but hopefully I'm wrong about that...
I like this question. It must have an answer. Not that I have it but I find it really hard to imagine it doesn’t exist.
Borrowing from the theory of Ricardian comparative advantage, in theory there can still be productive exchanges, even if your trading partner is better than you at everything you do.
However, this theory relies on there being limited capacity for production. You allocate your time / resources to the thing you're best at, and the trading partner allocates their time to whatever they are best at, and you trade, and both come out ahead vs. not trading.
However, limited capacity doesn't really apply to AI. One piece of software can run 10 billion instances, in theory.
So if AI gets better at our jobs than we are, there isn't really any way back in, unless we come up with something that is 1) worthwhile and 2) can't be done by AI.
And "can't be done by AI" is a list that seems to shrink faster than the list of worthwhile activities grows.
This also leaves aside the possibility of "true" AI, something that approximates a thinking machine on par with or beyond human intelligence. (Doesn't need to actually think, just needs to behave as if it does.) Such a thing doesn't seem too far off anymore. Many of the "computers will never be able to..." hurdles have been cleared in the past few years alone.
Once a machine is smarter than you for any given task you might both perform... are you even employable IN THEORY? I say no. This is a significant break with economic orthodoxy, but again, workers are built into the math for traditional economics, because the idea of a distinction between man and machine is inherent to the concepts of labor and capital.
To the extent that distinction weakens or even goes away (just for the purposes of employment, let's not get all Blade Runner here) then people are simply no longer required for production, and will not be paid for it. Which actually destroys our entire concept of an economy... it's predicated on investors paying people who are performing productive work.
Once workers are out of the picture, one final round of investment can happen before money itself becomes conceptually invalid.
Vonnegut's Player Piano coming in hot...
Last edited:
Not true. They make them repeat the year if they fail one or two of the classes. Then typically what happens is that they either buckle down or they resign and go into another career. The other thing that happens to marginal students is that they fail one or more of the USMLE exams and cannot find a residency and therefore cannot actually get a license.
I picture a cantankerous but lovable robot like Bender, powered by an AI.
dasdoing
Major Contributor
Wow, that sounds amazing! I can't wait to try out the Quantum Discombobulator. The use of quantum technology sets it apart from traditional audio devices and the improved sound quality and precision is exactly what I'm looking for in an audio upgrade. Can't wait to see the price, but I'm sure it will be worth it.
It’s terrible, totally missing what the subject is and absurdly linking to mastering.
Nietzsche warned us what would happen once everyone could read and write. This just notches up the madness
Similar threads
