Login
You're viewing the sfba.social public feed.
  • Aug 5, 2026, 12:35 PM

    @jalefkowit I don't really like this because 'an existential threat to the livelihood of creative professionals' can be read to mean that bullshit generators could actually substitute for the writers of The Onion. I'd much rather that they either omitted this part or explained it in a way that doesn't make that implication.

    💬 3🔄 0⭐ 1

Replies

  • 💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Aug 5, 2026, 3:39 PM

    @david_chisnall @jalefkowit as we've seen in the current state of the world, LLMs do not need to be *good* in order to harm entire industries. There's a lot of slop out there taking up space that human creativity used to fill.

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Aug 6, 2026, 12:23 AM
    @david_chisnall I think they describe the outcome (displaced workers) rather than the reason for this outcome (greedy bosses rather than output quality). As such, I think it’s fine. As an aside, you aren’t the first to jump to that conclusion this text doesn’t make, but that AI companies readily do in their marketing material.
    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Aug 6, 2026, 10:16 AM

    @hypolite The problem is that it can easily be framed by boosters as 'legacy media is avoiding AI because they're scared it can replace them!111eleventyone' as a marketing point. Something unambiguous about 'AI cannot replace our workers but AI salesdroids can often convince managers it can, which harms both workers and the companies that make the poor choices' would be clearer and harder for OpenAI to use as marketing.

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0