top of page
  • Writer's pictureMicah Voraritskul

ARE WE SURPRISED? | Chat is Putting the Hurt on Creative Arts

Two datasticians, one from NYU and one from Washington U, recently published hard numbers in the SSRN repository (to add to work already compiled by some at Harvard and Boston Consulting) on the negative impact ChatGPT is having on the creative industries.


"The study's conclusions are hardly surprising, but which someone had to provide concrete data for, and that's what we academics are for: the introduction of the ChatGPT generative algorithm a year ago has had significant negative effects on creative professions such as graphic designers and copywriters."*

The drop in jobs available for bid AND earnings is a clear sign (not surprisingly) that AI Chatbots are cutting into the human job market.

Surprised

AI startups are a dime a dozen. We wade through the newsfeed every day and click on the incessantly growing number of sites representing companies claiming a new angle on how to turn AI into dollars for YOU. Bigger, smarter, faster, but also more specific, nuanced, and focused on precisely how you can make your profits.


We (VerifiedHuman™) have tried to be neutral observers about what could and probably would happen as AI technology has proliferated in this year of AI, 2023.

So far, we've been correct:
1. AI is here to stay.
2. AI will put a massive hurt on the arts and creative media production, where humans are doing things the way they have been until 2022.
3. Human creators will have to figure out how to adapt to a new normal and capitalize on the kinds of things that only humans can bring: experience, emotion, and the true stuff of living.
4. Detecting generative AI's influence in created media will become virtually impossible for humans or machines.
5. Technology will not answer the differentiation problem (neither in detection, encryption, or watermarking).
6. Legislation (laws and copyrights) will be largely irrelevant to the pragmatic masses.
7. And machines don't give a rip about watermarks or human laws. They are irrelevant.

What remains? The value of human trust. We have a lot to say about trust and verification. That's what we do.


We have been keeping up with the Hollywood strikes. We have been in real conversations with real writers, visual artists, musicians, and voice actors whose livelihoods are at risk. And all along the way, we have tried to maintain the fine line between supporting AI development and protecting the unique human touch.


Are we surprised by these new data?

Not even a little bit.


Are we rightly concerned?

Absolutely.


Are we daunted?

That would be a hard "Nope."


People win.


 

Comments


+ BLOG

bottom of page