Alright, @Sci , you can make your point without harassing people.
I don’t feel particularly harassed by that question...
Until i became a consultant i was member of one of my countries biggest unions. I am all for strengthening worker’s abilities to make a living and protect them from precarious working conditions.
Yes there should be rules and restrictions. Which is why unfettered AI is annoyance at best and saying writers and other industry professionals should accept it blindly is backwards.The best approach would be to implement a proper industry wide framework for applying AI use cases.
The last time a writer's strike happened some promising shows that I liked as kid only did half seasons. I'm thinking of Probe and Highwaymen.
That was two strikes ago. The last one was 2007-8.
Yes there should be rules and restrictions. Which is why unfettered AI is annoyance at best and saying writers and other industry professionals should accept it blindly is backwards.
The writers’ objection to AI is based on the technology requiring writing to generate new material. So it’s taking their work and slightly modifying it, then claiming that it’s original and new. For example if you wanted an AI produced Star Trek TNG script, you feed it all the previously written scripts and give it some prompts, it would then use those scripts to produce something using those prompts. It’s a bit like Mad Libs. The problem is that it can’t produce a script without the ones written by humans and they should be compensated for their work. The problem isn’t that they want to reject technology, they want to avoid being cheated out of being paid.
The writers’ objection to AI is based on the technology requiring writing to generate new material. So it’s taking their work and slightly modifying it, then claiming that it’s original and new. For example if you wanted an AI produced Star Trek TNG script, you feed it all the previously written scripts and give it some prompts, it would then use those scripts to produce something using those prompts. It’s a bit like Mad Libs. The problem is that it can’t produce a script without the ones written by humans and they should be compensated for their work. The problem isn’t that they want to reject technology, they want to avoid being cheated out of being paid.
Writers do this with Trek today. To maintain the same voice as the characters, they use phrases that the character often says a lot on the show. I see this throughout Trek fiction. I would not be surprised by an AI trying to mimic the character voices using the same approach. AI has to be trained on past data, so this wouldn't be at all shocking. You see this in Star Gate as well. It's not unheard of to hear Teal'c say: Indeed.
Let's not get crazy, now...Tommy Wiseau could write a better script than any AI.
Yes, characters in a lot of shows including the various Treks have catchphrases. This is nothing new or revelatory.Writers do this with Trek today. To maintain the same voice as the characters, they use phrases that the character often says a lot on the show. I see this throughout Trek fiction. I would not be surprised by an AI trying to mimic the character voices using the same approach. AI has to be trained on past data, so this wouldn't be at all shocking. You see this in Star Gate as well. It's not unheard of to hear Teal'c say: Indeed.
Yes, characters in a lot of shows including the various Treks have catchphrases. This is nothing new or revelatory.
I can definitely see it being used in long running procedural cop shows that follow a formula. There is so much CSI and NCIS for an AI to learn from that I wouldn't be surprised if it could put out decent content in five years. But for shows with much fewer episodes, I doubt it could produce good material. I'm reading the Hardy Boys books now. It's not super complicated prose. And so many exist over so many years, that I can imagine AI writing Hardy Boys books in the future and doing an okay job.
If the studios move to AI instead of honest to God writers, how do you get the next Aaron Sorkin? Joss Whedon (the writing, not the scummy person)? Quentin Tarantino? Mike Schur? Rob Thomas? David Mamet? Writers with voices so clear, original and distinctive that they affect everything that comes after. AI can't do that, it can only ape it, at best mash together different versions to get something that sounds original, but is really just an amalgamation of what came before. Fuck. That.
In what way is this BBS considered a workplace environment?No they don't actually. That's the sort of thing where "No means no" comes in, and if this were a real world setting and I kept pestering a coworker on this question I would be fired immediately the next day.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.