writers' strike and Trek

[cgervasi]

Honestly, I'm surprised the actors even went to the convention. Just being there without talking about struck work seems like threading a needle. That seems like violating the spirit of the rule while staying within the letter. They probably shouldn't have talked about it at all, even elliptically.

It seemed like walking a tightrope to me too.

Another way they dodged the spirit of the agreement was by asking someone in the audience to say a the name of a show or character that actors were forbidden to say.

It was far from a perfect solution, but I’m glad they didn’t cancel it altogether, and I hope the mere mention of the shows doesn’t keep them from coming to an agreement.

If he wanted to violate the rules, he should've quit the union.

I got the idea, although I’m just guessing, that he’s in the union grudgingly because so many jobs in the industry require it. I don’t know an easy solution for that situation. Just flouting the rules he agreed to seems wrong. Maybe he was making a statement by trying to get kicked out or censured just for saying "Star Trek" at a Star Trek convention, or maybe he just wanted to get attention for himself, either for its own sake or to get some non-union project he wants.

You can't "replace" that kind of work with automation, because that doesn't replace creativity or talent with something equivalent, it merely eliminates it.

In other words, the reason technology replacing drudge work makes the world better is because it frees the human mind to be more active and creative. Replacing artistic jobs with AI does the exact opposite of that.

Now, if there's a way to use AI in service to human artists' ideas and expression of their talent, that's fine. But that's not what the studio heads want. They want to reduce "content creation" to a mindless automated process with no individual will behind it.

You say above that you can’t replace creative work with automation. Then you say the studios want to reduce content creation to an automated process. In other words, the studios want something that can’t be done. My only point was that if it can be done, a strike won’t be able to stop it. Maybe it cannot be done, as you say, and that part of the strike is unnecessary.

My speculation, without really knowing the details, is that they mention “AI” because it’s a hot buzzword that gets attention. The real issues, I suspect, are modifying the contract to cover streaming and to cover payments for actors’ images spliced into different films. It makes sense they’d need to come to an agreement on these new issues. The union adding a buzzword just makes it easier for journalists looking to write about hot new trends to write about the strike.

I hope they work it out because I want the shows to keep coming.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

It seemed like walking a tightrope to me too.

Another way they dodged the spirit of the agreement was by asking someone in the audience to say a the name of a show or character that actors were forbidden to say.

It was far from a perfect solution, but I’m glad they didn’t cancel it altogether, and I hope the mere mention of the shows doesn’t keep them from coming to an agreement.



I got the idea, although I’m just guessing, that he’s in the union grudgingly because so many jobs in the industry require it. I don’t know an easy solution for that situation. Just flouting the rules he agreed to seems wrong. Maybe he was making a statement by trying to get kicked out or censured just for saying "Star Trek" at a Star Trek convention, or maybe he just wanted to get attention for himself, either for its own sake or to get some non-union project he wants.



You say above that you can’t replace creative work with automation. Then you say the studios want to reduce content creation to an automated process. In other words, the studios want something that can’t be done. My only point was that if it can be done, a strike won’t be able to stop it. Maybe it cannot be done, as you say, and that part of the strike is unnecessary.

My speculation, without really knowing the details, is that they mention “AI” because it’s a hot buzzword that gets attention. The real issues, I suspect, are modifying the contract to cover streaming and to cover payments for actors’ images spliced into different films. It makes sense they’d need to come to an agreement on these new issues. The union adding a buzzword just makes it easier for journalists looking to write about hot new trends to write about the strike.

I hope they work it out because I want the shows to keep coming.

What the studios want is to replace creativity with automation so they don't have to pay anyone.

The fact that the result of their desire if carried out fully would be the true destruction of real creativity in Hollywood is not something they care at all about until and unless it starts to affect their bottom line (ie until audiences reject automation).

Right now, the studios are betting that audiences will take whatever is given them even if it is objectively far worse than what actual human creativity could have produced. And given the perennial popularity of 'reality tv', that expectation isn't entirely ridiculous, either. In short, the fact that the studios can't replace human creativity with AI and actually get the same level of quality and creativity out of that does not matter to them at all. But it does matter a great deal to the writers and actors and it should matter a great deal to audiences.

Most importantly for both audiences and the actors and writers, even if the studios bet would eventually come back to haunt them and their attempt to replace creativity with automation resulted in a massive crash of their industry forcing them to change their position on AI, the damage for everyone else would already be long done and irreversible. That's why the guilds have to stop the studios' AI strategy before it gets off the ground - not after.

 

[Christopher]

I got the idea, although I’m just guessing, that he’s in the union grudgingly because so many jobs in the industry require it. I don’t know an easy solution for that situation. Just flouting the rules he agreed to seems wrong. Maybe he was making a statement by trying to get kicked out or censured just for saying "Star Trek" at a Star Trek convention, or maybe he just wanted to get attention for himself, either for its own sake or to get some non-union project he wants.

Or maybe he's just a jerk. The next day, he posted on Twitter/X agreeing with a homophobic comment someone made about who qualifies as "real" fans.

You say above that you can’t replace creative work with automation. Then you say the studios want to reduce content creation to an automated process. In other words, the studios want something that can’t be done.

Exactly -- or rather, it can't be done successfully, because it's the wrong paradigm. The studio execs don't understand creativity. They see artistic creations merely as "content" and want to churn out a steady supply of generic, standardized product like they do in the tech industries they came from. They have no comprehension that creativity doesn't work like that, that generic product is not the goal like it is with smartphones or software apps. They could achieve their goal, but it would not succeed at satisfying an audience, and it would be a massive failure. There would be no more brilliant, innovative films, just an endless stream of disposable pabulum.

The executives want that because they see money as the exclusive product of business -- an end in itself rather than a means to an end. The only thing that matters to them is making more profit for themselves and their shareholders. But that is not what the consumers of entertainment want. They want to spend their money on things that are worth it, things that satisfy and engage them. That takes creativity, not automation. An AI could've churned out a script for a Barbie movie, but it would've just been forgettable filler, not the smash hit Greta Gerwig created.

My only point was that if it can be done, a strike won’t be able to stop it. Maybe it cannot be done, as you say, and that part of the strike is unnecessary.

It can be done, but the point is that it would have a disastrous impact on the industry if it were done. It is not a sustainable alternative to the current system.

 

[The Wormhole]

In other words, the studios want something that can’t be done. My only point was that if it can be done, a strike won’t be able to stop it. Maybe it cannot be done, as you say, and that part of the strike is unnecessary.

That's it exactly, it can't be done. But that does not make the strike unnecessary. The point of the strike is to guarantee job security before the studios lean into AI full tilt resulting in writers losing their jobs and then learn what a mistake they made. Because that is a very real possibility, with studios' desires to save money and make a profit at every turn. The writers want to make sure they won't become jobless as a result of the studios experimenting with AI.

I hope they work it out because I want the shows to keep coming.

Well, of course, everyone wants shows to keep coming. We the audience want to keep enjoying our entertainment, the actors and writers want to keep having a job and the studios want to keep making money off the shows. Sometimes stands have to be made, like going on strike or whatever in order to guarantee everyone involved in the creativity and production are treated fairly and compensated as they should be, ultimately to guarantee the best possible product can be made which makes everyone happy. A happy audience making money for a happy studio which keeps happy writers and actors employed.

 

[cgervasi]

Right now, the studios are betting that audiences will take whatever is given them even if it is objectively far worse than what actual human creativity could have produced. And given the perennial popularity of 'reality tv', that expectation isn't entirely ridiculous, either. In short, the fact that the studios can't replace human creativity with AI and actually get the same level of quality and creativity out of that does not matter to them at all.

My first thought is it’s not true that the employees know how to run the business better than the owners and managers because if it were they should start their own business, but that’s a good point about reality TV.

Or maybe he's just a jerk. The next day, he posted on Twitter/X agreeing with a homophobic comment someone made about who qualifies as "real" fans.

I saw that. Someone said something conflating supporting the union and supporting LGBTQ rights. He should have said basic respect for all people is non-negotiable and not related to his views on the union. As you say, maybe he’s just a jerk and a bigot. That would be a shame.

That's it exactly, it can't be done. But that does not make the strike unnecessary. The point of the strike is to guarantee job security before the studios lean into AI full tilt resulting in writers losing their jobs and then learn what a mistake they made.

I understood their other reasons for striking, but I still don’t agree with the AI part. It’s their right to strike, though, so my opinion doesn’t matter.

 

[UssGlenn]

My first thought is it’s not true that the employees know how to run the business better than the owners and managers because if it were they should start their own business,

Knowing the correct decisions to make in an existing business and starting a new one from are completely divorced skill sets. It takes a certain personality to start a business, but more importantly it takes money.

 

[Christopher]

I understood their other reasons for striking, but I still don’t agree with the AI part. It’s their right to strike, though, so my opinion doesn’t matter.

The AI part is vital, because it's not just about AI, it's about not letting the execs abuse AI as an excuse to strip away worker power and protections. Nobody's saying AI should be banned, just that there should be guarantees that humans won't suffer as a result of introducing AI, and that people won't have their likenesses or creations stolen to feed AI product. Because that's what this stuff is doing -- stealing intellectual property en masse. That theft and violation of rights is what the unions are trying to stop, not the progress of technology per se.

 

[Firebird]

Had a script rejected that you thought was God's gift to whatever media groups you pitched it to,?

That seems to be a constant to a lot of these armchair keyboard warriors these days, especially on social media. I've lost count of the number of tweet threads I've seen where the author is hyper-critical of some part of Oppenheimer or something, and then they reveal they've been trying to sell a spec script about it for a while.

 

[Char Kais]

Some of the actors said the strike was to prevent AI from replacing jobs. I respectfully disagree with them on that point. Nicole de Boer lamented that a third of jobs will be replaced by AI, so we should all be worried about this. I think technology will replace most jobs. Most jobs that existed a few generations ago are gone, yet the world way more prosperous and peaceful. I think that positive trend will continue. If the goal is to reduce the use of AI, I think that's wrongheaded and hopeless. I understand, however, the need for new contract terms to deal with situations arising from new technology.

WOW, that AI stuff sounds interesting!
So many implications for all societies on this planet and for all mankind!

If only we had a Science Fiction show that could explore in an allegorical way the political, economic, sociological, and philosophical implications of AI in a multifaceted way.
Maybe add a demographic dimension to it?
If only...

But, no. Let's tell stories about high school-level interpersonal relationship drama, Alien/Predator ripoffs, musicals, revenge, and especially about evil AIs taking over Federation starships that shoot at other Federation starships.

And let's do that four times...

That's gonna do it. Oh well.

 

[fireproof78]

and especially about evil AIs taking over Federation starships that shoot at other Federation starships.

"Ultimate Computer" already discussed it.

 

[cooleddie74]

And better than DSC did or even PRO.

 

[fireproof78]

And better than DSC did or even PRO.

Only a Dunsel would say that

 

[Nerys Myk]

Only a Dunsel would say that

 

[cooleddie74]

Uh-oh. We're gonna need a Finagle's Folly and STAT.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

Some boring waffle.

No.

 

[mattman8907]

I’ll say this. Once this writer’s strike ends, I hope they shoot season 3 AND season 4 back to back. That way they can make up for this long hiatus.

 

[Mudd]

The writers and studios went back to the table on the 11th.

 

[The Wormhole]

I believe they're currently in recess while the WGA considers the offer studios have made.

 

[Mudd]

As Hollywood discloses quarterly reports for the first time since the dual work stoppage began, the financial hits are coming into focus while companies game out timetables for a deal.

Those mega-wealthy CEOs? They're employees, and their stockholder bosses are not patient when they fuck up the bottom line. The Igers and Zaslavs like to strut and pretend that they can outlast and squeeze the Guild members forever. They can't.

 

[The Wormhole]

More or less the way I figured it would go. The longer the strikes go on means longer without new product being made which is going to cause the Suits to become very irate.