I was just informed from my boss and HR that my entire profession is being automated away.

[usonian]

Not me, the author below.

https://old.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1guhsm4/well_this_is_it_boys_i_was_just_informed_from_my/

For context I work production in local news. Recently there’s been developments in AI driven systems that can do 100% of the production side of things which is, direct, audio operate, and graphic operate -all of those jobs are all now gone in one swoop. This has apparently been developed by the company Q ai.

For the last decade I’ve worked in local news and have garnered skills I thought I would be able to take with me until my retirement, now at almost 30 years old, all of those job opportunities for me are gone in an instant. The only person that’s keeping their job is my manager, who will overlook the system and do maintenance if needed. That’s 20 jobs lost and 0 gained for our station.

We were informed we are going to be the first station to implement this under our company. This means that as of now our entire production staff in our news station is being let go. Once the system is implemented and running smoothly then this system is going to be implemented nationwide (effectively eliminating tens of thousands of jobs.) There are going to be 0 new jobs built off of this AI platform.

There are people I work with in their 50’s, single, no college education, no family, and no other place to land a job once this kicks in. I have no idea what’s going to happen to them. This is it guys. This is what our future with AI looks like. This isn’t creating any new jobs this is knocking out entire industry level jobs without replacing them.

That's the entire post. You may be interested in the 467 replies. Company is not given.

And what about HR? How many does it take to "HR" a handful of people, assuming more than that one manager is kept? One place I worked, HR was outsourced.

And then management?

On edit, I deleted a duplicate post caused by a network hangup.

[msongs]

1. with ai fake music wont need real musicians and songwriters anymore. no royalty payout for spotify nt

[kevinore]

2. They just don't get it!

AI is intended to get rid of the cost of human labor making you and the rest of us obsolete. It is not a new problem, we have ignored it. From garbage collection to medical care, AI can replace humans for most, it not all tasks. The question is, what happens when we are all unemployed?

[PeaceWave]

3. The other day, someone here was arguing that "AI will replace as many jobs as it takes away."

He or she was suggesting that it was fairly easy to get re-educated in AI skills and re-enter the workforce.

[soandso]

14. I remember that and they're full of shit

Yes, different occupations will come about but not as many as are lost.

I saw a video with Yavul Harari (I think that's his name, Israeli guy) talking with Klaus Schwab (an actual fascist) and Harari, while discussing AI putting people out of work, said "What will we do with all of these useless people? Video games and drugs, I guess." That is how they view humanity.

One possible upside is that people become more creative and learn trades that AI can't replace. We need people who can do shit, like plumbers, electricians, carpenters. Those trades are aging and not nearly enough new people are learning them.

[usonian]

21. I think we're seeing only the low-hanging fruit being picked.

AI will probably plateau as it runs out of training data, currently everything in the planet. And it will start eating itself as the internet fills up with AI-generated data.

As it commoditizes, it will offer no competitive advantage to companies over other companies.

And advanage will be because of people ...

Who are gone.

[DSandra]

9. And this in the age of high inflation, ever more expensive rent, and an incoming fascist regime...

Things are looking super bleak for many in America...

[calimary]

28. Oh they're not thinking that far down the line.

What happens when we’re drowning in unemployment statistics? What happens to all those PEOPLE??? People who have legitimate needs?

Nobody knows, and it seems like even fewer people care.

[highplainsdem]

4. There's evidence Spotify's already starting to do that. Ted Gioia has written about it, and he and

Rick Beato talked it this in one of Rick's videos several months ago.

[soandso]

15. I listen to Beato quite a bit

and really like him.

A while ago I saw a video about AI music and it was stunning. The music was very good and could easily replace most of the pop and country music on radio.

[highplainsdem]

19. It's that good ONLY because companies like Udio and Suno stole all the music they could and are

being sued for it.

See my long reply below.

[soandso]

25. Thanks and I'll read it

I know that AI learns by vacuuming up what's out there and then generates something else and I doubt all of the lawsuits will stop it.

[Silver Gaia]

5. This is exactly what I have been saying would happen.

Is there no union for these people? Unions can fight this shit and win, just like they did for writers and actors.

[regnaD kciN]

26. Unions can only fight things with the threat of strikes messing up the business...

They can't do a damn thing when they're all being fired at once. AI doesn't belong to any union.

[Otto_Harper]

6. The other aspect of this is

that with centralized control, and zero humans in the loop, news is even more under the tight control of whomever is pulling the strings from back in the shadows.

[wnylib]

23. That is the real danger. Orwell was off by a few decades

in his prediction of a dystopian world in 1984. Instead, it is 2024.

[Steven Maurer]

7. They can try, but will lose audience

Ownership tries this all the time with new technologies, and it never works out.
There is a lot of suffering while they figure this out though.

[PeaceWave]

8. Just more reason to hope for the aliens to stop screwing around and finish us off already.

[questionseverything]

12. Some times it's so bs backwards I feel like I'm in a science experiment

[soandso]

20. Lots of people believe we're in a simulation

I'm talking all of reality. I don't hold that view because a simulation would have to be simulating something else and I don't think the something else is capable of being simulated. It's way too unknown and complex.

[slightlv]

13. I'm still waiting for the asteroid.... n/t

[misanthrope]

18. Huh? If aliens had our termination in mind

all they need do is sit back and wait. We are well on our way to offing our species along with numerous others.

[Doodley]

10. This is where capitalism needs to be reigned in. Ideally, as we are replaced by AI and machines, we should work fewer

hours for the same pay and can enjoy a lot of leisure time. Instead, there will be a lot of pain and suffering under the Trumo regime.

[highplainsdem]

11. Thanks for posting this, usonian! I skimmed some of those replies. Very different tone from what

I'd see all too often on Reddit early last year, where fans of AI were dreaming of spending a few days or weeks learning to be "prompt engineers" immediately making salaries well into 6 figures. And where copywriters and others who were already losing their jobs to AI were taunted by AI fans telling them that meant their work was inferior and they deserved to lose their jobs. The AI fans kept up with that delusion even when copywriters explained their old bosses or clients admitted the AI output was inferior, but said they couldn't ignore the cost savings.

On Twitter, I've seen even teachers who once thought AI would help them finally start to realize that the ultimate goal is AI completely replacing them.

And on Bluesky, I just saw John Scalzi (science fiction writer and former SFWA president) post about Harper Collins, a major publisher, having made a deal with an AI company.

See these Bluesky posts

https://bsky.app/profile/scalzi.com/post/3lbaipqnr7c2f

https://bsky.app/profile/scalzi.com/post/3lbaips3i3s2f

and he linked to this, by Drew Broussard

https://lithub.com/harpercollins-is-selling-their-authors-work-to-ai-tech/

On Friday, author Daniel Kibblesmith posted a series of screenshots on Bluesky in order to share a concerning email he received from the agency who’d repped him on his children’s book Santa’s Husband: the book’s publisher, HarperCollins, was offering $2,500 (non-negotiable) for the right to use the book in an AI training deal that they’d signed with an anonymous “large tech company.”

Kibblesmith told them no in clear and immediate terms, but here are the screenshots of the offer—they’re worth reading for yourself.

To call this bleak is an understatement. “And of course there is concern that these AI models may one day make us all obsolete” is a truly absurd line to hear out of a publisher engaged in actively feeding one such AI model and I’m struck (to put it gently) by the classic union-busting energy of “These terms have already been negotiated… and agreed to by several hundred authors, so individual negotiation at this point isn’t possible.” And a $2,500 flat fee—per title, so really it’s $1,250 to Daniel and $1,250 to his illustrator on this book—is an insultingly small amount for *checks notes* the entirety of your intellectual property to be chewed and regurgitated ad nauseam for as long as there’s a greedy capitalist there to push the “generate” button.

-snip-

Generative AI is ALMOST ENTIRELY about stealing humans' work and knowledge so the companies producing the AI models can profit from that theft by selling mimicry by AI of that work and knowledge. There might be a few people and a few uses that are more altruistic. But what's behind the genAI bubble (with countless billions of investment capital that otherwise could have gone to better use, and with companies trying to add AI to every device possible, and to habituate people to AI slop everywhere) is the aim of getting rid of those pesky human creators who want decent compensation and recognition and even respect that their already wealthy overlords don't want to give them.

And every person who goes along with this - who lets the corporations think their AI slop is just fine, or who amuses themselves playing with AI because wow it makes them feel creative and smart so who cares that it's based on theft of other people's intellectual property by a company that doesn't give a damn about anyone - is just hastening this atrocity.

If people are forced to use genAI for work or even school, they may see no choice. But they're being coopted into a capitalist process based on theft and intended to replace them as well. Silicon Valley's new dream, as Sam Altman has said, is a billion dollar company with no employees, just the human founder/owner/CEO assisted by AI.

[usonian]

24. Wow! Capitslist's Ayn Rand dream.

But it runs out of data and plateaus, ABC then everyone offers it, so it's like the 10 cent plastic bag.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=19739922

And the advantage is in people ...

Who are gone.

[slightlv]

16. In many SciFi series, there is usually one episode (or more)

where there are at least two segments of the population... those who continue to use technology and those who disdain and have outlawed technology - thus taking us back to the time and efforts prior to the tech. Anything proffered as "will make your life easier" will inevitably be turned against humanity. That's the upshot of these episodes, anyway... and usually, the tech is made out to be smarter, and more benevolent to humankind. And the technology-dismissing society is portrayed as backward, dirty, dull, etc.

I found these episodes of SciFi shows interesting to consider, but never really looked at them as something that could come to pass. Now? I wonder... how long before we find a group of people "taking it back to the basics" and eschewing technology? I don't think it'll take us until the timing of ST: Deep Space Nine to get there. Some things, we seem to be pushing the envelope on when it comes to timing. Just something to think about... regulated capitalism could make all things work for the good of all. Free for all capitalism only works for those who create it - the billionaires. They really do want all the money in the world. Why? After a certain point, what is left to buy? And what intrinsic worth would it have?

[kerry-is-my-prez]

17. I got laid off when I was an HR Consultant.its sort of a "pluff" job

[soandso]

22. Located this video I'd watched

IIRC, watching the whole thing, this guy enter his own lyrics into the program and AI did the rest. Video starts about mid way and just listen to this music!!!

&t=853s

[highplainsdem]

27. Again, this is all based on theft of IP. You don't even need to enter lyrics. Just a few words to suggest lyrics.

There's nothing magical about what happens, and no talent or even real interest in music is required, since these companies have stolen all the copyrighted music they could to create AI to compete with the artists whose intellectual property they stole.

It's completely unethical to use these tools. It's also pathetic and dumbs people down, making them less creative and less likely to learn skills they'd need to make music themselves.

See these videos:

[soandso]

30. I'll watch those

I would guess that some AI programs, like what's being discussed in those videos, will make stuff that's nearly direct copies of the ripped off works but some others may not. I'm thinking as the AI learns more, it will get more original with it's own creations. I know that sounds insane because it doesn't have consciousness or imagination but the more it's exposed to, the more it will gain the ability to generate new and different material. Think of all of the music in the world, old and new, different types, cultural influences, sounds that are unique to some traditional stuff, like Mongolian throat singing, the trills and vibrato in Arab and Indian music, classical, Baroque, electronic, etc. Mix it all up and the possibilities for new output are astounding and more than any human could take in in a lifetime. I share your concerns, though, and I think musicians who want to make a living at it are screwed. Not yet, but it's not that far off.

An interesting aside: I had a book on native American art (pottery, weaving fabric and baskets). An interesting thing happened when anthropologists started collecting pottery shards for museums: the living craft nearly died out because people learn by first copying and then creating something original from what they've learned and been exposed to and they copied and were inspired by what the anthropologists took away. Isn't AI learning the same way as the people? It's collecting data and making something new. I have no clue where this goes. It's mind blowing.

[cstanleytech]

29. Change is never welcome but without it we would still be living in caves.

[Tadpole Raisin]

31. It's one thing to replace the horse and buggy - re: the quantity and the time it took to do it,

it’s another to do this with the quantity of people in jobs AI can replace and the rapidity with which it can be accomplished.

This could (?will) collapse the economy. Rich CEOs are only looking at this by how much more profit they will make in the modern day world of Ebenezer Scrooge and TSF is Scrooge.

In fairness Congress has been warned about this for years and of course has done nothing.

IF, IF there is one good thing about Dems losing, this is likely going to explode on TSF’s, made worse by his known plans.

But oh my god the suffering!!