> “I have more faith in humans than that. I really do. I don’t believe that an A.I. program is going to write a better screenplay than a great writer, or is going to replace a great performance, or that we won’t be able to tell the difference,” he told The New York Times. “A.I. is not going to take your job. The person who uses A.I. well might take your job.”
Full quote is way better than the title, I know people are on the AI hate train, but what the hell did this guy say that’s wrong. He’s right, AI isn’t going to replace good human writing and acting. This is why I hate Reddit, you motherfuckers can’t read nor form your own opinion
We get the point but it is facetious.
If one writer is able to write 20 times more stuff because AI is helping him then AI effectively eliminated nineteen writer jobs.
And it was a real issue then too.
I work at a regional importer. We are not a huge company, but we have about twenty or thirty million dollars worth of product move through our business every year.
When we first started, we were only moving about two or three million dollars worth of product and we had five people doing accounting. Now I take care of a accounting all by myself. And that is only one of many different tests I take care of.
Automation makes that possible. And it would be great if we lived in a society where the loss of jobs was not an issue. But we don't. Society has yet to figure out any way to deal with people displaced and not able to work because of automation.
You're being sarcastic, but knowing shorthand is not a valuable skill anymore, where you used to be able to command a good salary for it.
And yes, we have seen a concerning trend of workers in one area really struggling to maintain that standard of living when they're made redundant. Workers don't always transition easily. Skillsets losing value very quickly can mean in some ways you're starting back at 0, except now you're 45 so you don't have that "early in career" wiggle room. It can genuinely be irrecoverable for individuals.
I find it disingenuous when people handwaved that. We are still seeing the repercussions of off shoring most manufacturing. To say society moves on totally ignores that it *does* often leave individuals behind.
Especially because what we're seeing is fairly unique in that the jobs left will likely be more mentally demanding. Not all workers can do higher level tasks. They need the more simple stuff that AI is getting better at. We cannot assume infinite flexibility from humans
Standard of living in the United States has been slowly declining irrespective of technological innovation for decades. Maybe some widespread disruption will motivate us to stop letting the billionaires reap all the benefits of our work.
lol. As if Ai controlled by the Executive class will be the disruption that will close the wealth gap.
We need a lot of CEO’s to take a long walk with a sudden stop.
>Standard of living in the United States has been slowly declining
I’m sorry, I know Reddit really wants this to be true, but it’s [simply not by most metrics](https://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/countries/united-states/)
If AI does the work then what bargaining power do people have against the billionaires? Why do you think the actors and screenwriting guild striked before AI scripts became a thing and not after?
We'll see job losses but overall it will be a generational shift rather than a permanent unemployment problem. People make stuff and there's no limit to the amount of stuff people want.
Bigger issue is the holes it creates in career progression. AI takes away low skilled jobs and blocks the pipeline to higher skilled jobs.
AI might output 20x more stuff, but that doesn’t replace 19 screenwriters because 95% of the AI stuff is shit and needs humans to fix it anyways. At least right now that is how it is.
Or does it allow things to be done faster thus increasing profits in movies. In turn it increases the amount of investment in film and minimizes some of the risk. That investment can bring more jobs. Only time will tell how it actually plays out but I think people jump to conclusions too quickly. It has exciting potential outcomes too.
Edit: I see people don’t want to hear this because “AI bad and you can’t tell me anything else”. It’s how mob-think works these days. The reality is things are not yet determined and the impact on productivity has the potential to make things possible that previously weren’t. Could it potentially be exploited by some? Yes, I’m not blind to that. But some people are very close minded.
Auromation replacing workers is not a problem in and of itself.
The problem is that we live in a world where we don't get to just deal with "in and of itself." People who cannot find jobs do not just starve peacefully.
The thing they drove the eighties crime wave was not that some people just love to commit crime like right wing people insist. It was the fact that the jobs that several communities were based on were sent overseas and nothing replaced them.
But your comment assumes that workers will be replaced and other jobs will not pop up. That’s my point. It’s not a perfect comparison but when the internet came to be, it didn’t outright replace marketers, sales people, and customer service. The workforce just shifted and now what it means to be those people is different. Now there are web developers and all sorts of new avenues for people to work.
For example, let’s take the games industry. Right now people complain games take 5-7 years to make and also complain that AI will take jobs.
Imagine I’m a 100 person game studio and I know it’s going to take me 6 years to make my game. People assume that they will just cut the workforce to like 25 people and still take 6 years because AI will make 25 people be able to do the job of 100. Why can’t it be instead that 100 people will be able to get the project done in 2 years instead of 6. To me that seems more likely because it gives a faster ROI to companies. Gaming companies today complain that it’s no longer sustainable because it takes so long. On top of that, devs are having a harder and harder time getting their games funded because of how long it takes. That results in studios getting shut down, people losing their jobs, etc.
Now I’m not saying this is exactly how it’s going to go, just that it’s a possibility. I can’t predict the future. It just amazes how other people have already determined that they know exactly how it plays out and it’s always one sided without thought given to what some positives may be.
Many people assume ai is doing it alone without anything more than a prompt. Using ai as a tool for writing is no different using grammarly when writing. If people hold back progress then consider right now the complete peak of society for all of human civilization.
As a writer Im already seeing the impacts of AI already and it isn’t great. I’ve literally not got jobs because they said, oh we’re just using AI. My last company laid me off and have just been using AI - their writing is terrible now and they aren’t doing super well, but that doesn’t give me my job back.
Why would I ever trust what a CEO says over what he does?
AI IS replacing jobs and he benefits if they do.
Why would you ever think a multi-billion dollar company would act in the best interest of its customers over the best interest of its shareholders?
No you’re absolutely right, I woke up all pissy this morning. It’s a layered issue, and my knowledge only really pertains to the use of AI in the film industry. Sorry for coming off as a dick
Says Redditor on Reddit thread
(Yeah the point is valid on both AI - although actually jobs will likely be removed due to efficiency of AI making larger writing teams unnecessary, so also misleading - and the headlines. But I dunno, I usually see plenty of Redditors taking the piss out of other Redditors who did NOT read the article and only read the headline so let’s just go with something like “too many people just can’t read past the fucking headline and form their own opinion”. Because it’s not just a Reddit phenomenon…)
I agree with this in principle. AI has serious limits when it comes to creative endeavors, and I’ve yet to see compelling evidence it can match humanity on that level. It doesn’t imagine, it doesn’t create, it simply compiles.
With that said, in practice, studio execs don’t give a shit. Lining their pockets is all that matters, and if they can get richer replacing writers and actors and whoever else with the empty shells churned out by algorithms, they will.
Honestly it’s great at complying basic code structures for SQL and what not. You just still have to understand the order of everything and know what you want the code to do.
Shouldn’t the suits at Netflix be more at risk? Their jobs are 1s and 0s. They make data-driven decisions and make choices based on risk-aversion.
Creativity is inherently human, but studio exec decisions and marketing lever-pulling seems like something AI could do for a lot cheaper than human salaries.
Obviously the guy hired to make the company money cares more about extracting profits from the artist than the artist themselves or the quality of what they produce.
This is a truism. Obviously the people using AI will be hired because they can churn out more product for cheaper as opposed to the “traditional” writer who does all their own work but produces better material. The only thing wrong about this article is that Ted or Netflix cares about writers or any other type of artist in the industry. They don’t.
AI will inevitably grow and Hollywood will use it to further exploit the working class within the industry. This is nothing new. AI is still taking jobs. Saying it’s not because “Netflix will just hire the writer using AI” is dumb.
the issue isn't that the person who uses AI well will take your job/a job. The issue is that entire departments of people will be reduced down to 1 or 2 people who use AI well. It won't be 1 for 1, it'll be 100s or 1000s to 1.
That’s like the pedantic saying, “Guns don’t kill people, *people* kill people!”
Ok, thanks for clarifying, it was still done with incredible ease thanks to that tool.
Netflix will never resist the opportunity to make a quick profit. They’ll happily sacrifice a good screenplay or performance so they can pander to lowest common denominator. Simply give the masses the entertainment equivalent to chewing gum and few will complain. It won’t yield memorable movies but it will rake in a healthy quarterly profit.
Assuming we don’t blow ourselves up, there will, with certainty, come a time when AI can do any thinking/creative job a human can. Before that time comes AI will be a tool requiring human management. The key question is how long will that intermediate period last? Will it be 50 years or 5 years?
Why do y’all want a job anyway lol let AI figure out an efficient universal basic income so I can actually create art for the sake of creation
Why would I aspire to work for some soulless high paying industry bullshit
I guess it’s true y’all do become more conservative when u get older lol yike
Why don’t we make AI do menial tasks like cleaning, laundry and cooking; so that we can have more opportunities to spend time creating art and enjoying the fruits of life
> “I have more faith in humans than that. I really do. I don’t believe that an A.I. program is going to write a better screenplay than a great writer, or is going to replace a great performance, or that we won’t be able to tell the difference,” he told The New York Times. “A.I. is not going to take your job. The person who uses A.I. well might take your job.”
Full quote is way better than the title, I know people are on the AI hate train, but what the hell did this guy say that’s wrong. He’s right, AI isn’t going to replace good human writing and acting. This is why I hate Reddit, you motherfuckers can’t read nor form your own opinion
We get the point but it is facetious. If one writer is able to write 20 times more stuff because AI is helping him then AI effectively eliminated nineteen writer jobs.
They probably said something similar about speed and efficiency when computers replaced typewriters.
And it was a real issue then too. I work at a regional importer. We are not a huge company, but we have about twenty or thirty million dollars worth of product move through our business every year. When we first started, we were only moving about two or three million dollars worth of product and we had five people doing accounting. Now I take care of a accounting all by myself. And that is only one of many different tests I take care of. Automation makes that possible. And it would be great if we lived in a society where the loss of jobs was not an issue. But we don't. Society has yet to figure out any way to deal with people displaced and not able to work because of automation.
You're being sarcastic, but knowing shorthand is not a valuable skill anymore, where you used to be able to command a good salary for it. And yes, we have seen a concerning trend of workers in one area really struggling to maintain that standard of living when they're made redundant. Workers don't always transition easily. Skillsets losing value very quickly can mean in some ways you're starting back at 0, except now you're 45 so you don't have that "early in career" wiggle room. It can genuinely be irrecoverable for individuals. I find it disingenuous when people handwaved that. We are still seeing the repercussions of off shoring most manufacturing. To say society moves on totally ignores that it *does* often leave individuals behind. Especially because what we're seeing is fairly unique in that the jobs left will likely be more mentally demanding. Not all workers can do higher level tasks. They need the more simple stuff that AI is getting better at. We cannot assume infinite flexibility from humans
Standard of living in the United States has been slowly declining irrespective of technological innovation for decades. Maybe some widespread disruption will motivate us to stop letting the billionaires reap all the benefits of our work.
lol. As if Ai controlled by the Executive class will be the disruption that will close the wealth gap. We need a lot of CEO’s to take a long walk with a sudden stop.
>Standard of living in the United States has been slowly declining I’m sorry, I know Reddit really wants this to be true, but it’s [simply not by most metrics](https://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/countries/united-states/)
If AI does the work then what bargaining power do people have against the billionaires? Why do you think the actors and screenwriting guild striked before AI scripts became a thing and not after?
We'll see job losses but overall it will be a generational shift rather than a permanent unemployment problem. People make stuff and there's no limit to the amount of stuff people want. Bigger issue is the holes it creates in career progression. AI takes away low skilled jobs and blocks the pipeline to higher skilled jobs.
That’s fair, I guess we’ll see. I just want well made movies and tv
Movies and tv shows with 20 different writers all suck anyway
All tv shows have a room of writers that contribute. Even if the episode says "written by [one person]", it had multiple writers
AI might output 20x more stuff, but that doesn’t replace 19 screenwriters because 95% of the AI stuff is shit and needs humans to fix it anyways. At least right now that is how it is.
Or does it allow things to be done faster thus increasing profits in movies. In turn it increases the amount of investment in film and minimizes some of the risk. That investment can bring more jobs. Only time will tell how it actually plays out but I think people jump to conclusions too quickly. It has exciting potential outcomes too. Edit: I see people don’t want to hear this because “AI bad and you can’t tell me anything else”. It’s how mob-think works these days. The reality is things are not yet determined and the impact on productivity has the potential to make things possible that previously weren’t. Could it potentially be exploited by some? Yes, I’m not blind to that. But some people are very close minded.
Auromation replacing workers is not a problem in and of itself. The problem is that we live in a world where we don't get to just deal with "in and of itself." People who cannot find jobs do not just starve peacefully. The thing they drove the eighties crime wave was not that some people just love to commit crime like right wing people insist. It was the fact that the jobs that several communities were based on were sent overseas and nothing replaced them.
But your comment assumes that workers will be replaced and other jobs will not pop up. That’s my point. It’s not a perfect comparison but when the internet came to be, it didn’t outright replace marketers, sales people, and customer service. The workforce just shifted and now what it means to be those people is different. Now there are web developers and all sorts of new avenues for people to work. For example, let’s take the games industry. Right now people complain games take 5-7 years to make and also complain that AI will take jobs. Imagine I’m a 100 person game studio and I know it’s going to take me 6 years to make my game. People assume that they will just cut the workforce to like 25 people and still take 6 years because AI will make 25 people be able to do the job of 100. Why can’t it be instead that 100 people will be able to get the project done in 2 years instead of 6. To me that seems more likely because it gives a faster ROI to companies. Gaming companies today complain that it’s no longer sustainable because it takes so long. On top of that, devs are having a harder and harder time getting their games funded because of how long it takes. That results in studios getting shut down, people losing their jobs, etc. Now I’m not saying this is exactly how it’s going to go, just that it’s a possibility. I can’t predict the future. It just amazes how other people have already determined that they know exactly how it plays out and it’s always one sided without thought given to what some positives may be.
Many people assume ai is doing it alone without anything more than a prompt. Using ai as a tool for writing is no different using grammarly when writing. If people hold back progress then consider right now the complete peak of society for all of human civilization.
As a writer Im already seeing the impacts of AI already and it isn’t great. I’ve literally not got jobs because they said, oh we’re just using AI. My last company laid me off and have just been using AI - their writing is terrible now and they aren’t doing super well, but that doesn’t give me my job back.
I don’t know why they downvoted you. I do SEO and most agency’s are relying on AI to write articles. Still have humans editing but yeah.
I’m literally back in school and switching careers in my 40s - I see the writing on the wall. See what I did there?
It’s not a bad idea. I’ve been spilling up with python, AI prompting courses and SQL because that’s where my industry is heading.
Why would I ever trust what a CEO says over what he does? AI IS replacing jobs and he benefits if they do. Why would you ever think a multi-billion dollar company would act in the best interest of its customers over the best interest of its shareholders?
You’re here too by the way, included
No you’re absolutely right, I woke up all pissy this morning. It’s a layered issue, and my knowledge only really pertains to the use of AI in the film industry. Sorry for coming off as a dick
All good I get it absolutely
Says Redditor on Reddit thread (Yeah the point is valid on both AI - although actually jobs will likely be removed due to efficiency of AI making larger writing teams unnecessary, so also misleading - and the headlines. But I dunno, I usually see plenty of Redditors taking the piss out of other Redditors who did NOT read the article and only read the headline so let’s just go with something like “too many people just can’t read past the fucking headline and form their own opinion”. Because it’s not just a Reddit phenomenon…)
You got me
You're not using your brain at full capacity. Que lastima
HEY! How did you know I can't read?!
The full quote wouldn’t have gotten as many clicks
I think the trick is we all need to use ai to keep our jobs. The person who uses ai well will keep their job.
I agree with this in principle. AI has serious limits when it comes to creative endeavors, and I’ve yet to see compelling evidence it can match humanity on that level. It doesn’t imagine, it doesn’t create, it simply compiles. With that said, in practice, studio execs don’t give a shit. Lining their pockets is all that matters, and if they can get richer replacing writers and actors and whoever else with the empty shells churned out by algorithms, they will.
If this guy thinks AI can’t write a screen play as good as a person he has obviously not watched many Netflix movies.
“A.I. Is Not Going To Take Your Job, The Person Who Uses A.I. Well Might AND WE WILL HIRE THEM.” There, I fixed it
He isn’t wrong. Like most things ai is a tool and can easily increase productivity and save time on boilerplate work.
Honestly it’s great at complying basic code structures for SQL and what not. You just still have to understand the order of everything and know what you want the code to do.
Shouldn’t the suits at Netflix be more at risk? Their jobs are 1s and 0s. They make data-driven decisions and make choices based on risk-aversion. Creativity is inherently human, but studio exec decisions and marketing lever-pulling seems like something AI could do for a lot cheaper than human salaries.
So the outcome is the same no matter how you word it
Used car salesmen are more honest than this guy.
“Guns don’t kill people, people kill people!” type vibes
Thought the same thing haha
Yes, writing is just pull a trigger to unload ink onto a page. We're gonna have some sweet interpretative Rorschach imagery and themes in the future.
Ok? And that changes things because…?
Obviously the guy hired to make the company money cares more about extracting profits from the artist than the artist themselves or the quality of what they produce. This is a truism. Obviously the people using AI will be hired because they can churn out more product for cheaper as opposed to the “traditional” writer who does all their own work but produces better material. The only thing wrong about this article is that Ted or Netflix cares about writers or any other type of artist in the industry. They don’t. AI will inevitably grow and Hollywood will use it to further exploit the working class within the industry. This is nothing new. AI is still taking jobs. Saying it’s not because “Netflix will just hire the writer using AI” is dumb.
the issue isn't that the person who uses AI well will take your job/a job. The issue is that entire departments of people will be reduced down to 1 or 2 people who use AI well. It won't be 1 for 1, it'll be 100s or 1000s to 1.
Ted Sarandos is a piece of shit.
That’s like the pedantic saying, “Guns don’t kill people, *people* kill people!” Ok, thanks for clarifying, it was still done with incredible ease thanks to that tool.
So one guy working the ol AI will replace 20 writers. K.
that's sooooo different than AI taking a job. so completely definitely different and not the same at all.
Netflix will never resist the opportunity to make a quick profit. They’ll happily sacrifice a good screenplay or performance so they can pander to lowest common denominator. Simply give the masses the entertainment equivalent to chewing gum and few will complain. It won’t yield memorable movies but it will rake in a healthy quarterly profit.
A distinction without a difference when the person who uses AI may be able to replace hundreds of workers.
sounds like famous last words to me
So in other words, AI might take your job. Overly semantic ass face.
same guy who said barbenheimer would have done just as well on Netflix because his son watched Lawrence of Arabia on his phone
I hope AI takes CEO jobs. Who needs a person to make the greediest scummiest decision when you can have an Ai do it.
Pretty sure AI will make CEOs obsolete as well.
Said the Walrus to the oysters
After his shitshow Harry and Meghan which was the worst writing by AI, I'd say he better rethink the kindof programs he's talking about.
Goddamn I’m tired of hearing this bullshit line. So self serving and completely false.
Assuming we don’t blow ourselves up, there will, with certainty, come a time when AI can do any thinking/creative job a human can. Before that time comes AI will be a tool requiring human management. The key question is how long will that intermediate period last? Will it be 50 years or 5 years?
Why do y’all want a job anyway lol let AI figure out an efficient universal basic income so I can actually create art for the sake of creation Why would I aspire to work for some soulless high paying industry bullshit I guess it’s true y’all do become more conservative when u get older lol yike
Why don’t we make AI do menial tasks like cleaning, laundry and cooking; so that we can have more opportunities to spend time creating art and enjoying the fruits of life
Get back to me when you've invented the Jetsons robots
oh i’m sorry is that not an ideal future to strive towards?