Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

This is what nascent disruption looks and feels like. Screenwriters at the WGA stopping work to “prevent” AI taking their jobs or part of their jobs. AI music infringing on brands. You will see many Napster’s and Kazaa’s emerge and die, and ultimately lawsuits and regulation will evolve and stabilize the landscape. But fighting to go back to the way things have been is like trying to stop people from using electricity and creating power plants and appliances: With a fundamental breakthrough of this magnitude, things will change and you will see a surge in innovation, with many old world casualties.


The writers strike has little to do with "AI" and a lot to do with getting paid for shows on streaming services. Tech media has ran wild with the AI angle because it's attention-grabbing, but it's far from being the most important demand.


That, and writing teams getting hired for entire productions/seasons vs. treating each script and rewrite like one-off gig work.


Also, I really doubt the streaming companies and such are even as profitable as they say. Plenty of book cooking.


It was also primed to take on the next big thing at the same time. Fighting this hard over streaming rights and ignoring AI makes no sense.


Accepting the wholesale decimation of the entertainment system by indirect copyright infringement is a pretty big issue.


Except it won't be.

Media is turning from a product into a service.

The personalization impact of AI on media is going to be more profitable for the surviving media companies than static media ever was.

You'll still have many of the roles currently in media, but the work will shift from creating a singular static media product to creating a media framework that's further extended by AI products.

People have turned out to have rather binary thinking on the topic. Everything is cast as either human or AI, with relatively little consideration for the much more likely scenario where it's both in nuanced applications.

We're nowhere near saturation in meeting demand for most things as much as we are constrained in supply which tempers and limits demand. AI supplementing human labor is going to result in much more tailored product offerings at similar costs, not the same offerings at lower costs.

And any companies that invest in the latter instead of the former are going to be losing market share to those who do the opposite.

I really hope people stop trying to forecast the future of disruption against the context of the status quo, and instead better recognize the ways that the status quo is going to be changing alongside that disruption.


It's not a forecast. People already bought copyrighted-ish goods.


Allowing copyright to last longer than human lives is an infringement on the idea of culture and social contract not being ownable by commercial entities.


We're talking about anything produced in the last 5 years.


The entirety of the horse-based industrial complex cries out in echos.


If we extrapolate on current trends, a surge in slop.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: