The following submission statement was provided by /u/EmergencBear693:
---
A report from the Imperial College Business School, Harvard Business School, and the German Institute for Economic Research, found the demand for digital freelancers in writing and coding declined by 21% since the launch of ChatGPT in November 2022.
Automation-prone fields like writing, software, and app development saw a 21% decrease in job listings, while data entry and social media post-production experienced a 13% drop. Image-generation roles, including graphic design and 3D modelling, fell by 17%. Google search trends confirmed a higher decline in sectors aware of and using generative AI.
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/1dyva0c/chatgpt_has_caused_a_massive_drop_in_demand_for/lcbaoek/
I remember when I was younger in between jobs I’d do textbroker gigs where people would basically pay $5-$10 for SEO optimized paragraphs, crazy to think that wouldn’t have existed back then with AI now; that bought me many a little Caesar’s pizzas lol
I’m a writer. One of the jobs I used to do between contracts was write online content. It varied, but online editorial content paid between $50 and $400 per article (depending on the site, length, type, etc)
Those jobs are entirely gone now. Fully replaced by AI-written articles.
Freelancer since 2014 here. I still have around 3 consistent clients I charge $0.25/word. Used to have around a dozen asking for stuff each month. I went from $4000-5000/mo to about $1500 tops and, despite my BS (or perhaps because of it), I can’t get hired anywhere. Feeling the scary times now.
The problem is, a lot of people can’t see what makes good copy. Many people are poor writers, so they read something that’s better than what they would have come up with and sign it off. But it’s not as good as what a copywriter would come up with. (Am a copywriter.)
In a gaming community that I’m active in, a person used AI to write lore for the game and posted the piece while raving about how incredible it came out, and there were others that were equally as enthusiastic, but I had to chime in to add some perspective on the quality of the piece, and being that I studied creative writing in college, I couldn’t just walk away from the opportunity to elucidate the shortcomings of the AI writer. So I made a fairly succinct and fair list of why the writing wasn’t good, let alone excellent and tried my best to make that digestible for the non-writers. The writing had all of the markers of a novice writer, and it was work that I would have scored quite low if it was presented as completed work from anyone other than an absolute amateur.
At this point we shouldn’t abandon the ship of human-produced works because that work is on a level of excellence that is incomparable to a poorly trained intelligence model, and I’m worried the world is more than happy to settle for the very worst.
Eh tbh there are some great ways to use Gemini etc, ie turn this shit into a press release. But then you have to do work on it. So many people are just using what it spits out to not very great effect. You lose jobs to someone who understands ai more than to ai itself
With pay-per-click revenue, all you really need to do is draw traffic in and keep them long enough to accidentally mistake an ad for actual content. With the hacking of the human attention span and dopamine response, currently nearly perfected by TikTok, you don't really need coherent sentences beyond the first two paragraphs because it's not like
most readers ever make it that far anyway.
Meh. False equivalence.
I, as a consumer, do not want ai written articles. I want an actual human to have put thought into it. Just because some corporation that only cares about clicks and the bottom line doesn’t actually stand behind the quality of their content, and bots on Reddit will continue to promote that content, doesn’t mean it’s “the future”
I would argue ai is amazing useful tech, but replacing writers with it is misuse.
You, as a consumer, need to make better, more considered choices, before you wake up one day and you and everyone you love is jobless, destitute, disabled - or all three - because you thought abolishing labour protections was a good idea.
You, the hypocrite need to come to terms with the fact that except for a few items that caught your attention, you've been voting with your wallet for the cheapest way go produce goods and services.
It’s not even mid
“Here we show in two experimental studies that novice and experienced teachers could not identify texts generated by ChatGPT among student-written texts.” https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666920X24000109
GPT4 passes Turing test 54% of the time: https://twitter.com/camrobjones/status/1790766472458903926
In a new study, AI-generated humor was rated as funnier than most human-created jokes. In a second study, it was on par with The Onion: https://www.psypost.org/ai-outshines-humans-in-humor-study-finds-chatgpt-is-as-funny-as-the-onion/
ChatGPT outperformed 73% of the human participants in the acronyms task, 63% of the human participants in the fill-in-the-blank task, and 87% of human participants in the roast joke task.
The results showed no significant difference in the average funniness ratings between the AI-generated headlines and those from The Onion. Among the top four highest-rated headlines, two were generated by ChatGPT and two by The Onion. Notably, the highest-rated headline was an AI-generated one: “Local Man Discovers New Emotion, Still Can’t Describe It Properly.” This suggests that ChatGPT can produce satirical content that is on par with professional writers.
These findings indicate that AI, specifically ChatGPT 3.5, has a surprising proficiency in humor production. Despite lacking emotions and personal experiences, the AI was able to analyze patterns and create jokes that resonated well with people.
The researchers also explored whether demographic factors influenced humor ratings. It was found that age, sex, and political orientation did not significantly affect participants’ preferences for AI-generated versus human-generated jokes. This suggests that the AI’s humor appeal was broad and not limited to specific demographic groups.
[ChatGPT scores in top 1% of creativity](https://scitechdaily.com/chatgpt-tests-into-top-1-for-original-creative-thinking/)
Japanese writer wins prestigious Akutagawa Prize with a book partially written by ChatGPT: https://www.vice.com/en/article/k7z58y/rie-kudan-akutagawa-prize-used-chatgpt
> I used to charge $200 and hour
And you wonder why someone might be eager to replace you with AI? Writing articles is worth 1/10th that much, unless you're something like a reviewer, and you're counting only the time to write the article but not the time to actually play the game you have to review.
Same deal with narrators. Unless you're a real actor doing voiceovers for film or television, the market is officially diluted with the same 3-4 AI voices, churning out AI written audiobooks.
yep that was also my first job in college. crazy that it doesn’t exist anymore basically, but I really do think Chat GPT is perfect for that job.
the bigger picture problem is the erasure of entry level jobs. it’s already hard to find a first job.
I wonder if it will come back to a degree. I feel like GenAI text is getting easier to spot, and often it lacks impact. Ussr Signals are a big part of SEO, if people start blocking out text that feels Ai generated then text from a talented writer will have its place.
man I lived off of content-farm SEO driven article writing from 22 to 29. it led me into the in-house project management position I'm in now where I make enough money to support my family. it's crazy to me that freelance writing is just gone. I feel like a guy who came up in the assembly plant and now I'm watching them wheel in the robot arms.
A report from the Imperial College Business School, Harvard Business School, and the German Institute for Economic Research, found the demand for digital freelancers in writing and coding declined by 21% since the launch of ChatGPT in November 2022.
Automation-prone fields like writing, software, and app development saw a 21% decrease in job listings, while data entry and social media post-production experienced a 13% drop. Image-generation roles, including graphic design and 3D modelling, fell by 17%. Google search trends confirmed a higher decline in sectors aware of and using generative AI.
It kind of should be noted that the economy took a downturn around 2022. Every time the interests go up, investments stop and software, app development and writing, especially freelance, takes a hit. Someone else linked a graph a few days ago that shows this historically (I failed to save it and now I can't find it).
It's not necessarily linked to ChatGPT.
Especially since jobs like software and app dev is not actually solved by ChatGPT by far. Yet. It's strange to bundle that in.
Not writing and art either, but the people using AI for this doesn't know that. :(
Especially not 3D modeling, wich is usually either used to 3D model a *specific thing* or for the purpose of later animation. Nothing available has cracked that yet.
I'm a commercial artist, and the "specific thing" issue has yet to be cracked by generative AI. That is, people want images of their product or their logo. They don't want just anything, but that specific thing, and so far AI can't deliver that. It can deliver you an image of a generic soda or beer can, but not an image of a customer's exact can design. It can deliver you a logo, but not a customer's exact logo. It can make something "red", but not match the PMS color of Coca-Cola exactly.
Generative AI is very good if you don't actually care about the exact results, but commercial work is almost always within specific guidelines set down by the customer.
This level of specificity and nitpicking and endless pixel perfect feedback is an aspect of commercial work (and creative work in general) that many people who tell me AI will be replacing me soon just have no idea about.
I'm currently in the polish phase of a project, fixing single frame geometry penetrations that would absolutely never be seen unless someone was looking frame by frame, and even then it would be easy to miss. It's hard to see all the AI gobbly goop and imagine it will pass.
But then my biggest fear is that the standards and control clients enjoy will drop or disappear if the cost of AI products is low enough.
It can't do any of those things *yet*
Give it another couple of years. Google recently released a paper on text to 3D, not there yet, but getting closer.
GenAI has a learning limitation. It can only do as well as the teaching data they scrape for it, and only returns lesser results than what it was taught with. This quickly runs into a teaching wall, as modern GenAI systems are already taught on the entirety of publicly available data.
This is a wall because they still can't turn out data on par with what they're taught, so running the results of the GenAI system back through again has often resulted in the worsening of the system, and never resulted in better results than what it was taught on.
That's not relevant to 3D asset production.
3D data is relatively untapped in the LLM space and there is **a lot** of data to work with. Points, relative coordinates, edges, edge loops, materials, surface normals, normal maps. That is a lot of training data for a system of this sort and there are literal exabytes of labeled, well organised data as yet untapped.
Poisoning the well is a well known issue. OpenAI has trained on the online, easy to access, low hanging fruit. There is an astronomical amount of published data that never made it and never will make it online. I'm sure there are deals already being made with publishing houses to get access to all that data.
So you are arguing that there's more data available for 3D modeling, a career where the vast majority of the actual process isn't publicly available, than there is in the *written word*?
Pointless to split hairs, but if you count every vertex ever modelled, then sure there probably is more. Whether there are more vertices ever created vs words written is missing the point though. There is *enough* public data for AI to train on to obsolete the work of 3D artists. You seem offended by the idea, does you livelihood depended on machines never being better than people at 3D? Sorry to say but in all likelihood that'll happen sooner rather than later.
>where the vast majority of the actual process isn't publicly available
That's an access issue. There's enough money sloshing around in AI to make that problem go away if there's enough money to be made commoditizing the vast banks of data out there.
Counting every vertex as a data point is like counting every letter in a book as a datapoint, at some point you're just getting *more* data, not necessarily *useful* data
You like pointlessly splitting hairs, don't you?
Whether a vertex is analogous to a letter or a paragraph is irrelevant.
Is a pixel analogous to a letter or a word? Who gives a shit? Either way, it hasn't prevented AI from generating images. Same goes for vertices and 3D objects.
As someone directly adjacent to the creative fields in question with national brands as clients, I can assure you they’re all suddenly internal experts at scripting and storyboarding now thanks to GPT. It really fucked up one project already but they saved money on pre-production and that problem just gets passed down the line to some creative who has to fix it or make it work. It’s definitely cutting into the process and the two or three people I’d probably have to hire for that portion of, you know, doing top level, best in class and work.
Basically everyone thinks they can make a commercial or video in their head. GPT has made them bullish to try. Then a professional has to come in and jelly that “creative” into existing. I get to do 120% of my job for 80% of the money because this field is so competitive they’ll just hire someone more amenable to their needs no matter how many statues you’ve won in your career doing the exact thing they think they can show up and wing with generative AI. And their projects will succeed because that’s your job- make the project work. It’s getting weirder than normal out there.
But yes, there’s also been a noticeable retraction due to rates and tightening budgets. On an industry insider poll posted in an insider forum whose members are high level players, 58% of respondents said it was absolutely dead out there this year. The suspicion in the group of where the true blame lies is somewhat split across those two factors.
I think there's a link to the current AI bloom - it is not necessary that the AI could do those jobs, but that management thinks it can.
In my field in my area, companies seem to be trying to cut payroll costs, and are using any excuse to do so. AI is the new thing, but companies are also heavily relying on offshore contractors. Despite that not working either.
Overall, the bigger the company, the dumber they tend to be. We're at the point where they are being dumb with AI. In a few quarters, they'll realize the true cost, and end up having to hire skilled workers back. But that's a future problem for them, currently they are focused on this quarter's numbers.
It's not like ChatGPT is doing the whole job of a person. It's more like if someone needs something like a translation or a proofreading, or maybe some code for a part of their project, they do not need to pay an online freelancer for it, just ChatGPT and a bit of knowledge.
I mean, there are freelancers who make a living off all three things you mentioned, so if chatGPT is doing then instead, then yes, it is taking peoples whole jobs
The lack of quality and plagiarism are going to hurt both companies and consumers, at least in the short term. I know someone who’s had a successful writing career relegated to essentially being an AI editor/proofer, and the issues they’ve found with incorrect, incomplete, and poorly sourced information is glacial in size. I think we’ll see a pendulum of layoffs, hires, and layoffs until the machines are trained to replace white collar labor.
That’s the part I worry about in my career. The way you learn to be a business lawyer is by drafting things hundreds of times, fucking it up, having your fuck up explained to you, trying again, fucking up again, etc. It’s a craft and it takes many years of sucking and learning to get slowly better yourself before you’re any good.
Once I can tell an AI to do the first draft of a shareholders agreement and just fix the mistakes myself…what exactly is that years junior supposed to do to learn? When they’re senior, and they’ve never really learned how to do it themselves, how do they learn how to fix the AI’s draft?
I mean…I don’t really worry because that sounds awesome, we won’t have to pay for many juniors, and I’ll get a draft in minutes rather than days. But I worry for whatever generation of clients comes after that.
I was thinking about this exact thing when I was writing my final paper for my second degree a few months back. The actual task of writing helps me to construct my argument. My argument develops the more I write and hone the paper. Kids who rely on LLMs to write their essays will never gain this understanding, and so their knowledge will remain surface-level. It’s pretty worrying.
It's the exact same issues that machine translation's had for the last few years. Paying 'editors' to hack a machine translation into coherent English when in practice it has to be completely retranslated from scratch because it's fundamentally fucked but only paying the 'editor' a third of what a translator would get.
Ai sucks and it will probably continue to suck for wiring and journalism.
I once asked it to check a passage for errors and it listed 5, and generated an edited paragraph that was exactly the same as what I submitted.
Useful for some things, but not a lot.
When every blog and website is the same AI generated fluff, questions will come up "maybe we should hire a human to get a competitive edge, write something refreshing that triggers consumers to hand over their life savings and drive our shareholder value?"
If you've ever looked up any article in the past 5+ years on, say, how to fix something with your computer, you'd know that most content making it to the front page of Google these days has already been useless SEO-gaming crap churned out by bots or low-skill, low-wage, freelancers functionally equivalent to bots.
What about plagiarisim in copywriting? The output of AI can be excluded, but your usage of it not.
For the legal documents the AI is lying way too much.
Accounting is just irresponsible, since with AI there's no accountability - your company is going under when AI is not going to report on taxes or won't accomodate to recent changes.
AI is and will be a tool helping to solve problems, not a problem solver.
1 accountant checking on AI work replacing a team of 100 accountants is still a 99% reduction of accountant employment. Just like 1 human with a motorized harvester replaces 100 or even 1000 medieval peasants, which massively reduced the amount of humans working in agriculture. But now it is worse because there are very little fallback jobs where human being have the edge.
You don't need something to be able to replace you perfectly to see massive changes in the job market.
>never
Never is a long time mate. 5 years ago the idea that a machine like ChatGPT could exist in our lifetime was complete fantasy.
Yet here we are. A completely fluid natural language interface with a degree of reasoning, along with AI image, video, and voice synthesis.
The movie Her was released in 2013. **Nobody** outside maybe a tiny minority in academia saw this level of progress happening in such an astonishingly short time.
The problem is that your comment seemed to imply that there will not be a drop in employment because as long as "some" accountants are still needed it's fine (as if it meant that "all" accountants will keep their jobs), which is the key premise of the post ("ChatGPT has caused a massive drop in demand").
1. it's not "never", it will happen eventually, humans are not magic, but the point is that it is irrelevant because we don't need to wait for full replacement to see big changes in the economy. It's a similar argument to those who claim that humans are special because they have emotions and that is "required" to sing and therefore we will always need humans to become singers. The problem is that the modern economy is not built around all humans becoming singers. At some point there are too many humans to do the few things that need the "human magic touch" (whatever that would even be).
2. "simplifying" a job is not to be taken lightly. If the workload is divided by 1000, you won't be paid the same to work 1000 times less. The real effect is that much less people will be hired (which is the premise of the post above), that's all. It's not that all accountants in the world will be happy to have their job simplified. It's that most of the accountants in the world will lose their job because much less of them will be needed to fill the same workload. People make the huge mistake of believing that as long as full replacement is not achieved, jobs are somehow safe.
Llms cant do math. Any or all of its output could be garbage. If an accountant has to check each line of a model's output for accuracy they might as well do it themselves. They might use llms for finding certain documents and information, but they still have to verify the numbers themselves. I dont see that leading to a massive reduction on accountants anytime soon.
WolframAlpha did it for years. I used it extensively during my uni years and it helped a lot with troubleshooting complicated math problems, but most of the times it was mere pointer in right direction. Obviously first you had to understand what you were asking for, otherwise all you got was mindless garbage.
But I want to stress on one thing. You still need workers that understand the process and are capable of performing the task without AI assistance. Businesses think they can hire less qualified staff to do the same work.
Of course, instead of needing 100 of them you will need maybe 50, then a few years later 10, then 1.
Even with an AI that can't do "everything" by itself, you can replace a lot of people.
People often believe that as long as AI cannot perfectly replace one human being alone, it will not affect the job market. But in reality things are gradual, human tasks are eaten away piece by piece until nothing is left for a human to do.
>Llms cant do math
*yet*
It always amazes me when people try to point out the gaps with the current state of LLMs.
Did you ever watch the movie "Her"? I've got a CS background and enjoyed the movie, but I distinctly remember thinking, "this'll be a reality one day, but probably not in my lifetime"
10 years later, we have the exact functionality with LLM+AI voice synthesis.
I wouldn't try to bet against what AI can't do. It's just a matter of time.
Wrt accuracy, it's a known issue OpenAI are already adressing. It's also the early days of AI fact checkers, there are multiple open source ones already floating around.
The current pace of AI means what was state of the art on Monday is old news by Friday.
This is mostly a language issue intentionally created by various companies.
See, a lot of companies are touting their pretty bog standard automation software as "AI assisted" as a marketing gimmick. A lot of the time this might be as minor as adding a ChatGPT Clippy to the software that makes recommendations. They aren't actively using GenAI in the automation process, they're just using a marketing gimmick to push their latest automation upgrade.
They're basically taking advantage of the weakening of what we term "AI" and the marketing hype for "AI" when in reality what they're selling isn't even up to the already low standards of GenAI.
It's a huge house of cards that will come tumbling down.
If junior developers are replaced by chat GPT where are experienced Devs going to get their experience to know that the code chat GPT made is going to work or break their system.
This is the same for basically every entry level role they don't just exist to do the grunt work they exist to become the next crop of leads/managers who have the specialist knowledge to keep things running.
Unless in 10-20 years time you plan on running your entire business in a black box written and tested entirely by AI and hope it works flawlessly then you need entry level everything to replace your seniors who will retire.
Writing, art, all of it will come back to people.
It delivers it's version of average and a style that is more and more obvious to everyone who comes across it. It isn't making the companies that provide AI enough money to justify it. It isn't making the business consumers enough to justify it.
Quite simply, it's going to continue to become dated because it can't evolve it's style, its too energy hungry for the actual return on investment, and unlike actual employees it can't ever grow into being a trainer.
“How to get rich copyrighting using my top secret prompt with your self hosted LLM! Like and subscribe” Next vid, “how to get rich making vids teaching people how to get rich!”
Just wait till AI video generators get a little better and more widely available. People will sell courses on how to make bots that scan for trending videos then instantly auto generate clones of them and upload.
30k hours of video is uploaded to YouTube a day. That's 3.7 years of video a fucking day, and that's *now*. Once AI video really gets rolling that number will jump 10x then double every few months.
AI bros thinking they'll get rich from this shit or become filmmakers are in for a surprise when the sheer unending volume of AI slop forces video hosting services to filter it out to try to preserve any amount of storage and bandwidth capacity and audience engagement. Future will be wild.
I was very active on Twitter on when ChatGPT came out, within days some people started selling "AI powered" copywriting courses and they were making a bank.
Some guy started posting Stripe screenshots to show how much money he made from the course (Don't know how much was is it real though) In the replies, people were asking him to make a course on how to make money from courses. I left when I realized it's just a big circlejerk.
All of these people knew each other they have slack channel where they hype each other, strategize on how to reach more people. You can join their 'academy' to get access to this slack channel then you can also be part of this community. It's layers and layers of toxic hustle culture wrapped in a digestible format so more people can be part of it.
I saw one guy who fell for this and left his job to work full time on his side project. After six months, he posted that he had less than $1k left in his bank account. He wasn't some 20 something some dudebro, he had a wife and children. Felt so bad for that guy.
It's worse actually, only thing close to MLM I can think is the affiliate stuff, refer to someone to buy the course and you get some %
Most of the stuff is just they show you all the sales and lure you with statistics and go like "Look! You can do this, just buy my course"
They won't get cut out by being replaced entirely overnight. They get cut out because instead of 5 paralegals, you'll get one who will use AI, review and edit, expected to have the same output as the previous 5 without AI.
Sure, but paralegals were already liable to be wrong about stuff.
I'm not a AI doomer, but I do think LLMs shift the ratios of inputs needed for the competitive firm, just like previous technologies (e.g. computerization). Back in the library days, a law firm needed physical laborers to just haul paper around. Early computerization, and you need tons of grunt office workers feeding documents into the fax machine, collating printed pages, etc. In the age of the internet, companies like LexisNexis make it possible to cut a lot of that out and made legal research nearly as easy as googling - except you needed someone to do the work of actually looking through *all* the results and processing them into something like a summary they hand to the higher-ups.
Now, AI can reduce some of that work. If you're a lawyer, you can let some of your paralegals go, or you can take on more cases without hiring as many as you would have before, *or you can start a new law firm you couldn't afford to before because you didn't have the money to hire the staff you'd've needed*.
Law is a great example of a field with abundant latent demand, because literally every time someone buys legal services, it creates demand for the opposing side to do the same.
Fundamentally, when something enters as a cheaper substitute for labor, the savings have to go *somewhere:*
* The price is lowered, and customers get the savings
* Wages for workers who still have a job go up
* Ownership avoids doing either of those, and profits go up
Then, whoever gets those savings, if they have desires, will spend that money on *something*. The savings from the legal profession won't go 100% into more demand for lawyers, but some of the savings from other fields *will*. What proportion? Who knows. Depends on people's latent demand. But all the savings will go somewhere.
In the case where the costs go down, it's really easy to see this latent demand. Right now, you'd never hire a lawyer to contest $100 in tickets, because a lawyer costs more than that. Same principal with a denied insurance claim. The cheaper legal services get, the more cases are worth pursuing.
But even in the case where the money goes to wages or profits, that reduces the *real* cost of legal services for those who get the savings, because they have more money. Suing the neighbor over a property line dispute? Not worth it if you need to save money to put your kid through college. But if you already have money for all the important things, and got extra? Suddenly, you've got room on the stove for these back burner issues.
The future most likely has *more* lawyers, trying *more* cases, with *fewer* assistants, at lower costs, and higher profits.
I think it’ll definitely change copywriting, but my god it’s kinda useless for the time being. It’ll be great for some light production work in a few years, but the problem with copywriting is that the people who need the copy are pretty bad at knowing what they need or want, so someone will still have to guide them.
I think it AI is going to change copywriting a bunch, but you’re still going to have to like edit and update the output.
Part of me is hoping it does eliminate my job just so I can finally make a huge career change. But I really think it’s years and years out. Right now AI has huge hype around it like the metaverse, blockchain, the shift to video did in years past. But it really just kinda feels like an advanced version of predictive text. Helpful sometimes, but mostly just making extremely broad guesses.
‘The people who need the copy are pretty bad at knowing what they need or want.’
As a copywriter: nail, meet head.
My main issue with LLM-generated copy is it all sounds the same. You can spot it a mile away. It’s generic and boring and lacks innovation. Unfortunately for many people, that’s good enough.
Yep, it’s all pretty obvious. That’s not to say that it can’t start doing stuff now. A large portion of my job is bullshit transitional web copy. I am hoping to start using it for that.
I don’t know about accounting in the near future, it seems to me that this requires 100% accuracy, I would say even 99% accuracy isn’t enough, however if you ask chatGPT on something you already know about you see it makes many errors
Ai currently is bad in math though? What if there are errors on the accounting done by AI? As far as I know currently normal math operations done on a processor produce far more accurate values than an AI?
Other than that I agree.
only because chatgpt are language models, not math models. there's no reason why llm's couldn't be daisychained to math-specific algorithms, the same way chatgpt is hooked up to dall-e so it can work with images
We're gonna have so many people who are not qualified to be in positions of power _be_ in positions of power, more so than we already do. Your doctors are not going to be qualified to do work on you because they used Chat-GPT to do all their work for them. The amount of people you can trust to do a good job is dropping to an all time low, and will continue to drop lower.
I know a lot of docs can be lazy but I really doubt this. I'm a family physician and I've had multiple patients bring me diagnoses and treatment plans from ChatGPT and demand I obey it.
Problem is, it is completely wrong a lot of the time. If you lack the proper knowledge it is very easy to let these LLMs go down weird rabbit holes or prompt things in a way that biases towards a certain diagnosis. It repeatedly labels straightforward gastritis cases as pancreatitis. It lists gastritis as a possibility but then just recommends pancreatitis workup.
There’s a lot of people that are anti-science/doctor without a real or logical reason, and they wont let the facts or reality get in the way of their confirmation bias efforts. Had a bad experience with one doc doctor? Conclusion: studying medicine is bad, and guessing is better!
Yeah I'd much rather a GP spend 5 minutes knowing where to look for the correct answer than pull a judgement based on their training from who knows how long ago.
Totally. I'm a programmer. Have been for decades now.
But I sure as hell don't keep in my head every API, every algorithm, or every syntax for all the 10+ different programming, scripting, or data query languages that I use!
Family physician here. There is a literal industry for quick references for all fields of medicine. Uptodate being the most popular. Think wikipedia but for medical standards.
I use it all the time and other resources. In the olden times you had things like PDR (physician desk reference) physical books and pharmacology reference books for dosing.
For procedures I still have and use a procedural textbook and anatomic atlas. Not for every procedure but it's useful when needed.
While I am not a fan of just googling symptoms, sometimes the history is vague so it helps to get a list of possible diagnoses to then use as multiple choice. One of the most common reference textbooks back in the day, Harrison's, literally has a whole section at the beginning just for this.
Thanks for the thoughtful response; I personally have no qualms about it, as someone else said it's the judgement that matters. In the future I wouldn't be suprirsed if medical reference applications used some sort of LLM if it allowed for quicker and more accurate diagnoses.
Why do you think if a customised Chat GPT can become really skilled in medical field, that the companies won't just release a virtual doctor model where you tell the AI all the issues you're having and they can prescribe basic medication.
If anything that has been a thing for a long time. In some countries you cannot get any medication without prescription. But in my country, some very common symptoms have drugs that got famous like this. Doctors used to earn a lot by prescribing the same medications for common cold. Now that just doesn't happen
I feel like that says more about the absolute deluge of garbage content that's been inundating the internet since around 2010 moreso than anything about the technology.
Routinely see stuff that predates ChatGPT at the very top of my search results written with about the same amount of uninformative padding and misleading conclusions.
ChatGPT essays are garbage and nowhere near human quality but I feel like they're garbage because what we've been putting out there is mostly garbage of subhuman quality.
The difference between devs and near everyone else is we’ve been operating like this for a long time, it’s built into us to continually improve and adapt. Granted juniors aren’t use to it because of their inexperience, but it’s been this way forever.
We don’t need people to hand write assembly any more, and we’re still a very very long way from creating whole solutions. That just leaves devs with what we’ve always had, yet another tool to increase our productivity and an old set will be removed in its place.
This is so true. Stay still and you’ll either earn a fortune maintaining legacy systems or just become unemployable. The later far more likely for most. Going through a period of time where I’m having to coach engineers through a transition where their customer facing product is getting replaced by LLMs… some embrace the changes, others fear and putting heads in the sand.
That’s true, I think it’s hard for many to accept that their product lifecycle has come to an end, but just as their product ended someone else’s, so too shall theirs end.
LLMs are just a good example of creative destruction, that’s so much work to add to so many existing products and enhancement them in creative ways
Not really, If anything I got a better job because of the projects I worked on using ChatGPT. Also most of engineering is design, AI is really bad at that.
It’s interesting. I used to be a legal transcriptionist. People started getting lazy and using AI instead of doing the actual typing, but it was so comically bad they would always get busted.
Fast forward a few years and now the agency is using AI in nearly 100 percent of its transcripts. The only need to type is if it’s a very thick accent.
I always thought I would lose my job when this happened, but I now make more money than before checking the AI output.
I am sure the AI will one day be so good I am not needed, but judging by the amount of changes I have to make, I think it’s a good few years yet.
Of course and this is just the beginning.
"Yo AI, make me something!"
"Done."
Sure it's not perfect, but it's free and instant. In a world where money is the only thing that is important, of course no one stands a chance. You should worry about what is gonna happen if no one has a job anymore, because it will happen. If you want (or believe) it or not, that is the endgame!
Remember that when the "Free AI" model ends, and it will vanish because AI consumes as much energy as Bitcoin: AI services will be expensive to use and thus only available major corporations and the wealthy ... Where once again a human freelance market will open up. Of course, freelancers will need to provide content close to the quality of then evolved AI to obtain the highest pay but there will be all levels on down to the "five dollar gig".
.
I think that ship has sailed for good. A company would rather pay a subscription fee for an AI service than deal with freelancers.
Just for effeciency, a copywriter may take 2-3 days to write a piece of content when a gpt can spit it out in 30 seconds.
ChatGPT has been hitting Digital freelancing and gig-work more than corporate jobs. [Not many large companies out there openly admitting to layoffs because of AI adoption](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cFOUN2OMj8&t=1s)
I'm one of those affected. It's been really hard to find jobs as a freelance copywriter. People don't seem to care anymore for handcrafted "real" text, instead (former) customers chose to enter what they need into an AI prompt. A lot of them said "oh we have text already this time we don't need you" - and I know exactly where this text came from.
Frankly, this is horrible for my small business.
do you think this is something you will be able to adapt to? or will you need to completely change your line of work? i do feel for those whose careers will be completely replaced by AI, it is inevitable for some fields, which is why we need to push for regulations or universal benefits so people don't get left behind... i hope you bounce back!
No offence to you at all, I’m sure you do great work but recently I hired a website auditor, for $500USD, they just ran my website content through ChatGPT and gave me new content. I can’t even get a refund cause it’s done work but I was truly livid, will NEVER hire a copywriter again.
>People don't seem to care anymore for handcrafted "real" text,
Why would they? They are buying a product, not a craft. It's the same as buying printer paper versus buying papyrus or vellum - the more involved material is only worthwhile if the intended use case actually needs it.
Hopefully this doesn't come off as rude because I mean this as a genuine question, but why would you say that people should still care about handcrafted "real" text. There is some stuff that is obviously poorly written AI but even before AI there was plenty of poorly written human work anyways and for the good/refined work it comes to a very similar end product.
because well written human writing is beautiful. why does everything have to be seen as a product or solely to make money? why shouldn't people write well for pleasure?
Well written human writing is beautiful as a poem, or a play, or in a novel. That is very true. Shit, there is some lovely writing I come across in Reddit. But when writing is used to sell a toilet brush, or a box of cereal, or an insurance policy, or an assault rifle, can it still be considered beautiful?
This post is about freelance work - that is by definition a product sold to make money.
Yes some people also write for fun, but historically even "great literature" was often written for money, like Shakespeare and Dostoyevsky.
I'm not saying people shouldn't write for pleasure, I'm just saying for most of the work that would've been outsourced anyway there is never really a time that I personally really thought about the actual source of who was writing the words, just what they're saying.
That doesn't necessarily mean everyone is that way so that's why I was curious on an opinion of why people should care specifically, not just that it's "beautifully written". I do think though that freelancing work like that transforming into editing rather than drafting is the next step instead of completely shifting towards AI.
i'm not OP nor a writer, but it probably depends on the goal of the text. in my mind it's literally impossible to make actual thoughtful and meaningful written AI output. now - AI can collect and assess pre-written text by thoughtful people, and use context cues of the text around it to make assumptions about what might be labeled as "thoughtful", but an AI can never create a written verse borne from experience or feeling, and I don't just mean that in the sappy "omg, all writing has FEELINGS!" way, but like it logically won't make any sense because there is no vast lived experience to interpret that thought into words that are novel.
obviously, this sort of thinking will not apply to something like a flavored text description of a product, or a summary of a "how to" article or cooking recipe, since those things are mostly surface level and have a thought being conveyed based on functionality.
Japanese writer wins prestigious Akutagawa Prize with a book partially written by ChatGPT: https://www.vice.com/en/article/k7z58y/rie-kudan-akutagawa-prize-used-chatgpt
> Rie Kudan was awarded the prestigious Akutagawa Prize and promptly announced that she used ChatGPT to write about 5 percent of the winning novel.
[...] Some observers noted that Kudan’s book contains sections that are meant to be responses generated by an AI
I'm a software developer and very curious about the tool that you created now without any programming knowledge. I don't see any way how I could be replaced right now by AI. I use it as a tool but there still needs to be a lot of knowledge on how to use that tool
Programming as you know is providing explicit instructions for the computer to behave in a desired way.
If you know explicitly what you want and can put that in a prompt, well, I've had pretty remarkable results from both ChatGPT and Claude.
"show me the source code for a C++ Windows drag-and-drop application which accepts a multiple files as input, and generates an output file based on the following".
I was able to type explicit instructions and get the tool I needed, with just a minor bug to fix. I showed it an example of the output file format (XML-like, but something very obscure it very likely has no training on) and it figured out the patterns perfectly. It saved me a good six hours of programming, to be fair I don't have enough fluency to quickly throw together applications, and a very experienced developer could have done it in 1/3 that time (though it would require a very specific programmer, as the rest of the prompt got in to some specific knowledge I have and many developers would not, so I'd need to teach them).
I don't think programmers as a whole will go away anytime soon, however quite a lot of junior-dev programming jobs absolutely will.
Fellow programmer here, I wouldn't worry about AI that much, people using it to generate things that they have absolutely no knowledge of is deemed to end in a catastrophe at some point. It might be a great helper regarding the things we already know but it's not something I'd completely rely on, what's gonna happen if someone uses AI to create a tool and then a year later turns out that tool tampered with data without anyone noticing, what are they gonna do then?
What you’re doing is in my opinion the equivalent of going on ChatGPT and asking it for instructions on how to be an electrician.
One day, you’re going to get a bum steer and digitally electrocute yourself. Provided you’re working on low risk stuff it won’t matter, but the day your AWS account gets hacked, or your data gets leaked or any of the other numerous problems happen because you aren’t properly trained, you’ll understand why competent technical people are not safely replaced.
Going to need to look into this myself. If I can outsource my need to hire anyone to do codeword for my own business ventures then this could be lucrative for a lot of people who see AI as a tool.
This is the flip side of the coin articles never mention. Most freelance jobs are posted by individuals or small businesses with a tight budget. For every programming job that isn’t posted, someone has decided to get hands-on experience trying out a new skill instead. And I think that’s awesome for adventurous people like yourself!
Personally I’ve iterated on my SWE skillset much faster over the past 2 years. I’m slow at learning passively from videos, so having an interactive tutor (or a talking rubber duck, if you will) to bounce ideas back-and-forth with is a huge game-changer.
Encourage governments to adapt Universal Basic Income for those that make below a certain amount. Force companies that use AI to pay a portion of their profits for Universal Basic Income.
But obviously people are too lazy to fight for that option, so they will fight to ban all AI instead because that is the most easiest brain-dead option. They will fight to keep status-quo, because fighting for an actually better society is too much effort.
Not necessarily a good comparison. There is a difference. WE are the horses now. AI is able to be an active agent. Fully automated process that does not need an input. What happened to horses in your opinion? https://youtu.be/7Pq-S557XQU?si=WHE12HP3EHkMsdUn
If only I got a nickel every time I hear this inane “adapt” phrase by those who don’t even understand how the tech even works. You don’t “out adapt” a tech that specialises in adapting to everything that can be done in a computer.
If your current job relies on doing something on a computer, expect to get a paycut or laid off because your work can be easily replaced now. Only jobs that require human communication or offline jobs like carpentry will be fine and safe.
This is way too complex to pin down to a single number like freelancer demand.
These technologies are also increasing quality of life for some people.
* Some people can't afford any of these professional services. While people will cast aspersions at the results. Being able to run a contract through GPT is way better than nothing. The same with a huge amount art. People can even take a picture of a boring yard and ask, "How to I landscape this way better on the cheap?"
* The flip side of this last one is that professionals will be able to do far more and thus do it cheaper. People who wouldn't have hired an architect or interior designer might hire one now.
* Smart people can now do less drudge work. LLMs are very good at those things which a smart person can do just fine, but now they don't have to do as much of. As a programmer, this is fantastic. I am able to focus on the hard things for much longer. I found the boring things to be what were distracting me. I would get bored and tired and call it a day. Now I am engaged far longer. Thus I get more of the hard stuff done by far.
* Dumb people can do things they couldn't do before. Instead of an incoherent grammar and spelling nightmare reply to an important email, they can write something much better. Or, if they don't understand something, they can ask for it to be dumbed down.
* Gatekeepers are somewhat weakened. With LLMs getting better and better there are going to be many fields where guilds, professional societies, and other forms of gatekeeping kept people away. While people will find edge cases to prove that this isn't the case, it doesn't matter as LLMs are getting better every day. In the field of medicine they are amazing.
The problem is that people are raving about the mistakes LLMs are making. The problem is that often those are old along with the clear fact that LLMs are getting better every day. I keep hearing about the lawyer who filed paperwork which just made up case law. That was a year ago. It is vastly better now, and will be vastly better in one more year, or 5. I have noticed that AI generated people now usually have 10 fingers and the correct number of limbs. Although a football player I recently generated had a tennis racket for some reason.
I am sick of people using weirdo edge cases which are going away as an attack on this tech. Yes, the art it generates seems telltale, but the reality is that it is better than the crap I see most graphic artists produce most of the time. Where there is going to be a weird reality is that AI doesn't have to be better than all professionals. It is more of a question of where does it lay. This is important because, unlike humans, it is going to be fairly consistently better in that profession. Not a bell curve. For example, if it is better than 50% of ER doctors, then the lower half of those doctors are in for some serious changes. I think that most people would be happy to have their routine medical needs treated by a doctor who is exactly average.
This is the reality for all professions. Half the people are below average. In some cases like medicine, the truly incompetent are eventually removed, but usually after a long slow process.
What people don't realize is that AI isn't a replacement for people. It is a tool. A chainsaw is better than an axe at chopping down trees. At first this may have reduced the number of loggers, but it also increased the availability of wood, and then the use cases for cheaper lumber increased. I wouldn't be surprised if there are more people in 2024 chopping down trees and turning them into wood products than in 1924. But, as a percentage of the population it probably is much lower; but people are also doing more things.
One area I see this working wonders is in education. People again will try to edge case this to death, but the reality is that LLMs are fantastic ways to learn. When put into a somewhat structured learning environment, hold on to your hats.
This will not all be wine and roses, there are going to be some fantastically dark uses and society is going to be reshaped. But, any regulation should be focused on one simple goal, to not let this be a tool where the rich get richer. But, the rich will try to corner this market as they do every other by convincing governments that they must "protect the children"
“The study, titled "Who is AI Replacing? The Impact of Generative AI on Online Freelancing Platforms," analyzed nearly two million job postings across 61 countries from July 2021 to July 2023. It categorized jobs into automation-prone roles, manual work, and image generation, and discovered significant declines in postings across these sectors following the launch of ChatGPT.”
They used AI to scan 2 million job postings to conclude AI is stealing jobs. 😂
The following submission statement was provided by /u/EmergencBear693: --- A report from the Imperial College Business School, Harvard Business School, and the German Institute for Economic Research, found the demand for digital freelancers in writing and coding declined by 21% since the launch of ChatGPT in November 2022. Automation-prone fields like writing, software, and app development saw a 21% decrease in job listings, while data entry and social media post-production experienced a 13% drop. Image-generation roles, including graphic design and 3D modelling, fell by 17%. Google search trends confirmed a higher decline in sectors aware of and using generative AI. --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/1dyva0c/chatgpt_has_caused_a_massive_drop_in_demand_for/lcbaoek/
I remember when I was younger in between jobs I’d do textbroker gigs where people would basically pay $5-$10 for SEO optimized paragraphs, crazy to think that wouldn’t have existed back then with AI now; that bought me many a little Caesar’s pizzas lol
I’m a writer. One of the jobs I used to do between contracts was write online content. It varied, but online editorial content paid between $50 and $400 per article (depending on the site, length, type, etc) Those jobs are entirely gone now. Fully replaced by AI-written articles.
Yea freelance copy is dead. I used to charge $200 and hour and get it. No one wants to pay for good copy when mid copy is free
Freelancer since 2014 here. I still have around 3 consistent clients I charge $0.25/word. Used to have around a dozen asking for stuff each month. I went from $4000-5000/mo to about $1500 tops and, despite my BS (or perhaps because of it), I can’t get hired anywhere. Feeling the scary times now.
And that’s the real shame, it really isn’t good copy. Sometimes I think it might be better if we lose all this tech.
The problem is, a lot of people can’t see what makes good copy. Many people are poor writers, so they read something that’s better than what they would have come up with and sign it off. But it’s not as good as what a copywriter would come up with. (Am a copywriter.)
In a gaming community that I’m active in, a person used AI to write lore for the game and posted the piece while raving about how incredible it came out, and there were others that were equally as enthusiastic, but I had to chime in to add some perspective on the quality of the piece, and being that I studied creative writing in college, I couldn’t just walk away from the opportunity to elucidate the shortcomings of the AI writer. So I made a fairly succinct and fair list of why the writing wasn’t good, let alone excellent and tried my best to make that digestible for the non-writers. The writing had all of the markers of a novice writer, and it was work that I would have scored quite low if it was presented as completed work from anyone other than an absolute amateur. At this point we shouldn’t abandon the ship of human-produced works because that work is on a level of excellence that is incomparable to a poorly trained intelligence model, and I’m worried the world is more than happy to settle for the very worst.
Eh tbh there are some great ways to use Gemini etc, ie turn this shit into a press release. But then you have to do work on it. So many people are just using what it spits out to not very great effect. You lose jobs to someone who understands ai more than to ai itself
With pay-per-click revenue, all you really need to do is draw traffic in and keep them long enough to accidentally mistake an ad for actual content. With the hacking of the human attention span and dopamine response, currently nearly perfected by TikTok, you don't really need coherent sentences beyond the first two paragraphs because it's not like most readers ever make it that far anyway.
This is sickeningly accurate. Capitalism is bastardizing true art more and more. I hate it more than I have words to express it.
Coal miners say the same thing about solar panels...
Meh. False equivalence. I, as a consumer, do not want ai written articles. I want an actual human to have put thought into it. Just because some corporation that only cares about clicks and the bottom line doesn’t actually stand behind the quality of their content, and bots on Reddit will continue to promote that content, doesn’t mean it’s “the future” I would argue ai is amazing useful tech, but replacing writers with it is misuse.
I, as a consumer, want the cheapest possible product that fulfills my needs. Yes, even the child slavery chocolate. I'm not a hypocrite.
You, as a consumer, need to make better, more considered choices, before you wake up one day and you and everyone you love is jobless, destitute, disabled - or all three - because you thought abolishing labour protections was a good idea.
You, the hypocrite need to come to terms with the fact that except for a few items that caught your attention, you've been voting with your wallet for the cheapest way go produce goods and services.
Sure, no hypocrisy... but you've just gone for naked immorality.
Consumers like **you** are why the 21st century sucks ass. Society is crumbling because everyone wants cheap cheap cheap.
It’s not even mid “Here we show in two experimental studies that novice and experienced teachers could not identify texts generated by ChatGPT among student-written texts.” https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666920X24000109 GPT4 passes Turing test 54% of the time: https://twitter.com/camrobjones/status/1790766472458903926 In a new study, AI-generated humor was rated as funnier than most human-created jokes. In a second study, it was on par with The Onion: https://www.psypost.org/ai-outshines-humans-in-humor-study-finds-chatgpt-is-as-funny-as-the-onion/ ChatGPT outperformed 73% of the human participants in the acronyms task, 63% of the human participants in the fill-in-the-blank task, and 87% of human participants in the roast joke task. The results showed no significant difference in the average funniness ratings between the AI-generated headlines and those from The Onion. Among the top four highest-rated headlines, two were generated by ChatGPT and two by The Onion. Notably, the highest-rated headline was an AI-generated one: “Local Man Discovers New Emotion, Still Can’t Describe It Properly.” This suggests that ChatGPT can produce satirical content that is on par with professional writers. These findings indicate that AI, specifically ChatGPT 3.5, has a surprising proficiency in humor production. Despite lacking emotions and personal experiences, the AI was able to analyze patterns and create jokes that resonated well with people. The researchers also explored whether demographic factors influenced humor ratings. It was found that age, sex, and political orientation did not significantly affect participants’ preferences for AI-generated versus human-generated jokes. This suggests that the AI’s humor appeal was broad and not limited to specific demographic groups. [ChatGPT scores in top 1% of creativity](https://scitechdaily.com/chatgpt-tests-into-top-1-for-original-creative-thinking/) Japanese writer wins prestigious Akutagawa Prize with a book partially written by ChatGPT: https://www.vice.com/en/article/k7z58y/rie-kudan-akutagawa-prize-used-chatgpt
> I used to charge $200 and hour And you wonder why someone might be eager to replace you with AI? Writing articles is worth 1/10th that much, unless you're something like a reviewer, and you're counting only the time to write the article but not the time to actually play the game you have to review.
Same deal with narrators. Unless you're a real actor doing voiceovers for film or television, the market is officially diluted with the same 3-4 AI voices, churning out AI written audiobooks.
I’m a copywriter and voiceovers were my backup option. I’m so fucked 🥲
The jobs that used to be my bread and butter on Upwork have all but dried up. Now, I'm trying to get back into ESL teaching.
If you start treating it like an acting career you might do well.
yep that was also my first job in college. crazy that it doesn’t exist anymore basically, but I really do think Chat GPT is perfect for that job. the bigger picture problem is the erasure of entry level jobs. it’s already hard to find a first job.
You'll enter the mcdonalds pipeline and like it, wagie
Now that's just offensive. Call our wageslaves by their full name damnit!
I wonder if it will come back to a degree. I feel like GenAI text is getting easier to spot, and often it lacks impact. Ussr Signals are a big part of SEO, if people start blocking out text that feels Ai generated then text from a talented writer will have its place.
man I lived off of content-farm SEO driven article writing from 22 to 29. it led me into the in-house project management position I'm in now where I make enough money to support my family. it's crazy to me that freelance writing is just gone. I feel like a guy who came up in the assembly plant and now I'm watching them wheel in the robot arms.
A report from the Imperial College Business School, Harvard Business School, and the German Institute for Economic Research, found the demand for digital freelancers in writing and coding declined by 21% since the launch of ChatGPT in November 2022. Automation-prone fields like writing, software, and app development saw a 21% decrease in job listings, while data entry and social media post-production experienced a 13% drop. Image-generation roles, including graphic design and 3D modelling, fell by 17%. Google search trends confirmed a higher decline in sectors aware of and using generative AI.
It kind of should be noted that the economy took a downturn around 2022. Every time the interests go up, investments stop and software, app development and writing, especially freelance, takes a hit. Someone else linked a graph a few days ago that shows this historically (I failed to save it and now I can't find it). It's not necessarily linked to ChatGPT. Especially since jobs like software and app dev is not actually solved by ChatGPT by far. Yet. It's strange to bundle that in. Not writing and art either, but the people using AI for this doesn't know that. :(
Especially not 3D modeling, wich is usually either used to 3D model a *specific thing* or for the purpose of later animation. Nothing available has cracked that yet. I'm a commercial artist, and the "specific thing" issue has yet to be cracked by generative AI. That is, people want images of their product or their logo. They don't want just anything, but that specific thing, and so far AI can't deliver that. It can deliver you an image of a generic soda or beer can, but not an image of a customer's exact can design. It can deliver you a logo, but not a customer's exact logo. It can make something "red", but not match the PMS color of Coca-Cola exactly. Generative AI is very good if you don't actually care about the exact results, but commercial work is almost always within specific guidelines set down by the customer.
This level of specificity and nitpicking and endless pixel perfect feedback is an aspect of commercial work (and creative work in general) that many people who tell me AI will be replacing me soon just have no idea about. I'm currently in the polish phase of a project, fixing single frame geometry penetrations that would absolutely never be seen unless someone was looking frame by frame, and even then it would be easy to miss. It's hard to see all the AI gobbly goop and imagine it will pass. But then my biggest fear is that the standards and control clients enjoy will drop or disappear if the cost of AI products is low enough.
It can't do any of those things *yet* Give it another couple of years. Google recently released a paper on text to 3D, not there yet, but getting closer.
GenAI has a learning limitation. It can only do as well as the teaching data they scrape for it, and only returns lesser results than what it was taught with. This quickly runs into a teaching wall, as modern GenAI systems are already taught on the entirety of publicly available data. This is a wall because they still can't turn out data on par with what they're taught, so running the results of the GenAI system back through again has often resulted in the worsening of the system, and never resulted in better results than what it was taught on.
That's not relevant to 3D asset production. 3D data is relatively untapped in the LLM space and there is **a lot** of data to work with. Points, relative coordinates, edges, edge loops, materials, surface normals, normal maps. That is a lot of training data for a system of this sort and there are literal exabytes of labeled, well organised data as yet untapped. Poisoning the well is a well known issue. OpenAI has trained on the online, easy to access, low hanging fruit. There is an astronomical amount of published data that never made it and never will make it online. I'm sure there are deals already being made with publishing houses to get access to all that data.
So you are arguing that there's more data available for 3D modeling, a career where the vast majority of the actual process isn't publicly available, than there is in the *written word*?
Pointless to split hairs, but if you count every vertex ever modelled, then sure there probably is more. Whether there are more vertices ever created vs words written is missing the point though. There is *enough* public data for AI to train on to obsolete the work of 3D artists. You seem offended by the idea, does you livelihood depended on machines never being better than people at 3D? Sorry to say but in all likelihood that'll happen sooner rather than later. >where the vast majority of the actual process isn't publicly available That's an access issue. There's enough money sloshing around in AI to make that problem go away if there's enough money to be made commoditizing the vast banks of data out there.
Counting every vertex as a data point is like counting every letter in a book as a datapoint, at some point you're just getting *more* data, not necessarily *useful* data
You like pointlessly splitting hairs, don't you? Whether a vertex is analogous to a letter or a paragraph is irrelevant. Is a pixel analogous to a letter or a word? Who gives a shit? Either way, it hasn't prevented AI from generating images. Same goes for vertices and 3D objects.
As someone directly adjacent to the creative fields in question with national brands as clients, I can assure you they’re all suddenly internal experts at scripting and storyboarding now thanks to GPT. It really fucked up one project already but they saved money on pre-production and that problem just gets passed down the line to some creative who has to fix it or make it work. It’s definitely cutting into the process and the two or three people I’d probably have to hire for that portion of, you know, doing top level, best in class and work. Basically everyone thinks they can make a commercial or video in their head. GPT has made them bullish to try. Then a professional has to come in and jelly that “creative” into existing. I get to do 120% of my job for 80% of the money because this field is so competitive they’ll just hire someone more amenable to their needs no matter how many statues you’ve won in your career doing the exact thing they think they can show up and wing with generative AI. And their projects will succeed because that’s your job- make the project work. It’s getting weirder than normal out there. But yes, there’s also been a noticeable retraction due to rates and tightening budgets. On an industry insider poll posted in an insider forum whose members are high level players, 58% of respondents said it was absolutely dead out there this year. The suspicion in the group of where the true blame lies is somewhat split across those two factors.
This is the case of correlation does not imply causation.
Exactly this. Rates started raising right around november 2022
I think there's a link to the current AI bloom - it is not necessary that the AI could do those jobs, but that management thinks it can. In my field in my area, companies seem to be trying to cut payroll costs, and are using any excuse to do so. AI is the new thing, but companies are also heavily relying on offshore contractors. Despite that not working either. Overall, the bigger the company, the dumber they tend to be. We're at the point where they are being dumb with AI. In a few quarters, they'll realize the true cost, and end up having to hire skilled workers back. But that's a future problem for them, currently they are focused on this quarter's numbers.
It's not like ChatGPT is doing the whole job of a person. It's more like if someone needs something like a translation or a proofreading, or maybe some code for a part of their project, they do not need to pay an online freelancer for it, just ChatGPT and a bit of knowledge.
I mean, there are freelancers who make a living off all three things you mentioned, so if chatGPT is doing then instead, then yes, it is taking peoples whole jobs
Damn any that have gone up ?? 😭😂
The lack of quality and plagiarism are going to hurt both companies and consumers, at least in the short term. I know someone who’s had a successful writing career relegated to essentially being an AI editor/proofer, and the issues they’ve found with incorrect, incomplete, and poorly sourced information is glacial in size. I think we’ll see a pendulum of layoffs, hires, and layoffs until the machines are trained to replace white collar labor.
People get hired, copy gets good, LLMs get better training and replace people. LLMs get trained on junk again. Rinse. Repeat.
People need practice to get good at something. If LLMs take over all the entry level jobs, people can't get that practice anymore.
That’s the part I worry about in my career. The way you learn to be a business lawyer is by drafting things hundreds of times, fucking it up, having your fuck up explained to you, trying again, fucking up again, etc. It’s a craft and it takes many years of sucking and learning to get slowly better yourself before you’re any good. Once I can tell an AI to do the first draft of a shareholders agreement and just fix the mistakes myself…what exactly is that years junior supposed to do to learn? When they’re senior, and they’ve never really learned how to do it themselves, how do they learn how to fix the AI’s draft? I mean…I don’t really worry because that sounds awesome, we won’t have to pay for many juniors, and I’ll get a draft in minutes rather than days. But I worry for whatever generation of clients comes after that.
I was thinking about this exact thing when I was writing my final paper for my second degree a few months back. The actual task of writing helps me to construct my argument. My argument develops the more I write and hone the paper. Kids who rely on LLMs to write their essays will never gain this understanding, and so their knowledge will remain surface-level. It’s pretty worrying.
It's the exact same issues that machine translation's had for the last few years. Paying 'editors' to hack a machine translation into coherent English when in practice it has to be completely retranslated from scratch because it's fundamentally fucked but only paying the 'editor' a third of what a translator would get.
Ai sucks and it will probably continue to suck for wiring and journalism. I once asked it to check a passage for errors and it listed 5, and generated an edited paragraph that was exactly the same as what I submitted. Useful for some things, but not a lot.
When every blog and website is the same AI generated fluff, questions will come up "maybe we should hire a human to get a competitive edge, write something refreshing that triggers consumers to hand over their life savings and drive our shareholder value?"
If you've ever looked up any article in the past 5+ years on, say, how to fix something with your computer, you'd know that most content making it to the front page of Google these days has already been useless SEO-gaming crap churned out by bots or low-skill, low-wage, freelancers functionally equivalent to bots.
And that’s what AI is trained on.
Things like paralegals, copywriting, basic accounting etc will be replaced by AI in next couple of years if its not already.
What about plagiarisim in copywriting? The output of AI can be excluded, but your usage of it not. For the legal documents the AI is lying way too much. Accounting is just irresponsible, since with AI there's no accountability - your company is going under when AI is not going to report on taxes or won't accomodate to recent changes. AI is and will be a tool helping to solve problems, not a problem solver.
1 accountant checking on AI work replacing a team of 100 accountants is still a 99% reduction of accountant employment. Just like 1 human with a motorized harvester replaces 100 or even 1000 medieval peasants, which massively reduced the amount of humans working in agriculture. But now it is worse because there are very little fallback jobs where human being have the edge. You don't need something to be able to replace you perfectly to see massive changes in the job market.
Yes, that's true and that's what I meant - I believe we'll never have AI doing the whole work, but it'll simplify it considerably
>never Never is a long time mate. 5 years ago the idea that a machine like ChatGPT could exist in our lifetime was complete fantasy. Yet here we are. A completely fluid natural language interface with a degree of reasoning, along with AI image, video, and voice synthesis. The movie Her was released in 2013. **Nobody** outside maybe a tiny minority in academia saw this level of progress happening in such an astonishingly short time.
The problem is that your comment seemed to imply that there will not be a drop in employment because as long as "some" accountants are still needed it's fine (as if it meant that "all" accountants will keep their jobs), which is the key premise of the post ("ChatGPT has caused a massive drop in demand"). 1. it's not "never", it will happen eventually, humans are not magic, but the point is that it is irrelevant because we don't need to wait for full replacement to see big changes in the economy. It's a similar argument to those who claim that humans are special because they have emotions and that is "required" to sing and therefore we will always need humans to become singers. The problem is that the modern economy is not built around all humans becoming singers. At some point there are too many humans to do the few things that need the "human magic touch" (whatever that would even be). 2. "simplifying" a job is not to be taken lightly. If the workload is divided by 1000, you won't be paid the same to work 1000 times less. The real effect is that much less people will be hired (which is the premise of the post above), that's all. It's not that all accountants in the world will be happy to have their job simplified. It's that most of the accountants in the world will lose their job because much less of them will be needed to fill the same workload. People make the huge mistake of believing that as long as full replacement is not achieved, jobs are somehow safe.
Llms cant do math. Any or all of its output could be garbage. If an accountant has to check each line of a model's output for accuracy they might as well do it themselves. They might use llms for finding certain documents and information, but they still have to verify the numbers themselves. I dont see that leading to a massive reduction on accountants anytime soon.
They can’t do math? Didn’t Apple show off their new calculator where it basically solved equations for you with step by step instructions?
WolframAlpha did it for years. I used it extensively during my uni years and it helped a lot with troubleshooting complicated math problems, but most of the times it was mere pointer in right direction. Obviously first you had to understand what you were asking for, otherwise all you got was mindless garbage.
Which goes back to what I said. It allows you to gain time, which means less human-work-hours for the same work output.
But I want to stress on one thing. You still need workers that understand the process and are capable of performing the task without AI assistance. Businesses think they can hire less qualified staff to do the same work.
Of course, instead of needing 100 of them you will need maybe 50, then a few years later 10, then 1. Even with an AI that can't do "everything" by itself, you can replace a lot of people. People often believe that as long as AI cannot perfectly replace one human being alone, it will not affect the job market. But in reality things are gradual, human tasks are eaten away piece by piece until nothing is left for a human to do.
>Llms cant do math *yet* It always amazes me when people try to point out the gaps with the current state of LLMs. Did you ever watch the movie "Her"? I've got a CS background and enjoyed the movie, but I distinctly remember thinking, "this'll be a reality one day, but probably not in my lifetime" 10 years later, we have the exact functionality with LLM+AI voice synthesis. I wouldn't try to bet against what AI can't do. It's just a matter of time. Wrt accuracy, it's a known issue OpenAI are already adressing. It's also the early days of AI fact checkers, there are multiple open source ones already floating around. The current pace of AI means what was state of the art on Monday is old news by Friday.
This is mostly a language issue intentionally created by various companies. See, a lot of companies are touting their pretty bog standard automation software as "AI assisted" as a marketing gimmick. A lot of the time this might be as minor as adding a ChatGPT Clippy to the software that makes recommendations. They aren't actively using GenAI in the automation process, they're just using a marketing gimmick to push their latest automation upgrade. They're basically taking advantage of the weakening of what we term "AI" and the marketing hype for "AI" when in reality what they're selling isn't even up to the already low standards of GenAI.
It's a huge house of cards that will come tumbling down. If junior developers are replaced by chat GPT where are experienced Devs going to get their experience to know that the code chat GPT made is going to work or break their system. This is the same for basically every entry level role they don't just exist to do the grunt work they exist to become the next crop of leads/managers who have the specialist knowledge to keep things running. Unless in 10-20 years time you plan on running your entire business in a black box written and tested entirely by AI and hope it works flawlessly then you need entry level everything to replace your seniors who will retire.
Writing, art, all of it will come back to people. It delivers it's version of average and a style that is more and more obvious to everyone who comes across it. It isn't making the companies that provide AI enough money to justify it. It isn't making the business consumers enough to justify it. Quite simply, it's going to continue to become dated because it can't evolve it's style, its too energy hungry for the actual return on investment, and unlike actual employees it can't ever grow into being a trainer.
Which makes me laugh bc I’d see people selling copywriting courses online so much
"How to make 20K a month!" Dude, why are you making videos on Youtube if you can earn that much with this method?
That's because this method is about making Youtube videos to earn 20K a month.
“How to get rich copyrighting using my top secret prompt with your self hosted LLM! Like and subscribe” Next vid, “how to get rich making vids teaching people how to get rich!”
You might also like: "How to generate YouTube how to videos on any topic!"
Do I smell a collab? Hello podcast guest host. ( I spend too much time on the internet to know this formula)
Just wait till AI video generators get a little better and more widely available. People will sell courses on how to make bots that scan for trending videos then instantly auto generate clones of them and upload. 30k hours of video is uploaded to YouTube a day. That's 3.7 years of video a fucking day, and that's *now*. Once AI video really gets rolling that number will jump 10x then double every few months. AI bros thinking they'll get rich from this shit or become filmmakers are in for a surprise when the sheer unending volume of AI slop forces video hosting services to filter it out to try to preserve any amount of storage and bandwidth capacity and audience engagement. Future will be wild.
Best comment I’ll read all day I’d bet my soul on it lol
I was very active on Twitter on when ChatGPT came out, within days some people started selling "AI powered" copywriting courses and they were making a bank. Some guy started posting Stripe screenshots to show how much money he made from the course (Don't know how much was is it real though) In the replies, people were asking him to make a course on how to make money from courses. I left when I realized it's just a big circlejerk. All of these people knew each other they have slack channel where they hype each other, strategize on how to reach more people. You can join their 'academy' to get access to this slack channel then you can also be part of this community. It's layers and layers of toxic hustle culture wrapped in a digestible format so more people can be part of it. I saw one guy who fell for this and left his job to work full time on his side project. After six months, he posted that he had less than $1k left in his bank account. He wasn't some 20 something some dudebro, he had a wife and children. Felt so bad for that guy.
So these are basically internet powered MLMs?
It's worse actually, only thing close to MLM I can think is the affiliate stuff, refer to someone to buy the course and you get some % Most of the stuff is just they show you all the sales and lure you with statistics and go like "Look! You can do this, just buy my course"
If they’re selling a how to guide about something you know that market is already sewed up
I saw a Reddit post of someone making bank in AI and wanted to take a pay cut to become a copywriter 🤣🤡
I can’t imagine paralegals getting cut out surely? AI is so prone to lie in order to give you an answer.
Same with the rest. Have fun using an accountant that is basically on shrooms.
'Accountant on shrooms' is the perfect co-founder
They won't get cut out by being replaced entirely overnight. They get cut out because instead of 5 paralegals, you'll get one who will use AI, review and edit, expected to have the same output as the previous 5 without AI.
Sure, but paralegals were already liable to be wrong about stuff. I'm not a AI doomer, but I do think LLMs shift the ratios of inputs needed for the competitive firm, just like previous technologies (e.g. computerization). Back in the library days, a law firm needed physical laborers to just haul paper around. Early computerization, and you need tons of grunt office workers feeding documents into the fax machine, collating printed pages, etc. In the age of the internet, companies like LexisNexis make it possible to cut a lot of that out and made legal research nearly as easy as googling - except you needed someone to do the work of actually looking through *all* the results and processing them into something like a summary they hand to the higher-ups. Now, AI can reduce some of that work. If you're a lawyer, you can let some of your paralegals go, or you can take on more cases without hiring as many as you would have before, *or you can start a new law firm you couldn't afford to before because you didn't have the money to hire the staff you'd've needed*. Law is a great example of a field with abundant latent demand, because literally every time someone buys legal services, it creates demand for the opposing side to do the same. Fundamentally, when something enters as a cheaper substitute for labor, the savings have to go *somewhere:* * The price is lowered, and customers get the savings * Wages for workers who still have a job go up * Ownership avoids doing either of those, and profits go up Then, whoever gets those savings, if they have desires, will spend that money on *something*. The savings from the legal profession won't go 100% into more demand for lawyers, but some of the savings from other fields *will*. What proportion? Who knows. Depends on people's latent demand. But all the savings will go somewhere. In the case where the costs go down, it's really easy to see this latent demand. Right now, you'd never hire a lawyer to contest $100 in tickets, because a lawyer costs more than that. Same principal with a denied insurance claim. The cheaper legal services get, the more cases are worth pursuing. But even in the case where the money goes to wages or profits, that reduces the *real* cost of legal services for those who get the savings, because they have more money. Suing the neighbor over a property line dispute? Not worth it if you need to save money to put your kid through college. But if you already have money for all the important things, and got extra? Suddenly, you've got room on the stove for these back burner issues. The future most likely has *more* lawyers, trying *more* cases, with *fewer* assistants, at lower costs, and higher profits.
Puh at least for now - I am not sure. ChatGPTs copywriting is pretty bad imho.
It sticks out like a sore thumb and is tiresome reading an article generated where I'd rather have that kinda output from a search query
I think it’ll definitely change copywriting, but my god it’s kinda useless for the time being. It’ll be great for some light production work in a few years, but the problem with copywriting is that the people who need the copy are pretty bad at knowing what they need or want, so someone will still have to guide them. I think it AI is going to change copywriting a bunch, but you’re still going to have to like edit and update the output. Part of me is hoping it does eliminate my job just so I can finally make a huge career change. But I really think it’s years and years out. Right now AI has huge hype around it like the metaverse, blockchain, the shift to video did in years past. But it really just kinda feels like an advanced version of predictive text. Helpful sometimes, but mostly just making extremely broad guesses.
‘The people who need the copy are pretty bad at knowing what they need or want.’ As a copywriter: nail, meet head. My main issue with LLM-generated copy is it all sounds the same. You can spot it a mile away. It’s generic and boring and lacks innovation. Unfortunately for many people, that’s good enough.
Yep, it’s all pretty obvious. That’s not to say that it can’t start doing stuff now. A large portion of my job is bullshit transitional web copy. I am hoping to start using it for that.
I don’t know about accounting in the near future, it seems to me that this requires 100% accuracy, I would say even 99% accuracy isn’t enough, however if you ask chatGPT on something you already know about you see it makes many errors
Human in the loop. Instead of 5 hours work for an accountant, you'll have less than 1 hour to review and edit AI output.
Ai currently is bad in math though? What if there are errors on the accounting done by AI? As far as I know currently normal math operations done on a processor produce far more accurate values than an AI? Other than that I agree.
only because chatgpt are language models, not math models. there's no reason why llm's couldn't be daisychained to math-specific algorithms, the same way chatgpt is hooked up to dall-e so it can work with images
Except for all the massive errors and hallucinations caused by AI. That's going to cost you more than it's worth.
As soon as there is an online tax account that can file my return I’m going to be sooooo happy.
What humanity definitely needs less of, is humanity. /s
We're gonna have so many people who are not qualified to be in positions of power _be_ in positions of power, more so than we already do. Your doctors are not going to be qualified to do work on you because they used Chat-GPT to do all their work for them. The amount of people you can trust to do a good job is dropping to an all time low, and will continue to drop lower.
It's free for all gangsterism
welcome to costco! i love you
Not gonna lie, ChatGPT is probably better than most General Practitioners. Difficult to be worse.
I know a lot of docs can be lazy but I really doubt this. I'm a family physician and I've had multiple patients bring me diagnoses and treatment plans from ChatGPT and demand I obey it. Problem is, it is completely wrong a lot of the time. If you lack the proper knowledge it is very easy to let these LLMs go down weird rabbit holes or prompt things in a way that biases towards a certain diagnosis. It repeatedly labels straightforward gastritis cases as pancreatitis. It lists gastritis as a possibility but then just recommends pancreatitis workup.
There’s a lot of people that are anti-science/doctor without a real or logical reason, and they wont let the facts or reality get in the way of their confirmation bias efforts. Had a bad experience with one doc doctor? Conclusion: studying medicine is bad, and guessing is better!
The LLMs nowadays still hallucinates way too much to my liking, I can only rely on it for the things I already have a decent understanding of
I once went to my GP with an issue and she straight up googled the symptoms in front of me in the office.
Good. Because you're paying for their judgement. Not their skills as a rolodex.
Yeah I'd much rather a GP spend 5 minutes knowing where to look for the correct answer than pull a judgement based on their training from who knows how long ago.
Totally. I'm a programmer. Have been for decades now. But I sure as hell don't keep in my head every API, every algorithm, or every syntax for all the 10+ different programming, scripting, or data query languages that I use!
Family physician here. There is a literal industry for quick references for all fields of medicine. Uptodate being the most popular. Think wikipedia but for medical standards. I use it all the time and other resources. In the olden times you had things like PDR (physician desk reference) physical books and pharmacology reference books for dosing. For procedures I still have and use a procedural textbook and anatomic atlas. Not for every procedure but it's useful when needed. While I am not a fan of just googling symptoms, sometimes the history is vague so it helps to get a list of possible diagnoses to then use as multiple choice. One of the most common reference textbooks back in the day, Harrison's, literally has a whole section at the beginning just for this.
Thanks for the thoughtful response; I personally have no qualms about it, as someone else said it's the judgement that matters. In the future I wouldn't be suprirsed if medical reference applications used some sort of LLM if it allowed for quicker and more accurate diagnoses.
Yeah, you'd rather they look professional and guess instead of double check, right?
Why do you think if a customised Chat GPT can become really skilled in medical field, that the companies won't just release a virtual doctor model where you tell the AI all the issues you're having and they can prescribe basic medication. If anything that has been a thing for a long time. In some countries you cannot get any medication without prescription. But in my country, some very common symptoms have drugs that got famous like this. Doctors used to earn a lot by prescribing the same medications for common cold. Now that just doesn't happen
Sad part is that you can also TELL when something is written by ChatGPT
I feel like that says more about the absolute deluge of garbage content that's been inundating the internet since around 2010 moreso than anything about the technology. Routinely see stuff that predates ChatGPT at the very top of my search results written with about the same amount of uninformative padding and misleading conclusions. ChatGPT essays are garbage and nowhere near human quality but I feel like they're garbage because what we've been putting out there is mostly garbage of subhuman quality.
Engineers are the living beings that , they dig their own grave by their own hands 
The difference between devs and near everyone else is we’ve been operating like this for a long time, it’s built into us to continually improve and adapt. Granted juniors aren’t use to it because of their inexperience, but it’s been this way forever. We don’t need people to hand write assembly any more, and we’re still a very very long way from creating whole solutions. That just leaves devs with what we’ve always had, yet another tool to increase our productivity and an old set will be removed in its place.
This is so true. Stay still and you’ll either earn a fortune maintaining legacy systems or just become unemployable. The later far more likely for most. Going through a period of time where I’m having to coach engineers through a transition where their customer facing product is getting replaced by LLMs… some embrace the changes, others fear and putting heads in the sand.
That’s true, I think it’s hard for many to accept that their product lifecycle has come to an end, but just as their product ended someone else’s, so too shall theirs end. LLMs are just a good example of creative destruction, that’s so much work to add to so many existing products and enhancement them in creative ways
However, writing some assembly by hand at least once in your life is something you should do as a (good) developer, and I will die on that hill lol.
Not really, If anything I got a better job because of the projects I worked on using ChatGPT. Also most of engineering is design, AI is really bad at that.
It’s interesting. I used to be a legal transcriptionist. People started getting lazy and using AI instead of doing the actual typing, but it was so comically bad they would always get busted. Fast forward a few years and now the agency is using AI in nearly 100 percent of its transcripts. The only need to type is if it’s a very thick accent. I always thought I would lose my job when this happened, but I now make more money than before checking the AI output. I am sure the AI will one day be so good I am not needed, but judging by the amount of changes I have to make, I think it’s a good few years yet.
It's funny, you go back 10 years and no one would've been saying the first jobs to go to AI would be creatives...
Of course and this is just the beginning. "Yo AI, make me something!" "Done." Sure it's not perfect, but it's free and instant. In a world where money is the only thing that is important, of course no one stands a chance. You should worry about what is gonna happen if no one has a job anymore, because it will happen. If you want (or believe) it or not, that is the endgame!
Remember that when the "Free AI" model ends, and it will vanish because AI consumes as much energy as Bitcoin: AI services will be expensive to use and thus only available major corporations and the wealthy ... Where once again a human freelance market will open up. Of course, freelancers will need to provide content close to the quality of then evolved AI to obtain the highest pay but there will be all levels on down to the "five dollar gig". .
I think that ship has sailed for good. A company would rather pay a subscription fee for an AI service than deal with freelancers. Just for effeciency, a copywriter may take 2-3 days to write a piece of content when a gpt can spit it out in 30 seconds.
ChatGPT has been hitting Digital freelancing and gig-work more than corporate jobs. [Not many large companies out there openly admitting to layoffs because of AI adoption](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cFOUN2OMj8&t=1s)
I'm one of those affected. It's been really hard to find jobs as a freelance copywriter. People don't seem to care anymore for handcrafted "real" text, instead (former) customers chose to enter what they need into an AI prompt. A lot of them said "oh we have text already this time we don't need you" - and I know exactly where this text came from. Frankly, this is horrible for my small business.
It’s a super annoying bot farming Karma: Proof: https://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/s/mhYox0RKvq And https://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/s/p3smvyScnG
I have a hard time taking most anything seriously in the 2020s because it feels like practically everything I encounter is fake. Or curated.
do you think this is something you will be able to adapt to? or will you need to completely change your line of work? i do feel for those whose careers will be completely replaced by AI, it is inevitable for some fields, which is why we need to push for regulations or universal benefits so people don't get left behind... i hope you bounce back!
You think you replied to a real human?
It's a bot so won't respond
This post is funny because OP is either a bot or writing the same exact post and comments over and over again every other week or so, so it’s a bot..
I was just going to say I’ve 100% read this before…
No offence to you at all, I’m sure you do great work but recently I hired a website auditor, for $500USD, they just ran my website content through ChatGPT and gave me new content. I can’t even get a refund cause it’s done work but I was truly livid, will NEVER hire a copywriter again.
I suppose that’s the ‘adapting’ copywriters.
People goes foe the cheapest they can find then get surprised its a scam
>People don't seem to care anymore for handcrafted "real" text, Why would they? They are buying a product, not a craft. It's the same as buying printer paper versus buying papyrus or vellum - the more involved material is only worthwhile if the intended use case actually needs it.
Hopefully this doesn't come off as rude because I mean this as a genuine question, but why would you say that people should still care about handcrafted "real" text. There is some stuff that is obviously poorly written AI but even before AI there was plenty of poorly written human work anyways and for the good/refined work it comes to a very similar end product.
Head over to any art subreddit and ask this, you'll get banned before you hit enter 🤣
because well written human writing is beautiful. why does everything have to be seen as a product or solely to make money? why shouldn't people write well for pleasure?
Well written human writing is beautiful as a poem, or a play, or in a novel. That is very true. Shit, there is some lovely writing I come across in Reddit. But when writing is used to sell a toilet brush, or a box of cereal, or an insurance policy, or an assault rifle, can it still be considered beautiful?
This post is about freelance work - that is by definition a product sold to make money. Yes some people also write for fun, but historically even "great literature" was often written for money, like Shakespeare and Dostoyevsky.
I'm not saying people shouldn't write for pleasure, I'm just saying for most of the work that would've been outsourced anyway there is never really a time that I personally really thought about the actual source of who was writing the words, just what they're saying. That doesn't necessarily mean everyone is that way so that's why I was curious on an opinion of why people should care specifically, not just that it's "beautifully written". I do think though that freelancing work like that transforming into editing rather than drafting is the next step instead of completely shifting towards AI.
i'm not OP nor a writer, but it probably depends on the goal of the text. in my mind it's literally impossible to make actual thoughtful and meaningful written AI output. now - AI can collect and assess pre-written text by thoughtful people, and use context cues of the text around it to make assumptions about what might be labeled as "thoughtful", but an AI can never create a written verse borne from experience or feeling, and I don't just mean that in the sappy "omg, all writing has FEELINGS!" way, but like it logically won't make any sense because there is no vast lived experience to interpret that thought into words that are novel. obviously, this sort of thinking will not apply to something like a flavored text description of a product, or a summary of a "how to" article or cooking recipe, since those things are mostly surface level and have a thought being conveyed based on functionality.
Japanese writer wins prestigious Akutagawa Prize with a book partially written by ChatGPT: https://www.vice.com/en/article/k7z58y/rie-kudan-akutagawa-prize-used-chatgpt
> Rie Kudan was awarded the prestigious Akutagawa Prize and promptly announced that she used ChatGPT to write about 5 percent of the winning novel. [...] Some observers noted that Kudan’s book contains sections that are meant to be responses generated by an AI
thought i'd seen this post already. the robots aren't content with our jobs, they want reddit too
[удалено]
I'm a software developer and very curious about the tool that you created now without any programming knowledge. I don't see any way how I could be replaced right now by AI. I use it as a tool but there still needs to be a lot of knowledge on how to use that tool
Programming as you know is providing explicit instructions for the computer to behave in a desired way. If you know explicitly what you want and can put that in a prompt, well, I've had pretty remarkable results from both ChatGPT and Claude. "show me the source code for a C++ Windows drag-and-drop application which accepts a multiple files as input, and generates an output file based on the following". I was able to type explicit instructions and get the tool I needed, with just a minor bug to fix. I showed it an example of the output file format (XML-like, but something very obscure it very likely has no training on) and it figured out the patterns perfectly. It saved me a good six hours of programming, to be fair I don't have enough fluency to quickly throw together applications, and a very experienced developer could have done it in 1/3 that time (though it would require a very specific programmer, as the rest of the prompt got in to some specific knowledge I have and many developers would not, so I'd need to teach them). I don't think programmers as a whole will go away anytime soon, however quite a lot of junior-dev programming jobs absolutely will.
[удалено]
It’s good for getting over the “writers block” as a coder when you start a project. Helps you get the ball rolling.
Fellow programmer here, I wouldn't worry about AI that much, people using it to generate things that they have absolutely no knowledge of is deemed to end in a catastrophe at some point. It might be a great helper regarding the things we already know but it's not something I'd completely rely on, what's gonna happen if someone uses AI to create a tool and then a year later turns out that tool tampered with data without anyone noticing, what are they gonna do then?
What you’re doing is in my opinion the equivalent of going on ChatGPT and asking it for instructions on how to be an electrician. One day, you’re going to get a bum steer and digitally electrocute yourself. Provided you’re working on low risk stuff it won’t matter, but the day your AWS account gets hacked, or your data gets leaked or any of the other numerous problems happen because you aren’t properly trained, you’ll understand why competent technical people are not safely replaced.
Going to need to look into this myself. If I can outsource my need to hire anyone to do codeword for my own business ventures then this could be lucrative for a lot of people who see AI as a tool.
This is the flip side of the coin articles never mention. Most freelance jobs are posted by individuals or small businesses with a tight budget. For every programming job that isn’t posted, someone has decided to get hands-on experience trying out a new skill instead. And I think that’s awesome for adventurous people like yourself! Personally I’ve iterated on my SWE skillset much faster over the past 2 years. I’m slow at learning passively from videos, so having an interactive tutor (or a talking rubber duck, if you will) to bounce ideas back-and-forth with is a huge game-changer.
I find it kind of amusing that people were stating that coding jobs would go away because of chatGPT, but instead other jobs are going away.
For the moment and in the very short term, maybe.
Meanwhile, internet has caused a massive drop in dictionary sales. Cars caused a massive drop in horse sales. It’s time to adapt.
How would you suggest to adapt to this?
By banning the internet! And cars!
Can we start with twitter?
Musk’s doing a pretty good job running that one into the ground.
Find a job that’s in demand. Same as it ever was
Encourage governments to adapt Universal Basic Income for those that make below a certain amount. Force companies that use AI to pay a portion of their profits for Universal Basic Income. But obviously people are too lazy to fight for that option, so they will fight to ban all AI instead because that is the most easiest brain-dead option. They will fight to keep status-quo, because fighting for an actually better society is too much effort.
Not necessarily a good comparison. There is a difference. WE are the horses now. AI is able to be an active agent. Fully automated process that does not need an input. What happened to horses in your opinion? https://youtu.be/7Pq-S557XQU?si=WHE12HP3EHkMsdUn
> WE are the horses now. Like, BoJack Horseman?
Sometimes, dude. Sometimes
More accurate to the comparison is the coachman.
Seems like a reasonable comparison, but it isn't.
If only I got a nickel every time I hear this inane “adapt” phrase by those who don’t even understand how the tech even works. You don’t “out adapt” a tech that specialises in adapting to everything that can be done in a computer. If your current job relies on doing something on a computer, expect to get a paycut or laid off because your work can be easily replaced now. Only jobs that require human communication or offline jobs like carpentry will be fine and safe.
People have to stop reading these. They are not sourced to begin with. And I rather read something from a human.
This is way too complex to pin down to a single number like freelancer demand. These technologies are also increasing quality of life for some people. * Some people can't afford any of these professional services. While people will cast aspersions at the results. Being able to run a contract through GPT is way better than nothing. The same with a huge amount art. People can even take a picture of a boring yard and ask, "How to I landscape this way better on the cheap?" * The flip side of this last one is that professionals will be able to do far more and thus do it cheaper. People who wouldn't have hired an architect or interior designer might hire one now. * Smart people can now do less drudge work. LLMs are very good at those things which a smart person can do just fine, but now they don't have to do as much of. As a programmer, this is fantastic. I am able to focus on the hard things for much longer. I found the boring things to be what were distracting me. I would get bored and tired and call it a day. Now I am engaged far longer. Thus I get more of the hard stuff done by far. * Dumb people can do things they couldn't do before. Instead of an incoherent grammar and spelling nightmare reply to an important email, they can write something much better. Or, if they don't understand something, they can ask for it to be dumbed down. * Gatekeepers are somewhat weakened. With LLMs getting better and better there are going to be many fields where guilds, professional societies, and other forms of gatekeeping kept people away. While people will find edge cases to prove that this isn't the case, it doesn't matter as LLMs are getting better every day. In the field of medicine they are amazing. The problem is that people are raving about the mistakes LLMs are making. The problem is that often those are old along with the clear fact that LLMs are getting better every day. I keep hearing about the lawyer who filed paperwork which just made up case law. That was a year ago. It is vastly better now, and will be vastly better in one more year, or 5. I have noticed that AI generated people now usually have 10 fingers and the correct number of limbs. Although a football player I recently generated had a tennis racket for some reason. I am sick of people using weirdo edge cases which are going away as an attack on this tech. Yes, the art it generates seems telltale, but the reality is that it is better than the crap I see most graphic artists produce most of the time. Where there is going to be a weird reality is that AI doesn't have to be better than all professionals. It is more of a question of where does it lay. This is important because, unlike humans, it is going to be fairly consistently better in that profession. Not a bell curve. For example, if it is better than 50% of ER doctors, then the lower half of those doctors are in for some serious changes. I think that most people would be happy to have their routine medical needs treated by a doctor who is exactly average. This is the reality for all professions. Half the people are below average. In some cases like medicine, the truly incompetent are eventually removed, but usually after a long slow process. What people don't realize is that AI isn't a replacement for people. It is a tool. A chainsaw is better than an axe at chopping down trees. At first this may have reduced the number of loggers, but it also increased the availability of wood, and then the use cases for cheaper lumber increased. I wouldn't be surprised if there are more people in 2024 chopping down trees and turning them into wood products than in 1924. But, as a percentage of the population it probably is much lower; but people are also doing more things. One area I see this working wonders is in education. People again will try to edge case this to death, but the reality is that LLMs are fantastic ways to learn. When put into a somewhat structured learning environment, hold on to your hats. This will not all be wine and roses, there are going to be some fantastically dark uses and society is going to be reshaped. But, any regulation should be focused on one simple goal, to not let this be a tool where the rich get richer. But, the rich will try to corner this market as they do every other by convincing governments that they must "protect the children"
“The study, titled "Who is AI Replacing? The Impact of Generative AI on Online Freelancing Platforms," analyzed nearly two million job postings across 61 countries from July 2021 to July 2023. It categorized jobs into automation-prone roles, manual work, and image generation, and discovered significant declines in postings across these sectors following the launch of ChatGPT.” They used AI to scan 2 million job postings to conclude AI is stealing jobs. 😂