I"ll leave it with
these thoughts from a former Ars staffer, whose
essay that spawned the name of his web site has shaped my thinking on mimicry vs artistry. Which, should be mentioned, I originally encountered here on Ars.
It's a good set of arguments. I can find no fault in it.
Yet gripping hand remains that the technology is here. It will not be regulated or put back into a bottle easily, or at all.
Thus we need to change the way our society works in order to make sure that
humans are still incentivized to create art.
And that's something we need to do quickly, because what I keep saying is that
artists being out of a job due to LLM's isn't the end result or goal of those currently investing enormous amounts of resources into the development of functional LLM's.
Picture Amazon with but a single employee in every warehouse dealing with the ever rarer algorithm conflicts of the automated robotics. Skyscrapers on Wall Street where only a single employee exists on every floor. The call center 'manned' by only a single person dealing with complaints escalated beyond the capacity of machines to handle.
The
core premise of LLM's is that they promise to replace humanity in as may job types as is possible in general. The holy grail sought for so long by every corporation in the world. The abolition of the need for employees.
It won't just be the artists out of a job. Once the first LLM proves capable of completely replacing customer service, ten years later not a single job in CS will exist. Same as with the vast majority of white and blue collar work alike.
What then? Our near future may be one where the majority of the population lives off a sort of 'citizen's salary' and the upper crust alone holds down some sort of job. In the best of all possible worlds this should be the first step towards the post-scarcity society of Star Trek where every human focuses on self-improvement.
I'm sure that
we non-fictional people will somehow manage to fuck ourselves into an even grimmer dystopia instead.