Many technologies promise to be disruptive, but few actually are. The Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) is one of them and threatens to impact all areas of life. Beyond the theories about the singularity – that moment when AI would surpass humans in intelligence that is glimpsed in Terminator – the implementation shows that The main impact is on the work, as some specialists anticipated.
The possibility of using machines to replace physical labor is an old dream of capital and socialism since the beginning of the industrial revolution. The promise was that the hardest, most boring jobs would be left to machines and humans would pursue more satisfying activities. Beyond the discussions about the fulfillment of these promises, jobs in services grew.
In the last couple of decades, The main economic actors of the 20th century understood that digital technology can ruin their business models. This time the potential victim is not a particular niche such as the media or banks but practically the entire spectrum of existing services. That is why they decided to react through legal means in a tsunami of lawsuits.
How not to lose your mind
Concern about the effects of Generative AI was already in the air before OpenAI’s ChatGPT stunned the world in late 2022. In November of that year, lawsuits began against GitHub, a giant computing repository that Microsoft bought in 2018. The company uses code generated by millions of programmers around the world to train Copilot, its AI. The basis of this claim is that uses human intelligence to train AI and replace programmers.
A few months later the Writers’ and actors’ unions demanded that production companies not use AIs trained with their work to replace them. In December 2023 the American newspaper New York Times sued OpenAI and Microsoft for using their items to train their AIs. The legal challenge is to demonstrate that they have effectively been trained with their content and, on the other hand, that they are protected by copyright, something that is not entirely clear.
The actress Sarah Silverman sued Meta and OpenAI for using his texts. Others writers followed in his footsteps, including Jonathan Franzen and John Grisham. The same thing is happening by illustrators and image banks like Getty. The list could go on for several more pages.
Meanwhile, AI tools are multiplying at full speed. In January, the GPT Store, a bot repository, was launched of AI developed by users and companies that offer, for example, drawings in the style of the New Yorker or writing like Margareth Atwood or Stephen King. OpenAI explicitly prohibits the use of “third-party content without the necessary permissions” and promises to take down bots as soon as they are reported. Those who fear that their works have been used must remain constantly vigilant to demonstrate that bots use fragments of their works.
Also the record labels They seek to prevent their artists’ music from feeding AI. Hundreds of musicians, from Billie Eilish to Stevie Wonder, signed an open letter demanding protection from the advance of different AIs that create music. Others, like the artist Grimes, accepted that they use her voice in exchange for half of the profits they generate with it in a kind of new rentism. Even more problematic is the case of AI-generated music that is “listened to” by bots to increase payments, an automated loop that does not even require humans enjoying the music not to mention wasting useless energy.
The future is arriving
Although investors raise the flag of innovation and ask that the goose that lays the golden eggs not be killed, it is almost certain that in the coming years demands will multiply if the current ones prosper. Less luck will be faced by global actors with limited resources and knowledge to access courts in the US, the country where most commercial AI is developed.
AI is not intelligence nor is it artificial, but human intelligence processed to find statistically significant patterns that allow the generation of a credible mimicry of creativity. In fact, problems are arising with AI trained with the product of other AIs, which generates serious problems of digital inbreeding and produces delirious or directly useless results.
The replacement of workers by machines is not new: it is already Frederick Taylor At the end of the 19th century, he sought to break down complex jobs into simple ones to replace experienced workers with cheaper ones or machines. Now, everything indicates, the same is happening to intellectual work, something that seemed impossible a few years ago. It’s true: AI could be a tool that increases productivity and saves time for everyone. However, experience indicates that this surplus is not usually distributed among the majority to improve their quality of life.
