Regulators are not far behind on AI

lol you took the middle sentence out of context. so I can understand why you wouldn't be convinced

I have been involved in multiple industries that have experienced this over the last 5 decades.

Technology never puts experts out of business, it makes them more in demand. The ones who insist on "manually" doing things are the only ones left behind.

Hand Painted Commercial Sign makers are still around...barely. The ones that learned tech, are thriving. The ones who never did and still can't make a sign by hand, but know the tech, are thriving.

It is a tool, it doesn't think, or evolve. It does not replace anything except low-level work. There was a time when people waxed floors on their hands and knees, now people use a
robot mop.

Deep fakes have been around since photography has been around. It just moved to animation, CGI, and now "Ai" driven versions of them.

The most powerful fake news is a blog. Nothing fancy is needed.


But all of that has nothing to do with the post.


My post (that you are not convinced of) addressed the original post...regulation (or lack thereof) and particularly that of the FTC.

IN THAT CONTEXT, in regards to the FTC, they have no concern about Ai or it's use...just how it is advertised.

@Kay King,

Hmmm ... I think it's the job of government, educational institutions and social organizations, with the support of the private sector and the general public as a whole, to provide tech training, orientation and livelihood modernization workshops for workers who might be immediately displaced with increased adoption of AI tech across various industries ...

For example, it's a good idea to educate more content authors on how to fine-tune and use open source or premium generative models for their particular use case, or even provide business training for building teams and working with engineers who can do this for them ...

Graphics artists can for instance fine-tune generative image models like Stable Diffusion (now open source as of version 2.0). This way, they can transfer their unique styles (or combine other styles that appeal to them and their clients) unto the model, allowing them to "own" the fine-tuned model. They'd be able to create content in much faster and less costly ways, enabling them to handle more clients across wider niche markets ...

Same thing with content writers, editors, proofreaders and generative NLP AI like OpenAI's GPT models ...

As for voice artists and neural text-to-speech synthesizer models and generative music AI ...

More so if they're trained in writing code. They can conceptualize unique runtime pipelines for their content production needs, potentially increasing the novelty value of their work product ...

But again, education, training and relevant resources, in these tech fields as well as in livelihood and job modernization, are crucial components ...

Additional Notes

Once you model your unique style, you can charge other people who want to use your style in their content and models ...

Sort of like patenting and licensing your style, i.e. If anybody wants to fuse Metallica's style into their music scores, sound effects and background music content, or add this style into their own generative models, then Metallica can charge them for using not just their generative models, but also for using their content as training data ...

But this paints another crucial component -- The effective implementation of government laws and industry regulations for handling private training datasets and the licenses that come with the data as published by its authors.

@Kay King,



Well, what I'm seeing in my inbox, spam and promotion folders, along with a lot of posts here and in other places, is like watching engineers play basketball ...

Certainly not something you'd want to watch. LOL!

Just like watching many marketers here and elsewhere talk about what they think and believe AI, Machine Learning, Deep Learning and applied Computer Vision, Natural Language Processing, Natural Language Understanding and probabilistic statistics is, without first having sufficient real world academic knowledge and hands-on engineering experience -- Nothing different from a train wreck.

Las' time I tried that baby, I nearly fell offa a pony.

Thing is, anywan tried to snake their way around helpful chatbots, automated ansas, or 1-7 optschwaahns gonna whooshy you through to the WRONG DEPARTMENT direck from yuffone knows this stuff don't interface with hoomans too great.

So prolly trustin' your marketin' strategy an' key copy to AI prolly akin to danglin' your fleshiest protrusions ovah a pit in whomo's depths the gobblin' teeth of unknown (& real hungry) monstahs proliferate.

Persnly, I am naht prepared to suffer said metamorphosis -- an' it ain't jus' bcs I gaht neat tits.

We cain't see jus' yet how the dreams of AI gonna match up to the resolootion.

(An' I speakin' here 'bout significant AI contribyootions masqueradin' as hooman copy, litrichure or *ffs* policy.)

Meantime, I believe Pantone have already decided on their color for 2024.

It is an uncannily grim hue they call ... Franz Kafka.