• Donkter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 hours ago

      This… Almost looks like the op of this post used AI to translate and change the art style of this comic.

      • i_love_FFT@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        34 minutes ago

        Replaced by AI: traductor

        Also modified the art style to make it less violent and subversive, so cross “artist” of that list as well.

        With the original, we clearly understand that it should all have been filled with humans, but there was a progression in the center line where AI (killed and) replaced professions that were always thought to be irreplaceable by AI.

  • Frosty_Pieces@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 hours ago

    AI hasn’t replaced Translators and the attempt to use them to replace artists and journalists isn’t going as well as you would assume. AI isn’t replacing any skilled position. Anyone who told you it will, is selling you something or dreadfully ignorant on the topic.

    • Skull giver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      38 minutes ago

      Having worked for a software company that needed translation services, I can confirm that translation software is indeed very necessary.

      People would notice when the word “date” is interpreted as “date on a calendar” in one file and “romantic event” in another, but AI sure doesn’t.

      Even Google’s apps have broken Dutch translations by reusing existing strings for different contexts that don’t mean the same elsewhere. “Search” gets translated to different words depending on if it’s used a noun or a verb, for fucks sake!

    • elucubra@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      I have done professional translation, as a side gig. The usual workflow involves a first run through machine translation (Deepl is my favorite), then opening the machine translation in a translation program (I use CafeTran), which is used to make the second pass, by the human translator. This program doesn’t translate (they can use one of the main translation engines) but provides a bunch of tools to make the translation refining process easier.

      Pure machine translation is a hack. AI can’t grasp nuances, contexts, etc… You will often see many words that may have several meanings, used incorrectly, for example.

      • Frosty_Pieces@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 hour ago

        I was a Sr Architect at a company that does this. No they do not use a level of machine translation first. In fact most of our contracts would have been violated if we did that at all. We implemented techniques to stop people from being able to.

        If you don’t understand how translating movie is different than translating in court or a medical setting you’re top uneducated on the topic to have a valid opinion.

    • maporita@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Correct. But it has made Translators more productive so we need fewer of them. But the productivity gains will create other jobs and so on. So it’s not as clear cut as people think. What will likely happen is that some jobs will vanish (anyone here remember elevator operators?) while some jobs will change and in other cases new professions will be created.

      • Frosty_Pieces@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        No it doesn’t. You guys are lying through your teeth. I designed systems for this. The software is completely forbidden. It sounds like you don’t understand the industry enough to have any opinion on the topic.

    • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      It’s true that it can’t replace a skilled profession. But I honestly believe you could replace most middle management with AI already. Of course the bar is incredibly low on that.

      • Frosty_Pieces@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        It can replace middle managers, but software and a spreadsheet could have done that 15 years ago. Middle management is there so the ruling class can redirect your anger to them. They’re scape goats.

  • The Menemen!@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    I still think that all jobs are, in general, safe for the foreseeable future. But we will be expected to use AI tools and just produce more and more, so that a few people will gain more and more resources and power.

    E.g. as engineers we will do less and less actual planning, but we will run AIs like it were a team of engineer slaves.

    And I think this will be similar for other branches. A music composer will run AIs to compose parts of a song, adjust it, readjust other parts, till the song is good. I mean, afaik this is already how much of it works.

    • elucubra@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I believe that a few jobs will be hard hit. Things like first level phone customer support or service are probably going to be decimated, keeping humans for 2nd or 3rd level.

      A similar thing happened with the irruption of the PC. In a few short years, the majority of professional typist jobs disappeared.

  • Manticore@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 hours ago

    Am I supposed to read this as simultaneous (those jobs are currently safe… for now, the others are not) or progressive (all these jobs are human/skilled and halfway they get replaced by robots)…?

    I suppose either way it’s commenting that you can’t take your position for granted. AI isn’t coming to replace you, but it is going to evolve your field, and workers that don’t adapt will be supplanted by those that do.

  • Angry_Autist (he/him)@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    12 hours ago

    The rich will always have money to pay better people to make beautiful things for them

    Just be useful to the rich and you’ll survive

    Just like they planned it

      • Suite404@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        12 hours ago

        I just watched a movie (Geostorm) where these obviously super wealthy people were in a skyscraper and the movies like “oh no, they might die if no one stops this!”

        Good? I’m more concerned about all the people below them getting swept away. These rich fucks should finally feel fear for fucking once.

  • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    13 hours ago

    How safe a profession is depends on how much more expensive replacing robots are than replacing people

  • HurlingDurling@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    14 hours ago

    When I see these kinds of posts I just look over at the vibe coders and just laugh harder than any joke about ai taking our jobs

    • ZeroOne@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Except Vibe-Coders are kicking back & sipping margaritas & your job is still gone

      • Frosty_Pieces@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Lol. Vibe coders aren’t taking anyone’s job. There have always been shitty engineers and now we just call them vibe coders.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        12 hours ago

        I was extremely skeptical so I looked into it and it absolutely does not work. There was also a guy on YouTube who basically tried to make a Minecraft clone with Vibe coding and it just fell apart almost instantly.

        All I was trying to do was get it to set up a basic scene in UE5 with some lighting effects and import a model of the building from the assets library. Nope, did not work. I didn’t even bother trying to implement game logic as it was so clearly a waste of time. The amount of time I spent trying to get it to do basic stuff, stuff that you would be able to do in UE5 after half an hour of training, I could have made significant progress on a gray box by then.

  • LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    17 hours ago

    I wanted robots to do my menial unpleasant chores for me so I’d have more time to do art, writing, and analytics. I didn’t want robots to do all the art, writing, and analytics so I had more time for chores & menial tasks 😭

  • imetators@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Drivers were on the edge for a long time. Lawyers are on the edge for the past 2-3 years. Cooks are probably the closest ones to be on the edge too.

        • elucubra@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Long haul freight truck yes. There are a few test convoys driving through Europe’s highways, with only a human driver in the first one. Trucks in smaller roads, or cities, are still quite a bit in the future.

  • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    20 hours ago

    People under Capitalism: Oh no, our jobs are being automated. 😱😭

    People under Socialism: Finally! Now that our jobs are being automated, I can chill and watch TV, maybe go on a vacation. 😎🏖🍺🎉🎊🎇🎆

    (Btw, USSR/Russia and PRC are not socialist, don’t get confused)

    • REDACTED@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      20 hours ago

      But you’re living in capitalism. Unless government forces billionaires to fund social programs, they will just keep getting richer, just like it’s happening right now (if we ignore the crashing markets, but you get the idea)

  • Snowclone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    18 hours ago

    Oh man is translation not possible with AI. You have no idea how little languages have in common. A lot of terms don’t mean a thing, but combine concepts you don’t have or associate to point at a thing.

    My dad said, about learning a new language, ‘‘cat means cat, not gato, don’t translate’’ and I think that holds up pretty well from my experience.

    • batu@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      7 hours ago

      You can’t be serious, buddy. I’m translating an entire episode with ai and it’s turning out better than the Netflix translation!

      • Frosty_Pieces@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        I worked for a huge software company who spent boatloads of money trying to to get AI to do translation, interpretation or localization and I can confirm with the absolute authority of someone who watched that dumpster fire first hand that AI will NOT be taking those tasks for a while.

        If you’re not knowledgeable about the topic you should comment about it.

        • batu@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 minutes ago

          Your company must be very unsuccessful in this business.

        • Prime_Minister_Keyes@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          If you’re not knowledgeable about the topic you should comment about it.

          Has this also been translated by an AI, or am I missing the point?

          • Frosty_Pieces@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 hour ago

            You’re missing the point. You’re so woefully uneducated on the topic you don’t understand how Google translate was around for ages and didn’t replace interpretation, translation or localization. Why do you think that is? Maybe you should do some research there.

    • HiddenLychee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      13 hours ago

      I mean given that “AI” are language models built on context and relations between words I’d argue that that’s one of the more applicable jobs compared to what’s listed in OP. With none of them is it capable of doing well, but I just wouldn’t argue that translation is outside that realm of what’s listed above

      • Nangijala@feddit.dk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        12 hours ago

        The problem is that the AI doesn’t understand cultural context. I dunno where you’re from so pardon me for assuming you’re likely an English speaker.

        A good translation isn’t just to translate what the text says but to communicate the same idea to the reader or viewer within their cultural context. A good example is Disney’s Aladdin where Robin Williams improvised A LOT during the recording sessions and most of his jokes are full of contemporary American cultural context. I’m Danish and most Danish kids didn’t understand these American jokes so our translators decided to switch out some jokes with other jokes that conveyed similar points but within a Danish cultural context.

        An AI cannot do that. It will translate what is written and it will be fucking nonsense to the receiver because they don’t understand the context or the references.

        AI is only good at translating as long as what is written can be translated 1:1. And even then I sometimes wonder. Because as a Dane I have noticed how terrible Word is at Danish when it comes to corrections. It follows English language context and will underline correct words in red and suggest alternative that aren’t real Danish. For example, Danish words are slammed together while in English they are separated = skolelærer - school teacher. Word could very well decide to red line skolelærer and suggest to you that you should separate the word and make it two = skole lærer. But in Danish that would nullify the meaning. Now it is no longer a school teacher but a school and a teacher.

        And I have seen on streaming services like Netflix and on steam how they lazily threw descriptions into a translator and it is just the most broken Danish I have ever read. It is so fucked because the newer generations of Danes who use these services are being influenced by them to learn incorrect Danish.

        I have very limited trust in AI to do a better job at it since it isn’t Danish people that have trained it and it doesn’t understand our culture, our history nor how we communicate with one another. Everything that comes out of digital text based platforms from the US is our language filtered and massacred through US context. It is very very bad in my opinion and incredibly lifeless and soulless.

        It would be the same the other way around btw. Me writing a piece of text with significant Danish cultural context and humor, slang and references would be translated into total nonsense for an English speaker, I’m sure.

    • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Oh man is translation not possible with AI.

      i mean, it’s pretty good at it? A lot of human translators even struggle with the same problem, the AI is just a lot faster, and significantly more versatile. That’s arguably one of it’s strongest areas of performance, is translation, because it’s so well suited to it.

      • Snowclone@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 hours ago

        You think it’s OK because it spits out grammatically correct language on your end, but if you spoke both languages you’d get how it fails. Look at translations of Korean comics if you’d like to see how badly mechanical translation is when it’s a connected story across multiple chapters, I was reading a comic where a character said he liked the elegant and sophisticated sound of calling a lightning strike skill ‘‘bolt’’ instead of whatever he was calling it ‘‘lighting strike’’ I think. It took me a while to realize what or whoever translated it didn’t know how to look at the context of the translation and find a English word that English speakers would find at least old fashioned if not archaic and of course longer or more poetic sounding. It’s like the whole thing when JRPGs can’t figure out if they should localize names by just spelling out the phonetic sounds in Roman letters or actually translating the meaning of the name, or a thing no one’s ever done and find a name in a European language family that has the same meaning.

        Just like the AI art, it’s not replacing good translation, it’s replacing hack job translations, it’s replacing mediocre and predictable art. I really don’t care if someone uses AI in the pre-production or some post production functions, just not the part you need a human for, the actual creativity, there’s an adage in 3D animation ‘‘it you let the computer do it, it’s gonna suck.’’ You can let the computer do inbetweens, but you better be giving it nothing near a key frame. It has to really be the very least important frames.

      • Gibibit@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        12 hours ago

        AI currently completely does not understand the context of translation when it comes to visual media. Whereas a human translator can use that for additional interpretation

      • itslola@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        14 hours ago

        It’s still doing a consistently poorer job than a skilled translator, because it has no concept of nuance or tone. I encounter people getting themselves worked up over information in AI-translated news articles, so I go back to the source material and discover it’s mistranslated, under-translated, or just completely omitted parts of sentences. It’s very Purple Monkey Dishwasher.

        The quality is better than it was a decade ago, sure, but that’s a pretty low bar. Back then it was gibberish, nowadays it’s natural-sounding phrases with incorrect translations.

        • Mikrochip@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 hours ago

          And yet, translators are losing their jobs left and right, from what I hear. Sure, quality has gone down, but most people don’t seem to care. Plus, in a lot of cases, instead of the AI doing all the work, translators proof-read AI generated texts and correct the worst mistakes. Fewer translators can translate more at a lower price this way.

          Does the quality still go down a bit that way? Probably. But again, who cares? Not the people spending money on translations, that’s for sure.

        • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          14 hours ago

          this is true, but for the average person, who just wants to translate something to make it make somewhat sense, it’s great.

          Though yeah, you can’t really trust it, there’s a lot of intricacies.

  • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    20 hours ago

    If we were not ruled by tech oligarchs, and the control & benefits of AI were not concentrated among a privileged few, AI replacing our jobs would be a good thing.

  • ThatGuy46475@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    23 hours ago

    Everyone thinks their own line of work is safe because everyone knows the nuances of their own job. But the thing that gets you is that the easier a job gets the fewer people are needed and the more replaceable they are. You might not be able to make a robot cashier, but with the scan and go mobile app you only need an employee to wave a scanner (to check that some random items in your cart are included in the barcode on your receipt) and the time per customer to do that is fast enough that you only need one person, and since anyone can wave a scanner you don’t have much leverage to negotiate a raise.

    • Gladaed@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      22 hours ago

      And that’s a good thing, if and only if you provide pathways to other jobs or phase workers out slowly i.e. by retirement.

        • TheDoozer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          20 hours ago

          I have had a number of conversations with relatively reasonable conservatives, where I’ve brought up the dangers of so many jobs moving toward automation with no additional job creation. And steering the conversation carefully, I got them to at least consider the idea of UBI funded by taxing any and all automation. I also got them (with the “everybody should have to work, people shouldn’t get life handed to them for free” mentality) to agree that the rise in automation should mean people working less hours each, so everyone still has jobs (basically, UBI and changing “full time” to 25 or 30 hours, where people get overtime past that… creating more jobs while peoples needs are still covered).

          It’s amazing, sometimes, how starting with some similar premises (people should have to work, which I mostly agree with) and shared threat (automation taking jobs) can lead to some more open minds for things that they would otherwise be adamantly against.

    • WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      21 hours ago

      This is the lump of labor fallacy. The error you are making is assuming that there is a fixed quantity of work that needs to be performed. When you multiply the productivity of every practitioner of a trade, they can lower their prices. This enables more people to afford those services. There’s a reason people don’t own just 2 or 3 sets of clothes anymore.

      • TheDoozer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        20 hours ago

        When you multiply the productivity of every practitioner of a trade, they can lower their prices.

        I’m sorry, but that’s some hilarious Ayn Rand thinking. Prices didn’t go down in grocery stores that added self-checkout, they just made more profit. Companies these days are perfectly comfortable keeping the price the same (or raising them) and just cutting their overhead.

        Don’t get me wrong, if there are things they could get more profit by selling more, then they likely would. But I think those items are few and far between. Everything else they just make more money with less workers.

        • WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          18 hours ago

          Are you sure self checkout is actually a labor-saving device? Does it actually save costs on net, once you factor in increased theft and shrinkage? Remember, just because companies adopt something, doesn’t mean it’s actually rational to do so. Executives are prone to fads and groupthink like anyone else. And moreover, this is a bit of an inappropriate example for two reasons. First, the demand for groceries is relatively fixed. Even if the price of groceries was cut in half, you probably wouldn’t suddenly double the calories you consume. Second, self checkout is a small marginal cost to the cost of goods in grocery and retail stores. Self checkout doesn’t improve the actual production process of the goods being sold in a store.

          But I’m sorry, yes, you can cherry pick a few examples. But the general rule is and always has been that increased automation leads to lower prices. This is the entire story of the Industrial Revolution. People used to own only two or three outfits, as that’s all they could afford. A “walk in closet” was an absurdity 200 years ago. The clothing industry industrialized, and the cost of clothing was driven to the floor, completely contradicting what your model predicts. The 19th century textile barons didn’t mechanize production and then simply pocket the savings.

          Hell, the only reason you can afford any kind of consumer electronics is because of automation. The computer, phone, or tablet you’re using now? It would cost 100x as much without automation. This is why niche electronics like specialized lab instruments cost so much money. If you’re only building a few of something for a tiny market, you can’t invest in large scale automation to bring the cost down.

          Look at how quickly and dramatically the price of LiDAR has declined. LiDAR was once the purview of specialized engineering and scientific instruments. But because of driver assistance technologies, the demand for LiDAR has exploded. This allowed LiDAR manufacturers to invest in more automated production chains. They didn’t automate and keep charging the same price, as you would assume.

          For an example of this in a white collar field, consider something like architecture. How many people actually hire an architect to custom design them a home? Very few. Most people buy mass produced tract homes. Tract homes benefit from a lot of automation and economies of scale, so they’re cheaper than one-off custom-built homes designed by architects. Yet if an architect could rely on specialized AI systems to vastly lower the number of hours required to design a set of home plans, they could charge less. Many more people would then be able to afford the services of an architect.

          Yes, you can cherry pick a few examples of industries that have little competition or fixed demand, where they automate without substantially lowering prices. But even those big box stores with their automated checkouts are examples of automation lowering prices. There’s a reason the giant chains can charge less for products than small mom-and-pop shops. A giant grocery chain is big enough to invest in a lot of automation and other economies of scale that a small co-op can’t afford.

          • Dimi Fisher@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 hours ago

            In some extent this is true and correct, but when it comes to automate individual thought and creation then ethical problems arise which should be looked at and asserted carefully and with dignity, because there should be boundaries on how much automation can extent in human life, in the end humanity does not compete with anybody except itself, we are humans trying to live and most of all communicate with each other, Jobs are also a way to communicate and socialise but as we already saw they try to take that away in any way they can.