How does labour strike against AI is supposed to protect them?

Vanth , 19 hours ago

AI isn’t mature enough to replace all creatives. If they push back now while they still have leverage, they can block AI from getting to the point where it can fully replace them.

Once it’s an industry and cultural norm, there’s no going back. They try now or it’s over forever.

blackstampede , 17 hours ago

Assuming that creatives can be replaced by AI (meaning there isn’t some soft cap on how good it can get for technical reasons) then creatives will be replaced with AI. The only difference striking makes is whether it happens in 5-10 years or 10-20.

Vanth , 17 hours ago

Lose your job/salary in 5 years, or maybe lose it in 10+. Easy call for me.

Not striking leaves no question.

xmunk , 19 hours ago

As a company won’t that mean that I should invest more in AI to not suffer through strikes?

As a company owner you’re certainly welcome to try - some have and it’s resulted in some pretty massive lawsuits because it turns out that AI is neat but unreliable.

This is an excellent time to get union agreements in place to prevent investments to refine AI for certain fields.

FriedRice , 18 hours ago

I know AI isnt that reliable, but AI is for the creative people, what the machines were for the working class in thebeginning of the industrial revolution. It will not defeat them, but replace some. So fighting for the right to have a job is a good thing, and striking is an opportunity to show that they don’t want to be replaced before its to late.

Mr_Fish , 11 hours ago

I’m sure they will, until they realize why it’s a good idea to keep the humans.

Ziggurat , 9 hours ago

It push the lawmakers to better regulate.