With the conclusion of the WGA strike and the potential conclusion of the SAG-AFTRA strike, there is a topic that needs to be discussed.
This topic, as stated in the title, is AI, or the supposed, artificial intelligence that has captured certain minds in this last year.
What started out with individuals experimenting with the technology, had quickly turned into these same individuals asking online Generative AI programs to create “art”, write scripts, and write books, and eventually led to darker uses for AI, which will be covered in this article.
Yet, this same AI, specifically generative programs, is something the executives of the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP) had wanted to use in place of scriptwriters and on-set actors. Even if WGA and SAG-AFTRA negotiate for the extreme limitation of AI in their careers, there are groups of people who still exploit this tool for their own purposes. And that is too dangerous to simply let be. So here’s how dangerous AI is and why it’s ruining the arts.
Firstly, it was a mistake to refer to the current usage of AI as if it were equal to our concept of artificial intelligence. If anything current Generative AI technology, as stated by the Guardian, is not intelligent nor artificial. This technology is simply an encyclopedic search engine that compiles information for what the user asks for. It does not create but takes what is already available online, and regurgitates it in a way to mimic human behavior whether or not it actually does that.
Secondly, the current discussion of AI will not include machine algorithm tools that artists use to make their lives easier. An example of this is Spiderverse animators using an AI tool to meld their 2D and 3D work to create a comic-esque look the movies are known for. This is just an example of the ethical usage of AI as it’s meant to make the artist’s life easier to create the art, not the Generative AI that will be discussed from henceforth.
One of the dangers of the current Generative AI is that it plagiarizes other people's art in a term now known as AI-generated “art”.
However, “art” is far from what is regurgitated from these artificial programs. In a New Yorker piece, visual artists have noticed more and more similarities between their work and the so-called AI art that is produced and have attempted lawsuits as the AI does not credit the artist nor compensate them for the art they originally created. Because of how widespread this has become, visual artists are even going as far as to Glaze their work, as in, implanting the software named Glaze on their work to keep AI from recognizing patterns in the artist's work. This will prevent the artist's work from being used without their consent, putting their virtual signature on their work.
It’s difficult to assess why anyone would willingly want to plagiarize art. Maybe it’s due to the fact the people trying to make money from the art are doing so by stealing and are fine with it. Maybe it’s the deep-seated jealousy and envy from these individuals for not being artists themselves and not willing to work or create this habit. Maybe it’s misplaced faith in Generative AI for being a potential technological advancement for future generations. Either way, a lack of empathy and ethics 101 classes is evident when one has conversations or approximate closeness to individuals like these.
Whether they understand it or not, artists and their work are being harmed by the usage of this type of AI and if it continues will do harm to the art and the art world.
Another danger of AI is the studio's usage of creating scripts via generative programs and implanting actors on the screen without their consent.
If studios were allowed to write scripts, there’s no telling how they could ruin or poorly mimic human dialogue. One of the main concerns is that Generative AI would not be able to write for specific demographics or reference specific jokes that the audience could relate to.
For example, take the mockumentary series Abbott Elementary. It’s highly doubtful Generative AI could write a rap for the well-loved character Tariq from the show. It’s highly doubtful AI could properly create dialogue for the kids on the show. And not to mention, generative AI could have never come up with a show like Abbott Elementary in the first place, as creator, Quinta Brunson states, the show was inspired by both her mother and Quinta’s 6th-grade teacher. It’s extremely difficult to understand whether generative AI would know in reality how an underfunded Philadelphia school district actually operates or functions without relying on stereotypes from people who are not aware of what this looks like.
Thankfully, AI is being limited for the writers, however, the AI fear is very real for SAF-AFTRA. Actors need to appear in works in order to qualify for healthcare, and some in recent years have been forced to allow studios to scan their bodies. The idea of a studio having a scan of you, and using that image in any movies and TV shows, can be terrifying, especially if you have no say in the matter.
This can lead to a deeper ethical dilemma, which studios seem to have no problem violating. Using scans will be cheaper for studios, but will allow studios to do whatever they want with someone's scans which can be an infringement of an actor's right-to-self.
There’s no telling how the studio would use the image as well, the studios could manipulate the image and make individuals look completely different than how they did, which could also eliminate jobs for other professions in Hollywood, ruining livelihoods, and computerizing an industry that is meant to be human.
Not to mention, the actors themselves would not be compensated for that usage after a one-time payment, so studios can use and reuse peoples’ images without repercussions.
It’s difficult to know if Studios would ever know the boundary between economic savings and humanizing work if they were allowed the ability to scan individuals and use them how they like. Hopefully, soon, SAG-AFTRA will get their deal the same as WGA got theirs.
The music industry has also been negatively impacted due to generative AI, which now takes us to the concerns of deepfakes.
Deepfakes are digitally altered individuals in images or videos which does include voice as they pertain to one’s self.
The concern is that deepfakes are usually and most often used with malicious intent. Because deep fakes can steal someone's likeness and voice, this can include spreading misinformation, harassing, intimidating, demanding, and undermining others. This can include falsifying political candidates' words, scamming people you are close to with your voice, and even leading to p*rnography.
Deepfake p*rnography is one of the biggest malicious uses of Generative AI, most of which targets women. This can result in “p*rnographic deepfakes [which] threaten, intimidate, and inflict psychological harm. It reduces women to sexual objects causing emotional distress, and in some cases, lead to financial loss and collateral consequences like job loss.”
The overuse of generative AI programs has resulted in the malicious usage of generative AI. The more you use these generative AI programs, the more information the program gathers about these individuals and can further fuel these deepfakes. The more generative AI which is created by using your artists to sing someone else’s song, could lead to these artists having inappropriate images and videos created of them without their consent.
In what way is it okay to take parts of a person and contort their image and likeness without their consent? Now, many people have to second-guess whether to post their images on social media or videos of themselves, because of this fear of deepfakes. There is no way any of this should be legal, but sadly, generative AI has moved too fast for policy and laws to learn how to curb the usage so people are not harmed.
The main issue with generative AI is that it takes what was never given. Many artists, both musical and visual, never consented to their work or their bodies being used in this capacity. Many individuals who post online don’t do it so people can make deepfakes.
This explains the numerous amounts of lawsuits being filed against AI because of the stealing, plagiarizing, and deep-faking that have violated people. The more you use it, the more dangerous it becomes and the more ways it can further harm folks.
It's no wonder the WGA and SAG-AFTRA went on strike, the ways in which Generative AI manipulates and writes need to be stopped. In many ways, the art world is worse off with Generative AI. The unoriginal and unabashed behavior of those profiting and using AI to “create” has cornered actual artists. The Generative AI used in the music industry is the same that has led to inappropriate usage of others' images and is used to manipulate and lie.
One of the most beautiful things about the arts is that humans for thousands of years have defied the laws of physics and created nothing from something, and that was the arts.
The one thing that breaks the First Laws of Thermodynamics is our creativity which fuels our art, how amazing is that?
The arts are beautiful because they come from people. And they are beautiful because people connect with said art. Whether that art is a painting, a show, a book, a movie… etc. what makes these pieces art is that people are the ones making them, creating them, and connecting with them. That’s what makes art, art. That will never be something Generative AI can do.
The most wonderful thing about art is that anyone can participate in it, you do not need to be a professional in the field in order to create something. Your creativity is a gift. It’s a wonderful thing to have and it’s certainly a shame the fake AI system has taken advantage of the gift the arts give us every day for their own profit and misfortune.
