Fury Erupts at Suggestion of Using ChatGPT to Replace Striking Writers
A recent tweet by a Twitter user, who goes by the name powerbottomdad1, sparked controversy when he stated that writing work no longer mattered because ChatGPT could replace humans. He suggested that a machine could endlessly pump out textual content, so there is no need to rely on humans. This statement caused outrage among creative professionals and those who value human labor.
The tweet garnered negative responses from people who believe in the importance of creative processes and human labor in producing quality content. It is not only about losing jobs to automation, but it is also about losing the personal touch and creativity that humans bring to the table.
Although the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in creative work is becoming more prevalent, humans are not robots, and the creative process is not just about generating as much content as possible. There are still numerous concerns with AI-generated content, including plagiarism and the lack of a unique voice. AI may be able to create an adequate script, but it cannot replace the human touch and the personal experience that a writer brings to the creative process.
The issue of using ChatGPT to replace writers highlights the importance of protecting human jobs from AI demands. The studios' decision to reject the strikers' demand regarding protection from AI demands could lead to more companies down this road.
In conclusion, there is value in creative work and the human touch that writers bring to the table. The use of AI in creative work may offer a solution to some problems, but it also brings new concerns and issues that need to be addressed. The creative process should not just be about generating as much content as possible; it should be about producing quality work that reflects the uniqueness of human experiences.
