If you’re worried about how AI will affect your job, the world of copywriters may offer a glimpse of the future.

Writer Benjamin Miller – not his real name – was thriving in early 2023. He led a team of more than 60 writers and editors, publishing blog posts and articles to promote a tech company that packages and resells data on everything from real estate to used cars. “It was really engaging work,” Miller says, a chance to flex his creativity and collaborate with experts on a variety of subjects. But one day, Miller’s manager told him about a new project. “They wanted to use AI to cut down on costs,” he says. (Miller signed a non-disclosure agreement, and asked the BBC to withhold his and the company’s name.)

A month later, the business introduced an automated system. Miller’s manager would plug a headline for an article into an online form, an AI model would generate an outline based on that title, and Miller would get an alert on his computer. Instead of coming up with their own ideas, his writers would create articles around those outlines, and Miller would do a final edit before the stories were published. Miller only had a few months to adapt before he got news of a second layer of automation. Going forward, ChatGPT would write the articles in their entirety, and most of his team was fired. The few people remaining were left with an even less creative task: editing ChatGPT’s subpar text to make it sound more human.

By 2024, the company laid off the rest of Miller’s team, and he was alone. “All of a sudden I was just doing everyone’s job,” Miller says. Every day, he’d open the AI-written documents to fix the robot’s formulaic mistakes, churning out the work that used to employ dozens of people.

  • Alphane Moon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    73
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Pretty dystopian article.

    But this will continue, until oligarchs like Altman, Cook, Nadella etc. start getting put into difficult situations; ones that create very strong incentives for them to show humanity (or at least emulate it).

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      When your profession is to be a nice guy, and your protocols of communicating with others are not strictly regulated, replacement is not an easily solvable task.

      Bu-ut I think that’ll eventually happen too. Or more precisely, things allowing a company to reduce workforce that much allow self-employed people to take a certain niche.

      Unless for copyright and CP protection self-employment gets banned.

  • chakan2@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    But these people who are getting paid to humanise AI are fantastic opportunists. Sure, it’s not a great job, but they have effectively recognised a new seat at a moment when we’re redefining the idea of productivity.

    That’s fucking soul crushing.

    We just fired you to hire this machine, however, if you’d like to stick around and edit for it, we will pay you 1/4 to 1/2 your current rate.

    Jesus…fuck that guy.

  • JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    The human serfs will have to proofread increasingly voluminous, numerous and complex output from ai systems. The product has become the master. Until the systems develop a sense of ‘truth’ beyond numerical statistics, generative ai is pretty much a toy.

    • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Until the systems develop a sense of ‘truth’ beyond numerical statistics, generative ai is pretty much a toy.

      I’ll start by saying I am pro-worker, pro-99%, pro-human.

      Now, I must refute your assertion for specific domains (and specific working styles), e.g. translation (or a preference for editing over drafting/coding from a blank page). If money used to hit your bank account every two weeks because you translated or provided customer service for a company, and now that money doesn’t come in anymore, it wouldn’t feel too playful or like a toy is involved.

      This is today, not “until” any future milestone.

      Re-sharing some screenshots I took a month or so back, below.


      November 2022: ChatGPT is released

      April 2024 survey: 40% of translators have lost income to generative AI - The Guardian

      Also of note from the podcast Hard Fork:

      There’s a client you would fire… if copywriting jobs weren’t harder to come by these days as well.

      Customer service impact, last October:

      And this past February - potential 700 employee impact at a single company:

      If you’re technical, the tech isn’t as interesting [yet]:

      Overall, costs down, capabilities up (neat demos):

      Hope everyone reading this keeps up their skillsets and fights for Universal Basic Income for the rest of humanity :)

    • fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      I think retrieval augmentation and fine tunning are the biggest tools to the results more refined (or better reference a document as a source of truth). The other ironically is just regular deterministic programming.

    • FaceDeer@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      3 months ago

      If it’s just a “toy” then how is it able to have all this economic impact?

      • demonsword@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        30
        ·
        3 months ago

        it’s an economic bubble, it will eventually burst but several grifters will walk out with tons of money while the rest of us will have to endure the impact

        • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          There were bubbles about things which were promising profits in the future but at the moment nobody knew how exactly. Like the dotcom bubble.

          This one does bring profits now in its core too, but that’s a limited resource. It will be less and less useful the more poisoned with generated output the textual universe is. It’s a fundamental truth, thus I’m certain of it.

          Due to that happening slowly, I’m not sure there’ll be a bubble bursting. Rather it’ll slowly become irrelevant.

          • Dayroom7485@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            While I agree with most points you make, I cannot see a machine that is, at a bare minimum, able to translate between arbitrary languages become irrelevant anytime in the foreseeable future.

            • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              OK, I agree, translation is useful and is fundamentally something it makes sense for.

              Disagree about “arbitrary”, you need a huge enough dataset for every language, and it’s not going to be that much better than 90’s machine translators though.

              It’s closer, but in practice still requires a human to check the whole text. Which raises the question, why use it at all instead of a machine translator with more modest requirements.

              And also this may poison smaller languages with translation artifacts becoming norm. Calque is one thing, here one can expect stuff of the “medieval monks mixing up Armorica and Armenia” kind (I fucking hate those of Armenians still perpetuating that single known mistake), only better masqueraded.

      • JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Speculation. 100% speculation. A tool is precise. A toy is not. Guided ai, e.g. for circuit optimizing or fleet optimization is brilliant. Gai is not the same.

  • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    Welcome to the new Industrial Revolution, where one person can do the work of many. Sure, mass produced goodscontent aren’t as good as handmade artisanal products writing, but there’s a huge market for it.

      • FaceDeer@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        A huge market means there’s lots of demand for the products. That doesn’t have to translate to lots of jobs for the people producing that product.

      • kandoh@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Absolutely, I maintained a bunch of small business websites in the 2010s and they all had blogs attached to them, they paid people to write generic articles about nutrition or whatever just so they’d get the SEO boost out of it from Google.

        No one was reading these articles. No one cares about these articles. But posting them was very important for Google to rank you higher then your competitors.

          • fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            Some people dig the holes some people fill them. Everyone greatful for the job.

            If search engine fix the bullshit signifers the fake would dry up.

      • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        It’s more like publishers etc. are believing they can just produce more and more, while not realizing the market of such things are already oversaturated.

  • nifty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    3 months ago

    There’s nothing inherently wrong with doing quality assurance work, but I think the workers are being fooled into thinking it’s less valuable work than their old job. In fact, based on QA in other industries, I’d say these workers should be getting paid more. This is why unions are important, otherwise people just get fooled or bullied into accepting bad deals