Yes, I agree. I believe that technology is like pollution, irrespective of its net utility on society: once it's been invented, it's practically impossible to go back to the state in history where it wasn't invented. Pretty soon it may begin to be the case that the invention of technologies that appear interesting on the surface have unexpected societal effects when they become mainstream, and it will be too late once the data and knowledge has spread to millions of individual hard drives.
In the case of DALL-E and GPT-3, I believe they will undermine human creativity and usher in a new era where fewer people care about slowly crafted skills like painting that require years or decades of practice and patience to master if the barrier to just have the art in front of you in seconds becomes so low.
It might get to the point that people will divide themselves on ideological grounds that AI art is "impure" and attack each other if they cannot prove its origin. I'm not saying that I'm one of those people that would join the pushback, given that a coming explosion in AI art is all but inevitable, but I'm describing what I think the new technology is going to cause the masses to believe - the population that aren't enthusiastic tech evangelists. When the expectations of millions of people are set by DALL-E and the like, I don't think the prospects will be universally positive.
Look at the number of people on HN asking if certain comments were written by GPT-3; they seem to appear weekly. I don't think implying that you didn't actually write the comment you posted will be taken very well by some people outside of an insular circle like HN once the general public becomes fully aware of AI, and could very well grow into a well-known insult if there ever comes to be a rift in opinions around AI art.
In the case of DALL-E and GPT-3, I believe they will undermine human creativity and usher in a new era where fewer people care about slowly crafted skills like painting that require years or decades of practice and patience to master if the barrier to just have the art in front of you in seconds becomes so low.
It might get to the point that people will divide themselves on ideological grounds that AI art is "impure" and attack each other if they cannot prove its origin. I'm not saying that I'm one of those people that would join the pushback, given that a coming explosion in AI art is all but inevitable, but I'm describing what I think the new technology is going to cause the masses to believe - the population that aren't enthusiastic tech evangelists. When the expectations of millions of people are set by DALL-E and the like, I don't think the prospects will be universally positive.
Look at the number of people on HN asking if certain comments were written by GPT-3; they seem to appear weekly. I don't think implying that you didn't actually write the comment you posted will be taken very well by some people outside of an insular circle like HN once the general public becomes fully aware of AI, and could very well grow into a well-known insult if there ever comes to be a rift in opinions around AI art.