Are Large Language Models Really AI?

The reason why people want to pay peanuts to begin with is that they are cheap and they wanted to get it for free using AI but they can't and humans are seen as disposable.

We aren't talking fine art here we are talking cheap add pics or company logos.

Nope. What we are seeing is expectations exceeding software capability. Or, it ain't GIGO its the crap in between the I and the O.

Paged!!!



Seeing as they are now training AI on AI generated input that diagram needs one more arrow tip.

What do you mean? I don't see how setting an art budget in commercial space is in anyway relevant to their point of view on humans.

There are still people who paid $5000 for a piece of art from big name artists in the industry for marketing purposes, because the marketing value from them generates more money than what they paid. Are you trying to say people are paying that much money because they see human as not-disposable or something?

And then there are people who paid $10 for a drawing on DeviantArt or Fiverr WAY before AI art exists, or they use stock images on Shutterstock. Are you saying all of them see human as disposable?

Just FYI, those people who paid $10-$20 for a drawing on DeviantArt before AI images are often just poor students or individuals who wants a hentai picture for "quick visual entertainment" or a cool forum avatars. They are paying that little because those images just aren't generating more values for them. And now AI is replacing human in this price tier because it was already not high price tier market with high return before.

I failed too see HOW price tiers existed is anyway relevant to how people see humans. It feels like an very forced assumption to me.

They belongs to different markets, fine art is in high tier market and logos and clip arts are mid to low tier market depending on how big your clients are.

but they still follows business 101 when the price is set: Supply and demand, investment v.s return etc.

When you try to frame basic market rules of supply and demand and market tier as people's perspective on humans, it felt forced if not biased.

Edit: Also AI actually seperates fine art and commercial art into 2 categories, and even in the space of commercial art, the mid to high tier market still aren't replaced by AI as of now. What AI really replaced is those Fiverr/DeviantArt/Shutterstock market which was already a low tier art market WAY before AI can do images.

Ever seen that movie where they hooked up a bunch of girls/guys in a line with.. you know the one.

It's like that.

ITT:

Well yeah, apparently your perceived reality on this matter is different from mine. Hence we are saying different things.

You are a human centric thinker, I am a system centric one. I absolutely can't understand your version of reality where an simple act of setting a price low due to low ROI for the said image is the same as seeing humans as disposable (lol@ the term "disposable" too, wtf man...). Because the price is related to the value of the image itself, not who produces it.

But hey, maybe that means humans are seen as "disposable" in your reality. Not mine though.

I tried to explain how the system works but apparently you can't understand this kind of framework at all. Gl thinking some small grocery store in the street corners that struggle to survive are using AI because human are "disposable" and feel endlessly depressed in the system because of this perceived reality.

#IGiveUp

Also, here is another lens for you to think about. Maybe, just maybe, that low budget users are using AI and have humans to clean up AI stuff is because communicating with human freelance artists is time consuming and difficult, since human often can't understand client needs effectively.

So the clients would rather use AI themselves to experiment different image styles until they have an image 90% done then have the human finish the last 10% once the direction is set.

In this case, it isn't human being disposable, it's AI being a useful creative tool for people who don't have the skill to draw nor communicate effectively with artists. And clients are using AI for the first part of the creation is because they feel now they have more control on the creative direction this way.

And this lens comes from someone who has tons of real life experience on client v.s artist communication in commercial space, and have a good idea on how much skill and experience is required to get communication part right. So maybe it's worth considering before jumping into human disposable kind of negative conclusions.

There is a concept you are leaving out of your equation. Its currently called late stage capitalism.

Then again I suppose replaceable is somewhat more applicable than disposable but disposable isn't incorrect.

Anything to avoid paying the original artists for their art.

It isn't the human that is replaceable in capitalism though, it's skill/service. And the reason why it's replaced isn't because they are human nor they are too expensive, but because there are little market value for the service that they are offering.

Fiverr artists has been undercutting hardcore with their $30 per piece offers way before AI. So they already offer very little by undercut their own value of their services. Their works are being devalued because they devalued their own services by undercutting hardcore on Fiverr to begin with

(And it isn't their fault, there is always market demand for cheap $30 logos like how there are market demand for cheap $10 shoes.)

They aren't even being "replaced" by AI in the article, just that their role in the business has changed from producing low cost logos from scratch to cleaning up AI's low cost logos as clients make 90% of the initial decision in the design process. Because they didn't offer anything except making an image, that's why their roles changed as business models changed.

Any visual designers who value their work will work on the brand/marketing consulting kind of service and sell their company logos to the big companies for $5000, before and after AI era. Because what they offered in this case isn't just a logo that AI can do, but something worth way more than that: like brand reputation, marketing etc. Those are the kind of services that generates more money for the clients therefore clients pay more.

So I wouldn't say humans are replaceable in capitalism either. It's product/services being replaceable. If humans can offer services that AI can't, they can still charge higher and no one can replace them.


"Late stage capitalism" is an ideology driven term, not a term to describe functions of this system.

I don't discuss ideology, I only discuss systems. How the system works, and why the system works this way, and how the system can improve if it needs improvement.

I don't mind discussing specific flaws within the system, but I don't think one random internet article that documents one perspective on one very specific market(Fiverr) out of all the commercial art space provides comprehensive understanding of the whole picture.

You filthy capitalist

Even if someone's job is really taken by Indians, it's just personal loss but not national economic loss anyways.

I run some quick simple analyze on the pros v.s cons of UK hiring indians and how they affect the economy, the pros slightly outweigh the cons.

For industries heavily suffer from labor shortage, like healthcare and hospitality, pros heavily outweigh the cons. It stabilizes wage and helps easing the pressure of inflation.

The only industry that may be affected more is the IT, some argued outsourcing to India made junior roles disappear. But even then it's not impossible to manage by putting talented young people on more of a higher level spot earlier.

And that isn't outsourcing problem. Those outsourced lower level task will eventually be replaced by AI anyways. So restructuring junior positions is something people will face even without outsource.

Foreigner stealing job is only a legit complaint if unemployment rate is something high like 8%+ or something. if it's lower that 5%(UK is like 4%) then the complaint isn't valid. Because lower than 5% unemployment rate indicates that majority of the competent people can find a job.

Honestly if your economy has 4% unemployment rate and you lose competition against cheap foreigners then it's probably your problem. It shouldn't be government's responsibility to give less competent people jobs just because they are citizens. Otherwise the whole nation will go down with them. And IMO wanting free jobs without effort, THAT is entitlement.

I work with a lot of H-1B folks and have for a few years now, mostly from India.

I love working with them because they work ethic is never an issue. I rarely have to follow up on things, they are usually ahead of tasks before I ask, and they never complain about doing work they don't want to do. There are almost never interpersonal issues and they just get their work done. When they mess something up, they learn from it and don't repeat the mistake.

Getting to know them and their families, I began to realize how big of a deal it is for them to be here. They told me their families brag to their friends in India about their kids working in the US. It's very competitive to come over here and it shows. It really put my life into perspective a bit about how fortunate I am to be from the US, it's easy to get drowned out in how "bad" things are until you hear where some of these folks came from and how badly they wanted to be here. It's also a great shame these folks are paid so poorly compared to their American counterparts when they prop up a lot of our infrastructure with their hard work and diligence. They deserve more and better for the level of work being done, but they are brought over here for a combination of work ethic and especially cost via contracting companies, they get paid a lot less than their peers and still they are excited to be here.

There are skill gaps but tbh they are skill gaps that exist with most US based folks also. AI can fill the gap in on some of this a little bit, but a lot of it is just growing gaps in certain areas of the industry as people age out and younger generations aren't motivated enough to learn new things outside of school. I know the general belief is that AI will fill these gaps, and in some cases it may, but as I've said before there just are some things that it won't replace or fix the gap on.

This is pure fiction. It would be like saying something is late stage thought, or late stage choice.

Globalization means that workers in every country are competing with entry level workers in India and China, which combined represent over 34% of the worlds population.

https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/population-by-country/

https://www.timedoctor.com/blog/average-salary-in-india/


https://www.timedoctor.com/blog/average-salary-in-china/

Now combine this with people of western nations being so ridiculously wealthy and privileged that they honestly believe success is due to them by virtue of existing. The result being that the average worker in the previous countries will run circles around and easily out compete the average worker in the later countries. The only way someone from a wealthy western country is going to outcompete someone from India or China is to leverage their wealthy and privilege to learn and refine marketable skills.

Tools like machine learning only just that, tools. Mastering that tool is just another skill that makes one more competitive. And contrary to the popular belief, companies are not using to replace workers whole sale as 95% of initiatives fail. Some did try, and the results were a disaster, with them having to spend more money to hire large numbers of, and this is seriously a job title, "vibe code cleanup specialists".

https://www.forbes.com/sites/lanceeliot/2025/09/18/the-new-job-of-being-a-vibe-coding-cleanup-specialist-is-intriguing-and-stirring-ample-controversy/

True or false:
Microsoft fired a bunch of people (in the thousands) then put out a plethora (in the thousands) of H1B requests a mere days after.

Whos Microsoft's CEO and where was he born?

Us v.s They mentality is a trap.

If you fall for it, you become a Rady.

Sounds like a smart move to me, assuming what Iamaman said about H1B worker's work ability is generally true in most cases.

Hmm... Bill Gates?


Thats a hard one... Manitoba?

Now smartass, try answering this:

Whos FFXIAH's CEO and where was he born?

Just step further left and demand H-1Bs get equal pay and mandatory days off so they can't be exploited. Toss in the 100k administrative fee Trump threw down and they'll no longer be cheaper. Problem solved.