A Spanish agency became so sick of models and influencers that they created their own with AI — and she’s raking in up to $11,000 a month::Founder Rubén Cruz said AI model Aitana was so convincing that a famous Latin actor asked her on a date.

  • 7112@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    152
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    They frame this article in such a weird way. Like replacing the models and their jobs was justified because they had egos etc…

    I can see similar framing used to replace other workers because they want to be paid fairly or do something drastic like take bathroom breaks… :D

    • hydrospanner@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      49
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean…the moment any large corporation figures out a way to replace human workers that need things like bathroom breaks (and basic human rights, and paychecks) and do the same work with robots and AI… literally the next moment, they’ll have the AI start generating layoff notices.

      It’s just less flashy when it happens that way because there’s no need for that AI to look like a beautiful young person.

      • shalafi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        But… why would you not replace workers with robots when you can? Serious question.

        The alternative is paying people to do an unneeded job, and that’s not sustainable. How do we intend to pay a person who contributes nothing to society?

        I feel there are going to be a shitload of questions like this in the coming decade. We’ve navigated such upheavals before, such as during the Industrial Revolution and the beginning of the Information Age. But now? Seems quite different.

        Had this talk with a more conservative acquaintance about minimum wage:

        “We gotta pay these people a living wage. What about all the dumbasses out there that can’t handle more than a convenience store job?”

        “Not my problem.”

        “But those people are OUR problem. Want to give them more welfare? Want them to be homeless with all the problems that brings?”

        Anyway, some fool will come along shortly and scream, “UBI!”. If you get a simple answer to a complex question, the answering party is simple.

        • Herbal Gamer@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          1 year ago

          Anyway, some fool will come along shortly and scream, “UBI!”.

          It sounds like you have other suggestions? Or at least objections to this one?

        • Kepabar@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s just so hard to see where we transition from here.

          We went from a resource economy to a manufacturing economy to a service economy… And now many services are being automated. So what’s next?

          I’m in favor of the automation but recognize it’s going to cause pain in the near future.

          I’ve seen people tout a ‘creative based economy’, but to be honest LLMs and GANs seen poised to grab that sector before anyone in service can transition to it.

          You’d hope all of this would mean an easier life, but so long as capitalism is the name of the game there is zero incentive to spread the benefits among all.

        • emptiestplace@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I could say the same about those who make blanket assertions, but then you could say the same back … and then what.

        • Daft_ish@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I for sure 100% want you deciding what we do with the, "dumbasses out there that can’t handle more than a convenience store job”

    • Guy_Fieris_Hair@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      They don’t need a justification. It is just capitalism. The second it becomes profitable to develop and implement an AI to replace a human, it will be done. And half the country/world will be rooting for them saying “yeah, go capitalism!”

      • Daft_ish@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Capitalism created influencers in the first place. No, we don’t need ordinary people living imaginary lives to create consumers who are being sold a lie.

        Good riddance to bad rubbish.

    • theluddite@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think that with these new kinds of stories, this sort of thing is super obvious because we haven’t gotten used to it and because they haven’t developed the more subtle vocabulary like officer involved shooting or how israelis are killed but Palestinians just die or how it’s always the strikers threatening the economy and never the bosses or unfair working conditions.

      I don’t think anyone does this on purpose, mind you, but it’s the system evolving to suit it’s needs, as Chomsky pointed out.

    • Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Wait, what is wrong with this?

      I mean the model is the backdrop, these fashion companies aren’t selling models, there selling clothes.

      If you were already going to use Photoshop and stock photos the fill out the background, put the model on a beach, adjust the time of day, put other people into the photo, add sone palm trees, etc. The model (and indeed the entire original photo) is now a very small part of this the final product. If you could now just photograph your clothing on posed mannequins and fill in ai generated faces, what’s so wrong about that? Why does the person wearing the clothes your selling matter more than the the people added from stock photos?

      • 7112@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Why use any human-like image then? A lot of amateur fashion designer on instagram use mannequins or busts. The models are serving a purpose. Removing them means someone loses a job.

        If we look at this from top-down you’re right because the company is saving a cost. But from the bottom-up, you’ve just become more expendable. This leads into the arguments others have been making, what happens when eventually people can’t work? And why should we use technology to serve the few and not the many?