Loopy Pro: Create music, your way.

What is Loopy Pro?Loopy Pro is a powerful, flexible, and intuitive live looper, sampler, clip launcher and DAW for iPhone and iPad. At its core, it allows you to record and layer sounds in real-time to create complex musical arrangements. But it doesn’t stop there—Loopy Pro offers advanced tools to customize your workflow, build dynamic performance setups, and create a seamless connection between instruments, effects, and external gear.

Use it for live looping, sequencing, arranging, mixing, and much more. Whether you're a live performer, a producer, or just experimenting with sound, Loopy Pro helps you take control of your creative process.

Download on the App Store

Loopy Pro is your all-in-one musical toolkit. Try it for free today.

Celebrities sign an anti Ai letter

13

Comments

  • @AudioGus said:

    @SevenSystems said:

    @AudioGus said:

    @SevenSystems said:

    @AudioGus said:

    @Krupa said:

    @AudioGus said:

    @Krupa said:

    @AudioGus said:

    @Krupa said:

    @AudioGus said:

    @Krupa said:

    @AudioGus said:

    @Krupa said:
    And no, there’s no way I can see that any AI tool will speed this particular project up, it’s participatory arts being shammied up into a VR film…

    hehe, I have no idea what that means

    Kids and adults drawing / collage making, then I cut it up, make all the extra elements and turn it into VR… it’ll end up in the British library so tbh it’ll be nice to have done it, but they got some shyster company to lowball quote them a minimal viable product that they then used to entice artists in, I’ma sucker I know…

    Oh snap, that sounds fun. Could train an SDXL Lora on the source material (or just use IP-Adapter in a pinch) to help make the extra elements super quick. ;)

    Yeah, making stuff like this is definitely fun, but going all that spreadsheet sounding weird ain’t, and tbh from my experience trying it is more time consuming than just making it, big ole rabbit holes as far as I’ve found (and believe me I’ve wasted weeks on it over the past two years…)

    Once you get savvy at it though it is super quick and efficient. Locally running Forge WebUI with SDXL, using ControlNet is super powerful.

    Believe me I’ve tried, it never gets me the results I want, guess I’m fussy 😅

    I find a lot of people just don't find the interaction engaging or rewarding enough to get good at it. But really it can be used to accelerate the creation of any form of 2D image. I worked with a lot of concept artists who just could not stomach it based on their core creative principles and could never develop a skillset with these tools.

    Yeah, it’s just so unsatisfying to work with, I hate the interfaces, the mode of thinking, the results, and to top it all off I feel like a fraud, and in all likelihood I’d I deliver anything with it I’ll get called out as such, so it’s kinda lose lose lose lose from my perspective (did I lose count there? 😅😂)

    satisfies the 'stakeholder' (ugh term)

    (made using AI! I'm sure some previous stakeholder got ripped off in the process! 😜)

    Hah! I love how unsatisfied they look too!

    😂 Yeah. But I always found the term terrible as well, so that meme was actually already in my collection ready to find a victim 😃

    For me it is down there with 'influencer' in terms of gut wrench. You can pretty much take the entire corporate glossary of terms and roll it up next to the toilet for me.

    Yeah, agree! Influenza 😃 "Sunsetting" is 2nd place.

  • edited October 24

    @SevenSystems said:

    @AudioGus said:

    @SevenSystems said:

    @AudioGus said:

    @SevenSystems said:

    @AudioGus said:

    @Krupa said:

    @AudioGus said:

    @Krupa said:

    @AudioGus said:

    @Krupa said:

    @AudioGus said:

    @Krupa said:

    @AudioGus said:

    @Krupa said:
    And no, there’s no way I can see that any AI tool will speed this particular project up, it’s participatory arts being shammied up into a VR film…

    hehe, I have no idea what that means

    Kids and adults drawing / collage making, then I cut it up, make all the extra elements and turn it into VR… it’ll end up in the British library so tbh it’ll be nice to have done it, but they got some shyster company to lowball quote them a minimal viable product that they then used to entice artists in, I’ma sucker I know…

    Oh snap, that sounds fun. Could train an SDXL Lora on the source material (or just use IP-Adapter in a pinch) to help make the extra elements super quick. ;)

    Yeah, making stuff like this is definitely fun, but going all that spreadsheet sounding weird ain’t, and tbh from my experience trying it is more time consuming than just making it, big ole rabbit holes as far as I’ve found (and believe me I’ve wasted weeks on it over the past two years…)

    Once you get savvy at it though it is super quick and efficient. Locally running Forge WebUI with SDXL, using ControlNet is super powerful.

    Believe me I’ve tried, it never gets me the results I want, guess I’m fussy 😅

    I find a lot of people just don't find the interaction engaging or rewarding enough to get good at it. But really it can be used to accelerate the creation of any form of 2D image. I worked with a lot of concept artists who just could not stomach it based on their core creative principles and could never develop a skillset with these tools.

    Yeah, it’s just so unsatisfying to work with, I hate the interfaces, the mode of thinking, the results, and to top it all off I feel like a fraud, and in all likelihood I’d I deliver anything with it I’ll get called out as such, so it’s kinda lose lose lose lose from my perspective (did I lose count there? 😅😂)

    satisfies the 'stakeholder' (ugh term)

    (made using AI! I'm sure some previous stakeholder got ripped off in the process! 😜)

    Hah! I love how unsatisfied they look too!

    😂 Yeah. But I always found the term terrible as well, so that meme was actually already in my collection ready to find a victim 😃

    For me it is down there with 'influencer' in terms of gut wrench. You can pretty much take the entire corporate glossary of terms and roll it up next to the toilet for me.

    Yeah, agree! Influenza 😃 "Sunsetting" is 2nd place.

    Hah! 'Sunsetting', a term I know all too well right now heh/sob (are you spying on me??)

  • @SevenSystems said:

    @AudioGus said:

    @Krupa said:

    @AudioGus said:

    @Krupa said:

    @AudioGus said:

    @Krupa said:

    @AudioGus said:

    @Krupa said:

    @AudioGus said:

    @Krupa said:
    And no, there’s no way I can see that any AI tool will speed this particular project up, it’s participatory arts being shammied up into a VR film…

    hehe, I have no idea what that means

    Kids and adults drawing / collage making, then I cut it up, make all the extra elements and turn it into VR… it’ll end up in the British library so tbh it’ll be nice to have done it, but they got some shyster company to lowball quote them a minimal viable product that they then used to entice artists in, I’ma sucker I know…

    Oh snap, that sounds fun. Could train an SDXL Lora on the source material (or just use IP-Adapter in a pinch) to help make the extra elements super quick. ;)

    Yeah, making stuff like this is definitely fun, but going all that spreadsheet sounding weird ain’t, and tbh from my experience trying it is more time consuming than just making it, big ole rabbit holes as far as I’ve found (and believe me I’ve wasted weeks on it over the past two years…)

    Once you get savvy at it though it is super quick and efficient. Locally running Forge WebUI with SDXL, using ControlNet is super powerful.

    Believe me I’ve tried, it never gets me the results I want, guess I’m fussy 😅

    I find a lot of people just don't find the interaction engaging or rewarding enough to get good at it. But really it can be used to accelerate the creation of any form of 2D image. I worked with a lot of concept artists who just could not stomach it based on their core creative principles and could never develop a skillset with these tools.

    Yeah, it’s just so unsatisfying to work with, I hate the interfaces, the mode of thinking, the results, and to top it all off I feel like a fraud, and in all likelihood I’d I deliver anything with it I’ll get called out as such, so it’s kinda lose lose lose lose from my perspective (did I lose count there? 😅😂)

    satisfies the 'stakeholder' (ugh term)

    (made using AI! I'm sure some previous stakeholder got ripped off in the process! 😜)

    LMAO!

  • @SevenSystems said:
    The whole argument about "Art being ripped off to train AI" is flawed. Human artists and creativity, as much as artists hate to hear it, works no different than AI artists and creativity. Neural networks just work by taking inputs, building complex abstract models of those, and then creating new, related ("creative") outputs.

    Every single human artist has been trained on other humans' art and is "ripping it off".

    I'm sorry!

    True.
    IA is the folk process with the ultimate goal of removing the folk.

  • @yellow_eyez said:

    @dendy said:
    lol that is hilarious ..

    Thank you , (i can’t take full credit, ChatGPT wrote that ) ^

    Uhm this is missunderstanding, i reacted on article in initial post of this thread.. 😂

  • @dendy said:

    @yellow_eyez said:

    @dendy said:
    lol that is hilarious ..

    Thank you , (i can’t take full credit, ChatGPT wrote that ) ^

    Uhm this is missunderstanding, i reacted on article in initial post of this thread.. 😂

    hehe, that is what I figured

  • edited October 24

    @JeffChasteen said:

    @SevenSystems said:
    The whole argument about "Art being ripped off to train AI" is flawed. Human artists and creativity, as much as artists hate to hear it, works no different than AI artists and creativity. Neural networks just work by taking inputs, building complex abstract models of those, and then creating new, related ("creative") outputs.

    Every single human artist has been trained on other humans' art and is "ripping it off".

    I'm sorry!

    True.
    IA is the folk process with the ultimate goal of removing the folk.

    That's one way of looking at it, but the entire history of humankind is about invention and innovation. Improving on what exists right now is what we do.

  • @Telstar5 said:
    https://apple.news/AEwwCNCpzTiGrANSj7xEkHw
    Reminds me of when drum machines came out . Is it just me, or is this all frigging stupid? You may not like certain aspects of it but it IS progress . Embrace it . Take what you need and leave the rest .

    It’s just you. You really need to wisen up and understand the ideologies of fascism and new feudalism driving Sam Altman et al. AI doesn’t exist. Never will.

  • @AudioGus said:
    I don't think it is frigging stupid at all. But I do think resistance is futile.

    You’re wrong. Resistance isn’t futile. Read this and wake up.

  • Hm… soon this topic will become too toxic to discuss.
    Good luck resisting!

  • edited October 24

    @looperboy said:

    @AudioGus said:
    I don't think it is frigging stupid at all. But I do think resistance is futile.

    You’re wrong. Resistance isn’t futile. Read this and wake up. !

    I doubt this would help me to make a living. Sadly I am not in a position where I can afford to sacrifice my livelihood for ideals. I will leave that up to the armchair commenters.

  • @AudioGus said:
    Sadly I am not in a position where I can afford to sacrifice my livelihood for ideals.

    Most people are in the same boat.

    That is why they are concerned about Ai taking their jobs.

  • edited October 25

    @Simon said:

    @AudioGus said:
    Sadly I am not in a position where I can afford to sacrifice my livelihood for ideals.

    Most people are in the same boat.

    That is why they are concerned about Ai taking their jobs.

    The problem isn't that AI is "taking" the jobs of humans. We should be grateful for every job that can be done by an AI (or any kind of automation) and thus doesn't have to be done by humans. More freedom, more free time, less danger, less illness.

    The problem is THE SYSTEM ™️, because the system depends on humans doing jobs, because it needs humans held as slaves with money as a threat.

    I'm not sure though that our extremely bright and competent and good willing politicians will understand this concept and redesign the system to "cope" with an utopia where humans don't HAVE to work!

    (more to the point: I think Universal Basic Income is the only solution to the AI conundrum. And a good one -- if implemented well!)

  • @Simon said:

    @AudioGus said:
    Sadly I am not in a position where I can afford to sacrifice my livelihood for ideals.

    Most people are in the same boat.

    That is why they are concerned about Ai taking their jobs.

    By that I meant regardless of what I think of it ethically I pretty much have to use it to stay ahead for as long as I can. More so I need to now constantly expand my skillset into new areas that AI cannot readily fulfill, for as long as those pockets exist, so that I can maintain being the one with the thumb on the AI button in the process, if that makes sense. My job has always mutated so I never felt it got 'taken' but the one thing I am really weary of is potentially feeling like a sort of outsource manager for those who have their thumb on the AI button, blech.

  • edited October 25

    @SevenSystems said:

    @Simon said:

    @AudioGus said:
    Sadly I am not in a position where I can afford to sacrifice my livelihood for ideals.

    Most people are in the same boat.

    That is why they are concerned about Ai taking their jobs.

    The problem isn't that AI is "taking" the jobs of humans. We should be grateful for every job that can be done by an AI (or any kind of automation) and thus doesn't have to be done by humans. More freedom, more free time, less danger, less illness.

    The problem is THE SYSTEM ™️, because the system depends on humans doing jobs, because it needs humans held as slaves with money as a threat.

    I'm not sure though that our extremely bright and competent and good willing politicians will understand this concept and redesign the system to "cope" with an utopia where humans don't HAVE to work!

    (more to the point: I think Universal Basic Income is the only solution to the AI conundrum. And a good one -- if implemented well!)

    There is never enough supply for things which are in demand. The potential for new jobs which will be created due to existing jobs disappearing (jobs we can't even imagine today) is unknowable.

    And not to take this thread too far afield, but "UBI" has been tried and it doesn't seem to work. It's based on uneconomic ideas and those ideas run contrary to human behavior. I won't post a link about it, but you can search yourself: "The Largest Study Ever on UBI Was Just Conducted—The Results Are Disappointing for Advocates".

  • @SevenSystems said:
    The problem isn't that AI is "taking" the jobs of humans. We should be grateful for every job that can be done by an AI (or any kind of automation) and thus doesn't have to be done by humans. More freedom, more free time, less danger, less illness.

    Well, if I come across anyone who loses their job to Ai and can't pay their rent or buy food I'll pass on your message and tell them they should be grateful.

  • @Simon said:

    @SevenSystems said:
    The problem isn't that AI is "taking" the jobs of humans. We should be grateful for every job that can be done by an AI (or any kind of automation) and thus doesn't have to be done by humans. More freedom, more free time, less danger, less illness.

    Well, if I come across anyone who loses their job to Ai and can't pay their rent or buy food I'll pass on your message and tell them they should be grateful.

    I've lost jobs due to companies making bad business decisions and then going under. A.I. had nothing to do with it. But then I found work elsewhere. This is how it should work. If anyone expects lifetime employment with one company, it's going to be their own company, not from working for someone else.

  • edited October 25

    @NeuM said:
    I've lost jobs due to companies making bad business decisions and then going under. A.I. had nothing to do with it. But then I found work elsewhere. This is how it should work.

    One company going under is managable.

    Whole industries firing huge numbers of employees nationally is another story. Try finding work in that environment. I think it is going to be tough on a lot of people.

  • @Simon said:

    @NeuM said:
    I've lost jobs due to companies making bad business decisions and then going under. A.I. had nothing to do with it. But then I found work elsewhere. This is how it should work.

    One company going under is managable.

    Whole industries firing huge numbers of employees nationally is another story. Try finding work in that environment. I think it is going to be tough on a lot of people.

    I don’t like people losing their jobs (who would?), but this is how the world works. Competition, creative destruction, turmoil… these will always be part of any vibrant and growing economy.

  • @NeuM said:

    @SevenSystems said:

    @Simon said:

    @AudioGus said:
    Sadly I am not in a position where I can afford to sacrifice my livelihood for ideals.

    Most people are in the same boat.

    That is why they are concerned about Ai taking their jobs.

    The problem isn't that AI is "taking" the jobs of humans. We should be grateful for every job that can be done by an AI (or any kind of automation) and thus doesn't have to be done by humans. More freedom, more free time, less danger, less illness.

    The problem is THE SYSTEM ™️, because the system depends on humans doing jobs, because it needs humans held as slaves with money as a threat.

    I'm not sure though that our extremely bright and competent and good willing politicians will understand this concept and redesign the system to "cope" with an utopia where humans don't HAVE to work!

    (more to the point: I think Universal Basic Income is the only solution to the AI conundrum. And a good one -- if implemented well!)

    There is never enough supply for things which are in demand. The potential for new jobs which will be created due to existing jobs disappearing (jobs we can't even imagine today) is unknowable.

    And not to take this thread too far afield, but "UBI" has been tried and it doesn't seem to work. It's based on uneconomic ideas and those ideas run contrary to human behavior. I won't post a link about it, but you can search yourself: "The Largest Study Ever on UBI Was Just Conducted—The Results Are Disappointing for Advocates".

    Interesting. I had a quick glance (might read more later), but the study might be statistically flawed because it explicitly picked low-income individuals for the test. This might skew the results towards correlated personal traits of certain social groups, so I'm not sure the study results are universal.

    @Simon said:

    @NeuM said:
    I've lost jobs due to companies making bad business decisions and then going under. A.I. had nothing to do with it. But then I found work elsewhere. This is how it should work.

    One company going under is managable.

    Whole industries firing huge numbers of employees nationally is another story. Try finding work in that environment. I think it is going to be tough on a lot of people.

    My main point is (also @NeuM) that society has to be completely rethought. The centuries-old "Get paid for work" scheme simply won't be adequate anymore, as essentially all essential work can be done by machines (good!) and thus humans are not strictly "required" to work anymore.

    So the whole premise of "Having to work to be able to live" becomes meaningless.

    How exactly society and politics need to change in order to adapt to this (amazing!) news -- I'm not sure. But I'm not a policymaker. I just know the old system won't work, obviously!

  • edited October 25

    @SevenSystems said:

    @NeuM said:

    @SevenSystems said:

    @Simon said:

    @AudioGus said:
    Sadly I am not in a position where I can afford to sacrifice my livelihood for ideals.

    Most people are in the same boat.

    That is why they are concerned about Ai taking their jobs.

    The problem isn't that AI is "taking" the jobs of humans. We should be grateful for every job that can be done by an AI (or any kind of automation) and thus doesn't have to be done by humans. More freedom, more free time, less danger, less illness.

    The problem is THE SYSTEM ™️, because the system depends on humans doing jobs, because it needs humans held as slaves with money as a threat.

    I'm not sure though that our extremely bright and competent and good willing politicians will understand this concept and redesign the system to "cope" with an utopia where humans don't HAVE to work!

    (more to the point: I think Universal Basic Income is the only solution to the AI conundrum. And a good one -- if implemented well!)

    There is never enough supply for things which are in demand. The potential for new jobs which will be created due to existing jobs disappearing (jobs we can't even imagine today) is unknowable.

    And not to take this thread too far afield, but "UBI" has been tried and it doesn't seem to work. It's based on uneconomic ideas and those ideas run contrary to human behavior. I won't post a link about it, but you can search yourself: "The Largest Study Ever on UBI Was Just Conducted—The Results Are Disappointing for Advocates".

    Interesting. I had a quick glance (might read more later), but the study might be statistically flawed because it explicitly picked low-income individuals for the test. This might skew the results towards correlated personal traits of certain social groups, so I'm not sure the study results are universal.

    @Simon said:

    @NeuM said:
    I've lost jobs due to companies making bad business decisions and then going under. A.I. had nothing to do with it. But then I found work elsewhere. This is how it should work.

    One company going under is managable.

    Whole industries firing huge numbers of employees nationally is another story. Try finding work in that environment. I think it is going to be tough on a lot of people.

    My main point is (also @NeuM) that society has to be completely rethought. The centuries-old "Get paid for work" scheme simply won't be adequate anymore, as essentially all essential work can be done by machines (good!) and thus humans are not strictly "required" to work anymore.

    So the whole premise of "Having to work to be able to live" becomes meaningless.

    How exactly society and politics need to change in order to adapt to this (amazing!) news -- I'm not sure. But I'm not a policymaker. I just know the old system won't work, obviously!

    I am an idiot. Bearing that in mind, I am sincerely curious when societies have undergone significant transformation on this level without having to collapse first and be reborn/rebranded under a whole new structure (with all the sticky gross meat space stabby stuff that is usually involved). Genuinely curious! My bias is to see systems/countries etc as a series of Titanics doomed to horribly sink with new ones taking their place, making new rules/borders in the wake of hard learned lessons etc. Can this be done without the (insert apocalyptic clichés etc)?

  • @SevenSystems said:

    @NeuM said:

    @SevenSystems said:

    @Simon said:

    @AudioGus said:
    Sadly I am not in a position where I can afford to sacrifice my livelihood for ideals.

    Most people are in the same boat.

    That is why they are concerned about Ai taking their jobs.

    The problem isn't that AI is "taking" the jobs of humans. We should be grateful for every job that can be done by an AI (or any kind of automation) and thus doesn't have to be done by humans. More freedom, more free time, less danger, less illness.

    The problem is THE SYSTEM ™️, because the system depends on humans doing jobs, because it needs humans held as slaves with money as a threat.

    I'm not sure though that our extremely bright and competent and good willing politicians will understand this concept and redesign the system to "cope" with an utopia where humans don't HAVE to work!

    (more to the point: I think Universal Basic Income is the only solution to the AI conundrum. And a good one -- if implemented well!)

    There is never enough supply for things which are in demand. The potential for new jobs which will be created due to existing jobs disappearing (jobs we can't even imagine today) is unknowable.

    And not to take this thread too far afield, but "UBI" has been tried and it doesn't seem to work. It's based on uneconomic ideas and those ideas run contrary to human behavior. I won't post a link about it, but you can search yourself: "The Largest Study Ever on UBI Was Just Conducted—The Results Are Disappointing for Advocates".

    Interesting. I had a quick glance (might read more later), but the study might be statistically flawed because it explicitly picked low-income individuals for the test. This might skew the results towards correlated personal traits of certain social groups, so I'm not sure the study results are universal.

    @Simon said:

    @NeuM said:
    I've lost jobs due to companies making bad business decisions and then going under. A.I. had nothing to do with it. But then I found work elsewhere. This is how it should work.

    One company going under is managable.

    Whole industries firing huge numbers of employees nationally is another story. Try finding work in that environment. I think it is going to be tough on a lot of people.

    My main point is (also @NeuM) that society has to be completely rethought. The centuries-old "Get paid for work" scheme simply won't be adequate anymore, as essentially all essential work can be done by machines (good!) and thus humans are not strictly "required" to work anymore.

    So the whole premise of "Having to work to be able to live" becomes meaningless.

    How exactly society and politics need to change in order to adapt to this (amazing!) news -- I'm not sure. But I'm not a policymaker. I just know the old system won't work, obviously!

    But the system does work, sadly, for the few and I don’t foresee them giving up their power easily.

  • @AudioGus said:

    @SevenSystems said:

    @NeuM said:

    @SevenSystems said:

    @Simon said:

    @AudioGus said:
    Sadly I am not in a position where I can afford to sacrifice my livelihood for ideals.

    Most people are in the same boat.

    That is why they are concerned about Ai taking their jobs.

    The problem isn't that AI is "taking" the jobs of humans. We should be grateful for every job that can be done by an AI (or any kind of automation) and thus doesn't have to be done by humans. More freedom, more free time, less danger, less illness.

    The problem is THE SYSTEM ™️, because the system depends on humans doing jobs, because it needs humans held as slaves with money as a threat.

    I'm not sure though that our extremely bright and competent and good willing politicians will understand this concept and redesign the system to "cope" with an utopia where humans don't HAVE to work!

    (more to the point: I think Universal Basic Income is the only solution to the AI conundrum. And a good one -- if implemented well!)

    There is never enough supply for things which are in demand. The potential for new jobs which will be created due to existing jobs disappearing (jobs we can't even imagine today) is unknowable.

    And not to take this thread too far afield, but "UBI" has been tried and it doesn't seem to work. It's based on uneconomic ideas and those ideas run contrary to human behavior. I won't post a link about it, but you can search yourself: "The Largest Study Ever on UBI Was Just Conducted—The Results Are Disappointing for Advocates".

    Interesting. I had a quick glance (might read more later), but the study might be statistically flawed because it explicitly picked low-income individuals for the test. This might skew the results towards correlated personal traits of certain social groups, so I'm not sure the study results are universal.

    @Simon said:

    @NeuM said:
    I've lost jobs due to companies making bad business decisions and then going under. A.I. had nothing to do with it. But then I found work elsewhere. This is how it should work.

    One company going under is managable.

    Whole industries firing huge numbers of employees nationally is another story. Try finding work in that environment. I think it is going to be tough on a lot of people.

    My main point is (also @NeuM) that society has to be completely rethought. The centuries-old "Get paid for work" scheme simply won't be adequate anymore, as essentially all essential work can be done by machines (good!) and thus humans are not strictly "required" to work anymore.

    So the whole premise of "Having to work to be able to live" becomes meaningless.

    How exactly society and politics need to change in order to adapt to this (amazing!) news -- I'm not sure. But I'm not a policymaker. I just know the old system won't work, obviously!

    I am an idiot. Bearing that in mind, I am sincerely curious when societies have undergone significant transformation on this level without having to collapse first and be reborn/rebranded under a whole new structure (with all the sticky gross meat space stabby stuff that is usually involved). Genuinely curious! My bias is to see systems/countries etc as a series of Titanics doomed to horribly sink with new ones taking their place, making new rules/borders in the wake of hard learned lessons etc. Can this be done without the (insert apocalyptic clichés etc)?

    I totally get your point, and unfortunately you seem to be right, as this (sticky gross meat stabby bomby stuff) is how it has always worked in history.

    I guess I'm just a terrible unfixable optimist sometimes 😄

  • edited October 27

    @SevenSystems said:

    @NeuM said:

    @SevenSystems said:

    @Simon said:

    @AudioGus said:
    Sadly I am not in a position where I can afford to sacrifice my livelihood for ideals.

    Most people are in the same boat.

    That is why they are concerned about Ai taking their jobs.

    The problem isn't that AI is "taking" the jobs of humans. We should be grateful for every job that can be done by an AI (or any kind of automation) and thus doesn't have to be done by humans. More freedom, more free time, less danger, less illness.

    The problem is THE SYSTEM ™️, because the system depends on humans doing jobs, because it needs humans held as slaves with money as a threat.

    I'm not sure though that our extremely bright and competent and good willing politicians will understand this concept and redesign the system to "cope" with an utopia where humans don't HAVE to work!

    (more to the point: I think Universal Basic Income is the only solution to the AI conundrum. And a good one -- if implemented well!)

    There is never enough supply for things which are in demand. The potential for new jobs which will be created due to existing jobs disappearing (jobs we can't even imagine today) is unknowable.

    And not to take this thread too far afield, but "UBI" has been tried and it doesn't seem to work. It's based on uneconomic ideas and those ideas run contrary to human behavior. I won't post a link about it, but you can search yourself: "The Largest Study Ever on UBI Was Just Conducted—The Results Are Disappointing for Advocates".

    Interesting. I had a quick glance (might read more later), but the study might be statistically flawed because it explicitly picked low-income individuals for the test. This might skew the results towards correlated personal traits of certain social groups, so I'm not sure the study results are universal.

    @Simon said:

    @NeuM said:
    I've lost jobs due to companies making bad business decisions and then going under. A.I. had nothing to do with it. But then I found work elsewhere. This is how it should work.

    One company going under is managable.

    Whole industries firing huge numbers of employees nationally is another story. Try finding work in that environment. I think it is going to be tough on a lot of people.

    My main point is (also @NeuM) that society has to be completely rethought. The centuries-old "Get paid for work" scheme simply won't be adequate anymore, as essentially all essential work can be done by machines (good!) and thus humans are not strictly "required" to work anymore.

    So the whole premise of "Having to work to be able to live" becomes meaningless.

    How exactly society and politics need to change in order to adapt to this (amazing!) news -- I'm not sure. But I'm not a policymaker. I just know the old system won't work, obviously!

    Functioning economies can be explained very simply ("we live in a system of exchange"), but they are also unpredictable and complex beyond whatever clean economic models may be theorized. There are off-books individual exchanges (barter), black markets (drug trade), organized gangs extorting and stealing, etc., all of which play a factor on top of upfront and visible economic activity. A "UBI" would be an invitation for fraud, which was proven during the pandemic when governments flooded economies with free money.

    https://apnews.com/article/pandemic-fraud-waste-billions-small-business-labor-fb1d9a9eb24857efbe4611344311ae78

    https://www.gao.gov/blog/more-fraud-has-been-found-federal-covid-funding-how-much-was-lost-under-unemployment-insurance-programs

    The fact is, central planning and command economies do not work. Free and competitive markets work, as much as governments insist the opposite is true. The UBI is a bad answer to a problem that does not exist, because the forces of supply and demand will ALWAYS solve problems faster and better. The only thing governments do better than private markets is wage war.

  • @NeuM said:

    @SevenSystems said:

    @NeuM said:

    @SevenSystems said:

    @Simon said:

    @AudioGus said:
    Sadly I am not in a position where I can afford to sacrifice my livelihood for ideals.

    Most people are in the same boat.

    That is why they are concerned about Ai taking their jobs.

    The problem isn't that AI is "taking" the jobs of humans. We should be grateful for every job that can be done by an AI (or any kind of automation) and thus doesn't have to be done by humans. More freedom, more free time, less danger, less illness.

    The problem is THE SYSTEM ™️, because the system depends on humans doing jobs, because it needs humans held as slaves with money as a threat.

    I'm not sure though that our extremely bright and competent and good willing politicians will understand this concept and redesign the system to "cope" with an utopia where humans don't HAVE to work!

    (more to the point: I think Universal Basic Income is the only solution to the AI conundrum. And a good one -- if implemented well!)

    There is never enough supply for things which are in demand. The potential for new jobs which will be created due to existing jobs disappearing (jobs we can't even imagine today) is unknowable.

    And not to take this thread too far afield, but "UBI" has been tried and it doesn't seem to work. It's based on uneconomic ideas and those ideas run contrary to human behavior. I won't post a link about it, but you can search yourself: "The Largest Study Ever on UBI Was Just Conducted—The Results Are Disappointing for Advocates".

    Interesting. I had a quick glance (might read more later), but the study might be statistically flawed because it explicitly picked low-income individuals for the test. This might skew the results towards correlated personal traits of certain social groups, so I'm not sure the study results are universal.

    @Simon said:

    @NeuM said:
    I've lost jobs due to companies making bad business decisions and then going under. A.I. had nothing to do with it. But then I found work elsewhere. This is how it should work.

    One company going under is managable.

    Whole industries firing huge numbers of employees nationally is another story. Try finding work in that environment. I think it is going to be tough on a lot of people.

    My main point is (also @NeuM) that society has to be completely rethought. The centuries-old "Get paid for work" scheme simply won't be adequate anymore, as essentially all essential work can be done by machines (good!) and thus humans are not strictly "required" to work anymore.

    So the whole premise of "Having to work to be able to live" becomes meaningless.

    How exactly society and politics need to change in order to adapt to this (amazing!) news -- I'm not sure. But I'm not a policymaker. I just know the old system won't work, obviously!

    Functioning economies can be explained very simply ("we live in a system of exchange"), but they are also unpredictable and complex beyond whatever clean economic models may be theorized. There are off-books individual exchanges (barter), black markets (drug trade), organized gangs extorting and stealing, etc., all of which play a factor on top of upfront and visible economic activity. A "UBI" would be an invitation for fraud, which was proven during the pandemic when governments flooded economies with free money.

    https://apnews.com/article/pandemic-fraud-waste-billions-small-business-labor-fb1d9a9eb24857efbe4611344311ae78

    https://www.gao.gov/blog/more-fraud-has-been-found-federal-covid-funding-how-much-was-lost-under-unemployment-insurance-programs

    The fact is, central planning and command economies do not work. Free and competitive markets work, as much as governments insist the opposite is true. The UBI is a bad answer to a problem that does not exist, because the forces of supply and demand will ALWAYS solve problems faster and better. The only thing governments do better than private markets is wage war.

    The Cola Wars were a devastating blight on prime time TV. But yah, UBI won't fix human greed and fear. Maybe a system whereby people receive UBI only if their system contains X amount of voluntary psilocybin. Just spit balling.

  • @AudioGus said:

    @NeuM said:

    @SevenSystems said:

    @NeuM said:

    @SevenSystems said:

    @Simon said:

    @AudioGus said:
    Sadly I am not in a position where I can afford to sacrifice my livelihood for ideals.

    Most people are in the same boat.

    That is why they are concerned about Ai taking their jobs.

    The problem isn't that AI is "taking" the jobs of humans. We should be grateful for every job that can be done by an AI (or any kind of automation) and thus doesn't have to be done by humans. More freedom, more free time, less danger, less illness.

    The problem is THE SYSTEM ™️, because the system depends on humans doing jobs, because it needs humans held as slaves with money as a threat.

    I'm not sure though that our extremely bright and competent and good willing politicians will understand this concept and redesign the system to "cope" with an utopia where humans don't HAVE to work!

    (more to the point: I think Universal Basic Income is the only solution to the AI conundrum. And a good one -- if implemented well!)

    There is never enough supply for things which are in demand. The potential for new jobs which will be created due to existing jobs disappearing (jobs we can't even imagine today) is unknowable.

    And not to take this thread too far afield, but "UBI" has been tried and it doesn't seem to work. It's based on uneconomic ideas and those ideas run contrary to human behavior. I won't post a link about it, but you can search yourself: "The Largest Study Ever on UBI Was Just Conducted—The Results Are Disappointing for Advocates".

    Interesting. I had a quick glance (might read more later), but the study might be statistically flawed because it explicitly picked low-income individuals for the test. This might skew the results towards correlated personal traits of certain social groups, so I'm not sure the study results are universal.

    @Simon said:

    @NeuM said:
    I've lost jobs due to companies making bad business decisions and then going under. A.I. had nothing to do with it. But then I found work elsewhere. This is how it should work.

    One company going under is managable.

    Whole industries firing huge numbers of employees nationally is another story. Try finding work in that environment. I think it is going to be tough on a lot of people.

    My main point is (also @NeuM) that society has to be completely rethought. The centuries-old "Get paid for work" scheme simply won't be adequate anymore, as essentially all essential work can be done by machines (good!) and thus humans are not strictly "required" to work anymore.

    So the whole premise of "Having to work to be able to live" becomes meaningless.

    How exactly society and politics need to change in order to adapt to this (amazing!) news -- I'm not sure. But I'm not a policymaker. I just know the old system won't work, obviously!

    Functioning economies can be explained very simply ("we live in a system of exchange"), but they are also unpredictable and complex beyond whatever clean economic models may be theorized. There are off-books individual exchanges (barter), black markets (drug trade), organized gangs extorting and stealing, etc., all of which play a factor on top of upfront and visible economic activity. A "UBI" would be an invitation for fraud, which was proven during the pandemic when governments flooded economies with free money.

    https://apnews.com/article/pandemic-fraud-waste-billions-small-business-labor-fb1d9a9eb24857efbe4611344311ae78

    https://www.gao.gov/blog/more-fraud-has-been-found-federal-covid-funding-how-much-was-lost-under-unemployment-insurance-programs

    The fact is, central planning and command economies do not work. Free and competitive markets work, as much as governments insist the opposite is true. The UBI is a bad answer to a problem that does not exist, because the forces of supply and demand will ALWAYS solve problems faster and better. The only thing governments do better than private markets is wage war.

    The Cola Wars were a devastating blight on prime time TV. But yah, UBI won't fix human greed and fear. Maybe a system whereby people receive UBI only if their system contains X amount of voluntary psilocybin. Just spit balling.

    Counter-offer: No UBI and let market-based competition solve it. ;)

  • @NeuM said:

    @AudioGus said:

    @NeuM said:

    @SevenSystems said:

    @NeuM said:

    @SevenSystems said:

    @Simon said:

    @AudioGus said:
    Sadly I am not in a position where I can afford to sacrifice my livelihood for ideals.

    Most people are in the same boat.

    That is why they are concerned about Ai taking their jobs.

    The problem isn't that AI is "taking" the jobs of humans. We should be grateful for every job that can be done by an AI (or any kind of automation) and thus doesn't have to be done by humans. More freedom, more free time, less danger, less illness.

    The problem is THE SYSTEM ™️, because the system depends on humans doing jobs, because it needs humans held as slaves with money as a threat.

    I'm not sure though that our extremely bright and competent and good willing politicians will understand this concept and redesign the system to "cope" with an utopia where humans don't HAVE to work!

    (more to the point: I think Universal Basic Income is the only solution to the AI conundrum. And a good one -- if implemented well!)

    There is never enough supply for things which are in demand. The potential for new jobs which will be created due to existing jobs disappearing (jobs we can't even imagine today) is unknowable.

    And not to take this thread too far afield, but "UBI" has been tried and it doesn't seem to work. It's based on uneconomic ideas and those ideas run contrary to human behavior. I won't post a link about it, but you can search yourself: "The Largest Study Ever on UBI Was Just Conducted—The Results Are Disappointing for Advocates".

    Interesting. I had a quick glance (might read more later), but the study might be statistically flawed because it explicitly picked low-income individuals for the test. This might skew the results towards correlated personal traits of certain social groups, so I'm not sure the study results are universal.

    @Simon said:

    @NeuM said:
    I've lost jobs due to companies making bad business decisions and then going under. A.I. had nothing to do with it. But then I found work elsewhere. This is how it should work.

    One company going under is managable.

    Whole industries firing huge numbers of employees nationally is another story. Try finding work in that environment. I think it is going to be tough on a lot of people.

    My main point is (also @NeuM) that society has to be completely rethought. The centuries-old "Get paid for work" scheme simply won't be adequate anymore, as essentially all essential work can be done by machines (good!) and thus humans are not strictly "required" to work anymore.

    So the whole premise of "Having to work to be able to live" becomes meaningless.

    How exactly society and politics need to change in order to adapt to this (amazing!) news -- I'm not sure. But I'm not a policymaker. I just know the old system won't work, obviously!

    Functioning economies can be explained very simply ("we live in a system of exchange"), but they are also unpredictable and complex beyond whatever clean economic models may be theorized. There are off-books individual exchanges (barter), black markets (drug trade), organized gangs extorting and stealing, etc., all of which play a factor on top of upfront and visible economic activity. A "UBI" would be an invitation for fraud, which was proven during the pandemic when governments flooded economies with free money.

    https://apnews.com/article/pandemic-fraud-waste-billions-small-business-labor-fb1d9a9eb24857efbe4611344311ae78

    https://www.gao.gov/blog/more-fraud-has-been-found-federal-covid-funding-how-much-was-lost-under-unemployment-insurance-programs

    The fact is, central planning and command economies do not work. Free and competitive markets work, as much as governments insist the opposite is true. The UBI is a bad answer to a problem that does not exist, because the forces of supply and demand will ALWAYS solve problems faster and better. The only thing governments do better than private markets is wage war.

    The Cola Wars were a devastating blight on prime time TV. But yah, UBI won't fix human greed and fear. Maybe a system whereby people receive UBI only if their system contains X amount of voluntary psilocybin. Just spit balling.

    Counter-offer: No UBI and let market-based competition solve it. ;)

    Awww man, I want SHROOMS DUDE!

  • @NeuM said:
    Counter-offer: No UBI and let market-based competition solve it. ;)

    I'm not sure market-based competition can solve it.

    Lots of unemployed, hungry, homeless people = problem.

    It's your house and food they will be coming for... got your guns loaded..?

  • edited October 27

    @Simon said:

    @NeuM said:
    Counter-offer: No UBI and let market-based competition solve it. ;)

    I'm not sure market-based competition can solve it.

    Lots of unemployed, hungry, homeless people = problem.

    It's your house and food they will be coming for... got your guns loaded..?

    Except that hasn't happened. When markets change, people typically adapt. New ways to capitalize on these advances is currently in progress. You can see this everywhere you turn if you're looking for the signs.

    I fully expect in a year or two that we'll start to see robots like Tesla's Optimus being used to do factory work and take over things like fast food jobs. But those are also the kinds of jobs where (A) costs have risen so high that it continues to become unaffordable to employ people in those jobs and (B) there is still a shortage of workers, across the board.

Sign In or Register to comment.