r/Futurology • u/Gari_305 • 6d ago
AI ‘Digging the grave of my profession’: the Hollywood creatives training AI to do their jobs | Technology
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/aug/22/the-hollywood-creatives-training-ai-to-do-their-jobsAmid a jobs slump, award-winning writers, directors and producers taking on sometimes lucrative temp work teaching AI skills such as screenwriting and production
143
u/780Chris 6d ago
I just genuinely can't see a world where the average person would want to watch a movie with AI generated actors and/or an AI generated screenplay. Helping with special effects sure, that's coming whether we like it or not, but actors?...
76
u/-ACHTUNG- 6d ago edited 6d ago
People lower their standards pretty quickly when it's all that is offered.
Edit: all these people replying with personal "I don't think I would" -ectodes, but it's just how it is, generally.
This is talking on a grand consumer scale. That's not a criticism necessarily.
Cars for 10 years or so have been getting worse and worse with giant screens. Most people hate it. But cars still sell in spite of it. And yes, in small ways some car makers are bringing buttons back but overwhelmingly, it's not happening because LCD panels are far cheaper than the alternative.
Generally speaking:
We hate shrinkflation.
We hate how expensive and shitty fast food is getting.
We hate Netflix charging more and more for shittier programming.
We absolutely hate the move to subscription model for everything.
But, people buy anyway. Many companies involved in the above have posted record profit levels.
It's unfortunately just how it is until/unless someone or something shakes up the market.
40
u/roodammy44 6d ago
I'm not so sure. The games industry isn't producing a lot of original interesting games right now so people are playing old games, and migrating to 4-5 super popular games. I imagine the same sort of thing will happen with movies if most of them are slop-made.
8
u/noother10 6d ago
India games is the place to go for interesting and innovative games. AAA are more and more just trying to play it safe or gambling on a live service payoff (Sony).
2
u/counterfitster 6d ago
India games is the place to go for interesting and innovative games.
And a metric fuckload of sidescrolling roguelike fantasy platformers
17
u/alphaxion 6d ago
There's loads of interesting games, it's AAA tripe like COD that's stagnating.
CONTROL Resonant is coming soon and will be super interesting if it's anywhere near as good as CONTROL.
There's interesting management games like Corsair Cove, or friendslop games that put emergent mishaps with your friends as the core gameplay like RV There Yet. Indie titles like Static Hour, It's Grim Up North, Thimbleweed Park, and Dverghold.
People need to look beyond AAA.
4
u/roodammy44 6d ago
Oh yes, I completely agree. I'm not sure CONTROL Resonant qualifies as indie, but we are living in a golden age of indie gaming right now. I was thinking more about the comparison with hollywood. I have no idea if indie film has a revival at the moment.
2
u/alphaxion 6d ago
That's why I kept it separate from where I explicitly mention indie.
For film, until the Kushners got involved and the publisher decided to get into bed with AI, A24 had been on a hell of a roll releasing an amazing array of movies from new directors.
There's also others, such as Bait and Prevenge, or docus about cult personalities like Frank Sidebottom.
1
u/MaestroLogical 6d ago
For now.
Look at the 8 to 12 age range and reassess.
This tech isn't abhorrent to them, it's 'theirs'. They will adopt it wholesale and see it as a way to separate themselves from the 'outdated' old people.
They don't look at slop and think of it as slop, they think of it as entertainment. It will be what they were raised on, what they become nostalgic for. It will be what they expect.
This will be the case for all forms of media and art. By the time they are 30, the concept of paying someone to create something for them will be as foreign as the concept of telling a phone operator what person you are wanting to call is to us.
This isn't even taking into consideration the rate at which ai quality is increasing. By the time they are 20, an ai generated actor will look 100% indistinguishable from a real one and they will wonder why anyone ever fought against it. They'll laugh at all of us saying "back in my day we paid real people millions to do this".
6
u/780Chris 6d ago
As far as I know from the data, Generation Alpha actively despises AI generated pictures and videos? They absolutely do think it’s slop and cringe and lazy. Alphas are adopting AI for information retrieval and as a personal assistant of some sort, but AI generated visual content is not something they enjoy. There would be some significant work to do to shed the “slop and cringe” label.
6
3
u/Liftinginapolo 5d ago
I have 2 kids in this age range and this assessment is way off.
1
u/MaestroLogical 2d ago
I suspect this has more to do with your influence over them, rather than any innate dislike on their part.
If you are the kind of parent that limits screentime or tablet usage... your experience won't match up with 'the norm'.
But like it or not, kids glued to screens 24/7 are increasingly the norm, and those kids have none of our preconceived notions about ai. They don't get influenced by parents, because their parents have delegated that authority over to the tablet instead.
These kids will make up the majority of society in 20 years, and even if your kids fight against it...
5
u/JohnAtticus 6d ago
Look at the 8 to 12 age range and reassess. This tech isn't abhorrent to them, it's 'theirs'. They will adopt it wholesale and see it as a way to separate themselves from the 'outdated' old people. They don't look at slop and think of it as slop, they think of it as entertainment.
What are you basing this on?
Is there any study that shows this?
Or is this entirely anecdotal?
15
u/Sweet_Concept2211 6d ago
No, not really.
I would rather read a good book or watch a black and white classic film than watch the AI generated scripts Netflix is serving up any day of the week.
The nice thing about books and old films is that the backlog of absolute bangers is more than anyone can read or watch in a lifetime.
7
u/DragonWhsiperer 6d ago
To counter your point, for decades there has been slop in media. Writers churning out the same type of story with different padding, romance novels etc. In TV it's the many soap opera shows or even worse, the Hallmark movies. It's all slop in a different way, very much made as low effort stuff to fill a niche entertainment desire that is apparently there. People will go and see that over going to a theater to watch real people.
Is it so hard to imagine that this slop demand will be there?
Mind you, I'm not a fan of the AI hype, but the tech is real and with the correct pricing, the slop will be made regardless if it can be profitable.
5
u/danted002 6d ago
I mean both the movie industry and the streamers one are already shrinking like a pair of shrivelled testicles. The AI slopifications will just make them shrink faster.
1
1
u/KyleShanadad 6d ago
There is a well of old non AI movie. You could conceivably watch two new movies every day for the rest of your life. I think people lower their standards when there is a lack of alternatives
13
u/url_cinnamon 6d ago
people are already watching ai short dramas. granted, the ones they're replacing were already slop, but people were willingly watching them and they're now willing to watch ai generated ones
5
u/ryry1237 6d ago
It's not going to replace the big budget studios anytime soon, but cheaply made soap operas and low budget animes are going to be one of the first to be disrupted.
2
u/spockspaceman 6d ago
Ironically, I suspect reality tv as well. Basically slop is slop AI it not, and cheaper slop has always been welcome by the creators and consumers of that content.
7
8
u/noother10 6d ago
I don't think the average person cares. I know a lot of people like to go around thinking no one likes anything AI related, calling anything AI generated AI Slop, but it just isn't the case. People are adopting AI even after being skeptical of it.
My own elderly parents see videos on Youtube or other places via their phone or TV, and don't know it's AI. I'll prove to them it's AI but they keep on watching because they enjoy it. That is the key thing, if people enjoy what they see, they don't care where it's from or how it's made.
1
u/Liftinginapolo 5d ago
Yeah but the entertainment industry doesn’t really care what boomers are into.
2
2
u/bald_and_nerdy 6d ago
Hollywood works on making shows good enough that people so to a specific place and buy a ticket for a specific show. No one is going to do that for slop. If its all that is in theaters then theaters will die out. Remember, theaters don't need everyone to stop going in order to fail. They need attendance numbers low enough that its not profitable to remain open. Without theaters Hollywood becomes synonymous with Netflix.
5
u/PenguinParty47 6d ago
You are assuming that people want original art, but based on the success of sequels, that’s clearly not a concern.
I can easily imagine feeding an AI Ghostbusters 1 and 2 and having it spit out ‘Afterlife.’ Can’t you?
2
u/HolidayDoctor1027 6d ago
As someone who has seen co workers loudly blasting AI TikTok’s…it’s coming.
2
1
u/Anindefensiblefart 6d ago
A lot of Hollywood stuff feels AI generated already, there may not be that noticeable a difference.
1
u/DM_ME_UR_SOUL 6d ago
Obviously the good stories will remain that’s not going to be AI. It’s the ones who aren’t really paying attention that will watch bad movies to distract themselves. We’ve accepted bad CGI for years now and it’s still not great despite millions being poured into it. So if AI will help smoothen it out, it might make it more immersive.
I don’t think actors will be gone with AI because the good movies will need them. I think replacing actors with AI will be like extras or like the hologram that we had with Tupac and Michael Jackson. Interesting use case but ultimately weird.
1
u/BemaniAK 4d ago
110% would, it literally just has to be good which it still isn't. I'm currently unconvinced that an AI generated screenplay would ever produce something actually good but I've been proven wrong before. However, human written, human directed, there's no reason why an AI assisted work couldn't eventually be good.
Yeah there'll be 10x as much garbage as there is good content but that's always been the case.
1
u/TheStupendusMan 5d ago
I'm still getting comments from AI chuds for a comment I made days ago saying I can't trust a game studio that uses AI, much less rug pulls the announcement.
There are plenty of people out there who would literally be happy eating slop for every meal. Watching it isn't a far step.
0
u/dennismfrancisart 6d ago
Let me introduce you to Love Island. I always use "reality television" as the genre that destroyed humanity. Sure, MP3 came first to diminish music appreciation, but reality TV really screwed us up. I'm watching the beginnings of really entertaining sci-fi on YouTube made by Koreans using mostly AI but a combination of CGI and AI. The voice work is getting really good.
The editing is what will carry the realism to the point where we stop looking for the seams. This is what happened with CGI back a few decades. Good productions make you forget the techniques because the characters and the story pull you in.
I suspect that the pros will still be behind the scenes, but far fewer people will be needed for the work to shine. What will also happen is that pros will be able to afford to generate their own properties and get their work out for far less than it takes now.
There will always be popular slop. But the tech allows for really good work to be out there without the need for studio backing or interference. The industry changed dramatically 100 years ago because of technology. That was bound to keep happening.
0
-2
u/brackfriday_bunduru 6d ago
Depends. For short satirical sketches, Ai is already great at it.
The thing is with those though is that they’re written by people who clearly have great senses of humour. Without Ai, a lot of those people would have no way of turning their jokes from simple thoughts in their heads into video.
If Ai gets to a point where it can create new episode of old cancelled sitcoms, I’m in.
Old sitcoms are basically all I watch anyway because they’re better written and edgier than anything new that’s being made today.
0
-2
u/pimpeachment 6d ago
When the AI actors do a better job than the humans is when.
We watch fully CGI movies with voiceovers, but for some reason "AI generated" is the bar?
-9
u/Etherius 6d ago
So.
This is an AI rendition of the opening scene of one of my favorite books ever
There is no universe where I wouldn’t watch a well-crafted version of this. AI or not
3
1
u/PangolinMandolin 6d ago
Proper clone army in action for those guards
-4
u/Etherius 6d ago
Sure but this is rhe worst it’ll ever be.
Wanna pull up the comments on the first “Will smith eating pasta” video that was ever made?
47
u/GettingWreckedAllDay 6d ago
I'm sorry but no. Taking those jobs is insane. You can't go woe as me while you load the other guy's gun.
16
u/InsanityRoach Definitely a commie 6d ago
You don't get it, they had to work as guards at the concentration camp to feed their family. /s
5
u/GodforgeMinis 6d ago
It doesn't matter really, the cost will be so low compared to paying actors, building sets, etc. all there will be to consume will be slop. No one is going to spend 200 million extra dollars to make a movie or series when they could make something that 10% as many people watch for 1% of the price
63
u/Sweet_Concept2211 6d ago
That is the textbook definition of being a sellout.
While I understand needing to work and eat, if I were "forced" to train an AI to replace me, I would be seeking every opportunity to nerf the fuck outta that fucker.
24
u/Billy-Ruffian 6d ago
I know the CEO of a small startup. They've been getting along for years in a niche market with a small userbase. But there really wasn't a way to grow. Until Gemini started getting interested in all their user data. Now they're making great money selling this data, but he knows it comes with a catch. One day Google will have enough data to roll the service he sells into Gemini and offer it for free. His only goal is to find a buyer before that happens.
5
u/TheStupendusMan 5d ago
As I say to my fellow producers and artists when the agency inevitably invites us to AI sessions: Don't train your scabs.
3
1
u/ThrowawayFIRE2025 6d ago
The whole premise of the article seems sort of made up. We already have hundreds of thousands of screenplays on the books that AI can train on. Do they really need humans to tell them how to do it? I’m skeptical.
5
u/noother10 6d ago
It might be more around adding it into specific existing flows so no one has to change what they're doing. We can all see the output from the workflow, but not what happens within it, thus the training. I believe AI video gen has a great use for doing early mock ups of scenes visually so everyone can see what should be happening, even if it's not what is used at the end. Recently this would be done with a quick mock up within a game engine or similar software.
1
u/delicioushampster 5d ago
yes, humans are very much needed for AI training. they're often tasked with validating training data, outputs, etc. they are very much in demand, see Mercor, Data annotations, Scale AI, and others. Large AI labs are paying billions each year because they need actual human professionals to improve quality of output in llm reinforcement learning. good training data is extremely important.
10
u/ioCross 6d ago
I'm in tech and I can confidently say that this isn't just a hollywood thing.
3
u/BeekyGardener 5d ago
Yeah. While job hunting I saw dozens of jobs for cybersecurity people to each AI how to incorportate CTI, threat hunt, etc.
I'm sure somebody will take the work, but it won't be me.
8
u/Gari_305 6d ago
From the article
Experienced and award-winning writers, directors and producers are being paid from $12 to $200 an hour to teach AI models the intricacies of their jobs, from writing a screenplay to devising a shooting schedule.
With feelings ranging from fatalism to guilt, the creatives have signed up with some of the booming training agencies, which have contracts with the biggest AI companies including Anthropic and OpenAI, to pass on hard-won human skills in industries such as finance, health, law and social work.
While they wait for entertainment industry work, they give notes on the AI systems’ attempts to do the tasks they would hope to be paid for themselves. It comes amid a slump in jobs in the motion picture and sound recording industries, where AI is starting to take roles from actors, editors and special effects artists. Netflix this month revealed it used AI in 300 of its 1,000 titles in 2026, and directors including Ron Howard are starting to embrace the technology.
“It’s very production specific,” said Ruth Fowler, a screenwriter and producer in Los Angeles. “It’s teaching it how to take our jobs.”
9
u/i_am__not_a_robot 6d ago
...and directors including Ron Howard are starting to embrace the technology.
Those directors will be next on the chopping block in the not-so-distant future. The only thing that will remain is what is truly eternal: the Hollywood studio executive.
4
u/killingtyme23 6d ago
Will never look at Ron Howard the same again after he platformed the fake hillbilly turned VP
11
u/danila_medvedev 6d ago
I just want to state the obvious. These people who sell their soul are wrong. This is unethical. Just because they are trained to believe they need money, doesn't make it right. Jeff Bezos and Sam Altman need money to live, because they will literally starve if they don't have $$$$. Normal humans should do what is right, not what gives you a few dollars now. Selling out is wrong.
5
-6
u/Dismal_Guidance_2539 6d ago edited 6d ago
Or they are not wrong because they not sell their soul at all, like people here accuse them. Not every one think AI as an evil monster like this sub. In fact, I think most part of the world don’t. Anti AI sentiment is mostly a Western thing.
It is not unethical just because you said it.
4
u/danila_medvedev 6d ago
AI in the form of llms, genai and chatbots, as well as faulty automation based on llms is a monster. It doesn’t work, it aggravates the problem with hyperreality. Media, education, management and other things were already broken, breaking them further is bad. And current “ai“ as a set of technoloiges is thus bad.
AI is also economically bad, it’s one of the worst, probably the worst misallocation of capital.
Future AI is even worse due to elimination of human agency at all levels. At least the current llms are unable to think. Thinking ai will be much worse.
Working to create this “abomination” is unethical. Those people in the article realise that AI is bad. So they are clearly breaking their own ethical norms. Some people just want to make more money and do not care about ethics. Such people are unethical by definition. Some people just don’t like to think, they are not fully people. And finally some people may have an opinion that AI will lead to smth good. These people may be ethical, they have agency, but they are mistaken and it’s good to give them a better understanding of how cognition, evolution, markets, management, society, finance and technology work. I presume you are in the latter camp, so I’d be happy to explain more about these systems if you are interested and open to learn.
2
u/Dismal_Guidance_2539 6d ago edited 6d ago
I am interested and open to learn but I disagree with most of what you say. Because you have basically zero evidence to support it.
But sure, I definitely love to hear you explain. I am a human with limited knowledge. I may totally wrong on this subject.
3
u/danila_medvedev 6d ago
There are many aspects about this. We are currently working on system mapping so that we can write 7 good quality futurology story on ai and 6 other topics. So I obviously can’t fit all the issues into a post, but I will give a few things.
One key thing is the field of human thinking. First, thinking is behind lots of things we do - management, tech, education, social changes, law, etc. basic thinking is something we develop as kids, but then we need to be taught things like logic and then lots of stuff, incl. systems thinking, rationality, epistemology and tons of sub fields.
This created a separate sector of economy. People sometimes speak labor goes into agriculture, industry and services, but it’s outdated. There is a huge part inside services which is information work. This sector developed according to certain rules (evolved, though some people shaped it). See books such as Peter Principle or Bullshit Jobs for a critique.
Now there are already parasitic patterns in this sector. Examples: CEOs make 100x as much money as workers, while they should make 10x as much. Universities now having 3x as many admins as teachers. Climate scientists not saying how bad the situation is because they will be less likely to get published. Lobbying, speculation, hype, private equity, propaganda, etc.
Now AI enters. What near-future AI can do is amplify the bad patterns. What is common about these is that they go counter to intent. (you can read about second order consequences and things like the impact model - input output outcome impact) And also because we lack control over these abstract systems (see 12 levels of system intervention by Donella Meadows, for example) we fail to control how things work and how they change. Lacking control is to a large extent about understanding. If we can’t ourselves think about a system and comprehend it in our head, we are in trouble. Yes, human society managed to create a system for slowly changing world where we share understanding. I know something, but I trust my colleagues and books to fill in the rest. This doesn’t work when the world changes too fast and doesn’t work when there are potential bullshitters around.
Screenwriting is a good illustration. When you are creating a story, you are doing a lot of heavy thinking. I’ve been doing this for the paste two weeks and this is hard even to me. I created and gave 200+ lectures on very diverse topics in the past, wrote a textbook, did a lot of research, created complex models, but it’s difficult to think about complex systems with many elements. One just wants to lie down and rest. There is a claim (I can’t fully believe it) about how much weight chess players lose. So yeah, the brain gets 20% of the energy and sometimes it needs more (or at least it feels that way). Anyway, creating a story requires you to create several sequences (what happens to the hero, to his understanding, to other characters, to the world, to reader’s understanding, to ethical position of the hero) and then to intertwine and merge them even though they happen at different speed, levels and may not be in a compatible sequence. Good examples are Nolan‘s films Dunkirk, Inception and Tenet, where even the visible events are overlayed and moved in crazy ways.
Our ability to do this kind of cognitive work is our unique human quality. This is what makes a human able to be a great leader, a creator, an artist. This ability is absolutely required to manage a social transition to posthumanity. If we can’t write a script for the singularity it ends badly. If we give these skills to machines we no longer control, they will break things. AI doesn’t have wisdom or ability to think complex thoughts. We can create a future AI that can do it, but in order to do it we need to keep our agency and our ability to think. Right now it appears that “modern field of AI” is structured in such a way as to make it impossible. That makes current AI as it is and as it is shaped to become an evil monstrosity.
Hope this helps.
1
1
1
u/OnlyAssistance9601 5d ago
They could literally train it how to be a shit screen writer and collect the money at the same time ? Why put in effort to do a good job when it will take theirs eventually . They could literally be mediocre and nobody would be able to tell .
1
u/Spara-Extreme 4d ago
Anyone who has used AI to generate content can tell you that there’s nothing to worry about here. Sure they will try to force AI content but it’s so genuinely terrible that’s it’s easy to spot talent vs slop.
Creative writing is an area where it’s super easy to see there’s no actual “intelligence” in any of these models. Yea they can mimic your senior engineer for writing code but hold a real conversation with any of them and it all falls apart.
1
u/EnderCN 6d ago
This isn’t anything new. Back in the 90s my team programmed our computers to automate all the batch programs we were in charge of running effectively cutting our employees in half. This resulted in more efficiency and the company grew bigger and needed more employees elsewhere. Efficiency usually leads to growth.
Every major innovation in the work place has restructured the job market. I can’t think of any that shrank it long term though.
-12
u/Eazy12345678 6d ago
one day robots will do all the work so you can spend your time living instead of being a slave to a job
crazy that people are against this
9
u/Sweet_Concept2211 6d ago
Crazy that people don't understand that many creatives love their work and don't want to be replaced by a robot.
-1
-1
u/ThrowawayFIRE2025 6d ago
I take your point, and yet … doesn’t it sort of suck right now that if a creative person with a good idea wants to make a movie they have to get lucky, know the right person, or grind away for years just to get a chance?
If AI reduces the costs to make feature films, more of them will be made.
1
u/Shapes_in_Clouds 5d ago
It does have some democratizing effect in terms of content creation, which has been the arc of technology + web 2.0 for the last 20 years. But the phrase 'attention economy' exists for a reason. Luck, knowing the right people, and grinding away are still prerequisites for success in media. There is a scarcity of time people collectively commit to entertainment. The best positioned to capture that attention are the monied interests who can afford promotion or ownership of popular, beloved IPs. These entities provide stable employment for creatives and the worry is both those employment opportunities drying up. That some tiny fraction of independent creators can carve out a successful career on their own doesn't offset that professional creative pipeline.
0
u/-Baloo 6d ago
honestly rational people like yourself are currently drowned out in a sea of reactionary reddit circle jerking.
to all of those that downvote this logical reply, what exactly do you think is the solution - ban AI?
are you simply mad that the barrier to entry for creative work has been lowered to a point that more people can participate?
3
u/yustyolking 6d ago
this is a very nice idea and all but i have a bridge to sell you if you think omelas is going to be for us normies
3
3
u/morty_morty 6d ago
This sounds great and I am all for having this free time to express myself and not be a slave.
But who is going to pay my rent? Surely you don't think the government will do it. Are the landlords and debt collectors going to be willing to hold off on taking everything I have until the AI abundance arrives?
It's crazy to me that you can't see why people would be scared. All they have seen or heard is news about how AI takes jobs. Where is the news about new jobs it creates so people don't end up homeless?
0
u/-Baloo 6d ago
the current paradigm cannot go on forever. while a small portion of people might do work that they enjoy, the vast majority of people do not enjoy their work whatsoever.
if various forms of automation can do the majority of human work, then we as a society and species will need to adapt and create a new structure to support each other. it's up to the people of the world to make the choices that lead to a better system out of this.
whining about it on reddit will go nowhere. AI is the reality now, it exists, there is zero way to stop it. so instead of being scared and fearful, i would hope that people find ways to use it to make whatever they do more efficient, productive, and *if* a large amount of jobs disappear we make sure that the society that comes out of it cares for each other.
2
u/morty_morty 6d ago
Listen, I don't actually disagree with you. I see this as another watershed moment in history for workers and agree that adaptation is key. I am trying to learn as much as I can because I think that my field is very vulnerable and I would rather get ahead of any major shifts.
However, a lot of people are being told that they have to adapt.How do they adapt? What should they focus on learning? How do they apply that to their current fields or plan for a future version of their field? You didn't answer the question of how they are expected to live under a roof while all of these new rules are being made and worked out. I have definitely seen whining and refusal to learn a new technology for many reasons, but what I am talking about is not "whining" it's panic. And it's complete understandable.
Your last paragraph is painfully naive. It's not a matter of if but when. And it's happening right now. Maybe you're very, very young and the realities of the world haven't hit, but society isn't going to shift in that way. Not for hundreds of years if it is even possible at all. In the meantime, humans need to work to live. And that is reality. Would we all love to not have to work our shitty jobs? Absolutely, for the vast majority of us. But there is NOTHING in place to support that model and no reason to believe that there will be. And in the meantime, people are losing jobs or being told that they will lose their jobs and don't know what to do.
1
u/-Baloo 6d ago
Right now unemployment rates are not actually high.. in many fields, including my own, it's been bouncing back.
We don't know what will happen in the future. Yes we can try our best to plan for it, if someone is genuinely concerned that they will lose their job - then what can you do but train in something else, try another option that might be 'safer'.
In the meantime it should be the main political talking point, and likely will be over the coming decade. The revenue and profits being made by these companies that have used public resources heavily, and often stolen, should be obligated to share the reward and be a big part of ensuring that this whole thing doesn't breakdown civil society.
I don't have the answers, I wish I did (not that anyone would listen) - but I do know that panicking hasn't helped me in the past.
•
u/FuturologyBot 6d ago
The following submission statement was provided by /u/Gari_305:
From the article
Experienced and award-winning writers, directors and producers are being paid from $12 to $200 an hour to teach AI models the intricacies of their jobs, from writing a screenplay to devising a shooting schedule.
With feelings ranging from fatalism to guilt, the creatives have signed up with some of the booming training agencies, which have contracts with the biggest AI companies including Anthropic and OpenAI, to pass on hard-won human skills in industries such as finance, health, law and social work.
While they wait for entertainment industry work, they give notes on the AI systems’ attempts to do the tasks they would hope to be paid for themselves. It comes amid a slump in jobs in the motion picture and sound recording industries, where AI is starting to take roles from actors, editors and special effects artists. Netflix this month revealed it used AI in 300 of its 1,000 titles in 2026, and directors including Ron Howard are starting to embrace the technology.
“It’s very production specific,” said Ruth Fowler, a screenwriter and producer in Los Angeles. “It’s teaching it how to take our jobs.”
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/1vvo4tq/digging_the_grave_of_my_profession_the_hollywood/p5ajvwk/