I can agree with that general viewpoint even though (I assume) portrait painters got paid more relatively since they work more hours than photographers. I don’t even think I blame AI on the fact the post production was all cut, but instead blame it on the “hype” surrounding it. My industry at large is still operating at 40% of typical since covid which is unrelated to AI, but jobs getting cut for the explicit purpose of trying AI still stings. 1/3 of post was laid off prior to covid because workers in South America were much cheaper. AI is just the new excuse for an existing problem.

So anyway, I’m planning to become an electrician now.

I wouldn’t say “every time new technology appears” since portrait painters definitely got replaced by photography as a widespread industry and a structural shift did happen. Technology in general tries to reduce human effort because human effort is expensive. Any expense that can be shaved down year after year to make more profits will be made regardless of if the quality is consistent. AI doesn’t need to be as good as creatives to replace them (either in part or in whole) eventually. It just needs to be “good enough”. And the thing about technology is that it’s always trying to get to a point to replace people whether it’s there yet or not. Photography couldn’t replace portrait painters initially due to color and image quality, but it eventually got there.

The CEO of a company I worked for decided to fire all the people in post production because he was convinced AI could replace humans in that department. He then sold the company after realizing AI wasn’t the magic solution he thought it was.

So it likely doesn’t matter if AI is replacing jobs or not if the people in charge of the workforce believe it can so much that it impacts decisions. The results are the same.

otherwise you justify all kinds of “just following orders” arguments.

I’m not sure I’d equate having your hand forced with following orders blindly. It’s nearly impossible to change individuals’ behaviors unless it’s due to systemic forces (minus the few who just want to be correct as long as it is visible). But if you’re more focused on individuals and their “responsibility” even though they had no input on the creation of this system, I’d only assume that you’re fine with this system and would rather shout at the brick wall of “individual responsibility”, then get frustrated when people end up hating vegetarians and vegans. I’m like 90% vegetarian nowadays because I can’t really afford meat anyways as well as it giving me headaches and foul moods, but I don’t think you’re being realistic in what you’re asking. Would the world be better with no factory farming? Absolutely yes. But we’re in this situation not because of people’s choices. We’re in this situation because the choice has been made for a lot of us. Some people are a single paycheck away from homelessness, so they likely don’t have the resources to learn how to cook, then ruin a bunch of food in the learning process, only to overspend, and be threatened with getting kicked out all for your own comfort. Go fight the people making this the reality we’re living in.

There’s something to be said about the ease of access and personal energy needed to deal with changing a diet that has been inherited by birth where the alternative is possibly much more expensive. I don’t blame individuals who eat cheap meat out of necessity just as I don’t blame people for not recycling since the responsibility of the exploitation and destruction of our planet lies entirely with the people who run the machine, not those who are forced under threat of violence to exist inside it.

A large portion of US zionists are white Christians who have no connections to the middle east other than their doomsday prophecy.