# data[].attributes.body
This is a good selection of articles and you are appearing to develop a clear understanding of the relationship between art and AI. As indicated in your peer assessment I think you need to focus more on a more specific are of digital creativity and AI. I think you appear to be doing that in terms of film and how automation appears to remove elements of creativity. Perhaps you could develop a clearer question around shot designer and what the positive and negatives are in terms of our creative futures.

# data[].attributes.body
About half of activities done by workers will automated

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
AI, automation, and the future of work: Ten things to solve for

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As machines increasingly complement human labor in the workplace, we will all need to adjust to reap the benefits.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The stuff of Sci-Fi films where robots live among us and complete tedious chores at our command is coming closer to reality. Enter AI assistants like Alexa, Google Assistant, Siri, and Cortana. These AI helpers take the form of a voice coming out of our devices, shout out a command and they make it happen. It is the science fiction fantasy of lazy people everywhere, and a Luddites' nightmare, coming to fruition. AI assistants are bringing us closer to a future where we won't have to lift a finger to get what we want, but at what cost?

Evryday tech companies are finding ways to make our lives easier. Turning phones into handheld devices, making computers lighter, sleeker and faster, and making everything virtually wireless. AI assistants are one of the newest and most popular additions to the mix.

AI assistants sometimes referred to as voice assistants, are the "voices" of pre-existing artificial intelligence within our devices. They use speech recognition and natural language processing to supply responses to queries and provide various services using certain applications. In recent years, the advancement of this technology has skyrocketed. AI's like Alexa (the voice assistant that comes with Amazon smart speakers) can even make jokes and present a "sassy" attitude. According to The Voicebot Smart Speaker Consumer Adoption Report 2018, 47.3 million adults in the United States have a smart speaker in their home and this number is expected to rise in the next couple of years.

A smart device is able to connect, share, and interact with its user and other smart devices across the internet. They have a set of programmed "skills" which may include access to certain apps on your devices, internet searches, and making phone calls or sending texts to your contacts. Depending on exactly how they're programmed their abilities will vary.

Here are some examples of popular AI assistants and what each one can do:

Alexa has over 50,000 skills and works with over 20,000 compatible devices.This means "she" offers a large range of completable commands. The most useful include ordering food to your door, calling you an Uber or playing a song on your command. Her whackier skills include telling jokes or "reading" your kids a bedtime story. CNET has provided a detailed list of things you can ask Alexa to do.

Google Assistant has nearly 2,000 commands. Although this seems significantly less than Alexa, Google Assistant has access to all your Google accounts including Gmail, Docs, Sheets, and Drive. This AI might be more helpful for someone who is using it specifically for professional/business purposes. Here is the complete list of what Google Assistant can do.

Siri is compatible with all Apple smart devices. If you're an Apple devotee "she" can really come in handy. Siri is helpful for all hand-free interactions with your devices. When you get a new Apple product you can immediately set up Siri to recognize your voice through Hey Siri. Siri can send texts for you, browse the internet, make calls or play music. Depending on which device you're using the range of commands may vary. If you're driving, or cooking shouting out "Hey Siri" instead of reaching for your phone can really come in handy. Here are some of the things Siri can do.

Cortana has a bit of way to go before it can dominate the AI assistant market. But as it is now, can launch applications, set appointments, and adjust settings within your computer (if it runs on Windows 10). Here is the complete list of Cortana's commands.

Technology is a double-edged sword. It's helpful but also harmful if used irresponsibly.

Because a large range of tasks can be completed through voice command these days, we're beginning to be accustomed to getting whatever we want without much effort. Furthermore, AI assistants don't argue, so no favor is too grand. Even simple tasks, though, are being eliminated. No need to stand up to switch off your lights or lock your door, you don't need to fetch the morning paper from the doorstep to read the news and you don't really need to speak to anyone but your device if you don't want to. Sure, it's convenient. But at what cost?

If voice assistants are making adults lazy, imagine the effects they'll have on our children. Growing up with voice assistants can confuse kids. AI assistants are not people and each interaction your child has with them is based on a sea of data. Letting your children interact with them from a young age can stun their social and emotional development.

Aside from that, voice assistants make children lazy in doing schoolwork. "Too many people have them installed without thinking through all the ramifications, like how their kids will actually learn anything if they get all their homework answers from an AI assistant." Said Katie Patrick, a family counselor from Dubai.

Beyond sheer laziness, AI assistants may also be making you dumber.If you're a student there's no need to open a book, no need to even type in a google search, all you have to do is activate your AI verbally and have your question answered. If you're driving a car or walking around, there isn't even a need to pay attention to where you're going because GPS will speak out every turn you need to make. Instead of storing information in our brains, we're storing them in artificial intelligence so they can do the thinking for us. We don't needto know the correct directions, or the answer to a question, we just need to ask our devices.

"Worrisome evidence suggests that our own intelligence is withering as we become more dependent on the artificial variety... Rather than lifting us up, smart software seems to be dumbing us down." Pulitzer Prize finalist Nicholas Carr wrote in his Wall Street Journal article called Automation Makes Us Dumb.

Voice command works because of the tiny microphones that are installed inside every smart device. The companies developing the gadgets vehemently deny that AI assistants are capable of spying on their users since they are only activated once their "wake word" is uttered. The companies state with all confidence that the privacy of each device owner is safe. Data breaches are not uncommon, however (i.e. Facebookand Apple) and the potential to listen in or watch through a smart device has been proven possible.

AI assistants can be a fun piece of tech to have around and can also be extremely useful. But start relying on them too much and the effects on your own intelligence and productivity will be grave. New technology is always exciting to experience and it's impressive how far humans have already come, but we need to be mindful of how we're using it and what is at stake when we do.
The Rise Of Cyber Models and AI Accounts On Instagram Data Breaches|Do People Care? Technology is a Distraction From Learning Originally appeared on www.goboldfish.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Are AI Assistants Making Us Lazy and Impatient?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The stuff of Sci-Fi films where robots live among us and complete tedious chores at our command is coming closer to reality. Enter AI assistants like Alexa, Google Assistant, Siri, and Cortana. These AI helpers take the form of a voice coming out of our devices, shout out a command and they make it happen.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Telemarketing
2. Bookkeeping Clerks
3. Compensation and Benefits Managers
4. Receptionists
5. Couriers
6. Proof-readers
7. Computer Support Specialists
8. Market Research Analysts
9. Advertising Salespeople
10. Retail Salespeople

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Is AI taking over jobs?

A quarter of workers are worried it is. There's even a website called " Will Robots Take My Job?" where you can input a job title and see the likelihood of it being taken over by AI.

The site is interesting to explore, but it's important to understand the facts. To give you an idea of how AI might affect the workforce, we'll discuss the impact it's already had, a list of jobs that AI can and cannot replace, and expert advice on how to future-proof your career and come out on top.
Table of Contents
Artificial Intelligence Disruption is Already Happening

AI once posed the most significant disruption to assembly lines. The recent AI boom has changed that, as advancements have introduced AI to many different industries and businesses, and more and more workers leverage it to do their jobs.

For example, salespeople are using AI to analyze sales calls faster, bloggers and content creators are already using AI to streamline the writing process, and customer support reps are bringing customers faster solutions.

However, as advancements continue, will the disruption become so great that the workforce will find themselves asking, will ChatGPT replace me?

HubSpot co-founder and CTO Dharmesh Shah has a positive outlook on the future of AI. In fact, he thinks bots and AI will make us better at our jobs and more secure in our careers, not the other way around.

Samyutha Reddy, Jasper's Head of Enterprise Marketing, thinks similarly. Her teams regularly use generative AI, but she's still actively hiring because AI can't replace the human experience: "We value writers in our society because they're able to give us a thought-provoking human perspective on the world...it's about humans sharing opinions on very real topics that help build your perspective on how you feel about something. So an AI could really never replace that human perspective."

Despite the expert opinions of Shah and Reddy, you might still be anxious about where your career stands. Below we'll discuss ten roles with a higher likelihood of replacement by AI and the ten roles that are the safest based on data from the landmark The Future of Employment study and the website " Will Robots Take My Job?

1. Telemarketers

Future of Employment Study Likelihood: 99%

Will Robots Take My Job? Likelihood: 100%

Why: You probably already receive robocalls on behalf of various products and services, and career growth in the telemarketing space is expected to decline by 18.2% by the year 2031. This is largely because of the requirements to be successful: unlike other roles, these jobs often require repetitive and predictable tasks that can easily be automated.

However, successful human telemarketers have a level of social perceptiveness and emotional awareness that machines can never replicate.

2. Bookkeeping Clerks

Future of Employment Study Likelihood: 99%

Will Robots Take My Job? Likelihood: 100%

Why: Jobs in this role are expected to decline 4.5% by 2031, and it's no surprise why - most bookkeeping is becoming automated if it hasn't been already. QuickBooks, FreshBooks, and Microsoft Office already offer software that does the bookkeeping for you, so it's no surprise this job has such a high probability.

3. Compensation and Benefits Managers

Future of Employment Study Likelihood: 96%

Will Robots Take My Job? Likelihood: 41%

Why: As companies grow, especially across multinational markets, a human and paper-based system can present more hurdles, time delays, and costs. Automated benefits systems can save time and effort for providing benefits to large numbers of employees, and companies like Ultipro and Workday are already being widely adopted.

4. Receptionists

Future of Employment Study Likelihood: 96%%

Will Robots Take My Job? Likelihood: 93%

Why: Pam predicted this back on , but in case you're not a fan, she said automated phone and scheduling systems can replace a lot of the traditional receptionist role - especially at modern technology companies that don't have office-wide phone systems or multinational corporations.

But, receptionists develop relationships in the office that give them a unique advantage in providing customized support compared to an algorithmic system.

5. Couriers

Future of Employment Study Likelihood: 94%

Will Robots Take My Job? Likelihood: 95%

Why: Couriers and delivery people are already being replaced by drones and robots, so it's only a matter of time until this space is dominated by automation altogether.

6. Proofreaders

Future of Employment Study Likelihood: 84%

Will Robots Take My Job? Likelihood: 100%

Why: Proofreading software is everywhere. From Microsoft Word's simple spelling and grammar check to Grammarly and Hemingway App, there are a lot of technologies out there that make it easy to self-check your writing.

On the other hand, the relationship a proofreader develops with a client gives them an understanding of the intention behind a writer's work and the contextual knowledge needed to successfully complete a project.

7. Computer Support Specialists

Future of Employment Study Likelihood: 65%

Will Robots Take My Job? Likelihood: 52%

Why: The field is projected to 6.2% by 2031, but with so much content on the internet with instructions, step-by-step guides, and hacks out there, it's no surprise companies will rely more heavily on bots and automation to answer support questions from employees and customers in the future.

8. Market Research Analysts

Future of Employment Study Likelihood: 61%

Will Robots Take My Job? Likelihood: 40%: 61%

Why: Market research analysts play an incredibly important role in developing messaging, content, and products, but automated AI and surveys can compile this information more and more efficiently.

While automated research tools can have a leg up in scale, speed, and accuracy, a human researcher has hands-on knowledge and personal experience that an algorithm can't develop. Human researchers that leverage automation tools can create a more effective process.

9. Advertising Salespeople

Future of Employment Study Likelihood: 54%

Will Robots Take My Job? Likelihood: 52%

Why: As advertising shifts away from print and TV and towards web and social media landscapes, people simply aren't needed to manage those sales for marketers who want to buy ad space. Social media platforms make it easy for people to buy space through free application program interfaces (APIs) and self-serve ad marketplaces removing the salesperson and making it faster and easier for users to run their ads. Even the ads themselves are leaning more and moe in artificial intelligence. When looking at actors or voice actors, we're also seeing a trend of companies using AI voices for advertisements like commercials.

10. Retail Salespeople

Future of Employment Study Likelihood: 92%

Will Robots Take My Job? Likelihood: 66%

Why: Companies are democratizing the shopping experience with features like self-checkout, and the modern buyer is much more internet-savvy and more likely to do internet research and make a buying decision on their own.

On the other hand, the care a retail salesperson brings during a 1:1 interaction differs from automated and unemotional support, and many consumers prefer to interact with humans during the support process.

1. Human Resources Managers

Future of Employment Study Likelihood: 0.55%

Will Robots Take My Job? Likelihood: 14%

Why Not: It's kind of in the name - but your company's Human Resources department will likely always need a human at the helm to manage interpersonal conflict with the help of non-cognitive and reasoning skills. Problem solving, contextual understanding, and unique business knowledge also make a human better equipped for this job.

The field is projected to grow 7.3% by 2031 as companies scale and need more robust structures for supporting and helping employees.

2. Sales Managers

Future of Employment Study Likelihood: 1.3%

Will Robots Take My Job? Likelihood: 30%

Why Not: Sales managers need high emotional intelligence to hit their monthly quotas, network and collaborate with customers, and motivate and encourage the larger sales team. Managers also have to analyze data and interpret trends. The high levels of intelligence required and the constant need to adapt to new situations make this role safe from automation.

3. Marketing Managers

Future of Employment Study Likelihood: 1.4%

Will Robots Take My Job? Likelihood: 18%

Why Not: Marketing managers have to interpret data, monitor trends, oversee campaigns, and create content. They also have to nimbly adapt and respond to changes and feedback from the rest of the company and customers, making this another human-forward career AI isn't quite ready to replicate.

A unique contextual understanding and previous business experience make a human stand out from an automated system.

4. Public Relations Managers

Future of Employment Study Likelihood: 1.5%

Will Robots Take My Job? Likelihood: 20%

Why Not: Successful PR managers rely on a network of relationships and contacts to procure press placements and buzz for the companies they represent, making this another completely safe role. PR managers who have to raise awareness around an issue or mission need a particularly human touch to raise funds or get people to participate in a campaign, too - and jobs are expected to grow 7.6% by 2024.

Most importantly, public relations managers are often on the go, attending events and being on hand to provide support if need be - a computer will never be able to do this.

5. Chief Executives

Future of Employment Study Likelihood: 1.5%

Will Robots Take My Job? Likelihood: 0%

Why Not: It's nearly impossible to automate leadership - after all, it's hard enough to teach it. Chief executives must inform broad strategy, represent companies' missions and objectives, and motivate huge teams of people working for them.Executives also have years of prior experience that make them successful.

Companies may answer to stakeholders and boards of directors, who likely wouldn't want a robot giving them an earnings report, either.

6. Event Planners

Future of Employment Study Likelihood: 3.7%

Will Robots Take My Job? Likelihood: 8%

Why Not: Event planning is a growing field, and if you ask anyone on our events team here at HubSpot, whether you're planning an event for employees, customers, or an industry event with tens of thousands of attendees, the planning process has many, many moving parts involved. Planners have to coordinate and negotiate with vendors, contractors, and freelancers to make things come together, and the organizational and people skills involved will make this another near-impossible role to automate.

Planners also attend events, ready to step in and troubleshoot on the spot. An automated tool simply couldn't be present.

7. Writers

Future of Employment Study Likelihood: 3.8%

Will Robots Take My Job? Likelihood: 49%
The large score difference is likely due to developments and advancements in language models post-2013 that can write entire blog posts or social media content.
Why Not: Writers have to ideate, create, and produce original written material, something that AI writing tools have not yet been able to replicate in the same way as humans ( see recent BuzzFeed controversy about AI-generated travel articles).

There are also many types of writers, some of which might be more at risk. An experienced journalist will likely be favored over AI, but a freelance copywriter may no longer be needed by a business that now uses AI to write Instagram captions.

8. Software Developers

Future of Employment Study Likelihood: 4.2%

Will Robots Take My Job? Likelihood: 39%
The large score difference is likely because of new back-end tools that help web developers write entirely new code, fill in gaps, and debug.
Why Not: Software engineering and development is complex enough for human beings, and the time and skill investment needed to create applications, software, and websites will be tough to replicate - especially since developers need to execute perfectly to create great products for customers. The field is expected to grow by 30.3% by 2024, so if you're a software developer, you're sitting pretty for now.

9. Editors

Future of Employment Study Likelihood: 5.5%

Will Robots Take My Job? Likelihood: 45%

Why Not: While the automated proofreading technology mentioned previously can take a load off, editors have to review writers' submission for clarity, accuracy, comprehensiveness, and originality. Some software can spot- check for clarity and scan for plagiarism, the but editor role must be carried out by a human in order to read work as another human would.

10. Graphic Designers

Future of Employment Study Likelihood: 8.2%

Will Robots Take My Job? Likelihood: 34%

Why Not: Image generators like Midjourney and DALL-E make it easy for people to create what they want, but graphic design is an artistic and technical field best suited for someone with fine arts training and experience. Like writing, graphic design work must be original and tailored to a unique use case.

If a graphic designer is working with a business, it also requires building a relationship between both parties throughout the design process. Plus, some image creators have been found to plagiarize artists' work - a lawsuit is likely the last thing people want.

Navigating Artificial Intelligence

Kate O'Neill, the author of Tech Humanist and Founder of KO Insights, explains that jobs that require emotional intelligence will be safer in the immediate future: "This is going to be a continuously moving target, but for the time being, what AI can't do well is use emotional intelligence, understand situational context, make judgment calls, and generally see nuance and meaning like we do."

"That means any kind of job that benefits from these kinds of human attributes is better off done by a human. A computer or robot may assist you in performing efficiently, but for now, you're the one who adds the expertise on how to perform appropriately," she added.

Even for jobs more likely to be impacted, there are always reasons why a human with real-life experience and expertise is a better fit. The best way to navigate the fast-moving world of artificial intelligence is to stay informed and adaptable.

How to Future-Proof Your Career

417,500 jobs were cut between January and May 2023, but only 3.9k were reportedly because of artificial intelligence - less than 1%. Still, regardless of what happens, you might be wondering how to future-proof your career. The answer? Re-skilling.

On a Marketing Against The Grain Episode, Kipp Bondar, HubSpot's Chief Marketing Officer, said, "As I think about the evolution of AI, I think about one of the things that's going to go part and parcel with it is the need to be amazing at re-skilling our workforce all around the world." (Listen to the full episode here).

Re-skilling doesn't mean preparing for the worst. Most jobs expect employees to engage in some sort of professional development, so this might be routine for you.

For example, you could explore different AI tools and how to leverage them in your day-to-day role or take a course to learn a new skill. As Shah said above, AI's most significant impact will likely be helping us be more effective in our careers. But, if your job is impacted, having taken the time to re-skill leaves you more prepared for future opportunities where you present yourself as a multifaceted candidate.

Learning from others is another great way to stay on top of the changing AI landscape and learn new skills. HubSpot has spoken to experts that have leaned into AI and incorporated it into their processes, and their insight is a valuable way to get ideas for reskilling. Here are some helpful resources:

Your Experience Is Your Greatest Asset

All technological revolutions impact how people work and AI will simply follow this pattern, having the most impact on rote and mundane tasks to save us time.

No matter what happens, your experience is your greatest asset in the face of a changing landscape. To stay up to date on AI and the trends, HubSpot's State of AI pillar houses all the information you need.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Jobs Will AI Replace & Which are Safe in 2023

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The age of artificial intelligence is here. We talked to experts and used a handy website to see which jobs AI will replace and which are safe.

# data[].attributes.body
Could corona virus change the job market forever? After a need for reduced human interaction, have machines proved to be more effective?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
For 23 years, Larry Collins worked in a booth on the Carquinez Bridge in the San Francisco Bay Area, collecting tolls. The fare changed over time, from a few bucks to $6, but the basics of the job stayed the same: Collins would make change, answer questions, give directions and greet commuters. "Sometimes, you're the first person that people see in the morning," says Collins, "and that human interaction can spark a lot of conversation."

But one day in mid-March, as confirmed cases of the coronavirus were skyrocketing, Collins' supervisor called and told him not to come into work the next day. The tollbooths were closing to protect the health of drivers and of toll collectors. Going forward, drivers would pay bridge tolls automatically via FasTrak tags mounted on their windshields or would receive bills sent to the address linked to their license plate. Collins' job was disappearing, as were the jobs of around 185 other toll collectors at bridges in Northern California, all to be replaced by technology.

Machines have made jobs obsolete for centuries. The spinning jenny replaced weavers, buttons displaced elevator operators, and the Internet drove travel agencies out of business. One study estimates that about 400,000 jobs were lost to automation in U.S. factories from 1990 to 2007. But the drive to replace humans with machinery is accelerating as companies struggle to avoid workplace infections of COVID-19 and to keep operating costs low. The U.S. shed around 40 million jobs at the peak of the pandemic, and while some have come back, some will never return. One group of economists estimates that 42% of the jobs lost are gone forever.

More from TIME

This replacement of humans with machines may pick up more speed in coming months as companies move from survival mode to figuring out how to operate while the pandemic drags on. Robots could replace as many as 2 million more workers in manufacturing alone by 2025, according to a recent paper by economists at MIT and Boston University. "This pandemic has created a very strong incentive to automate the work of human beings," says Daniel Susskind, a fellow in economics at Balliol College, University of Oxford, and the author of A World Without Work: Technology, Automation and How We Should Respond. "Machines don't fall ill, they don't need to isolate to protect peers, they don't need to take time off work."

As with so much of the pandemic, this new wave of automation will be harder on people of color like Collins, who is Black, and on low-wage workers. Many Black and Latino Americans are cashiers, food-service employees and customer-service representatives, which are among the 15 jobs most threatened by automation, according to McKinsey. Even before the pandemic, the global consulting company estimated that automation could displace 132,000 Black workers in the U.S. by 2030.

The deployment of robots as a response to the coronavirus was rapid. They were suddenly cleaning floors at airports and taking people's temperatures. Hospitals and universities deployed Sally, a salad-making robot created by tech company Chowbotics, to replace dining-hall employees; malls and stadiums bought Knightscope security-guard robots to patrol empty real estate; companies that manufacture in-demand supplies like hospital beds and cotton swabs turned to industrial robot supplier Yaskawa America to help increase production.

Companies closed call centers employing human customer-service agents and turned to chatbots created by technology company LivePerson or to AI platform Watson Assistant. "I really think this is a new normal-the pandemic accelerated what was going to happen anyway," says Rob Thomas, senior vice president of cloud and data platform at IBM, which deploys Watson. Roughly 100 new clients started using the software from March to June.

In theory, automation and artificial intelligence should free humans from dangerous or boring tasks so they can take on more intellectually stimulating assignments, making companies more productive and raising worker wages. And in the past, technology was deployed piecemeal, giving employees time to transition into new roles. Those who lost jobs could seek retraining, perhaps using severance pay or unemployment benefits to find work in another field. This time the change was abrupt as employers, worried about COVID-19 or under sudden lockdown orders, rushed to replace workers with machines or software. There was no time to retrain. Companies worried about their bottom line cut workers loose instead, and these workers were left on their own to find ways of mastering new skills. They found few options.

In the past, the U.S. responded to technological change by investing in education. When automation fundamentally changed farm jobs in the late 1800s and the 1900s, states expanded access to public schools. Access to college expanded after World War II with the GI Bill, which sent 7.8 million veterans to school from 1944 to 1956. But since then, U.S. investment in education has stalled, putting the burden on workers to pay for it themselves. And the idea of education in the U.S. still focuses on college for young workers rather than on retraining employees. The country spends 0.1% of GDP to help workers navigate job transitions, less than half what it spent 30 years ago.

"The real automation problem isn't so much a robot apocalypse," says Mark Muro, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. "It is business as usual of people needing to get retraining, and they really can't get it in an accessible, efficient, well-informed, data-driven way."

This means that tens of thousands of Americans who lost jobs during the pandemic may be unemployed for years or, in Collins' case, for good. Though he has access to retraining funding through his union contract, "I'm too old to think about doing some other job," says Collins, who is 63 and planning on taking early retirement. "I just want to go back to what I was doing."

Check into a hotel today, and a mechanical butler designed by robotics company Savioke might roll down the hall to deliver towels and toothbrushes. ("No tip required," Savioke notes on its website.) Robots have been deployed during the pandemic to meet guests at their rooms with newly disinfected keys. A bricklaying robot can lay more than 3,000 bricks in an eight-hour shift, up to 10 times what a human can do. Robots can plant seeds and harvest crops, separate breastbones and carcasses in slaughterhouses, pack pallets of food in processing facilities.

That doesn't mean they're taking everyone's jobs. For centuries, humans from weavers to mill workers have worried that advances in technology would create a world without work, and that's never proved true. ATMs did not immediately decrease the number of bank tellers, for instance. They actually led to more teller jobs as consumers, lured by the convenience of cash machines, began visiting banks more often. Banks opened more branches and hired tellers to handle tasks that are beyond the capacity of ATMs. Without technological advancement, much of the American workforce would be toiling away on farms, which accounted for 31% of U.S. jobs in 1910 and now account for less than 1%.

But in the past, when automation eliminated jobs, companies created new ones to meet their needs. Manufacturers that were able to produce more goods using machines, for example, needed clerks to ship the goods and marketers to reach additional customers.

Now, as automation lets companies do more with fewer people, successful companies don't need as many workers. The most valuable company in the U.S. in 1964, AT&T, had 758,611 employees; the most valuable company today, Apple, has around 137,000 employees. Though today's big companies make billions of dollars, they share that income with fewer employees, and more of their profit goes to shareholders. "Look at the business model of Google, Facebook, Netflix. They're not in the business of creating new tasks for humans," says Daron Acemoglu, an MIT economist who studies automation and jobs.

The U.S. government incentivizes companies to automate, he says, by giving tax breaks for buying machinery and software. A business that pays a worker $100 pays $30 in taxes, but a business that spends $100 on equipment pays about $3 in taxes, he notes. The 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act lowered taxes on purchases so much that "you can actually make money buying equipment," Acemoglu says.

In addition, artificial intelligence is becoming more adept at jobs that once were the purview of humans, making it harder for humans to stay ahead of machines. JPMorgan says it now has AI reviewing commercial-loan agreements, completing in seconds what used to take 360,000 hours of lawyers' time over the course of a year. In May, amid plunging advertising revenue, Microsoft laid off dozens of journalists at MSN and its Microsoft News service, replacing them with AI that can scan and process content. Radio group iHeartMedia has laid off dozens of DJs to take advantage of its investments in technology and AI. I got help transcribing interviews for this story using Otter.ai, an AI-based transcription service. A few years ago, I might have paid $1 a minute for humans to do the same thing.

These advances make AI an easy choice for companies scrambling to cope during the pandemic. Municipalities that had to close their recycling facilities, where humans worked in close quarters, are using AI-assisted robots to sort through tons of plastic, paper and glass. AMP Robotics, the company that makes these robots, says inquiries from potential customers increased at least fivefold from March to June. Last year, 35 recycling facilities used AMP Robotics, says AMP spokesman Chris Wirth; by the end of 2020, nearly 100 will.

RDS Virginia, a recycling company in Virginia, purchased four AMP robots in 2019 for its Roanoke facility, deploying them on assembly lines to ensure the paper and plastic streams were free of misplaced materials. The robots could work around the clock, didn't take bathroom breaks and didn't require safety training, says Joe Benedetto, the company's president. When the coronavirus hit, robots took over quality control as humans were pulled off assembly lines and given tasks that kept them at a safe distance from one another. Benedetto breathes easier knowing he won't have to raise the robots' pay to meet the minimum wage. He's already thinking about where else he can deploy them. "There are a few reasons I prefer machinery," Benedetto says. "For one thing, as long as you maintain it, it's there every day to work."

Companies deploying automation and AI say the technology allows them to create new jobs. But the number of new jobs is often minuscule compared with the number of jobs lost. LivePerson, which designs conversational software, could enable a company to take a 1,000-person call center and run it with 100 people plus chatbots, says CEO Rob LoCascio. A bot can respond to 10,000 queries in an hour, LoCascio says; an efficient call-center rep can answer six.

LivePerson saw a fourfold increase in demand in March as companies closed call centers, LoCascio says. "What happened was the contact-center representatives went home, and a lot of them can't work from home," he says.

Some surprising businesses are embracing automation. David's Bridal, which sells wedding gowns and other formal wear in about 300 stores across North America and the U.K., set up a chatbot called Zoey through LivePerson last year. When the pandemic forced David's Bridal to close its stores, Zoey helped manage customer inquiries flooding the company's call centers, says Holly Carroll, vice president of the customer-service and contact center. Without a bot, "we would have been dead in the water," Carroll says.

David's Bridal now spends 35% less on call centers and can handle three times more messages through its chatbot than it can through voice or email. (Zoey may be cheaper than a human, but it is not infallible. Via text, Zoey promised to connect me to a virtual stylist, but I never heard back from it or the company.)

Many organizations will likely look to technology as they face budget cuts and need to reduce staff. "I don't see us going back to the staffing levels we were at prior to COVID," says Brian Pokorny, the director of information technologies for Otsego County in New York State, who has cut 10% of his staff because of pandemic-related budget issues. "So we need to look at things like AI to streamline government services and make us more efficient."

Pokorny used a free trial from IBM's Watson Assistant early in the pandemic and set up an AI-powered web chat to answer questions from the public, like whether the National Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown, the county seat, had reopened. (It had, as of June 26, with limited capacity.) Now, Watson can answer 75% of the questions people ask, and Otsego County has started paying for the service, which Pokorny says costs "pennies" per conversation. Though the county now uses AI just for online chats, it plans to deploy a Watson virtual assistant that can answer phone calls. Around 36 states have deployed chatbots to respond to questions about the pandemic and available government services, according to the National Association of State Chief Information Officers.

IBM and LivePerson say that by creating AI, they're freeing up humans to do more sophisticated tasks. Companies that contract with LivePerson still need "bot builders" to help teach the AI how to answer questions, and call-center agents see their pay increase by about 15% when they become bot builders, LoCascio says. "We can look at it like there's going to be this massive job loss, or we can look at it that people get moved into different places and positions in the world to better their lives," LoCascio says.

But companies will need far fewer bot builders than call-center agents, and mobility is not always an option, especially for workers without college degrees or whose employers do not offer retraining. Non-union workers are especially vulnerable. Larry Collins and his colleagues, represented by SEIU Local 1000, were fortunate: they're being paid their full salaries for the foreseeable future in exchange for taking 32 hours a week of online classes in computer skills, accounting, entrepreneurship and other fields. (Some might even get their jobs back, albeit temporarily, as the state upgrades its systems.) But just 11.6 % of American workers were represented by a union in 2019.

Yvonne R. Walker, the union president, says most non-union workers don't get this kind of assistance. "Companies out there don't provide employee training and upskilling-they don't see it as a good investment," Walker says. "Unless workers have a union thinking about these things, the workers get left behind."

In Sweden, employers pay into private funds that help workers get retrained; Singapore's SkillsFuture program reimburses citizens up to 500 Singapore dollars (about $362 in U.S. currency) for approved retraining courses. But in the U.S., the most robust retraining programs are for workers whose jobs are sent overseas or otherwise lost because of trade issues. A few states have started promising to pay community-college tuition for adult learners who seek retraining; the Tennessee Reconnect program pays for adults over 25 without college degrees to get certificates, associate's degrees and technical diplomas. But a similar program in Michigan is in jeopardy as states struggle with budget issues, says Michelle Miller-Adams, a researcher at the W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.

House and Senate Democrats introduced a $15 billion workforce-retraining bill in early May, but it hasn't gained much traction with Republicans, who prefer to encourage retraining by giving tax credits. The federal funds that exist come with restrictions. Pell Grants, which help low-income students pay for education, can't be used for nontraditional programs like boot camps or a 170-hour EMT certification. Local jobless centers, which receive federal funds, spend an average of $3,500 per person on retraining, but they usually run out of money early in a calendar year because of limited funding, says Ayobami Olugbemiga, press secretary at the National Skills Coalition.

Even if federal funding were widely available, the surge of people who need retraining would be more than universities can handle, says Gabe Dalporto, the CEO of Udacity, which offers online courses in programming, data science, AI and more. "A billion people will lose their jobs over the next 10 years due to AI, and if anything, COVID has accelerated that by about nine years," says Dalporto. "If you tried to reskill a billion people in the university system, you would break the university system."

Dalporto says t he coronavirus should be a wake-up call for the federal government to rethink how it funds education. "We have this model where we want to dump huge amounts of capital into very slow, noncareer-specific education," Dalporto says. "If you just repurposed 10% of that, you could retrain 3 million people in about six months."

Online education providers say they can provide retraining and upskilling on workers' own timelines, and for less money than traditional schools. Coursera offers six-month courses for $39 to $79 a month that provide students with certifications needed for a variety of jobs, says CEO Jeff Maggioncalda. Once they've landed a job, they can then pursue a college degree online, he says. "This idea that you get job skills first, get the job, then get your college degree online while you're working, I think for a lot of people will be more economically effective," he says. In April, Coursera launched a Workforce Recovery Initiative that allows the unemployed in some states and other countries, including Colombia and Singapore, to learn for free until the end of the year.

Online learning providers can offer relatively inexpensive upskilling options because they don't have guidance counselors, classrooms and other features of brick-and-mortar schools. But there could be more of a role for employers to provide those support systems going forward. Dalporto, who calls the wave of automation during COVID-19 "our economic Pearl Harbor," argues that the government should provide a tax credit of $2,500 per upskilled worker to companies that provide retraining. He also suggests that company severance packages include $1,500 in retraining credits.

Some employers are turning to Guild Education, which works with employers to subsidize upskilling. A program it launched in May lets companies pay a fee to have Guild assist laid-off workers in finding new jobs. Employers see this as a way to create loyalty among these former employees, says Rachel Carlson, the CEO of Guild. "The most thoughtful consumer companies say, Employee for now, customer for life," she says.

With the economy 30 million jobs short of what it had before the pandemic, though, workers and employers may not see much use in training for jobs that may not be available for months or even years. And not every worker is interested in studying data science, cloud computing or artificial intelligence.

But those who have found a way to move from dying fields to in-demand jobs are likely to do better. A few years ago, Tristen Alexander was a call-center rep at a Georgia power company when he took a six-month online course to earn a Google IT Support Professional Certificate. A Google scholarship covered the cost for Alexander, who has no college degree and was supporting his wife and two kids on about $38,000 a year. Alexander credits his certificate with helping him win a promotion and says he now earns more than $70,000 annually. What's more, the promotion has given him a sense of job security. "I just think there's a great need for everyone to learn something technical," he tells me.

Of course, Alexander knows that technology may significantly change his job in the next decade, so he's already planning his next step. By 2021, he wants to master the skill of testing computer systems to spot vulnerabilities to hackers and gain a certificate in that practice, known as penetration testing. It will all but guarantee him a job, he says, working alongside the technology that's changing the world.

-With reporting by Alejandro de la Garza and Julia Zorthian/New York
This appears in the August 17, 2020 issue of TIME.
More Must-Reads From TIME

Contact us at letters@time.com.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Millions of Americans Have Lost Jobs in the Pandemic - And Robots and AI Are Replacing Them Faster Than Ever

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The drive to replace humans is accelerating as companies struggle to avoid workplace infections of COVID-19 and keep operating costs low.

# data[].attributes.headline
What is the future like for humans with the development of AI

# data[].attributes.subject
What is the future like for humans with the development of AI

# data[].attributes.body
The population is ever growing and the amount of jobs being taken over by AI is also growing. How long will it be until AI takes all of our work? And what work can it take?

# data[].attributes.body
Each generation has a new technology that makes the past generation see it as an increase in laziness. Is AI this generations new wave of laziness?

I would like to look at how technology is automating our lives in ways that reduce us from taking part in simple life activities. Is it benefitting society by giving us more time or is it making us dependant on technology.

# data[].attributes.body
Fat Llama has helped to make film rentals more accessible as well. With some rental houses having minimum spends and other restrictions. Fat Llama allows small time renters to get in touch with small time filmmakers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I had quite a demanding job & Thomas was very accomodating and flexible with the rental. Next time i...

# data[].attributes.body
Kickstarter and the new age of crowd funding has allowed small film makers bypass the usual route of self funded films or studio films. This has helped to make filmmaking accessible to those who wouldn't usually get the chance.

# data[].attributes.body
Using AI to decide what films to make and who to cast can massively reduce the risk studios go under to greenlight a film.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The film world is full of intriguing what-ifs. Will Smith famously turned down the role of Neo in The Matrix. Nicolas Cage was cast as the lead in Tim Burton's Superman Lives, but he only had time to try on the costume before the film was canned. Actors and directors are forever glancing off projects that never get made or that get made by someone else, and fans are left wondering what might have been.

For the people who make money from movies, that isn't good enough.

If casting Alicia Vikander instead of Gal Gadot is the difference between a flop and smash hit, they want to know. If a movie that bombs in the US would have set box office records across Europe, they want to know. And now, artificial intelligence can tell them.

artificial intelligence turns filmmaking into fantasy football

Los Angeles-based startup Cinelytic is one of the many companies promising that AI will be a wise producer. It licenses historical data about movie performances over the years, then cross-references it with information about films' themes and key talent, using machine learning to tease out hidden patterns in the data. Its software lets customers play fantasy football with their movie, inputting a cast, then swapping one actor for another to see how this affects a film's projected box office.

Say you have a summer blockbuster in the works with Emma Watson in the lead role, says Cinelytic co-founder and CEO Tobias Queisser. You could use Cinelytic's software to see how changing her for Jennifer Lawrence might change the film's box office performance.

"You can compare them separately, compare them in the package. Model out both scenarios with Emma Watson and Jennifer Lawrence, and see, for this particular film ... which has better implications for different territories," Queisser tells The Verge.

Cinelytic isn't the only company hoping to apply AI to the business of film. In recent years, a bevy of firms has sprung up promising similar insights. Belgium's ScriptBook, founded in 2015, says its algorithms can predict a movie's success just by analyzing its script. Israeli startup Vault, founded the same year, promises clients that it can predict which demographics will watch their films by tracking (among other things) how its trailers are received online. Another company called Pilot offers similar analyses, promising it can forecast box office revenues up to 18 months before a film's launch with "unrivaled accuracy."

The water is so warm, even established companies are jumping in. Last November, 20th Century Fox explained how it used AI to detect objects and scenes within a trailer and then predict which "micro-segment" of an audience would find the film most appealing.

Looking at the research, 20th Century Fox's methods seem a little hit or miss. (Analyzing the trailer for 2017's Logan, the company's AI software came up with the following, unhelpful tags: "facial_hair," "car," "beard," and - the most popular category of all - "tree.") But Queisser says the introduction of this technology is overdue.

"On a film set now, it's robots, it's drones, it's super high-tech, but the business side hasn't evolved in 20 years."

"On a film set now, it's robots, it's drones, it's super high-tech, but the business side hasn't evolved in 20 years," he says. "People use Excel and Word, fairly simplistic business methods. The data is very siloed, and there's hardly any analytics."

That's why Cinelytic's key talent comes from outside Hollywood. Queisser used to be in finance, an industry that's embraced machine learning for everything from high-speed trading to calculating credit risk. His co-founder and CTO, Dev Sen, comes from a similarly tech-heavy background: he used to build risk assessment models for NASA.

"Hundreds of billions of dollars of decisions were based on [Sen's work]," says Queisser. The implication: surely the film industry can trust him as well.

But are they right to? That's a harder question to answer. Cinelytic and other companies The Verge spoke to declined to make any predictions about the success of upcoming movies, and academic research on this topic is slim. But ScriptBook did share forecasts it made for movies released in 2017 and 2018, which suggest the company's algorithms are doing a pretty good job. In a sample of 50 films, including Hereditary, Ready Player One, and A Quiet Place, just under half made a profit, giving the industry a 44 percent accuracy rate. ScriptBook's algorithms, by comparison, correctly guessed whether a film would make money 86 percent of the time. "So that's twice the accuracy rate of what the industry achieved," ScriptBook data scientist Michiel Ruelens tells The Verge.

An academic paper published on this topic in 2016 similarly claimed that reliable predictions about a movie's profitability can be made using basic information like a film's themes and stars. But Kang Zhao, who co-authored the paper along with his colleague Michael Lash, cautions that these sorts of statistical approaches have their flaws.

One is that the predictions made by machines are frequently just blindingly obvious. You don't need a sophisticated and expensive AI software to tell you that a star like Leonardo DiCaprio or Tom Cruise will improve the chances of your film being a hit, for example.

Algorithms are also fundamentally conservative. Because they learn by analyzing what's worked in the past, they're unable to account for cultural shifts or changes in taste that will happen in the future. This is a challenge throughout the AI industry, and it can contribute to problems like AI bias. (See, for example, Amazon's scrapped AI recruiting tool that penalized female candidates because it learned to associate engineering prowess with the job's current male-dominated intake.)

Because AI learns from past data, it can't predict future cultural shifts

Zhao offers a more benign example of algorithmic shortsightedness: the 2016 action fantasy film Warcraft, which was based on the MMORPG World of Warcraft. Because such game-to-movie adaptations are rare, he says, it's difficult to predict how such a film would perform. The film did badly in the US, taking in only $24 million in its opening weekend. But it was a huge hit in China, becoming the highest grossing foreign language film in the country's history.

Who saw that coming? Not the algorithms.

There are similar stories in ScriptBook's predictions for 2017 / 2018 movies. The company's software correctly greenlit Jordan Peele's horror hit Get Out, but it underestimated how popular it would be at the box office, predicting $56 million in revenue instead of the actual $176 million it made. The algorithms also rejected The Disaster Artist, the tragicomic story of Tommy Wiseau's cult classic The Room, starring James Franco. ScriptBook said the film would make just $10 million, but it instead took in $21 million - a modest profit on a $10 million film.

As Zhao puts it: "We are capturing only what can be captured by data." To account for other nuances (like the way The Disaster Artist traded on the memeiness of The Room), you have to have humans in the loop.

Andrea Scarso, a director at the UK-based Ingenious Group, agrees. His company uses Cinelytic's software to guide investments it makes in films, and Scarso says the software works best as a supplementary tool.

"Sometimes it validates our thinking, and sometimes it does the opposite."

"Sometimes it validates our thinking, and sometimes it does the opposite: suggesting something we didn't consider for a certain type of project," he tells The Verge. Scarso says that using AI to play around with a film's blueprint - swapping out actors, upping the budget, and seeing how that affects a film's performance - "opens up a conversation about different approaches," but it's never the final arbiter.

"I don't think it's ever changed our mind," he says of the software. But it has plenty of uses all the same. "You can see how, sometimes, just one or two different elements around the same project could have a massive impact on the commercial performance. Having something like Cinelytic, together with our own analytics, proves that [suggestions] we're making aren't just our own mad ideas."

But if these tools are so useful, why aren't they more widely used? ScriptBook's Ruelens suggests one un-Hollywood characteristic might be to blame: bashfulness. People are embarrassed. In an industry where personal charisma, aesthetic taste, and gut instinct count for so much, turning to the cold-blooded calculation of a machine looks like a cry for help or an admission that you lack creativity and don't care about a project's artistic value.

Ruelens says ScriptBook's customers include some of the "biggest Hollywood studios," but nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) prevent him from naming any. "People don't want to be associated with these AIs yet because the general consensus is that AI is bad," says Ruelens. "Everyone wants to use it. They just don't want us to say that they're using it." Queisser says similar agreements stop him from discussing clients, but that current customers include "large indie companies."

Hollywood is unlikely to accept AI having the final say anytime soon

Some in the business push back against the claim that Hollywood is embracing AI to vet potential films, at least when it comes to actually approving or rejecting a pitch. Alan Xie, CEO of Pilot Movies, a company that offers machine learning analytics to the film industry, tells The Verge that he's "never spoken to an American studio executive who believes in [AI] script analysis, let alone [has] integrated it into their decision-making process."

Xie says it's possible studios simply don't want to talk about using such software, but he says script analysis, specifically, is an imprecise tool. The amount of marketing spend and social media buzz, he says, are a much more reliable predictor of box office success. "Internally at Pilot, we've developed box office forecast models that rely on script features, and they've performed substantially worse than models that rely on real-time social media data," he says.

Despite skepticism about specific applications, the tide might be turning. Ruelens and investment director Scarso say a single factor has convinced Hollywood to stop dismissing big data: Netflix.

The streaming behemoth has always bragged about its data-driven approach to programming. It surveils the actions of millions of subscribers in great detail and knows a surprising amount about them - from which thumbnail will best convince someone to click on a movie to the choices they make in Choose Your Own Adventure-style tales like Black Mirror: Bandersnatch. "We have one big global algorithm, which is super-helpful because it leverages all the tastes of all consumers around the world," said Netflix's head of product innovation, Todd Yellin, in 2016.

It's impossible to say whether Netflix's boasts are justified, but the company claims its recommendation algorithm alone is worth $1 billion a year. (It surely doesn't hurt that such talk puts fear into the competition.) Combined with its huge investments into original content, it's enough to make even the most die-hard Hollywood producer reach for a fortifying algorithm.

Ruelens says the transformation has been noticeable. "When we started out four years ago, we had meetings with big companies in Hollywood. They were all super skeptical. They said 'We have [decades] of expertise in the industry. How can this machine tell us what to do?'" Now, things have changed, he says. The companies did their own validation studies, they waited to see which predictions the software got right, and, slowly, they learned to trust the algorithms.

"They're starting to accept our technology," says Ruelens. "It just took time for them to see."
Correction Wednesday May 29th, 04:00AM ET: An earlier version of this piece suggested that Cinelytic's software analyzes scripts. That is incorrect; it only uses film summaries to organize data. We regret the error.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Hollywood is quietly using AI to help decide which movies to make

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Artificial intelligence is being slowly embraced by filmmakers as a tool to help predict box office revenue and decide which films to make. Companies like Vault, ScriptBook, Pilot, and others are promising that machine learning can fill in the gaps of human knowledge. But how good is an AI's aesthetic judgment really?

# data[].attributes.body
This is an application that helped turn pre production for art and cinematography from tactile and physical to semi-automated floorplan drawings.

It allows the user to use pre drawn shapes and objects to draw floor plans. You can also animate cameras and characters to accurately plan a scene or space.

Each design you make is automatically saved and stored on the cloud so the chances of you losing work is very low. They can be collaborative and easily sharable unlike pencil and paper which would have needed to be redrawn or rubbed out.

Hand drawn floor plans on the other hand can be far more customisable as you don't have the restrictions of pre-drawn shapes and objects. You can also be more creative with spaces and are not stuck with predetermined lights.

There is potential for people to become lazy and just rely on how easy this kind of software is to use. But, there is always a chance, like with most new technologies that things could go wrong or the program could have bugs. This means unless you can work with the old tools of pencil and paper you'll be rather stuck with what you can do.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The industry standard app for camera blocking

# data[].attributes.body
Using sensors on the brain this technology creates art from brainwaves when listening to music.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Imagine if you could turn your memories and emotions into compelling, abstract paintings. It's basically every artist's dream.

A London-based creative technology studio, random quark, has found a way to visually represent emotions by scanning people's brain activity to create awe-inspiring paintings.

Equipping individuals with commercial EEG headsets in a room with dim lights and free of noise, the company asks you to close their eyes and think of an emotionally charged memory, happy or sad.

As the device scans the brain's electrical activity from the left to the right, it creates a dataset which constitutes a unique insight into the individuals' memory and mood at that time.

But this deluge of information needs to be translated into the canvas in a visual way that is a unique piece of art.

Bird swarms

Random quark's Theodoros Papatheodorou and Tom Chambers adopted a technique that draws inspiration from generative art - that's a flocking algorithm inspired by bird swarm or movement of fish in the sea.

"Some rules of the swarm rely on stochastic/random decisions and therefore are unique," Papatheodorou said. "At the same time, keeping some rules the same we managed to create a uniform visual output. Basically, all look like they were made by the same painter, on a different day."

Flocking algorithms also give the chance to make use of the massive amounts of data that comes out of the brain during the EEG test, without reducing it to a few inputs.

To determine what people are feeling, random quark relies on a theory called lateralization of emotion which basically says that activity in the left side of the brain is associated with positive feelings while increased activity on the right is linked to negative feelings.

"We measure the asymmetry between left/right hemispheres as well as the overall activation of the brain (alpha/beta/gamma waves) and we plot this data in a 2D valence-activation graph which is known as the Geneva Emotions wheel where all the human emotions are plotted," Papatheodorou said.

Raw emotions

For the purpose of the experiment, random quark filtered and reduced the emotions to 7 major ones - joy, sadness, anger, love, disgust, fear, surprise - and measure only them, giving them a score.

The feelings are ranked by intensity, with a confidence level for each one. Then, the system picks only the first 2 emotions and proportionally assign a unique shade of colour to each particle of the system.

"Around 100,000 agents are released on the canvas and their movements are guided by a swarm algorithm that we have written which is partly affected by the raw EEG data," Chambers said.

"One particle leaves a random trail, but when you have 100, 1,000, 10,000, 100,000 particles you start to have a painting that looks like brush strokes, because these particles kind of coalesce together, they break apart and they interact with each other to make the painting."

True colours

How the swarm travels on the canvas is directly linked to the raw brainwaves as we read them - shaping in effect the patterns on the "paper", Papatheodorou says.

The colours' association is arbitrary although it's based on common symbols for emotions - red for anger, blue for sadness and so on - and the authors stress the artistic (not scientific) nature of their work.

The project started when Saatchi Wellness, a creative agency, asked random quark to find a way to represent emotions in an intuitive and accessible way.

The paintings have been exhibited in a gallery in London. Papatheodorou and Chambers also used emotional techniques for Saatchi Wellness website where the due basically scan the "twitter-sphere" and extract the emotional state of the world using machine learning.

"We process random tweets in real-time and we measure their emotional state using IBM's Watson to measure basic feelings. We then use these parameters about how the world feels to guide the swarm you see on their website."

Possible applications

Random quark sees the brainwaves painting as an experiment in human computer interaction. "What we see as the future of computing is a way of giving computers context so they can make better decisions. When you talk to Alexa or Google Home if they can understand how you're felling it can engage with you in a more intelligent way," Chambers said.

In the future computers will be able to understand more context like emotions which will enable them to become more adaptive, with applications such as adjusting your home environment to suit your mood when you come home from work. It can also impact storytelling in a way that makes it more interactive so that the story can adapt to your reactions to the way the story is being told.

"Rather than writing a book or a song, artists in the future will likely write programs that generate them uniquely for each read or listen based on all the cues it takes in," Papatheodorou said.

Wow!

WATCH: Memories are colour and brain waves are brush strokes in these mesmerizing paintings

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
Gianluca Mezzofiore, Videos by Nikolay Nikolov

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Watch your raw memories become mind-blowing abstract art

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Imagine if you could turn your memories and emotions into compelling, abstract paintings. It's basically every artist's dream. A London-based creative technology studio, random quark, has found a way to visually represent emotions by scanning people's brain activity to create awe-inspiring paintings.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a great website which is currently a way of finding cinematography inspiration. They log each photo so you can refine searches.
If they managed to implement AI into the logging of the stills then they could reduce the work load a lot which means they can increase the amount of films they add to the database..

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
SHOTDECK :: Fully Searchable High-Res Movie Images

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
ShotDeck is an invaluable research and educational resource that makes life easier for anyone in Film, Media, Advertising, and Education.

# data[].attributes.body
Nvidia made a program that can turn basic block patterns into art. If this is developed enough it could be used for things like story boards.