There's an image going around that is the back of a $20 with the demolition in progress, and every time I see it my finger hovers over the share button, then I think, "there's like a 90% chance that this is 'AI' crud and not a Photoshop" and I die a little inside and do not share.
This is what they have stolen from us.
@jwz Does the craftsmanship of the meme matter or the message?
I think in this case well-prompted AI enables more people to relay their message -- it's not replacing art or trying to deceive.
@alexr Yes, the medium matters. Anyone using "AI" is as piece of shit, and yes, they are trying to replace art, and yes, they are trying to deceive. Fuck them entirely.
@jwz @alexr
I completely disagree. AI is a tool, if properly used it allows people to express themselves in ways which may not have been previously possible.
Someone may have a wonderful idea for an image, but not the ability to make it himself; I see nothing wrong in using a tool which simplifies doing that.
AI is not replacing art, if anything AI is an additional tool which can be used to make art.
That would be like saying that since electric guitars exist there is no more classical music, which very much is not the case.
@monkeyben @jwz @alexr
The fact that it was trained on stolen data is indeed a problem.
I completely understand if you consider using AI as immoral as it uses stolen data.
However, it can be used to create new things with an artistic value. I don't see why someone would say that things made with the aid of AI have no artistic value.
A collage just takes things made by other people, and sticks them together in an artistic way.
But with collage you still need to have artistic skill to create something. When AI mashes things together if you ask it to include anything that isn't in it's dataset it can not draw them, because it can't create new ideas. It's only mashing things together with artist rules that are inherent in the art it has already stolen.
Looking at AI art compared to real art made by people is like comparing psychopaths with normal people. A psychopath may be able to fake love, empathy and emotions but to the person on the recieving end of those fake emotions it feels off, like there is no substance to the emotions, and there is not!
@monkeyben @jwz @alexr
I do not agree: with AI you prompt for something specific. You prompt several times until you obtain a certain result which has some properties you desire. After that you may further modify what you obtained with other techniques.
This whole process is artistic. It is not the AI itself who is deciding what to do and providing the finished things. It's a human using the AI as a tool to create something. The value is not in the AI itself, it's in how the person uses it to obtain a certain result.
Many painters said that computer graphics would destroy traditional arts. That did not happen, computer graphics created a new form of art with new techniques which can be used.
You can use traditional painting techniques and use computer graphics to add certain things to it, or you can do arts completely using computer graphics.
AI has the potential to develop completely new artistic forms. I feel this has not happened yet, it is currently mostly used to simplify doing what has been traditionally done in computer graphics.
However I do start seeing artistic applications of AI. Italian Brainrots may be seen as a prototypical form of new art using this technique. It's not something I really enjoy or value, but it does have its artistic value. Same as you could see the first stickman pictures as an initial form of computer graphics art.
I do believe it is possible to transmit messages and feelings through images generated with AI.
Well whether people think AI output is art or slop genAI/LLMs are still highly amoral to use because: -
1. It is killing the planet with energy and water use, and component obsolescence.
2. It is based on a vast amount of stolen art work in its dataset.
3. It is being pushed on to people mostly by the US fascist regime and moraless evil companies and billionaires, for propaganda so they can hide facts and restrict people's data source to LLMs purely controlled and corrupted by them
@monkeyben
I agree with the three points you raise, completely.
However, these are unrelated to the fact that AI can be used to generate art.
It is possible to develop AI which does not have these three problems in fact. The first point is the most difficult to resolve, but it can be mitigated.
@rastinza @jwz @alexr absolutely pushing back on "ability to make."
Everyone has the ability to make an image to convey their ideas. EVERYONE. Not all can do it 'a la mode commercial' however. That's what AI sells; the commercialized form as the only valid form. It's wrong, it's evil, and it hurts everyone who uses it.
@ike_seblon @jwz @alexr
Sure, everyone has the ability to make things. I agree with that.
I'm not sure what you mean by commercial form however. You can use AI to make many different things. I do not think that AI can only be used to do one single type of thing, depending on who uses it different outcomes may be obtained.
Some people are very good at ink drawing and others are good at drawing on the computer. Switch them around and possibly don't do as well and get frustrated. Is the person drawing on the computer evil because he does not use an ink pen?
I do not see what is evil of one person trying to make something nice using AI. Maybe even trying to convey an important message. I really do not see why that should not be considered an artistic endeavour.
@rastinza @jwz @alexr look. The AI is the evil. The evil is that it DEVALUES the user's innate ability to communicate meaning which is the inheritance of all humans. AI tells you that you are not human enough to create meaning without its help; by using it YOU AGREE. It is robbing you of the experience of creation. Anyone who uses AI is telling everyone else "I am incapable", anyone who advocates it is saying "you are incapable too". In short, just post the fucking prompt, human to human.
@ike_seblon @jwz @alexr
The prompt itself often has no communicative value.
Should I give you all the SVG commands or you'd rather see the rendered image?
Why would AI devalue or damage humans communication abilities is unclear to me.
AI is a tool, it tells you nothing. It is not there to inherently attempt to make your life worse. Using AI does not mean you're incapable of doing things. It means you are able to do certain things using AI as a tool. You're not incapable of writing because you use a keyboard rather than a pen.
Indeed I agree it can be misused, in some cases it may even be dangerous for some people. I'm thinking for example at people using chatbots as substitutes for psychologists.
What I don't understand is why a proper and constructive use is not conceivable to you.
@rastinza I cannot, we cannot, possibly want to see the result less. We would prefer that you post images of your bowel movements. Your "result" is worthless to everybody. Your lack of understanding on subsequent points is bizarre and appalling. You are absolutely wrong on fundamental levels.
@ike_seblon
I see AI as a tool.
I am missing your point I'm sorry. I tried to argument my opinion in a clear way, maybe I failed.
I really do not understand what you mean by my lack of understanding and being wrong on fundamental levels. It is a bit offensive to be treated this way.
I feel like this chat is not really going anywhere at this point. If you wish to explain a bit better what you mean by that, that may help.
I'll reiterate: why is a constructive and artistic use of AI not conceivable?
@rastinza @alexr Well, you're wrong, and you're so *offensively* wrong that I'm just gonna go ahead and block you. *plonk*