"AI-generated content is a perversion of creation."
It's a very strong claim that @auschwitzmuseum is making here, yet his arguments resonate with me.
A worthwhile long-form read.
The argument made is greatly subjective, yet argued as objective fact.
>There is something deeply different about owning an original painting – knowing that the artist’s own hand made those actual brush strokes – than there is in owning even a flawless reproduction.
Only if the owner assigns that value.
>The visceral experience of a live concert cannot be matched by a recording, no matter how good the audiovisual system or how immersive the experience.
Neuro-divergent erasure. Many ND people experience things vastly differently, and you can't claim a universal truth like the quoted part.
>Receiving a handwritten letter is far more meaningful than receiving an email with the exact same message,
It wouldn't matter to me. And I know other people who would agree.
Every single anti-AI argument I've seen always boils down to "it doesn't have soul", to which I say "souls don't exist."
@atatassault @ct_bergstrom @AndyPerfors your comment speaks a lot about yourself, and this is fine. It would still speak a lot about yourself (in a different way) if you had written it with a ChatGPT. But if we don't know, we wouldn't know the difference.
To simplify, I could say the same about auto-correction: if I see a mistake in your message here, I'd attribute it to that. Not so if I see a handwritten letter. With LLMs, we are not talking of mistakes, but of creative choices.
