Can we finally appreciate AI art without getting into conundrums about the supposed end of human creativity?

[HereticBD]

Good gag, but incorrect.

I don't think so. There's no value in AI art. It's a novelty. There's value in AI porn. Once this shit truly takes off and anyone can merely think of something and have AI create it, it will funnel to porn. Mark my words. This AI image/video generating technology, will be mainly used for pornography in the very near future. It's a given.

 

[deviake]

AI art is still in its infancy, it's pretty nuts and bolts. That said, I think AI is already on the steps of the road showing that human ingenuity/creativity may not be so unique as we thought. So far to me it looks like it depends on the complexity of the system in question.

 

[TheMaster]

There's no value in AI art. It's a novelty. There's value in AI porn. Once this shit truly takes off and anyone can merely think of something and have AI create it, it will funnel to porn. Mark my words. This AI image/video generating technology, will be mainly used for pornography in the very near future. It's a given.

I don't think this is true actually at all. There is already multitudes of porn available already of every conceivable kind and this will continue. Part of the appeal for people who are porn addicts is in the finding of novelty within their interests and not merely limited to what they can think of. So their search for what's out there is the appeal. There is already the possibility in making pornographic images with AI but thats not how it is being used for the vast majority of it.

The conversation isn't about what is possible. It is about what is going to happen as a result of it and what we will see is people cheating and using computers to create art instead of coming through their soul and we will see less spirituality and less creativity in the human race as a result of it.

It's true that art doesn't have to be commercialized, but most people don't have time for full-time jobs, family and a hobby in art that creates as much output as a full or part-time art gig does. That's less human are in the world as a result.

Well you say yourself it's what's happening already. AI art was as inevitable to happen as the nuclear bomb was inevitable to happen once people understood particle physics. So we have to adjust to this new reality. There is still sculpture and art made with materials which cant be replicated, as well as the appreciation for the genuine hand made pieces of visual art.

My daughter is in private school getting a very high-end liberal arts education. That means that art and writing are a substantial foundation in what she is learning about. Most of the kids are having AI write most of their papers or part of their papers already. So that is a net result of dumber students but also turning them into less creative liars. So again the conversation is not about what is possible. It's about what is going to happen as a result and we will see a degradation of humanity as a result of it.

If there are kids attending art college and having AI write things for them they are just dumb and cheating themselves out of an education. That's a choice not everyone would make and means they were not genuine in why they attended in first place.

Your example of the artist who doesn't have the skills but does have the vision could also be reversed, couldn't it?? If art isn't about commercialization and making money, then why can't that person create their own art anyway because the beauty and joy of it coming through them will be a spiritual discipline and a spiritual practice as will be the humility of accepting that they're not incredible artists. That person you think AI is helping doesn't need AI's help. But also I think people probably could appreciate art that came through someone's heart like that even if the outcome isn't perfect.

This is an idealistic stance. Yes, there is an important part in the process of creating art that can be spiritual and I agree that this is lost. However the fact remains that I and most would never be able to create a piece like the old classical masters. So the possibility of bringing to life some of these visions is amazing. There is a skill in being able to fine tune the AI still and using photoshop if necessary to adjust it. So what is lost in the process of creating is more than made up for in the end result.

You say a person doesn't need the help of AI but let's be serious, appreciating some pencil drawing you made or nice little watercolor is one thing. Having sublime images made that are as good as any artist and through the lens of one's imagination in an instant is another thing, and it can be valued.

 

[Phlog]

AI art is objectively good.

It also doesn't threaten human made art in the slightest. What it does do is threaten the capitalist model by reducing the need for humans in the means of production.

People can continue to do what they want to do for fun.

This is a microcosm of what is going to be considered the greatest period of change in human history. The automation of the means of production, a continuation of the industrial revolution. Capitalism as we know it actually cannot survive it.

 

[LEWIS540]

I don't think so. There's no value in AI art. It's a novelty. There's value in AI porn. Once this shit truly takes off and anyone can merely think of something and have AI create it, it will funnel to porn. Mark my words. This AI image/video generating technology, will be mainly used for pornography in the very near future. It's a given.

Specifically for art, maybe.....I was talking AI as a whole.

 

[IDL]

I don't think so. There's no value in AI art. It's a novelty. There's value in AI porn. Once this shit truly takes off and anyone can merely think of something and have AI create it, it will funnel to porn. Mark my words. This AI image/video generating technology, will be mainly used for pornography in the very near future. It's a given.

I can see plenty of value in AI art for commercial applications, which is probably where most of the jobs for artists are. Things like brochures, presentations, marketing material, etc. Even things like gift cards perhaps.

Sounds like you are just thinking of art that people purchase for the sake of collecting and owning. TBD on whether or not people will pay for AI art on that front but I think it's a safe bet that it won't be worth nearly as much as human created pieces.

 

[Nathan LaMontagne]

I understand your viewpoint, I just think it's naive.

In a scenario where advanced AI can replace most jobs, the organizations that will hold all the leverage will be the tech corporations and governments/militaries that own the intellectual rights to the AI. You, as an ordinary citizen, will have no negotiating power at all. You won't own the AI. Historically, strikes and work boycotts were some of the only actually effective methods through which ordinary citizens could leverage their power against their rulers. You won't even have that anymore. When has a corporation not taken advantage of their leverage against people to make more profit? Never, they always capitalize. Your sole economic value will be relegated to being a passive consumer.

My girlfriend is an animator for the simpsons. Graduated from UCLA,
The whole animation guild went on strike, lasted like 6 months... one of the CEOs cockily said that they don't have to give them shit and they can starve and lose their houses.

Imagine when her job can be done to some degree with AI.

It's not like the simpsons has integrity beyond making money. The soul is gone already.

I say give it 5 years and it's all over.

 

[Nathan LaMontagne]

I don't think so. There's no value in AI art. It's a novelty. There's value in AI porn. Once this shit truly takes off and anyone can merely think of something and have AI create it, it will funnel to porn. Mark my words. This AI image/video generating technology, will be mainly used for pornography in the very near future. It's a given.

Porn is practically the sole reason that VHS won the war, as well as the push to DVD.

It's funny to think about but porn really dictates the way mediums get pushed ahead.

 

[HereticBD]

Porn is practically the sole reason that VHS won the war, as well as the push to DVD.

It's funny to think about but porn really dictates the way mediums get pushed ahead.

They also won the war for Blu Ray.

 

[koquerelle]

AI "art" is garbage. They steal what real artists have done and mash it together. A bunch of talentless thieves pretend it's art, but it's not. Fuck AI "art" and anybody who tries to justify its existence.

 

[IDL]

AI "art" is garbage. They steal what real artists have done and mash it together. A bunch of talentless thieves pretend it's art, but it's not. Fuck AI "art" and anybody who tries to justify its existence.

It's existence is justified by the progression of the underlying technology regardless of how people feel about it

I don't think it's as simple as 'stealing and mashing together' like it was some person doing it. Maybe if you mean by stealing billions of images and ideas from the human collective and using that as its foundation.

But at the same time, it's kinda what someone does when they learn something. They are learning from previous humans and examples that have already been created, and based on that they then produce their own work but it is always on top of that foundation.

 

[Vayn Sword]

I was genuinely surprised by the weirdness of the images AI created when I tried it.

 

[koquerelle]

It's existence is justified by the progression of the underlying technology regardless of how people feel about it

It exists only because it steals from artists. That's not an opinion. That's a fact.

 

[IDL]

It exists only because it steals from artists. That's not an opinion. That's a fact.

You may need to define 'stealing' then in this context. If you mean that it is trained on millions or perhaps billions of images and ideas then sure. Odds are that a small subset of those images are copyrighted but that is in no way a requirement for it to work.

Also now that the models have been developed you can create your own training data sets so that you can produce things most heavily influenced by that custom set.

 

[koquerelle]

Odds are that a small subset of those images are copyrighted

That's an enormous lie which shows you know little about the subject. You don't care about the truth. You want to be right.

 

[IDL]

That's an enormous lie which shows you know little about the subject. You don't care about the truth. You want to be right.

Send me a link regarding how many copyrighted images it (one of the many models) is estimated to use. I'm curious.

But either way, the technology itself does not require copyrighted images to work

For example Facebook trained a model on the images within Facebook, but there are a lot of different models all of which use different training datasets.

 

[koquerelle]

But either way, the technology itself does not require copyrighted images to work

Keep digging that hole.

"They used thousands of copyrighted artworks and are getting sued for it, but they don't need it."

What a dumb fucking take. You're a fucking idiot. Let's bet you're a talentless Tech Bro with no moral values.

Amazon took down comic books created with AI because they realized it was theft. Other platforms did the same. Can you explain their decision?

 

[IDL]

Keep digging that hole.

"They used thousands of copyrighted artworks and are getting sued for it, but they don't need it."

What a dumb fucking take. You're a fucking idiot. Let's bet you're a talentless Tech Bro with no moral values.

Amazon took down comic books created with AI because they realized it was theft. Other platforms did the same. Can you explain their decision?

You realize they use hundreds of millions of images, and there are many different models right?

I see you are getting emotional, so keep in mind that I am just trying to discuss how it works in order to have productive discussion. I have many qualms with AI in the grand scheme of things.

 

[koquerelle]

Porn is practically the sole reason that VHS won the war, as well as the push to DVD.

It's funny to think about but porn really dictates the way mediums get pushed ahead.

Sorry, but you're wrong. VHS won because it offered longer recording time and it was cheaper to produce.

Indiana Jones also played a role. You could buy a VHS copy for $25 while the Beta version would cost you $75. Video stores knew what to do after that. Beta had better video quality, but the price difference wasn't worth it.

 

[koquerelle]

You realize they use hundreds of millions of images, and there are many different models right?

I see you are getting emotional, so keep in mind that I am just trying to discuss how it works in order to have productive discussion. I have many qualms with AI in the grand scheme of things.

You're right. I sincerely apologize about my emotional outburst. I'm an passionate asshole. I try to do better, but it's hard. I'm an old dog.

I've worked with artists for a few years and seen what AI stole from them. That's why I get mad. The Tech Bros knew what they were doing. They stole and were willing to live with the consequences because it'd be too late to do anything meaningful once the process was started.