Board 8 > What do people here think about AI-created media?

(+) Yeah! (+)

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Congrats, you found the exception that proves the rule.

What the hell does this mean lol.

You're infantilizing art work as pleasure and not real work.

foolm0r0n posted...

What the hell does this mean lol.

You're infantilizing art work as pleasure and not real work.

It means either you found an explicit explanation of an edge case which allows you to infer what the standard situation is, or that you found a counterexample that demonstrates the purported rule is faulty

masterplum posted...

Well yeah, because the profession has been dead for generations.

Don't think it was anyone's dream job when it existed either.

Kind of a sidebar here, but I feel like there's this meme every time a new technology gets criticism that goes "People always complain about new technology. Why, people even complained about the telephone." with the unstated implication being that those criticism weren't valid, so these aren't either.

But, a lot of the contemporaneous criticisms about items like the telephone WERE valid! It did ruin the art of letter writing; it was noisy and disruptive in households. Same with other technologies. Television did shorten attention spans. It was just that we, as a society and as individuals, both consciously and unconsciously, decided that the positives outweighed the negatives for these technologies, but that doesn't mean they didn't exist, and we've done a great disservice over the years by pretending that they didn't, both when it comes to the technologies in question, and when it comes to emerging technologies in the future.

I fully support the notion of AI-generated cover letters.

WhiteLens posted...

I fully support the notion of AI-generated cover letters.

I tried one, it was terrible

Really like what AI has done so far to support on a few tasks.
The potential going forward as it improves is pretty exciting.

Big L for AI "Art"

https://twitter.com/MAiJiNTHEARTIST/status/1628505937580552193?s=19

i can't wait for ai to unemploy me personally

I, for one, welcome our new AI overlords.

NFUN posted...

It means either you found an explicit explanation of an edge case which allows you to infer what the standard situation is, or that you found a counterexample that demonstrates the purported rule is faulty

I know what the phrase means but it makes no sense here

foolm0r0n posted...

I know what the phrase means but it makes no sense here

yeah i was just trying to point out that he doesn't know what the phrase means

https://youtu.be/aAZVtj_JsCY

If the argument is AI art is bad because its replacing things people do for meaning and pleasure and your response is what about the tedious art that people grind out, then Id point you to the post I had already made:

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Fun as a toy, but people using it to try to churn out content for money is bad enough that Id be cool if it went away.

So the exception is tedious art that proves the rule of its bad for meaningful/pleasurable art.

Or to put it another way:

NFUN posted...

It means either you found an explicit explanation of an edge case which allows you to infer what the standard situation is

NFUN posted...

yeah i doesn't know

https://grammarist.com/phrase/the-exception-that-proves-the-rule/

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

So the exception is tedious art that proves the rule of its bad for meaningful/pleasurable art.

And that's what I'm saying is a super wrong and condescending view of art, that it's mostly all fun and games. Like how can you think you're defending art when you think hard labor is an exception in the act of creating art.

foolm0r0n posted...

And that's what I'm saying is a super wrong and condescending view of art, that it's mostly all fun and games. Like how can you think you're defending art when you think hard labor is an exception in the act of creating art.

No what Im saying is that the problem with AI art is that people are intentionally using it to make and replace the kind of art people like to make. Not that that theyre not working hard when they make it.

Going back to the earlier comparisons of chimney sweep and blacksmithboth are hard work, but some people do the hard work of blacksmithing because they like it. Do you think theres many chimney sweep enjoyers?

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

No what Im saying is that the problem with AI art is that people are intentionally using it to make and replace the kind of art people like to make. Not that that theyre not working hard when they make it.

Going back to the earlier comparisons of chimney sweep and blacksmithboth are hard work, but some people do the hard work of blacksmithing because they like it. Do you think theres many chimney sweep enjoyers?

So technology put blacksmiths out of work even though they enjoyed it and ai art will put digital artists out of work even though they enjoy it

I don't understand your point

And just like blacksmiths people who create digital art can still do it just as much now as before, they just won't get as much money for it

My point is that thats lame, and that unlike mechanical automation where efficiency lets us build railroads faster, what exactly do we gain for that replacement?

Whats the benefit? Some business dude can churn out a childrens book in less than an hour? Yuck

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

My point is that thats lame, and that unlike mechanical automation where efficiency lets us build railroads faster, what exactly do we gain for that replacement?

Whats the benefit? Some business dude can churn out a childrens book in less than an hour? Yuck

Yes? It reduces work the same way mechanical automation reduced work.

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

replace the kind of art people like to make

It doesn't. It's really bad at design. It will get good at design eventually, but that will affect a lot more than just artists.