• 0 Posts
  • 209 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 17th, 2023

help-circle












  • Every word has an impact that you can’t predict. So no. All your words and condescending tone speak more about what you don’t know. You are are hitting a button and continually trying new things until you get the results from the AI that you want. That is not the same. Especially since you’ll start just changing things just because your original intent didn’t match what you want so you’ll start reaching for other synonyms and the like.

    It simply isn’t the same as human inspiration. There’s a reason courts voted against giving rights to AI generated art to the prompt creator. Their reasoning holds.

    Just because someone might not be able to tell the difference between a forgery and the real thing doesn’t make them both equally art.

    Same holds true to your example which I literally already used and explained why it didn’t work. Are you even reading my comments or just ranting?


  • I’m not arbitrary. I explicitly gave a reasonable difference between content and art. You can create content without soul, that’s fine. I’m not saying you need to mix your own paint. I’m saying art is inherently human by definition. You can pump out all the content you want, but it will just make finding decent art that much worse. It’s like saying ChatGPT can pump out android apps more quickly, but I don’t think anyone would argue it’d raise the quality of the Android app markets.

    You’re just thinking of everything from the point of view of middle management. Quantity over quality.

    When you remove humans from the equation, it’s not art. It’s content. It’s disposable fluff. It’s mass produced. It’s soulless. But sure, think yourself intelligent because you literally put money over anything else. Why don’t you just flood the market with remakes and remasters at this point. It fits your argument.

    You can’t raise an expectation of art by literally removing any meaning to it.






  • It’s not the same as an artist being inspired. It’s more like an artist painting something in the style of someone else. AI can generate anything new and it doesn’t transform things in its own way. It just copies and melds together. Nothing about it is really it’s own. It’s just a biased algorithm putting things together. Moreover, the artist could actually forget what the painting looks like, but still be inspired. If you erase something from the LLM, it will change it’s output. It’s basically more of a constant copying.

    That analogy is what a bunch of people who want to sell AI art try to pitch. It’s the difference between content and art.