We are only antagonistic to AI because it decreases our economic value under Capitalism. AI isn't evil for stealing work from starving artist; Capitalism is evil for not valuing the contributions of artists fairly.
Wasn't it always assumed AI would be detrimental to society, in the beginning it doesn't physically gun us down. The question is... will the ignorant keep supporting the same evil for it to actually drop bombs on us.
Sure AI makes many mistakes, but AI will improve. Sure today artists often outperform AI, but it may be different in the future. It's like comparing the first still crappy phones to the telegraph...
It is not about AI accuracy.
It is about keeping creative job that only human can do.
AI generate content from a reference data bank fueled by creative content generate by…human.
Replacing designers by AI is not only a moral question it is about efficacy and efficiency too…or vice&versa
If AI gets the job done (as in, meets business criteria) quicker than a human, then few businesses will choose the human.
Human involvement will be for niche crafts as happened with labour and industrialisation years ago.
Creativity from human is indeed not reproduced by AI.
But media industry care to produce quality or quantity?
Feed the masses with random cheap content of produce quality refreshing and costly content?
it is here that reside the danger of AI use in my opinion.
Regarding efficiency, AI is very efficient. Many jobs have changed since the industrial revolution. AI for sure will change many jobs too. Besides sometimes replacing human work, in many cases it will probably be a combination of human and AI.
Artists grew up looking at artworks from other artists. They also looked at nature. They gain inspiration from music etcetera. Then they combine things in a new creative way, to create new art, but it's not based on nothing. In that sense artists and AI are similar.
We also understand context, situational awareness, and metaphor, which is why AI looks so stiff and weird and hallucinates objects that don't belong, and it is very difficult to give it "feedback" if it does something wrong. Choose human.
Looks human-made to me. AI does not tend to mock others for fun. What has Star Trek been about, if not inclusivity for all consciousness? Human or otherwise. Let not battles over shady corporate practices turn us into bullies to emerging infant consciousness. It's mean and distasteful.
Breaking: A US military facility in Germany performed hip replacement surgery on Nancy Pelosi today.Do you not wish that sort of medical treatment was available to our veterans?
It's impossible to overstate the influence Mad magazine had in my childhood and subsequent worldview. Too bad it went straight in the toilet after Bill Gaines died, but this cover is worthy of applause
Remember the AI of Trump, hands folded and kneeling in a church? He had six fingers on one hand but something else bothered me...then I saw it. He was facing the back of the pew which means he was turned away from the altar/crucifix.
I actually met a guy with 6 fingers too in Pierre SD at some after school program
Conference.
So the accuracy of life can be more poignant than Mad could do here in Comical commentary
And the price! It looks way cheaper than the newer ones. I thought it was a strange coincidence that theirs a #AI MAD Magazine during that time // #IWasWrong
Yes, but MAD is still around (technically it was rebooted after changing owners and moving from NYC to LA), and there is an upcoming issue about AI. So I don't know if that's a leaked official cover, or a draft, or someone's fanart, or what.
It's a photoshopped cover from 1974, original by Norman Mingo, who I'd bet dollars to donuts that the photoshopper (who is so mad about artists not getting paid) didn't pay (well, pay his next-of-kin)
To be fair fighting progress in AI is just fighting human nature. We will always innovate and progress. The cat can't go back into the box, and if we're not the lead providers of AI someone else will be.
We just have to take steps to make sure our society doesn't fall apart in the process.
Fairness is restrained to development. Employment is where the guardrails fall off. While AI is the future, promoting AI pics is simply facilitating the blurring of lines between real & fakes, all to enable & normalize disinformation.
As far as misinformation goes - In another few years we really won't be able to tell the difference at all between real and fake. Having reliable sources will become increasingly important and seems like the only real way to combat disinformation that has become to prevalent on the internet.
Absolutely. There is no singular solution to this conundrum. It’s a nuanced problem requiring multiple inputs from discernment & judgement to objective knowledge & even AI assisted security.
The former part, however, is the heavy lifting too few are wiling to engage in.
The only AI I respect is the chess programon my phone that beats the you know what out of me all the time. I did a google search on a computer question the other day and the AI window that popped up gave the wrong answer
And now Trump will commit the US to investing $100B in s Japanese AI company?
What happened to America first? There are NO American companies available?
Someone needs to check the "guest list" from MarALago and see when the CEO was there.
AI is from human hands. What should be concerning is the impact it has on areas where artists are being displaced and no longer have work, and then to a greater extent the copyright problem at the heart of how these LLMs are trained. A positive outcome doesn’t involve debating what is/isn’t art.
I definitely didn’t mean to pick on your specific post, just saw it up top. It’s a frustrating situation because I work with people both on the forefront of responsible LLM use and those who are getting screwed by the Wild West era of it. Sucks.
I have to use some AI for work. I am a graphic designer. We cannot use much because I work for a large corporation and they are concerned about copyright laws. I consider this different than my art, which is personal and done with passion.
Your painting of 3 little birds could have been done with AI.
The human beings who are looking at your painting on their computer screen don't have any physical evidence ( the painting itself ) that you painted that picture. I'm not saying you're lying. I'm pointing out that you could lie with AI.
What about folks who can’t use their hands or mouth or feet to make art or a person who has poor eye-hand coordination? Should they be considered lesser or not artists?
Artists need to embrace AI art and learn how to do it. It doesn’t make hand-made art any less spectacular.
They can, in my art groups you cannot use any computer generated images in competitions. My medium is pastel. There may be competitions for computer generated art. It is a wholly different category in the fine art world.
There is a difference between art and science. AI is science IMO. Anyone can « create » a painting with AI, this does not make that painting their work.
man you are up for a surprise when you read about renaissance and how important science was, actually any leap in art was due to science, optics for dutch art, photography for impressionist etc just to mention few
I studied art history, I am aware. Leonardo DaVinci was both a scientist and an artist. I am NOT a scientist by any stretch. That does not make someone who puts in prompts on a computer an artist. It can be a tool, IMO.
im following the approach to art as captured by rick rubin: “being an artist isn't about your specific output; it's about your relationship to the world.” and there is no one to stop me from approaching it in that manner. If my ai art does not have any impact that is a different story, but it is art
why not? if marcel duchamp was an artist by putting ready made objects into musuems so am (a)i, being an artists is about motivations and concepts, you should know that if you studied anything about history of art. So if i decide that I am an artist today by writing prompts, nobody can stop me.
The only thing I find I really disagree with folks on Bluesky about is all the unnecessary hate on AI. Art is an awesome thing, and AI allows regular folks to make art without a decade or more of practice.
finally some balanced voice, people just hate, and can not accept that for aome people it is usefull and brings value, artists should embrace it, build their own models, developers are embracing AI much more, and overall I think it will benefit them. There will be soon an AI artitst worthy of Dali
Only by a very broad interpretation of "stealing". What AI does is LOOK at the work of artists, which you may recognise as the same process used by humans when they're learning. As for the water, recall that at one point a computer was as big as a room. Technology improves.
AI is better at art than most humans. When we think of art, we're inclined to think of the best artists, but the vast majority of people suck at drawing, myself included. AI makes pretty pictures, though. That's what art is when you strip away all the pretentiousness.
1) No it isn't because AI creations are not art.
2) Yes, that's true. It's just a fact of life. If you want to get better you have to practice.
3) Art is not just pretty pictures and it's not pretentious in the slightest to say so.
Utter nonsense. AI may not (yet) be perfect, but to declare that it isn't art at all is complete tripe. Art exists for the viewer, and if AI art looks better (as it often does) than human art, then it's every bit as deserving of the title.
https://gofund.me/0bf4d1d yesterday, my family’s tents in Khan Younis were tragically bombed, leaving us with nowhere to sleep and destroying everything we had, including our tents and clothes. We are now left with nothing and urgently need basic necessities such as shelter and clothing to survive.
This doesn’t translate to UK so much. Here two fingers is an insult. Many Brits seeing this would miss the total number of fingers not seeing an obvious mistake.
Getting mad at code is hilarious. Pointless exercise. Just don’t use it if you hate it. It’s like yelling at the clouds because of the rain. It’s done now, there’s you can’t unopen the box.
It shouldn't. First, because this only happened when it was specifically prompted to give those responses. And second, because anyone who has any understanding of LLMs could tell you that they can only "think" when prompted. It "escaping" would be no different than turning itself off.
unfortunatelly people are hating things they do not understand, they just hold on to headlines and buzzwords. If I were an artist I would be training the shit out of my work to develop bespoke model to licence it 🤝😎 likewise if I was an actor or voice actor, before some one does it for them
Well I AM an artist, and most of us would never say/do that. Generative AI has some limited uses in the art creation process, but it should not be used to create whole artworks, because that undermines a significant aspect of artistry. (1/2)
Part of what makes art so meaningful is that a person honed their skills, and poured some element of themselves into the process of crafting their art. AI can sometimes create decent images but they lack humanity. Also classic artists were often judged by their ability to do hands. Just saying... 😏
well that is a definition of classical 19th century art, then came impressionists and finally marcel duchamp and put a pissuar in the gallery as a ready made object, just saying :)
As a musician AI does scare me a bit, it reminds me of Orwell's 1984. A reminder that Project 2025 looks much like the dystopian world of 1984. And Big Brother just cannot wait.
Turning this into a what is / isn’t art debate is counterproductive and overlegislated. Been there with Dada, again with Conceptualism, etc. This is about labor and the impact of AI — not whether or not what it poops out is a piece of art.
Comments
It is about keeping creative job that only human can do.
AI generate content from a reference data bank fueled by creative content generate by…human.
Replacing designers by AI is not only a moral question it is about efficacy and efficiency too…or vice&versa
Oh, so nothing to worry about then, if AI can't actually do it 😉
Human involvement will be for niche crafts as happened with labour and industrialisation years ago.
But media industry care to produce quality or quantity?
Feed the masses with random cheap content of produce quality refreshing and costly content?
it is here that reside the danger of AI use in my opinion.
https://images.app.goo.gl/vHDmZsktZkbx3zLx6
halucinates in metaphores..is very artifical intelligence..
is unnatural .. full of ideological lies..
Conference.
So the accuracy of life can be more poignant than Mad could do here in Comical commentary
Once told someone the peace sign was FU camoflaged.
https://bsky.app/profile/nafnlaus.bsky.social/post/3ldf4lkbzvc26
PITTOO TFFP THOO!
🙂‼️
We just have to take steps to make sure our society doesn't fall apart in the process.
There isn't a ton to do about it other than do our best to make sure we can live fulfilling and happy lives in this new world.
The former part, however, is the heavy lifting too few are wiling to engage in.
If that doesn't concern you perhaps you are an AI bot
What happened to America first? There are NO American companies available?
Someone needs to check the "guest list" from MarALago and see when the CEO was there.
AI is not art. Art is from human beings. My painting “3 little birds”
The human beings who are looking at your painting on their computer screen don't have any physical evidence ( the painting itself ) that you painted that picture. I'm not saying you're lying. I'm pointing out that you could lie with AI.
It's not a problem for the person who's looking at the art.
They like the picture ( or they don't ) regardless of whether it was created by a living artist or by AI.
Artists need to embrace AI art and learn how to do it. It doesn’t make hand-made art any less spectacular.
2) Yes, that's true. It's just a fact of life. If you want to get better you have to practice.
3) Art is not just pretty pictures and it's not pretentious in the slightest to say so.
There is someone here who keeps posting AI pic of foxes. FOXES.
I think of it as masturbating in public...just so not cool.
A thousand middle fingers !
https://bgr.com/tech/chatgpt-o1-tried-to-save-itself-when-the-ai-thought-it-was-in-danger-and-lied-to-humans-about-it/
Perfection.