[below ideas based on conversation had after post]
11) The Fun Part - coding AI mostly replaced no fun stuff, e.g. boilerplate code, while leaving high level stuff. Art AI would be better liked if it exclusively replaced boring stuff, e.g. background details, letterboxing for social media
11) The Fun Part - coding AI mostly replaced no fun stuff, e.g. boilerplate code, while leaving high level stuff. Art AI would be better liked if it exclusively replaced boring stuff, e.g. background details, letterboxing for social media
Comments
13) Identity - Artists more likely than coders to see their work as their defining characteristic.
Drawing apps allow you to eyedropper a color and fill a circle with it, which would take quite a bit longer manually, so you do that rather than color it in, it isn't part of the creative process
That's coding with AI
1) The job of programming isn't to write code, it's to build systems and solve technical problems. So in that sense having AI write the code is like a carpenter using a nailgun - they're paid to deliver a house, after all, not to hammer.
I don't want AI to write the important core functions and business logic -- if I must have it at all, let it write boilerplate headers and unit tests and release notes and remember to update the ticket status.
A .py file is the component pieces that make up the final software, while the .jpg is just the final flattened image.
AI coding would probably suck if it could only train on .exes
But it's always "Give a description and get an art", which is just, like, not the artistic process
I think we’re already seeing the limit of what one-shot art models are good for — people look for the lack of attention to detail like hawks
Also, arts being non utilitarian, artists always need to justify their existence.