Firstly, art and creativity are turning into a kind of Lego constructor with minimal value, and secondly, it is becoming more and more difficult to trust the news, because AI makes better and better deepfakes; Thirdly, people, for example, I have a friend on the Internet, but due to the frequent use of AI, he has become quite apathetic, I try to support him and somehow help him, as I did before, but more and more often he just ignores me and brushes me off with a simple thank you or bye, and if we communicate, then not for long, since he does not listen to me, but usually he shows me masterpieces or memes that he has generated with the help of AI, calling it real art, honestly, it is more and more unpleasant for me to communicate with him.
I hope I explained clearly, sorry, the exact explanations are not about me.
I disagree with the premise and find it borderline offensive to call Lego builds “minimal value”.
Hey, don’t shit on Lego.
Anyone that uses AI to compose music or make art is neither a musician, nor an artist- any more than I am a mathematician because I use a calculator.
It’s trash.
As a hobbyist photographer, I find it pretty amusing that when I use a device I just point at a target and press a button, it counts as art - but when I spend 3 hours tweaking a prompt to get exactly the image I want, suddenly it doesn’t. Seems way more like an ideological stance than a logical one.
Good point, wrong conclusion
People fail to see that AI is becoming a middleman for everything that requires thinking and removing the human to human thought-based interactions from our lives. In particular the indirect human to human interactions. This is a massive loss.
The replies here got me typing so much I can’t post a proper reply to this. I’ll make a post and link you to it, but it will be a long one.
Ow, geeze. “Thought as a service.” Ew.
I’m ambivalent about it.
On the one hand, it’s just math. It’s the way reality works for some reason. So may as well get used to it.
On the other hand, capitalism takes what should be a gift to humanity and makes every aspect of it insufferable. From unethical training methods to inefficient, monolithic implementations to offensive marketing to equipment shortages, there’s a lot to hate.
I don’t think it inherently devalues people or art, though. It’s capitalists who are trying to use it for that.
It certainly doesn’t devalue real art by real people, but it clearly is doing serious harm to humanity as a whole. Even for those of us that refuse to use it, it’s becoming harder and harder to navigate the world. The internet is absolutely overflowing with slop to the point at which you have no idea what’s real or not anymore. Open source maintainers are being overrun with slop “contributions”, leading to tons of churn and burnout. We are, at this very moment, existing in the shattered remains of the internet. And people that do use these things are experiencing marked detrimental effects, from delusional behavior to cognitive and neurological impacts.
The intersection of this technology and human psychology is something insidious and devasting. We are like a people exposed to a brand new virus for the first time, with no natural defense against the infection.
deleted by creator
My bizarre opinion: AI is making bad and amateur art more valuable, because AI can easily make overwhelming drawings and arts, but if you ask it to draw some shit drawing it just can’t handle it because they won’t train AI on low quality shit.
I’m starting to see more quality on bad designers with a lot of inconsistencies than good design styles, because it’s one of few ways to be completely sure it’s at least legit and audited by a real person.
Gotta repost this gem:
Give me a bit to find the author…
I agree, in my case I am now happy to see at least a crooked drawing, if only it was created by a real person.
The same happened with audio.
Everyone and their mother can download east west synths and make a movie score in 3 seconds. I’ve done it. Easy.
What it can’t do is make authentic organic music. And sure, llms can make it "seem* organic, but you can tell. At least for now. I myself always research artists of music I listen to so its not an issue, and I can tell for now when something is fake.
I don’t think that AI devalues art.
Nobody looks at AI products and goes, wow, this is art.
At least not in and of itself. There could be something to be said for using AI as part of a larger artwork, and that does not devalue the artwork, in my opinion, but AI by itself is not art.
Nobody looks at AI products and goes, wow, this is art.
I’ve came across plenty of AI pieces that I genuinely like.
Nobody looks at AI products and goes, wow, this is art.
Well, in fact, I have seen such people and they directly called it real art. But it was hard to disagree with them, given the highest quality of the content generated.
As for art in general, I know very well what it is and am completely disappointed with it.
At least not in and of itself. There could be something to be said for using AI as part of a larger artwork, and that does not devalue the artwork, in my opinion, but AI by itself is not art.
Well, over time we will see if this is true.
Yeah, I’ve noticed, it fucking sucks
The silver lining is: if your nudes ever leak, you can simply claim its deepfake.
I really don’t feel that it’s devaluing art. Slop has always been slop whether AI or human generated. Real art takes an artist’s soul put into it and I don’t see AI replicating that. If anything it just highlights the importance of passion in art.
In fact, the AI can simply copy the artist’s soul and even enhance it, which turns out to be very easy thanks to high-quality models and accurate prompts.
I also used to believe in the soul of the artist, but, unfortunately, the delicious cake was stolen.
I have yet to be emotionally moved by a single piece of AI generated content, and not for lack of exposure. I am moved by human art on a daily basis.
No.
What sucks is that it should be a good thing. I think it could be better and hopefully we will see open source trained things that come out where more thought is put into the inputs to raise the quality.
In what sense?
so ones that are trained exclusively on well known and quality texts in fields along with transcripts of famous debates and such. Right now they kinda just amass a lot of input without any attempt to curate high quality training material.
Return him the same level of interest that he shows you when he puts up an AI generated “masterpiece”. Just a simple - "Oh… " as a response.
Step back and see what he does, if anything.
nothing can “devalue” art. each piece of art means something different to every person who has ever perceived it. nothing can add or remove “value” from that.
you can argue it removes economic value from it, but then I would remind you that money and the economy is entirely made up and has no intrinsic value of it’s own besides what you give it.
either way, if you’re perceiving art as less valuable because of the existence of generative AI, then it is your own subjective choice for that art to have less value, not an objective “fact” as you claim.
Well, unfortunately, we live in a complex world where thinking that you know something for sure can end in a fatal mistake, and history has proven this many times. So yes, value is a relative concept.
What cartoon is this horse from?
Ren & Stimpy
“Somebody save my walrus!”
