• zbyte64@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    At our library we teach people how to do art, including crochet. If the person is able to go to the library then they aren’t being gatekeeped from learning art.

    My alternative? AI art isn’t even art so at this point we’re just debating what is a better skill: crafting or prompting.

    • gmtom@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago

      For one you understand that way more libraries have computers than crochet classes?

      If someone want high quality digital art, teaching them crochet doesn’t help them.

      Can you give an actual concrete reason why AI art isn’t art? Because the only arguments people make for that case are either esoteric nonsense about “soul” or their argument is so broad it ends up also applying ti things like photography.

      • zbyte64@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        13 minutes ago

        Hold up, you think the definition of art is too broad if it includes Photography but not broad enough if it doesn’t include Generative AI? Based on that I don’t think it is possible to give you a reason you would accept.

        This conversation of “art” reminds me of the difference between “value” and “values”: https://davidgraeber.org/articles/value-the-antropological-theories-of-value/

        If someone want high quality digital art, teaching them crochet doesn’t help them.

        This is a statement of “value” not “values”. That someone wants “digital art” but there is no connection being made to their “values”, they are simply getting what they want.

        Art is not a commodity, AI is.