AI is a tool. if it can help dropping in a drum track or something so you can eventually LEARN to do it yourself, cool. if it does the whole damn song so you don’t have to do it yourself, go play it to a woodchipper
AI Artists do not exist. The AI isn’t an artist, and niether is the human who told the AI what to generate.
You’re right, fixed it.
The AI “”“Art”“” in question:
They really just don’t understand that anyone who isn’t a greedy sociopath just fucking hates them, huh.
Oh for christ sake, stop calling them “artists”.
I’m not a cook because I asked the pizza joint for custom toppings.
Prompt engineering my lunch order
I wouldn’t associate them with engineers either. Script kiddies at most.
script kiddies could write scripts and would have to check their errors themselves.
Fully agree. My comment was meant to satirize and ridicule the term prompt engineering. Just how making a food order doesn’t make you an engineer either.
How can you be “left behind” in art? I can make a cave painting right now and there would be nothing wrong or inherently bad about it.
Reminds me of that guy that drew a sexy dragoness on a flat rock with a stick to flex on the AI bros.
Financially. It’s always about money. That’s why they care about it. They see in AI an opportunity to get rich quickly. But for that they need people to actually enjoy AI slop and thus we get posts like these.
Those people don’t understand art. They think if it’s faster to produce, it’s inherently better. That’s why they aren’t artists, they are producers. And they don’t produce art, they produce content marketed as art. Which is a totally different thing.
Which is obvious because they call AI images “art.” They’re not. AI images are patterns to fit a mathematical probability. It’s the difference between calling a Jackson Pollock and a QR code art.
I honestly don’t know which one you are calling art. My first thought was the Pollock, but maybe the art in this case is the QR code, because there is something it is intended to convey whereas the Jackson Pollock is random splatters?
Pollock’s art is splatters and swirls and whatnot, but his process wasn’t just random splatters. He knew when his art was done because it felt done to him.
Likewise, a QR code isn’t random splatters, either. Both are intentionally created to have meaning. One as a work of art that should make the viewer feel something at an emotional level, and one to tell you that the restaurant you’re in hasn’t updated their menu since COVID.
AI art isn’t art because gen AI is trained on art without the ability to feel or sense the emotions it’s trying to convey. If I take a picture of an artwork and try and copy it at home, I haven’t created art. I’ve copied someone else’s art. I’ve made a picture, a copy of the original. If the AI hasn’t been trained on, let’s say, cubism, I can’t show it ONE image of cubism and hope it can go from there and be creative and reach the same point. I can’t describe cubism and expect it to achieve the same thing. The best it can ever manage is to copy an original work it was trained with.
the ai can’t jizz on a canvas.
Funny you mention Jackson Pollock, I recently read an article about how art traditionally delivered very political anti establishment messages; modern abstract art was heavily funded and supported by the US establishment because it didn’t contain left or progressive ideologies.
you gotta see Pollocks in person. photos don’t do them justice
Which is funny to me, in the “if we don’t laugh we’ll cry” sense.
Because whenever I go to a museum and look at modern art, abstract art, and so on, I see all sorts of curators notes explaining how this mix of shapes and colors and designs actually has some sort of profound, inspirational, generally leftist or anti-establishment, message.
But people don’t see the message or understand the message right away. From a casual look, it’s just pleasing colors and shapes. You have to believe it matters and put in the effort to understand it in order to get those inspirational messages.
In other words: if you oppose the establishment, and you are looking for modern art that opposes the establishment, you will find it. But if you’re an average person that anti-establishment message will mean nothing to you. You won’t even think to look for it.
So it’s not that modern art doesn’t contain left or progressive ideologies. It’s worse. Because it does contain left and progressive ideologies in a self censored form. All the power and energy of these left and progressive artists has been captured by the establishment and harmlessly redirected into pursuits that “support” left and progressive causes but pose no threat to the powers that be.
And I’m thinking more and more this makes it bad art.
Think about advertisements. If someone in a car looks out and sees a billboard passing, they should understand, in the few seconds they see that billboard, what product it’s advertising and why they should buy that product. A billboard that doesn’t get those two points across in a matter of seconds has failed at being a billboard.
And a piece of visual art that doesn’t get those same two messages across in a matter of seconds - what message it’s sending and why you should care - has failed at being visual art.
I would say that it’s bad propaganda, not necessarily bad art. Which can still be a net negative, of course; I am pro lefty propaganda.
Well said, and it’s insidious, isn’t it? A deft bit of sleight of hand that defangs the work while appearing to support it.
They produce bullshit nobody cares about. I love to check how many ppl engage with it, and untill it’s a plastic jesus doomerbait nobody cares.
Imagine making cave paintings after a master like Klarg…
These chucklefucks still don’t get that they are gushing about using AI to replace to fucking good stuff that’s fun to do.
Are they going to be waving the flags for AI football next? Who’s playing sports anymore when AI can do it?
Of course the people who love this shite are the people who are using it to not pay real artists and want to profit from it’s ability to crank out piles of mediocrity that gormless dumbasses will gobble down.
Or that if they succeed, no-one is going to hire a vibe artist. Why do that whwn they can just assign someone to generate images for them, and avoid having to hire someone?
Upvoted solely for the word gormless.
I used “gormless” here the other day and garnered some attention. It seems to be catching on!
I have to confess: I associate the word solely with an ASOIAF fan podcast, and for that reason it cracks me up every single time I see it.
Anyone else remember when they said the robots would take care of all the shitty work, so the rest of us could spend our days painting, or writing poetry?
Yeah. Turns out they’re giving those jobs to the robots, while we do all the shitty work.
I think the idea is that robots will do all the work and humans do whatever they feel like doing. This has some prerequisites. First you need to adress uneven wealth distribution. Then you need to adress corruption.
So it seems we’re not going to get there, are we 🫠
Of course not. You get there with guillotines or not at all. To me it looks a lot like we are in the “not at all” scenario.
I agree on everything but the last sentence because fear mongering literally enabled orange cheeto to become president for a second term 🤮
They are colonisers. They will become tourists when they travel for pleasure.
Sounds like the average D&D party
deleted by creator
