Technology

59708 readers

2105 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

376

Redditors Vent and Complain When People Mock Their "AI Art" (futurism.com)

submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

250 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Setting aside the usual arguments on the anti- and pro-AI art debate and the nature of creativity itself, perhaps the negative reaction that the Redditor encountered is part of a sea change in opinion among many people that think corporate AI platforms are exploitive and extractive in nature because their datasets rely on copyrighted material without the original artists' permission. And that's without getting into AI's negative drag on the environment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] -3 points 8 months ago (4 children)

This needs to change : there is no AI art. Art is something humans do, and AI is something that does not exist.

There cannot be AI art.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 8 months ago (2 children)

“Art is whatever the artist chooses it to be.” And I’d also call art whatever the beholder chooses it to be. If Dog Art is something that exists, AI Art is something that exists.

Whether you think in the case of AI the artist is the LLM or the prompter, that’s irrelevant.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

If you consider the prompter to be the artist then do you consider me to be an artist when I make a Google search and click on images? I still get an image I didn't make but I wouldn't say that makes me an artist.

And according to your quote the ai model couldn't be an artist simply because it can't consider anything to be an art, it just gives you the random noise that is the result of putting some text through its network. There are of course other reasons why the model shouldn't be considered an artist but this was the simplest I think.

Anyway, I'd say that ai art shouldn't be called art when there's no artist.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago

Wow, looks like I have two wildly different options here, such luxury.

C. There is no art

[–] VirtualOdour 12 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Agi doesn't exist, saying ai doesn't exist is like saying physics doesn't exist because unified field theory isn't a thing yet.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago

I'm sorry, I can't follow a reasoning unless it uses a car analogy. Please rephrase

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

Can animals or aliens create art?

[–] mindbleach 1 points 8 months ago

There are several reasons this is a stupid word game, but the most damning is simple pragmatism. Either you have a better label that most people readily agree is better... or they're gonna keep using the same label. Because words mean what they are used to mean and what they are understood to mean.