this post was submitted on 23 Mar 2024
44 points (94.0% liked)

Technology

58061 readers
31 users here now

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


Our Rules


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

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

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] 9 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

Depends on the workflow, in my opinion. There are people who just type "1girl lol" into a text box and there are some people who set up workflows with hundreds of steps including significant manual work done in Photoshop or GIMP.

Similarly nearly all music these days is made with a DAW, which enables you to selectively edit and combine performances that otherwise you wouldn't be able to achieve. Drummer off beat? Quantize it. Want a string section but don't know how to play violin? Use a synth. And certainly there are people who are overly reliant on those tools because their core music abilities aren't very strong.

If you think any amount of computer assistance means that something isn't art, then basically all music made since the 90s would also not be art. It's not a binary. Any tool can be used tastefully or be used to mask an underlying lack of talent.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

You don't usually call the audio engineer a musician though. The fact that you "want a string section" is the important part. Art is communication, if you fuck with the AI until it communicates what you want, that can be art, as long as you're not trying to pass off that the fake brushstrokes contain any meaning. If you learn all the right prompt words to make it "good" and then Photoshop it to fix all the telltale AI glitches but the only idea being communicated comes from 6 random people on Deviantart smashed together, that's not art.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Computer assisted ≠ computer generated. This is a fundamentally understood distinction.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'd welcome you to offer a rigorous definition of this supposedly well-known distinction. Computers don't generate anything spontaneously. They always require some level of direction.

Are the outputs of VSTs not "computer generated"? You can fumble around on a keyboard just moving up and down until you find the pitch you want, and the software will output an orchestral swell of dozens of instruments that take years and years to master, with none of that effort expended by the one mashing the keyboard.

Is that sound computer-assisted or computer-generated in your estimation? Much the same with AI images. It's not fundamentally different from any other computerized tool.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Again, ASSISTED ≠ CREATED. I don’t know how this is difficult for you.

Assisted requires foreknowledge of skill/talent. Like a guitarist using an effect pedal to enhance his sound.

Created leans entirely on the hardware/software condo the heavy lifting.

It take ZERO skill to type a sentence into a computer to generate an image. Period. And of argument. I’m sorry this others you; but this is how I see it.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I said in my original post that just typing a prompt isn't an example of skill. I stated that there are people who use both AI and non-AI tools in complex workflows that include a ton of manual work, and in those cases it's disingenuous to write off the process as not being creative.

I'm not sure exactly what you're arguing against, but it isn't the position I took. Seems like a reading comprehension issue.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

My point is that AI generated pictures aren’t art. Period.

I’m not arguing nuance. My opinion is across the board- no nuance. No argument… it’s not art.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

Would you call a person that creates paintings by cutting images from magazines an artist?

What if the person cuts the images from AI generated content?