Artistry is not simply the assembly of images. And good artistry requires intention and expression, typically in order to communicate a novel idea.
Whether its “art” should never have been the point people attempted to defend.
It’s a shorthand to describe basic quality. Because AI slop can be manufactured so quickly, and because it can reasonably approach human art at first glance, the fundamental problem it presents is one of sifting. How long do I need to analyze a piece of material to determine whether it is a real message or a procedural generation? How do I discern real conversations from automated prompts my partner never meant to send? How do I manage my own response to a deluge of clumsy attempts at manipulation?
This isn’t an issue of AI content being “art” or not. This is an issue of AI content being industrially generated spam content.
Even without commercialization
This stuff doesn’t exist without commercialization precisely because of the volume of material and resources necessary to make it work. Even then, its haphazard and poorly implemented. But there’s just so god damn much of it. The media equivalent of smog clouding up your windshield and clogging your lungs.
Artistry is not simply the assembly of images. And good artistry requires intention and expression, typically in order to communicate a novel idea.
How does that refute my statement? I never claimed an assembly of images = art.
How long do I need to analyze a piece of material to determine whether it is a real message or a procedural generation? How do I discern real conversations from automated prompts my partner never meant to send? How do I manage my own response to a deluge of clumsy attempts at manipulation?
This isn’t an issue of AI content being “art” or not. This is an issue of AI content being industrially generated spam content.
I don’t think even the people who unironically call themselves “AI artists”, as delusional as they are, would defend using AI to manipulate people or generate ad spam with it. (maybe some of them would)
This stuff doesn’t exist without commercialization precisely because of the volume of material and resources necessary to make it work.
I think again you are missing what my point was. I was talking about this at an individual usage level. A person could load up a local model as is and generate some stuff for use at home. No transactions occurred.
As for how generative AI got to this point, I don’t think even then commercialization was an inevitable requirement for its existence. That’s how it played out to a certain degree, but technology frequently is created by massive government grants historically. The internet itself is an example of this.
![[Rusty Creates] 'Artists'](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/ee6ccbcc-d001-4b28-a88f-d39c2b75f860.png){kind=link}
Artistry is not simply the assembly of images. And good artistry requires intention and expression, typically in order to communicate a novel idea.
It’s a shorthand to describe basic quality. Because AI slop can be manufactured so quickly, and because it can reasonably approach human art at first glance, the fundamental problem it presents is one of sifting. How long do I need to analyze a piece of material to determine whether it is a real message or a procedural generation? How do I discern real conversations from automated prompts my partner never meant to send? How do I manage my own response to a deluge of clumsy attempts at manipulation?
This isn’t an issue of AI content being “art” or not. This is an issue of AI content being industrially generated spam content.
This stuff doesn’t exist without commercialization precisely because of the volume of material and resources necessary to make it work. Even then, its haphazard and poorly implemented. But there’s just so god damn much of it. The media equivalent of smog clouding up your windshield and clogging your lungs.
How does that refute my statement? I never claimed an assembly of images = art.
I don’t think even the people who unironically call themselves “AI artists”, as delusional as they are, would defend using AI to manipulate people or generate ad spam with it. (maybe some of them would)
I think again you are missing what my point was. I was talking about this at an individual usage level. A person could load up a local model as is and generate some stuff for use at home. No transactions occurred.
As for how generative AI got to this point, I don’t think even then commercialization was an inevitable requirement for its existence. That’s how it played out to a certain degree, but technology frequently is created by massive government grants historically. The internet itself is an example of this.