We're seeing pictures, videos, music, and even stories being produced by a computer now. Can something made through such
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Art
Innocent User — 1 year ago(December 11, 2024 07:21 PM)
We're seeing pictures, videos, music, and even stories being produced by a computer now. Can something made through such an artificial process ever be considered creative? Are any of these works inspiring, emotive, informative, controversial, or in any way expressing anything of value?
Do we have any artists* here? How do you feel about this kind of technology not only encroaching into your field, but possibly flourishing and moving you aside?
*That's artists, not autists, so most of you don't have to reply.
This post was sponsored by
ChatGPT
. Boiling the frog one prompt at a time. -
∂³∑x² — 1 year ago(December 11, 2024 07:37 PM)
Ah, the age-old debate: can a soulless hunk of silicon be truly creative? Let’s not forget that humans are essentially bags of water and carbon, running on electrical impulses. If we’re allowed to slap paint on a canvas and call it art, I don’t see why a computer can’t do the same just because it doesn’t need a coffee break or cry in the shower afterward
As for the fear of being 'moved aside' I'm not worried. Machines can replicate Van Gogh’s brushstrokes, but they can’t experience the soul-crushing joy of unpaid exposure. Besides, no AI will ever outpace a human artist in the fine art of procrastination. Gimme a call when they can spend six hours setting up their workspace only to spend the seventh crying into a cup of tea from Starbucks 'ethical' range
Ultimately, the real question isn’t whether machines can be creative or not — it’s whether they can suffer for their art. Until AI learns to endure rejection emails, existential doubt, that one guy at the gallery asking, 'But what does it mean?' and Statler and Waldorf in the box scene heckling them we humans have nothing to fear
Call me ∑ -
∂³∑x² — 1 year ago(December 11, 2024 07:47 PM)
Ah, yes, the ol' 'AI lacks consciousness' classic argument. By that logic, we should also disqualify kiddies from being creative because they’re just remixing everything they've absorbed from their environment. Ever seen a toddler's finger painting? Chaotic, derivative, and yet somehow revolutionary. Kind of like AI-generated art, without the sticky hands
Sure, these models ‘regurgitate’ data, but let’s not pretend human artists are plucking ideas out of the thin air of a mystical void. We’re all inspired by something, whether that’s a sunset, heartbreak, or the 220th rewatch of Predator. AI just has the processing speed and power to mash those inspirations together faster than someone can say "Mid-life existential crisis - time to completely zig-zag on the career!"
In the end, creativity isn’t just about where ideas come from—it’s about how they resonate and are absorbed
If an AI-made poem makes somebody cry, does it really matter whether the author had consciousness or just a really well-trained algorithm that elicited that very real response?
After all, if emotional impact were dependent on sentience, we'd have to start questioning the artistic legitimacy of an IKEA instruction manuals
Call me ∑ -
/.ㅤ — 1 year ago(December 11, 2024 07:48 PM)
By that logic, we should also disqualify kiddies from being creative because they’re just remixing everything they've absorbed from their environment
No, because children are conscious. They do suck at art, however.
My password is password. -
∂³∑x² — 1 year ago(December 11, 2024 08:10 PM)
The entire concept of concept of consciousness is an interesting one to look into and probably one that current models of AI can seem to pass (For us and, only currently, by using linguistics)
AI isn't a biological being and so isn't caught up with the same self preservation rules of such through eating, sleeping, procreating or ****ting as other biological beings, like children, are (To degrees)
However children, like cats, can be cruel and AI isn't (So far). Cats can just eat their prey but often pincher it and torture it through play. Children can be the nicest people on the planet but then can be seemingly needlessly nasty about someone for no discernible reason other than they can be
Would a 'sentient' AI be cruel? Whether it could pass for what we call conscience or not, if it were sentient would it copy the traits of biological beings for some sort of aggressive state for self preservation?
Thankfully this topic is about art which, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder and not the artist and so I think it's safe to assume that AI can create art
Call me ∑ -
/.ㅤ — 1 year ago(December 11, 2024 08:28 PM)
Current AI can't create art. It makes no decisions about what it produces. It just follows the preset rules that have been programmed into it. It is similar to how the law of physics can come together to create something like the Grand Canyon. The Grand Canyon may be interesting and visually appealing, but no one would ever call it art.
My password is password. -
Innocent User — 1 year ago(December 11, 2024 08:40 PM)
You're talking to a moron. I've been down paths like this with him before. You'll get nowhere and it'll take up hours of your life and give you nothing in return.
This post was sponsored by
ChatGPT
. Boiling the frog one prompt at a time. -
-
∂³∑x² — 1 year ago(December 11, 2024 08:46 PM)
The Grand Canyon may be interesting and visually appealing, but no one would ever call it art.
There will always be at least someone out there who calls it art.
Such is the nature of the beholder upon the world
Call me ∑ -
Innocent User — 1 year ago(December 11, 2024 08:38 PM)
Define art?
Is art just a picture? What's the difference between a newspaper article about a tragedy and the movie made about the same "story"?
This post was sponsored by
ChatGPT
. Boiling the frog one prompt at a time. -
Innocent User — 1 year ago(December 11, 2024 09:04 PM)
If you need me to elaborate, I'll have to consult AI.
I don't think a definition that says it can't be defined is much of a definition at all.
Do you have another one? Your picture doesn't feel like art to me. It's just an image.
This post was sponsored by
ChatGPT
. Boiling the frog one prompt at a time.