Seriously, I fucking hate how this shit got even more convincing compared to like what 2 years ago when this stupid trend started?
This shit has already been abused by the likes of Israel faking gore of literal children and will be used in the future to fake a bunch of shit. Fuck there will probably be court cases of people “comitting crimes” and that used as evidence against them.
Not to mention that a lot of people will be out of a job. I already struggle finding to do commissions for graphic design, digital art and 2D animation. Hell I even spoke to people who have over decades of experience in this shit compared to me and are disheartened seeing flyers and posters both irl and on social media being made by AI.
Even in my college people are glazing It. Hearing from my professors that “It will replace some art forms like the car replaced the horse”. FUCK THIS I’M SO SICK OF THIS SHIT
WE LIVE IN ONE OF THOSE MOST UNCOOL AND BORING DISTOPIAS
You must log in or register to comment.
You are not wrong. Keep in mind that it is a weapon, though. It’s a weapon that is wielded against you in particular. Being creative is a gift that is extremely difficult to learn. You can train the technical skills. That just takes time. But actually having the gift is something that is difficult to acquire.
The tech bois want to make “art” something you can just type into the text box. They don’t want to think, they don’t want art that makes you “feel” anything. They just want to have the “AI” think of something “creative” that they can sell to some other vapid moron. It’s “democratizing” art. Except being creative isn’t a democracy. You either are or you aren’t. Typing your bullshit into a text box isn’t “creative”.
There is a very particular chair in the world that I despise. The chair didn’t do anything wrong. It was a good chair. But I had to draw that particular chair in still-lifes for four years. I hate that chair. But that chair taught me more about perspective than any instructor ever could. So I actually love that chair. “AI” will never understand that. It will never understand anything. LLMs are not capable of understanding anything at all.
“AI” exists to keep workers scared. That’s it. That’s it’s only purpose. It’s a boogeyman. “Don’t misbehave, children, or the AI will take your job!”
Maybe one day we will develop a model of consciousness that can actually understand reality, but LLMs are not it. Frauds like Sam Altman will never accept that.
The chair didn’t do anything wrong. It was a good chair. But I had to draw that particular chair in still-lifes for four years. I hate that chair. But that chair taught me more about perspective than any instructor ever could. So I actually love that chair. “AI” will never understand that. It will never understand anything. LLMs are not capable of understanding anything at all.
I really like this.
AI will never be able to make art that depicts something you simultaneously love, and hate at the same time. It is a level of creativity that requires the artist, because the audience can only understand the art by considering how the artist feels.
Art separated from artist isn’t art is it? It’s a picture but it’s not art. The artist is thinking something and feeling something when they make their image, every single part of it, and understanding their emotions is a part of the image itself. This can not be simulated with AI. An AI can not simulate the experience of drawing the same chair with a different person or object sat on it hundreds of times. It can not be human.
Generative AI is Corporate Memphis, and corporations will struggle to differentiate themselves as the technology deepens. This is where actual artists can shine because they alone understand how to differentiate themselves from the slop.
Having played with the new forms of Generative AI, both LLMs and Standard Diffusion, I know for a fact that it won’t replace artists. However AI will challenge and replace much of the original ‘art’ slop: corporate art and writing. Photoshop (and other digital tools) are a better metaphor. Yes you can replace painting on canvas with a digital equivalent, but that doesn’t make one an artist nor can one just brush their way to art. It still needs both technique and an objective self-critique. It does let corporations produce their slop faster. It also lets corporations throw a bunch of their staff out of work. Therein lies the problem. All of the hype and angst is because we need employment to function in society, and Capitalists are incentivized to push workers out of their balance sheets. But this is also their undoing as it accelerates the “noise” they must compete against.
A particular flaw I’ve found in AI is the same you might find in terrible artists: They focus on the wrong details. Generative Art will have poorly rendered eyes/hands/etc but can generate endless background details. LLMs mess up on the details, but damn if they can’t print out endless purple prose. AI loathes empty liminal space. It’s the problem of uniform distribution. AI does not know what it needs to focus on, so it focuses on everything uniformly. I joke that AI will make the user a better artist out of sheer frustration fighting this tendency.
A great historical example is the Camera. It did replace a whole subset of realistic painters, but at the same time two phenomenon emerged. The first is artists simply moved into different mediums, styles, and genres. The second, realistic artists became the camera operators. Despite the supposed ‘simplicity and ease’ the camera offered to the layperson, you aren’t going to have your cousin take your official wedding photos. You hire a professional camera operator! Turns out composition and a sense of style, the signatures of an artist, are still critical despite the technological leaps.
