Oh the Ai art generator has no "soul" and it's soy and reddit? This precious art form (illustrating things that other people pay you to, a medium dominated almost entirely by furries, porn, and furry porn) is being destroyed by the evil AI? I'm sorry that the democratization of art creation is so upsetting to you. I've brought dozens of ideas to life by typing words into a prompt and I didn't have to pay someone $300 to do so.

  • GorbinOutOverHere [comrade/them]
    ·
    edit-2
    hace 2 años

    When you use a printing press to make duplicates of someone else’s work, you don’t erase their name and replace it with yours.

    amalgamating a billion different works of art into something new isn't "stealing" the art and is, in fact, something that you and literally every other artist ever does whether you know it or not, unless you've developed your art entirely cut off from the rest of society

    there is no such thing as "an original idea," every idea anyone has ever had has built off of those of someone else

    There is not even a thought, or an invention, which is not common property, born of the past and the present. Thousands of inventors, known and unknown, who have died in poverty, have co-operated in the invention of each of these machines which embody the genius of man.

    Thousands of writers, of poets, of scholars, have laboured to increase knowledge, to dissipate error, and to create that atmosphere of scientific thought, without which the marvels of our century could never have appeared. And these thousands of philosophers, of poets, of scholars, of inventors, have themselves been supported by the labour of past centuries. They have been upheld and nourished through life, both physically and mentally, by legions of workers and craftsmen of all sorts. They have drawn their motive force from the environment.

    The genius of a Séguin, a Mayer, a Grove, has certainly done more to launch industry in new directions than all the capitalists in the world. But men of genius are themselves the children of industry as well as of science. Not until thousands of steam-engines had been working for years before all eyes, constantly transforming heat into dynamic force, and this force into sound, light, and electricity, could the insight of genius proclaim the mechanical origin and the unity of the physical forces. And if we, children of the nineteenth century, have at last grasped this idea, if we know now how to apply it, it is again because daily experience has prepared the way. The thinkers of the eighteenth century saw and declared it, but the idea remained undeveloped, because the eighteenth century had not grown up like ours, side by side with the steam-engine. Imagine the decades that might have passed while we remained in ignorance of this law, which has revolutionized modern industry, had Watt not found at Soho skilled workmen to embody his ideas in metal, bringing all the parts of his engine to perfection, so that steam, pent in a complete mechanism, and rendered more docile than a horse, more manageable than water, became at last the very soul of modern industry.

    Every machine has had the same history — a long record of sleepless nights and of poverty, of disillusions and of joys, of partial improvements discovered by several generations of nameless workers, who have added to the original invention these little nothings, without which the most fertile idea would remain fruitless. More than that: every new invention is a synthesis, the resultant of innumerable inventions which have preceded it in the vast field of mechanics and industry.

    Science and industry, knowledge and application, discovery and practical realization leading to new discoveries, cunning of brain and of hand, toil of mind and muscle — all work together. Each discovery, each advance, each increase in the sum of human riches, owes its being to the physical and mental travail of the past and the present.

    By what right then can any one whatever appropriate the least morsel of this immense whole and say — This is mine, not yours?

    • bread book
    • kristina [she/her]
      ·
      edit-2
      hace 2 años

      These people that are against it are reactionaries, all socialist literature agrees that this is good and should be held in common for the benefit of all. :shrug-outta-hecks:

      • GorbinOutOverHere [comrade/them]
        ·
        hace 2 años

        they're right to not want it in the hands of corporations and to the benefit of the wealthy at the expense of artists but like this is literally just Luddites 2.0

        • kristina [she/her]
          ·
          hace 2 años

          The only real form of art is to smear shit on a cave wall :anprim-pat:

    • macabrett
      ·
      hace 2 años

      Yes, everyone is inspired by other things when making art. But we bring our own experiences in it and that art evolves.

      AI art as it stands today simply takes other people's art and combines them in clever ways. There's no additional layer of experience. There's nothing that evolves the art. It's literally just taking the work of others and claiming it as your own.

      • sysgen [none/use name,they/them]
        ·
        hace 2 años

        This is not really true. This generation of algorithms work by generalizing and condensing ideas into a vector representation, where the similarity between vectors and the dimensions then naturally represent the addition, substraction, and difference of concepts.

        As a result, you can quite literally "explain" - or perhaps even make to experience the essence of - concepts to these algorithms that they have never ever encountered, and they can apply them to art.

        This is not really different from a human or animal taking inspiration. It's a very similar mechanism, it's just much more primitive. Think of it as a primitive form of intuition.