Well I don’t want to cause more trouble, honestly

Nvm

deleted by creator

I'm really sorry. I have no excuses for what I said. I apologize but I know I can't really do anything to make it up to you because I'm just a stranger online. I hope you have a good day

Removed by mod

Anyway, this has turned into a thesis, and I’ll just say that I personally liked Mad God because I thought it displayed a depth of imagination that was nearly without bottom – yes, it was dark, and loosely plotted to say the least, but I felt I understood the philosophical message of it, which I wrote about in a comment on your previous post.

Ok, but this is partially my point. I disagree with the only philosophical message that "gorefest without plot" can give- "life is meaningless suffering, and we should end it". That message is inherently counterrevolutionary. Sure, you can argue that Ligotti never meant to imply that killing people was ok, but there's no grounded philosophical reason not to simply kill everyone under the framework of the movie itself, or at minimum yourself. The only reasons not to do that are purely deontological, and at that point you have to ask yourself what gives you the right to dismiss the deontological principles that led people to believe life is good in the first place. There is no "deontology wizard" that says that the principle to lessen suffering matters more than the principle to maintain life.

Anti-natalism can function as a philosophical framework, but horror CANNOT give the nuance required for that.

It’s disgusting and sad that you and other people consider this philosophy deep or meaningful. Like all nihilism, you can just ignore. It’s meaningless by nature, a perversion of art and philosophy. Slasher films for entertainment are actually the good kind of dark horror

I literally looked this up beforehand and knew it was ferris but still left that mistake in :debord-tired:

Either way I meant Ferris and Ferris is the person common in those circles

Ok hold up, this is Ferris, which is commonly associated with trans circles and admittedly general weeb circles, but there's no guarantee this person is a porn addict.

And even if they were, that's a fucking weird insult to use. Sus as hell, if I may say.

the OP literally included executive function in the post why are you telling them to do their dishes like it's some sort of easy feat, read up on executive dysfunction you libs

That's irrelevant to whether or not OP deserved compassion or support. That's my point, not that they shouldn't ban people for things like that.

Hey, this is a systemic issue, not an individual one. If someone wants to use AI for their own project then I think they should be empowered to do so.

This is my point basically, human art will still exist but "good enough" is enough to replace the majority of artists.

Thank you for being nice, I'm so sorry for being so rude especially on a brand new account.

I mean, first, AI generated art is even easier to make then pop songs are, and second, visual arts being brought to the same place as music is still enough to suck. A lot.

Third, it's hard to tell the difference between AI generated art and human-made art, while pop music is it's own distinct genre which is separated from other genres in both quality and intention. While AI generated art can come very close to human made art in quality, and it's only difference in the long term is intention.

I'm sorry I was so touchy, as an art hobbyist myself seeing computers just... conjure images has really demotivated me, because I can just see people in the future actually saying to me "why do you draw you can just use DALLE" so I'm unhealthily invested in this subject. I'm making one more post and then logging off for a bit, actually (which I know is funny on a brand new account).

i agree with this, and i’m not sure how you got the idea that i didn’t. again, sorry i misread your thing, you are right to be worried, and i totally get if my post isn’t reassuring at all because i don’t know too much about this, i just know that behind the curtain there’s a lot of fiddling going on to make this tech seem more advanced than it is.

I was paranoid because I've seen the take that artists just need to "adapt" and make new art styles a few times. I'm sorry, again, I'm sorry for being so confrontational.

Honestly, neither of those things are comforting for me and mean nothing to someone who does art as a job and relies on it to live.

"most people aren’t doing particularly unique art rn"

People shouldn't need to do "unique" art for their self expression to be valuable. Fuck that.

What artists need right now is material support and material reasons for their job to continue to exist, not abstract notions of "human expression" or "fulfillment".

But my concern is that the average capitalism-human will not care about that emotion, and, from a material perspective, all of the people who thrive off of expressing that emotion will be in an even worse economic position than before.

I know that automation of it is good, but there are plenty of good things that capitalists turn into bad things...

Good

I'm going to make a machine to wedgie techbros at inhuman speeds.