AI Generative Art

[temnix]

4 hours ago, biostem said:

Sure, sure.  My point is that a poet is "an artist", a musician is "an artist", and so is a writer.  Just as adapting a comic book to a cartoon or live action may require voice artists and musicians to fully realize it, a painter may need inspirational input or even a fully fleshed out description, sometimes with detailed backstories, etc, in order to bring about their art, as well...

 

He may need a description as an instruction, though lyrics are usually written to the tune and not the other way around, but "voice artist" and so on just means a professional of a certain kind. There is not necessarily any talent involved, only a craft. And what does any of this have to do with "A. I."?

[temnix]

4 hours ago, biostem said:

Sure, sure.  My point is that a poet is "an artist", a musician is "an artist", and so is a writer.  Just as adapting a comic book to a cartoon or live action may require voice artists and musicians to fully realize it, a painter may need inspirational input or even a fully fleshed out description, sometimes with detailed backstories, etc, in order to bring about their art, as well...

A musician may need a description as an instruction, though lyrics are usually written to the tune and not the other way around, but "voice artist" and so on just means a professional of a certain kind. There is not necessarily any talent involved, only a craft. And what does any of this have to do with "A. I."?

[biostem]

14 minutes ago, temnix said:

He may need a description as an instruction, though lyrics are usually written to the tune and not the other way around, but "voice artist" and so on just means a professional of a certain kind. There is not necessarily any talent involved, only a craft. And what does any of this have to do with "A. I."?

Because AI is a tool, just as a paintbrush or photoshop are tools.  I'll grant that telling an AI to "create a superhero", then just going with whatever it generates isn't that impressive on the person's part, but to discount anything created using AI as "not art", IMHO, is to admit that anything created using tools that you couldn't otherwise create with your own hands, isn't art, either, (or, at the very least, that anything using any digital tools that in any way automate any part of the creative process also isn't art)...

Edited Sunday at 10:33 PM by biostem

[temnix]

20 hours ago, biostem said:

Because AI is a tool, just as a paintbrush or photoshop are tools.  I'll grant that telling an AI to "create a superhero", then just going with whatever it generates isn't that impressive on the person's part, but to discount anything created using AI as "not art", IMHO, is to admit that anything created using tools that you couldn't otherwise create with your own hands, isn't art, either, (or, at the very least, that anything using any digital tools that in any way automate any part of the creative process also isn't art)...

 

Art = skill + talent. Skill = practice + tools. Talent = a fertile brain + ideas. Any degree of autiomation, e. g. in something like Photoshop, keeps skill from developing. "A. I." is not like a brush at all, because brushes, even digital ones, don't do the job for you. They make it possible to put a dot or a draw a line, if your body is honed enough to control the tool, they don't do it themselves. Moreover, a brain gets inspired, inter alia, by the process of using tools and the feedback from them and material. A line that looks identical on paper and on the screen is yet not the same, because the resistance of paper, thoughts on having to spare the expensive paint, thoughts about what one's mother would say about not saving expensive paint, thoughts on Trump's face that the line suddenly begins to resemble midway... a muscle cramp and everything else in the universe as far out as the source of cosmic rays in distant galaxies in that moment comes together to result in that line and its connotations, later lines and shapes. The digital line is sterile, and that is if it is drawn by a man or woman on a tablet. When it is not even that but something plotted by a machine on request, all parts of the creative process are gone, leaving only a fevered idle space for pretense where one imagines that giving prompts is itself somehow creative.

[biostem]

1 minute ago, temnix said:

Art = skill + talent. Skill = practice + tools. Talent = a fertile brain + ideas. Any degree of autiomation, e. g. in something like Photoshop, keeps skill from developing. "A. I." is not like a brush at all, because brushes, even digital ones, don't do the job for you. They make it possible to put a dot or a draw a line, if your body is honed enough to control the tool, they don't do it themselves. Moreover, a brain gets inspired, inter alia, by the process of using tools and the feedback from them and material. A line that looks identical on paper and on the screen is yet not the same, because the resistance of paper, thoughts on having to spare the expensive paint, thoughts about what one's mother would say about not saving expensive paint, thoughts on Trump's face that the line suddenly begins to resemble midway... a muscle cramp and everything else in the universe as far out as the source of cosmic rays in distant galaxies in that moment comes together to result in that line and its connotations, later lines and shapes. The digital line is sterile, and that is if it is drawn by a man or woman on a tablet. When it is not even that but something plotted by a machine on request, all parts of the creative process are gone, leaving only a fevered idle space for pretense where one imagines that giving prompts is itself somehow creative.

That's a wonderful and poignant sentiment, but in the end, it's just an opinion, no more or less valid than mine, so where do we go from here?  You can deride those using AI as "not artists" all you want, and while you're at it, be sure to pour a little out for all the buggy whip salesmen and manufacturers that are no longer with us...

[temnix]

2 minutes ago, biostem said:

That's a wonderful and poignant sentiment, but in the end, it's just an opinion, no more or less valid than mine, so where do we go from here?  You can deride those using AI as "not artists" all you want, and while you're at it, be sure to pour a little out for all the buggy whip salesmen and manufacturers that are no longer with us...

 

Opinions don't all have the same karat content, you know. And the lazy hacks will continue to be lazy hacks, true enough, as more opportunities for them bloom.

[Healix]

[Forager]

Don't argue with people who try to gatekeep the term art.

[Krimson]

Warning. The video contains smoking and a bad word on a T-shirt. 

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 02:19 AM by Krimson

[battlewraith]

1 hour ago, biostem said:

That's a wonderful and poignant sentiment, but in the end, it's just an opinion, no more or less valid than mine, so where do we go from here?  You can deride those using AI as "not artists" all you want, and while you're at it, be sure to pour a little out for all the buggy whip salesmen and manufacturers that are no longer with us...

 

We watch the fallout. Whether or not AI is art is something that can be debated. Whether or not it's a tool is, IMO, pretty straightforward to answer. It's not. It's automation. The goal is to replace the worker. And we are already seeing this in the job market--entire divisions of companies being phased out in favor of AI. Recent college grads in general are facing much worse prospects at employment due to AI.

 

The buggy whip salesman was phased out by technology. But I don't think that there is a natural human inclination to be a buggy whip salesman. AI is intended to replicate the products of human creativity while bypassing the effort that was needed to produce these artifacts. And LLMs have gotten to this stage of development by feeding off the work of human artists so that they can be removed from the equation. 

 

 

[Krimson]

Samurai 5000

 

 

[Jacke]

15 hours ago, battlewraith said:

Whether or not it's a tool is, IMO, pretty straightforward to answer. It's not. It's automation.

 

The only uses I've read for Large Language Models that are anywhere truly useful (outside of continued research which is behind the scenes and likely under too much pressure to change them to "improve") is when the data they are trained on is very restricted to narrow them to a tight group of related use-cases.  An example was a game studio who trained a LLM on the lore and other details of a complex game and could query it to answer their questions.  This focused use is not what most users of LLMs are doing.

 

Won't bother going in the reality of LLMs, because that is complex and my knowledge is limited.  And the reality seems to have no bearing on the reception and adoption of LLMs as a magical panacea.  A long time ago I learned about the adoption of new technologies, with details like early adopters, middle adopters, and late adopters.  But now certain new technologies become the Next Big Thing that corporations rush to incorporate for fear of missing out.  And Devil take the hindmost.

 

And LLMs--Generative AI--is now the Next Big Thing.  Nothing exceeds like excess.  Some people are talking about LLMs verging onto AGI: Artifical General Intelligence.  (I'm skeptical.)  No matter, all ahead flank with what they've got now.  Massive new server farms are being build with great impact on land, power grids, pollution, etc.  (We each get by on about 100-200W of power.  LLMs a tad bit more.)

 

For those in charge of Corporations, the Line Must Go Up.  No matter what.  So it's onto the rest of your paragraph.

 

15 hours ago, battlewraith said:

The goal is to replace the worker. And we are already seeing this in the job market--entire divisions of companies being phased out in favor of AI. Recent college grads in general are facing much worse prospects at employment due to AI.

 

Words escape me.  Except for ones that are far too angry for these forums.

 

And of course, there are those who want to use AI to go into an even more twisted future.

 

 

[Octogoat]

Every ai query burns the equivalent of one 24 oz bottle of water.

[biostem]

I think, at this point, maybe we should move the discussion about the use of AI to a different thread, and allow people to share what they've created using it, in this one...

Edited Tuesday at 04:53 PM by biostem

[Octogoat]

Burning my daily water ration 

[Krimson]

5 hours ago, Octogoat said:

Every ai query burns the equivalent of one 24 oz bottle of water.

Not on my system it doesn't. I should know. I pay for the power. 

[Octogoat]

2 hours ago, Krimson said:

Not on my system it doesn't. I should know. I pay for the power. 

I was quoting a popular anti-ai talking point

[Krimson]

1 hour ago, Octogoat said:

I was quoting a popular anti-ai talking point

They wouldn't like to know that the electricity I pay for my AI use costs less than CDN $20 a month.

[battlewraith]

https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/05/20/1116327/ai-energy-usage-climate-footprint-big-tech/

 

[TheMoneyMaker]

More AI pics please. Energy consumption be damned.

 

If we're going to worry about every use of AI to do anything as a carbon footprint issue, then the people worried about it shouldn't be wasting energy use of internet posting of studies that will be accessed and viewed by others online, nor should they be interested in playing online games that contribute to energy consumption by the games' servers, and pretty much eschew all the wonderful bounty of internet convenience.

[Octogoat]

5 hours ago, TheMoneyMaker said:

More AI pics please. Energy consumption be damned.

 

If we're going to worry about every use of AI to do anything as a carbon footprint issue, then the people worried about it shouldn't be wasting energy use of internet posting of studies that will be accessed and viewed by others online, nor should they be interested in playing online games that contribute to energy consumption by the games' servers, and pretty much eschew all the wonderful bounty of internet convenience.

I will never stop posting ai pics they're too fun to make

[Kai Moon]

[Kai Moon]

[Krimson]

New music video. 

 

[Octogoat]

Glow Rat