I’d disagree that it’s antithesis to art, it just has to be used artistically. Our current AI systems intrinsically don’t possess the pieces needed to make Art independently, so it’s ultimately all derived from human intention.
It’s similar to how random chance can be used for artistic ends: the specific outcomes are outside of human control, but the context, parameters, and nature of the random are deliberate choices.
The way AI is invariably used right now is cost saving, not intentional.
Any tool can be used for art, but it has to be used for art, not as a way to skimp on voice actors or whatever. Pollocks random painting was guided by intention: it was intentional, not coincidental. The sink he washed his brushes in, while also caked in chaotic paint, was coincidental.
Most people are producing, at best, low effort slop. Businesses are looking to cut costs. Somewhere out there someone is hooking an LLM to a text to speech engine, mangling its training set until it emits a constant stream of wookie noises, beat boxing, and hallucinations of IP law out of a speaker installed in a toilet.
I would immediately accept one of these as art.
Except that Ai, and support for Ai, has the end goal of stealing from and attacking artists. No artist worth paying any attention to should or would support Ai through its use. The only time I would ever consider it art is in using it to shit on itself, as a specifically anti-Ai piece, but that’s not really the same thing. Kinda like the guy on Instagram who shows it being completely unable to understand or follow basic instructions.
No excuses for Ai. I don’t like to take the absolute stance on too many things but in its current form, with its current goals, “Ai” is poison that shouldn’t be anywhere near anything, espcially not art. Fuck that garbage.
I’d disagree that it’s antithesis to art, it just has to be used artistically. Our current AI systems intrinsically don’t possess the pieces needed to make Art independently, so it’s ultimately all derived from human intention.
It’s similar to how random chance can be used for artistic ends: the specific outcomes are outside of human control, but the context, parameters, and nature of the random are deliberate choices.
The way AI is invariably used right now is cost saving, not intentional.
Any tool can be used for art, but it has to be used for art, not as a way to skimp on voice actors or whatever. Pollocks random painting was guided by intention: it was intentional, not coincidental. The sink he washed his brushes in, while also caked in chaotic paint, was coincidental.
Most people are producing, at best, low effort slop. Businesses are looking to cut costs. Somewhere out there someone is hooking an LLM to a text to speech engine, mangling its training set until it emits a constant stream of wookie noises, beat boxing, and hallucinations of IP law out of a speaker installed in a toilet.
I would immediately accept one of these as art.
Except that Ai, and support for Ai, has the end goal of stealing from and attacking artists. No artist worth paying any attention to should or would support Ai through its use. The only time I would ever consider it art is in using it to shit on itself, as a specifically anti-Ai piece, but that’s not really the same thing. Kinda like the guy on Instagram who shows it being completely unable to understand or follow basic instructions.
No excuses for Ai. I don’t like to take the absolute stance on too many things but in its current form, with its current goals, “Ai” is poison that shouldn’t be anywhere near anything, espcially not art. Fuck that garbage.