“Everyone Is Using A.I. for Everything” nowadays, a.k.a. vibe-living, and if you don’t, you’re a misfit outsider who should be stoned to death in the town square to prevent contagion, and then A.I. should resurrect you virtually from your data so you can be stoned to death in the virtual town square, for infinity…
Criticizing A.I. as a criminal plagiarizing machine that steals the work of artists without permission or compensation used to strike me as a bit hyperbolic…
The point is, I’m not saying all this to defend humanity. Humanity sucks. It’s totally terrible. I’m saying this because I believe in an old-fashioned virtue called Doing the Freakin’ Work.
Read the book, not the summary.
Write the piece, not the prompt.
Suffer like the artist you are. It ain’t easy, but if it were easy, it wouldn’t be worth doing.
Fudge AI in art, and creativity, or even technical responsible fields like programming.
And isn’t programming for human to control machinery, too?
I do still recall the book that featured Lisp, from MIT University we read:
Our goal is that students who complete this subject should have a good feel for the elements of style and the aesthetics of programming.
They should have command of the major techniques for controlling complexity in a large system.
They should be capable of reading a 50- page-long program, if it is written in an exemplary style.
They should know what not to read, and what they need not understand at any moment.
They should feel secure about modifying a program, retaining the spirit and style of the original author.
These skills are by no means unique to computer programming. The techniques we teach and draw upon are common to all of engineering design. We control complexity by building abstractions that hide details when appropriate.
We control complexity by establishing conventional interfaces that enable us to construct systems by combining standard, well-understood pieces in a “mix and match” way. We control complexity by establishing new languages for describing a design, each of which emphasizes particular aspects of the design and deemphasizes others.
~ Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs (SICP) [ISBN: 0262510871]
It does not allow you to actually organize your own mind, to discover yourself, memorize, and learn.
Generative is empty. It’s noise. Do you like listen to and learn from noise? I don’t, and will never.
Obviously, there’s no creativity in AI, and especially in art.
AI makes no art, and there’s nothing to search for in it, also considering the amount of different people works and effort meatground into digital limited/sampled quantized data. It’s noise.
There’s no place for a machine in it, otherwise it becomes limited, lacking, and lifeless.
Art exists for people, us the humans to communicate with each other through time and narrow channels as general languages.
> “There are always two people in every picture…” ~ Ansel Adams
Source (AI struggles with true creativity compared to humans, study finds…)
Again, fudge AI over effort. Effort helps to stay accountable, responsible, and to realize the significance and infinite marvel of art…
Art is of human for human.
Fudge AI in art, and creativity, or even technical responsible fields like programming.
And isn’t programming for human to control machinery, too?
I do still recall the book that featured Lisp, from MIT University we read:
It does not allow you to actually organize your own mind, to discover yourself, memorize, and learn.
Generative is empty. It’s noise. Do you like listen to and learn from noise? I don’t, and will never.
Again, fudge AI over effort. Effort helps to stay accountable, responsible, and to realize the significance and infinite marvel of art…
Art is of human for human.
Just to better understand your comment, is fudge short for fuck or is it the verb to fudge
it’s used instead of fuck because people still to this day, have problems is just saying a word for some dumb reason.
You better fudge off.