• Emerald@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    10 months ago

    If you are concerned about AI making “content” more throwaway, then you are already viewing creative works as something throwaway. Artists make works with meaning, AI doesn’t have a brain, it can’t make things with a meaning. That’s the job of the artist.

    • planish@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      But now, or soon, you can have one person with half an idea, like “what if The Rock had to save Shanghai from mole zombies”, and they can grab a text generator to fill in most of the screenplay, and then dial in the number of synonyms for “exciting” used to describe the explosions, and come out with Day of the Living Moles, a 95 minute feature film, in a weekend. Without actually having to have had any traditional cinematography skills or breaking an artistic sweat.

      There are categories of creative work that are throw-away; little sketches on napkins, improvised songs, quick sketches that an artist might think of are of no account to anyone. And the scope of what can be dashed off like that, with minimal time and effort, is growing because of more powerful tools.

      Why should I watch Universal’s superhero blockbuster when I can watch my buddy Jimothy’s? What happens when the number of plausible films dramatically exceeds the time that movie critics have to watch them to sort out which are any good?

      • Emerald@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Why should I watch Universal’s superhero blockbuster when I can watch my buddy Jimothy’s?

        That’s up for you to decide.

        What happens when the number of plausible films dramatically exceeds the time that movie critics have to watch them to sort out which are any good?

        Movie critics don’t have to watch every movie in the world. Also why trust some critics anyways? Just watch something and see for yourself

    • smeenz@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      10 months ago

      So you’re saying the people who write and tweak the prompts to create the output they envisaged don’t deserve to be called artists?

      In my mind, AI just lowers the barrier required for people to be able to express what’s in their mind

      • shneancy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        if you actually were to try and engage in artistic expression you’d find out the whole process from conception to finishing your creation is something worth the time, and mistakes/accidents that often happen during it can bring new ideas to the surface. In that process you have the ultimate control over how good it turns out. Be it comically bad or a masterpiece there’s a charm in how you have expressed your idea.

        AI flattens all that to a button click and regurgitates what’s already been made by somebody else, oftentimes creating something you’ve most likely already seen, somewhere, and won’t remember for long.

      • butterflyattack@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        AI just lowers the barrier required for people to be able to express what’s in their mind

        Yeah, there’s nothing wrong with people being about to express themselves, but that’s not necessarily art. With art the barriers are things like talent, creativity, and hard work. Lowering those barriers mostly creates rubbish. Typing ‘Make a pic of an x fighting a y and make it look cool!’ doesn’t make anyone an artist.