It's this delusional notion that there's enough intellectual properties to pull from that can be fed into an algorithm. Algorithms might be able to tell a story using tropes and writing its fed, but it's creatively empty from the beginning.
I've also gotten into it with "fuck you got mine" types on Hexbear about that.
It went something like this: "What is creativity, exactly? Where is this soul you speak of (no one spoke of a soul, not literally, but they built a pile of straw to point and sneer at anyway)? A writer is just a meat computer and this technology is superior to such an obsolete means of entertainment production. The only way to be a True Leftist is to unconditionally embrace this technology as liberating. To do so is Materialism(tm). Anything else is emotional. Don't make me break you." :very-intelligent:
It pisses me off when people reduce art to logic or magic. Art isn't a science nor is it mystical. The artist is beholden to their perception and experiences of the world and that influencess their art. When people talk about "soul" what they really mean is the personal feeling you get from good art that shows you someones unique perception of the world. You are almost getting a peak through someone elses eyes. This provides a unique connection to another human being. It's that feelng of "Oh, so that's what I look like to you, ha ha." it gives you a taste of someone elses mind.
That's why AI sucks and I hope it only gets used for jokes and curiosity. Because you can't get someone elses perspective from an algorithm that mashes up and replicates from others.
The artist is beholden to their perception and experiences of the world and that influencess their art. When people talk about “soul” what they really mean is the personal feeling you get from good art that shows you someones unique perseption of the world. You are almost getting a peak through someone elses eyes. This provides a unique connection to another human being. It’s that feelng of “Oh, so that’s what I look like to you, ha ha.” it gives you a taste of someone elses mind.
A lot of consumers don't want that. They want infinite dudebro power fantasies where the insert-dudebro-ego-here character receives infinite sex and validation from a rotating cast of waifus that vary only in hair color and combination of dudebro approved body types and dudebro-approved personality quirks.
I dare suspect that if human creativity was driven almost entirely out of fiction because of chatbot related technology, such consumers would be as indifferent to that as they were to the mass firing of professional script writers after the strike made television that much more lazy, toxic, and trashy over time.
Consider the Go-playing AI, KataGo. A truly magnificent creation of machine learning, it beats top level players with relative ease and has revolutionized how we think about the game.
Except it doesn't actually know how to play Go. You can beat it every time with one simple trick. What we've created isn't "artificial intelligence" at all, but a machine that replicates Go playing without understanding what it's doing or why.
AI "art" is exactly the same as KataGo. The machine doesn't know what words mean, it doesn't understand the shapes or colors it puts on a canvas - the only thing it can do is mimic human artists, and rely on human observers to impose a meaning on the images or text it generates.
:porky-happy: might be fine with that, because Capital has no use for art. Meaningless images that have their interpretation imposed on them by the viewer is literally what capitalism has been telling human artists to create for almost a century now. The machine can and will replace corporate "art", but the images generated by machine-learning-algorithms are not and will not ever actually be art.
It's this delusional notion that there's enough intellectual properties to pull from that can be fed into an algorithm. Algorithms might be able to tell a story using tropes and writing its fed, but it's creatively empty from the beginning.
I hate this :meow-tableflip:
I've also gotten into it with "fuck you got mine" types on Hexbear about that.
It went something like this: "What is creativity, exactly? Where is this soul you speak of (no one spoke of a soul, not literally, but they built a pile of straw to point and sneer at anyway)? A writer is just a meat computer and this technology is superior to such an obsolete means of entertainment production. The only way to be a True Leftist is to unconditionally embrace this technology as liberating. To do so is Materialism(tm). Anything else is emotional. Don't make me break you." :very-intelligent:
It pisses me off when people reduce art to logic or magic. Art isn't a science nor is it mystical. The artist is beholden to their perception and experiences of the world and that influencess their art. When people talk about "soul" what they really mean is the personal feeling you get from good art that shows you someones unique perception of the world. You are almost getting a peak through someone elses eyes. This provides a unique connection to another human being. It's that feelng of "Oh, so that's what I look like to you, ha ha." it gives you a taste of someone elses mind.
That's why AI sucks and I hope it only gets used for jokes and curiosity. Because you can't get someone elses perspective from an algorithm that mashes up and replicates from others.
A lot of consumers don't want that. They want infinite dudebro power fantasies where the insert-dudebro-ego-here character receives infinite sex and validation from a rotating cast of waifus that vary only in hair color and combination of dudebro approved body types and dudebro-approved personality quirks.
I dare suspect that if human creativity was driven almost entirely out of fiction because of chatbot related technology, such consumers would be as indifferent to that as they were to the mass firing of professional script writers after the strike made television that much more lazy, toxic, and trashy over time.
Yeah capitalism is bad for art in general.
deleted by creator
so like...
Consider the Go-playing AI, KataGo. A truly magnificent creation of machine learning, it beats top level players with relative ease and has revolutionized how we think about the game.
Except it doesn't actually know how to play Go. You can beat it every time with one simple trick. What we've created isn't "artificial intelligence" at all, but a machine that replicates Go playing without understanding what it's doing or why.
AI "art" is exactly the same as KataGo. The machine doesn't know what words mean, it doesn't understand the shapes or colors it puts on a canvas - the only thing it can do is mimic human artists, and rely on human observers to impose a meaning on the images or text it generates.
:porky-happy: might be fine with that, because Capital has no use for art. Meaningless images that have their interpretation imposed on them by the viewer is literally what capitalism has been telling human artists to create for almost a century now. The machine can and will replace corporate "art", but the images generated by machine-learning-algorithms are not and will not ever actually be art.
Until the machine can truly learn, which isn’t impossible. It’s honestly more likely than there ever being a space colony in our lifetimes.
Either way, it is for the worse when :porky-happy: owns it, profits from it as its intention, and decides how it is used.
I think it would probably be one of those indistinguishable things. But either way it doesn't bode well for creatives. Not like capitalism ever was.