you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 13 points 10 months ago (2 children)

tl;dr - "art" generated by LLMs is ultimately lame and uninspiring. It's probably never going to inspire people very much. It's a parlor trick and everyone intrinsically recognizes it. Don't expect to be taken seriously as a creator if this is your primary tool.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    It's generative AI though, not creative. It can literally only create what it's seen before. It's incapable of being original. Not that there's anything wrong with that. Andy Warhol painted soup cans. But anyone who expects inspiration and creativity from generative AI doesn't understand the technology as it's applied...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (1 child)

    It generates new content based on what is trained on. not just what is trained on

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    Where is the new part coming from? The new part can only come from combining things it already knows.

    And even that is the part that is already provided by the human as part if the prompt.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    Just like it can Hallucinate text, it also hallucinates content. That's a core part of the generative feature

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    It hallucinates from incorrectly putting other info in its network together. It is all just stochastics.

    That is not original or new its is the core of what slop is.

    The problem is that it does not have a goal or even just understands why it is doing what it is doing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago*

    If you know what a ice sculpture of a human looks like and you know what an ice sculputre of a swan looks like you can maybe infer what an "ice sculpture of a flying crocodile with wings" might look like too, by combining what you already know. It's as much incorrect as your imagination, no?

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 child)
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (1 child)

    In order for an art piece to exist, an artist have to have something to say by said art. Fancy autocomplete is not an entity, it's an algorithm to generate something looking like something else, and even if it crawls out of the uncanny valley at some point (which I'm not sure is possible), the best case scenario is that it will generate something that looks like some people did at some point. It's not what art is, and it's not what people look for in art. This will never change, this is the never in said never.
    AGI will create art, but at this point we're further away from it than we were 10 years ago, or even 50 years ago (and I would argue it's a goos thing)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 10 months ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 child)
  • [–] 0 points 10 months ago*

    Your opinion of an average person is overly negative.
    Generated shit is the new Muzak, the new Alegria clipart, but done very badly. When a person who doesn't care about music and doesn't understand music hears Muzak they don't think about it at all, that's kind of almost the point of it. It's an amalgamation of a corporate default sequence of sounds invented to be approved by a committee. And that's the best that generators can wish to do, and I suspect there is a fundamental quality to it that will prevent it from being that ever.
    That's the thing about art, intentionality, it's not that "human art" is somehow superiour, it's that only human art exists, copying algorithms are doing copies, and even if sometimes it works, you don't get art without an artist saying you something.
    Obviously, people who don't enjoy art don't care. But that doesn't really matter.

  • source
  • parent