this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2023
763 points (95.7% liked)

Technology

59598 readers
3398 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Robin Williams' daughter Zelda says AI recreations of her dad are 'personally disturbing'::Robin Williams' daughter Zelda says AI recreations of her dad are 'personally disturbing': 'The worst bits of everything this industry is'

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And you mean to tell me they decided to do it themselves?

No human told them what to draw and you can let it keep drawing just by itself forever and generate original images. By your logic no AI can ever do anything by itself just because a human pressed the power button on the computer once. That's nonsensical.

Do you seriously believe that executives, who hold the highest power, will decide to replace themselves?

The shareholder will demand it when it becomes clear that an AI would do a better job.

You think oil paintings lost all worth when photography and printing and digital painting came about?

When was the last time the average person bought an oil painting? I can't even remember the last time I saw one.

That is what you think progress is?

Once upon a time aluminium worth was as much as gold. Then we figured out how to refine it for cheap and we build our Coke cans out of it now. Values change. Nobody is going to pay hundreds of dollars for an image that AI can generate better in 10sec. Just as nobody is paying monks to copy books anymore, we have printers for that. The whole idea of a static image is starting to feel bizarre once you played around with AI for a while.

The progress here isn't replacing the artist, but that replacing the artists allows you to build bigger and better things. The artists that used to draw a single image, now has the power to draw the whole rest of the comic book just by themselves. The filmmaker that used to make a little 10min short can now to the full 2h movie. And the guy that had their head full of ideas, but no skill to draw, can now produce compelling images as well. The bar has been raised and it will keep raising.

You just seem to be eagerly praying for the day you will be turned into a paperclip, for “value”.

I simply don't pretend that we ever cared about the artists in the first place. Most of the great artists of the past died poor. Their images and fame came much later, long after their death. Today we watch movies and have little to no idea who or how they were created. We care about if the movie entertained us. Not the process of its creation or the hundreds of names scrolling by in the credits. Once AI keeps making movies that will entertain us, we'll watch them.

People that are passionate about creating something manually, can still do as they please, they just can't expect other to pay for it, when there are cheaper and better alternatives around.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Tired of your disingenuous responses. By your definition a die is intelligent because "you didn't tell it what number to roll". Stop playing dumb about that AI. I know you understood it.

The shareholder

Humans, again.

Trying to make big claims based on your own indifference towards art and artists only convinces me you are the last person I'd want an opinion about it. There's a lot of discussion to be made about what makes art "better". It's not just making it bigger and longer.

The whole idea of a static image is starting to feel bizarre once you played around with AI for a while.

This just sounds weirdly cultish.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I know you understood it.

Your whole argument is nothing more than unfounded human exceptionalism. AI can't do stuff because it is not human. Yet you fail to show any significant difference between AI and human. Look at the history of art. Humans just follow patterns and copy other artists too. You don't see new trends emerge from nothing, it's all just a slow evolution. Or go over to https://www.artstation.com/, half the stuff on their is just fan art, celebrities or generic sci-fi/fantasy/military stuff that can be replicated by AI in a couple of seconds. Where is that magical human originality?

You compare the best of the best that billions of human have managed to produce over hundreds of years with what AI farted out in 10sec and than complain that AI isn't up to par, completely missing that about 99.9999% of those humans would be completely useless in producing high quality art.

Humans, again.

Human deciding to hand control over to AI is not humans being in control. That's humans losing control.

It’s not just making it bigger and longer.

Well, for a lot of art it is. Short movies being short. Comic books being black&white. Indie games using pixel art. None of that is because the people making those things want that, it's because doing it bigger and better is outside the time/budget that they can afford. AI art makes things possible that used to be impossible on a small budget. I welcome that.