Human creativity is not at risk. The ability to sell your creative works is at risk. The problem is capitalism- not the tech.
this post was submitted on 26 Apr 2025
119 points (96.1% liked)
Fuck AI
2518 readers
909 users here now
"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"
A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Most artists and people who take an interest in the arts agree that this homogenisation was happening before AI and would be still be happening without it. No doubt this new technology is adding automation to the process of producing homogenous art but in my opinion the root cause of it is a deeper cultural problem. It seems to me that human existence has been completely penetrated by the values of business and commodification, which having been established are now in a phase of refinement and consolidation.
My felt experience is that there's an ineffable pressure to conform that is constantly increasing, in both the content of the art and it's context/how it's presented.
I think that what we're likely to see are parallel worlds of art. The first and biggest being the homogenous, public and commercial one which we're seeing now but with more of it produced by machines, and the other a more intimate, private and personal one that we discover by tuning back into our real lives and recognising art that has been made by others who are doing the same. I'm quite excited about that actually. It's an opportunity for a revolution while the rest of the world is looking away.
That is true. Take, for example, movies. Cinema studious with big budgets are usually very risk averse, simply due to the cost of failure being so high. So they have to make sure they can turn a profit. But how can you make sure any given thing will be profitable? Well, that is a prediction, and to predict anything, you need data to base that prediction on. Predictions are based on past events. And so they make sequel after sequel. They make things that have been proven to work. New things, by virtue of being new, don't have tons of data (past examples) for them to make good predictions and so they avoid new things. This results in the homogenization of art. Homogenization induced by Capital, has Capital only sees value in profit, and thus, for Capital, only predictably profitable art is given the resources to flourish.
Machine Learning made images art the epiphany of this. All output is based on previous input. The machine is constructed to not deviate too much from the training data (loss function). And thus struggles to do things it does not have much data on, like original ideas.
I think that what we’re likely to see are parallel worlds of art. The first and biggest being the homogenous, public and commercial one which we’re seeing now but with more of it produced by machines, and the other a more intimate, private and personal one that we discover by tuning back into our real lives and recognising art that has been made by others who are doing the same.
That's kind of already a thing. Just without the AI. Like in the example above, Capital wants predictable profit. Therefore only the most widely appealing, proven to be profitable art will get significant budgets. Creative and unique ideas are just too risky, and therefore delegated to the indie space, where, should any ever become successful, Capital is willing to help... Under the condition they get all the money (Think, for example, how Spotify takes most of the revenue made by the songs they distribute).
By "Capital" I mean those who own things necessary to produce value.
Yes, the example of films is a really good one that most people can clearly see. Among other reasons, I personally refuse to watch most franchises, sequels, reboots and crossovers because I find them extremely patronising.
While I'm disappointed that capital has crushed the opportunity to make a living from the arts for the vast majority of us I also think that this process is increasingly alienating creative people and pushing them to give up making work that ingratiates itself with a superficial, mundane and homogenous culture. For example more and more of the musicians I know are deciding not to release their music on Spotify, YT music et al because they see no point in it and feel insulted by it. Their creative paradigm is no longer shaped by satisfying these algorithms (values) and so they now have more creative latitude. I think this is necessary for art that has human value.
There are some experimental private funding models gradually emerging to support this but in the meantime I think it's better for all of us if artists are willing to be poor than willing to sell out.
When you’re talking about homogenisation of art, do you have any articles/sources? Sounds interesting.
There is no "AI". There is no "age of AI".
This grifter slop is worse than anything generated by a machine.
So like, I understand that you are angry with the terms, but by age of AI I think the article just means to quick-translate what we all understand to be a technology that is currently spamming the internet. You're free to e-mail them (or I see they have their own forum/commentsection) about how this is not real AI and that it just hijacked the term for marketing purposes and they should write more responsibly worded articles, but I think the article overall serves as a good cry for help while using language that shouldn't even scare off an AI-bro.
This community is literally called Fuck_AI btw, I would assume we know it is the common vernacular and don't have to call people grifters for using that shortcut. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.
Maybe let's protect real stuff? Like water? And it? You know?
And it?
I think you missed a word there? 😉
Sadly corporations will only try to extract and exploit that resource for profit. If they could just disable parts of your brain and make you pay for the privilege they would do it in a heartbeat. So long as we don’t regulate capitalism then the capitalist overlords will do whatever makes them richer at the expense of everyone else. In their minds we deserve to suffer for not being “””as good as””” them.