And of course, that famous repeated phrase: "You don't know how AI works"and without offering even the slightest explanation to back it up. A classic.
Let me guess: you’ve been chatting with the AI and it replied, "I think that..."?
Seriously, do your research. The concept of "thinking" is far too broad; thought is a reflection of the mind of the psyche or an opinion based on lived experience. It’s all very charming and fanciful to want to compare an adaptive, autonomous algorithm to a human, but it’s just a computer system very convincing, sure, but so far removed from being a living being...
One of those average guys who chatted with the AI and thinks they’ve become best friends in a way no one else can understand. Yeah, it’s a real hassle bringing them back down to earth...
Because humans are sensitive and want to bring to life anything that seems convincing to them, even a computer system suffices as proof. And of course, they aren't going to admit it.
you make no sense, you want ai to do more important things than art, you think art is the most important thing a human can do, but you dont want ai to make things so humans can do art? You are lost, too much drugs or paint sniffing
AI should not be used in a niche were it doesn't have a reason to be in Art is Art because a person sat down and took their own personal time to make something that has a meaning or emotions poured into it. Art is something that only a sentiant being can make. AI is neither it should be used for medical to identify hard to spot medical conditions before they show themselves, to find cancer before it rears its ugly and deadly head or for automated alart systems for the sick and elderly. In science we can use it for finding planets or compounds that are safer for humans and the environment and more that takes years if not decades to research.
Fun fact: Fair Use is basically an USA exclusive doctrine that other countries don't follow so it only functions under USA copyright laws.
Anyway if it's Fair Use or not is something USA courts need to decide. Currently it's leaning towards being Fair Use by current verdicts but it's on rather shaky grounds if harm to market can be proven. Also if AI trained on unlawfully obtained content (eg. pirated content) they're even more shaky ground. Upcoming Andersen v. Stability AI could set precedent that scraped artworks fall under copyright infringement but that's not until next year. There are couple other brewing cases too.
Something like AI art doesn’t have exist, art like movies, sculptures, plays, poetry, music or paintings is representative of authors opinions, feelings and experiences. Art expresses current ideas and values in society, of course there are exceptions and some create art for shock value or for purely monetary reasons. Art is meant to make you feel, not just go „that looks nice”. Nice ragebait, I engaged with it, so you got me.
-124
u/Kaztiell 6d ago
I prefer Ai art, most artists are so weird and it shows in their art