![]() There are surely applications for artificial intelligence that improve existing technologies (web search, for example) and it’s a waste of time to argue about whether it should or shouldn’t exist. It's no wonder that professors preaching the inherent worth of artifice are also setting their students up with workshops that leverage commercial talent scouts ready to factory farm some content. The attempts to muddle it with commercialization and industrialization and now algorithmic synthesis are an attack on creativity, and a mini-lobotomy for the casual consumer. They have to pay people money to go to work and make products people have been making art for free since the stone age. AI art is cowardly because the person using it-who may even have the audacity to call themselves an artist-lacks confidence in their ability to create without the crutch of consensus, autogenerated by an algorithm developed by the least artistic people who have ever lived.Īs art left its spiritual origins and entered The Marketplace, it also surrendered daylight between art as art and art as product. Gone is the linearity of a mind’s influences over a lifetime, replaced by a monstrous amalgamation of every artwork ever made, reduced to binary and aped. A piece of AI art is generated by typing an idea into a box and letting a computer fart out the median example of that idea, according to its massive dataset, much of which was actual art and is now just statistical noise to be smoothed. More specifically, it is for the kind of dull person that thinks having an idea is the same as creating art. This is relevant to the question of art’s linear nature because linearity is at the center of the argument: if AI is nothing more than a tool, then how can one say that it is different from the invention of the paintbrush or the canvas? This is a false equivalence for many reasons but one most prominent among them: none of those tools were attempting to artificially replicate the human mind, which is the only place where linearity and artistic expression reside.ĪI art is for dull people. People who are bad at making art are normally the best at figuring out ways of reducing it to insignificance, which is probably why machine-worshippers are trying to do just that.Īrtificial intelligence is currently at the center of at least a hundred different intellectual property disputes, from the ongoing Writers Guild of America strike to the question of whether AI-generated music is theft for leveraging past creative output to make a “new” lifeless audio product. Now that the modern man has become so smart that God isn’t useful, I’m not sure what it’s called anymore. Back when The Word was the vehicle for artistic expression, this was known as a divine spark. Art has always been inside of human beings, who have gradually acquired the means to express it. ![]() Cave drawings predate the written word, and pictography is still prevalent in Chinese script, the oldest writing system we have. It is a language or means of expression, and likely our earliest iteration of communication. People are welcome to rewrite the history of the arts all they want, but the paintings are still signed by people that artists aspire to.īut art is also more than the sum of material output. If artistic expression was not linear, the names of those that inspired future generations wouldn’t attract such awe from art’s practitioners. Industrialization, which created a linear iteration in the West known as modernism, or the forced opening of trade with Japan that shipped in ukiyo-e works and ushered in the Japonisme trend among French alcoholics. One can easily trace the impact that specific events have on material artistic expression. These are all things that qualify as art, and only a fool would deny that the material expression of art is linear: one thought causes another, and all of a work’s influences are present in it, if not necessarily visible. There is the obvious, material thing which is a piece of art. This is a controversial opinion among the kinds of people who care about both art and AI, so let me explain.Īrt is a concept that describes two things. Art is linear, and so artificial intelligence cannot create art.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |