#could you imagine someone arguing 'these two hooks and a cup are a human face because I can see distinct features?' come on now

[kindaeccentric]

If I see one more shit take about how AI 'art' is art, because 'art is not just created, but perceived' and photography being given as an example I'm going to start screaming. If you don't see a difference between a real human being using a tool (photo camera) to capture an image filtered through their very personal sense of aesthetic and importance, choosing an angle, light etc. and an amalgamation of stolen art without any personal input, no creative process AT ALL, then buddy, I have a clear picture of how little value real life artists have for you and how little understanding you have for what art really is.

[kindaeccentric]

People be like 'but ALL art is derivative :)' and 'a director takes credit for an entire film despite it being a work of many people, AI is similar!', honey, how do I explain to you art is a form of self expression, it isn't only for you to consume, it's to connect with other people, to learn, to grow, to feel the ACT OF CREATION itself. Even readymade art movement had A CONSCIOUS THOUGHT behind it and that's what made a factory-produced product a piece of art. Do you really think AI could create modernism when only being fed classical art? Do you think it could create Goya's 'The Disasters of War' or Picasso's 'Guernica'? Do you think AI can do a performance? Art isn't just pretty pictures to look at. I say it even as an artist that draws pretty pictures, because they come from a place of love, of a deeply human need. You draw on the walls of the cave. You use your eyes, your own brain, your soul.

Yes, we know that AI uses stolen art and of course it's a problem, we are not stupid, but it runs deeper. It's reducing something to only it's effects, it's death of the author treated literally. If we allow ourselves to think this way, that only the output is important, then what's the point of creating, of living? Only to consume? That's what corporations want. Don't let yourself be fooled.

If I see one more shit take about how AI 'art' is art, because 'art is not just created, but perceived' and photography being given as an example I'm going to start screaming. If you don't see a difference between a real human being using a tool (photo camera) to capture an image filtered through their very personal sense of aesthetic and importance, choosing an angle, light etc. and an amalgamation of stolen art without any personal input, no creative process AT ALL, then buddy, I have a clear picture of how little value real life artists have for you and how little understanding you have for what art really is.