No man, that doesn’t mean that. I’m saying the artist for the banana piece is depending on the curator to do the actual creation of the piece, just like the guy writing the prompts for the AI is depending on the AI to create the piece.
depending on the curator to do the actual creation of the piece
We might as well attribute that work to the curator, then, hm?
Does the artist also get credit for how high up the wall the piece was displayed? Which floor or wing it’s displayed in? Because this is what AI prompter’s claim. They paint nothing but enter painter’s competitions.
You get credit for the things you do, and not for the things you don’t. LLMs are built to decide for you.
They paint nothing but enter painter’s competitions.
Yeah, so that’s a stupid thing that individual humans are doing. If you “hand made” a 3d model in Blender and printed it out and submitted it to a painting competition, you are not doing something right.
You get credit for the things you do, and not for the things you don’t.
So the banana guy doesn’t get credit for making the piece. what did they actually do then? This is my point: Either the banana guy is doing nothing and getting paid shitloads, in which case, not art, (lots of ) humans make trash, here’s an example, which means the AI guy is also not an artist, so fine.
Or Banana guy is an artist because he came up with the concept and is an artist, and so is the AI guy because he also came up with the concept.
I’m fine with either. I’m not fine with “banana guy is an artist, AI guy is not”
The bananamana gets credit for doing the Art Museum equivalent of a shitpost. I think everyone understands this intuitively.
The AI guy writes prompts. Maybe they do some touch-up after. But, this leaves a lot on the table: where is the museum curator filling in the little birds in the sky? Or the pedestrian across the street who makes it into some generateds and not others? Or the row of planets that, in video, turns into a guitar that then turns into a gas cloud that then turns into a trumpet-planet-thing that then dissolves into nothing? They live in the machine. A machine that doesn’t know what a pedestrian is, that doesn’t know what a trumpet is—It’s just visual noise. It may as well be TV static. It means nothing.
Why does the AI idea-guy think that their work should be interesting to anyone when it is 90% colorful jingle keys for me, the dribbling baby, to look at while observing their “concept”: Cthulhu dressed up as a police officer.
Did you like that? Cthulhu as a police officer? That’s my art. Type that into a generator and appreciate it for me.
If we can’t explain the difference, AI must be sentient? This argument reminds me of “God of the gaps”.
No man, that doesn’t mean that. I’m saying the artist for the banana piece is depending on the curator to do the actual creation of the piece, just like the guy writing the prompts for the AI is depending on the AI to create the piece.
We might as well attribute that work to the curator, then, hm?
Does the artist also get credit for how high up the wall the piece was displayed? Which floor or wing it’s displayed in? Because this is what AI prompter’s claim. They paint nothing but enter painter’s competitions.
You get credit for the things you do, and not for the things you don’t. LLMs are built to decide for you.
Yeah, so that’s a stupid thing that individual humans are doing. If you “hand made” a 3d model in Blender and printed it out and submitted it to a painting competition, you are not doing something right.
So the banana guy doesn’t get credit for making the piece. what did they actually do then? This is my point: Either the banana guy is doing nothing and getting paid shitloads, in which case, not art, (lots of ) humans make trash, here’s an example, which means the AI guy is also not an artist, so fine.
Or Banana guy is an artist because he came up with the concept and is an artist, and so is the AI guy because he also came up with the concept.
I’m fine with either. I’m not fine with “banana guy is an artist, AI guy is not”
The bananamana gets credit for doing the Art Museum equivalent of a shitpost. I think everyone understands this intuitively.
The AI guy writes prompts. Maybe they do some touch-up after. But, this leaves a lot on the table: where is the museum curator filling in the little birds in the sky? Or the pedestrian across the street who makes it into some generateds and not others? Or the row of planets that, in video, turns into a guitar that then turns into a gas cloud that then turns into a trumpet-planet-thing that then dissolves into nothing? They live in the machine. A machine that doesn’t know what a pedestrian is, that doesn’t know what a trumpet is—It’s just visual noise. It may as well be TV static. It means nothing.
Why does the AI idea-guy think that their work should be interesting to anyone when it is 90% colorful jingle keys for me, the dribbling baby, to look at while observing their “concept”: Cthulhu dressed up as a police officer.
Did you like that? Cthulhu as a police officer? That’s my art. Type that into a generator and appreciate it for me.