Setting aside the usual arguments on the anti- and pro-AI art debate and the nature of creativity itself, perhaps the negative reaction that the Redditor encountered is part of a sea change in opinion among many people that think corporate AI platforms are exploitive and extractive in nature because their datasets rely on copyrighted material without the original artists’ permission. And that’s without getting into AI’s negative drag on the environment.

  • Hadriscus
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    3 months ago

    This needs to change : there is no AI art. Art is something humans do, and AI is something that does not exist.

    There cannot be AI art.

    • hansl@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      “Art is whatever the artist chooses it to be.” And I’d also call art whatever the beholder chooses it to be. If Dog Art is something that exists, AI Art is something that exists.

      Whether you think in the case of AI the artist is the LLM or the prompter, that’s irrelevant.

      • vert3xo@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        If you consider the prompter to be the artist then do you consider me to be an artist when I make a Google search and click on images? I still get an image I didn’t make but I wouldn’t say that makes me an artist.

        And according to your quote the ai model couldn’t be an artist simply because it can’t consider anything to be an art, it just gives you the random noise that is the result of putting some text through its network. There are of course other reasons why the model shouldn’t be considered an artist but this was the simplest I think.

        Anyway, I’d say that ai art shouldn’t be called art when there’s no artist.

      • Hadriscus
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        Wow, looks like I have two wildly different options here, such luxury.

        C. There is no art

    • VirtualOdour@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      Agi doesn’t exist, saying ai doesn’t exist is like saying physics doesn’t exist because unified field theory isn’t a thing yet.

      • Hadriscus
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        I’m sorry, I can’t follow a reasoning unless it uses a car analogy. Please rephrase

    • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      There are several reasons this is a stupid word game, but the most damning is simple pragmatism. Either you have a better label that most people readily agree is better… or they’re gonna keep using the same label. Because words mean what they are used to mean and what they are understood to mean.