• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Merged Artificial Intelligence

I contend that there are very many human activities that are disparaged despite how hard people work at them. To the point that people working so hard at them is part of why they are so disparaged.

We value art because it does something for us that we don't get from the mere recitation or depiction of facts. We don't actually care at all how hard someone worked to produce it.

If effort defined value, we'd all be celebrating 9/11 Truth, the Shroud of Turin, and Soviet Communism.
 
Shepherd said:
Most modern pop music is probably already highly processed formulaic slop, anyway. I think some of Taylor Swift's "hits," for example, may have had as many as 12 co-writers, many of whom helped to make hits for other pop stars too and with each bringing their own familiar element into the mix. Also, the music is highly manipulated with things like autotune and whatnot and highly compressed to make it feel more energetic.
Click to expand...

it is and the idea that ai is going to improve that isn't landing with me.

you want to see art that's original and inspired and a labor of love. ai isn't capable of producing anything like that, it deviates towards mediocrity and people pleasing
 
dirtywick said:
you want to see art that's original and inspired and a labor of love. ai isn't capable of producing anything like that, it deviates towards mediocrity and people pleasing
Click to expand...

I can think of many Stock Aitken Waterman and Spice Girls [et al] songs that are as bad as any AI could produce.
 
dirtywick said:
it is and the idea that ai is going to improve that isn't landing with me.

you want to see art that's original and inspired and a labor of love. ai isn't capable of producing anything like that, it deviates towards mediocrity and people pleasing
Click to expand...
It can't raise the bar. It can get closer than 90% of humans to it though. For the typical commission use it's more than good enough. Can I have one of the top 10 manga artist to draw a silly drawing for my T-shirt ? Nope. Can I get Brodway class female singer to sing my stupid composition ? Certainly not. Can I get 100 of them in a choir ? Forget it. But with AI I can, for very little money if not for free.
I even think AI can get into high art. AI by itself can't be original enough, sure .. but with user input it can be. It can mix and modify existing styles on command, and of course it can do pretty much any topic you ask it to do. IMHO the moment when AI "painting" is sold for huge money is coming. We know empty canvas can be sold, and we know NFTs could be sold .. it's just a matter of time.
 
dirtywick said:
it is and the idea that ai is going to improve that isn't landing with me.

you want to see art that's original and inspired and a labor of love. ai isn't capable of producing anything like that, it deviates towards mediocrity and people pleasing
Click to expand...
Personally, I don't think AI will ever get beyond people-pleasing pop-art. It's going to generate whatever is popular... and realistically "popular" is the province of imitators, not creators.
 
Dr.Sid said:
It can't raise the bar. It can get closer than 90% of humans to it though. For the typical commission use it's more than good enough. Can I have one of the top 10 manga artist to draw a silly drawing for my T-shirt ? Nope. Can I get Brodway class female singer to sing my stupid composition ? Certainly not. Can I get 100 of them in a choir ? Forget it. But with AI I can, for very little money if not for free.
I even think AI can get into high art. AI by itself can't be original enough, sure .. but with user input it can be. It can mix and modify existing styles on command, and of course it can do pretty much any topic you ask it to do. IMHO the moment when AI "painting" is sold for huge money is coming. We know empty canvas can be sold, and we know NFTs could be sold .. it's just a matter of time.
Click to expand...

i agree ai can make uninspired art for cheap, there's definitely a use case there and the nft comparison is appropriate
 
arthwollipot said:
Who are you calling "we"?
Click to expand...
Humanity in general, the participants in this thread collectively, and you and I as individuals.

I contend that you do not in fact value art because of the effort involved, because I am confident this is not a metric you apply to anything else. You don't value wars of aggression, for example, even though they generally involve a titanic amount of effort. I'm also confident that your valuation of a given work of art is not actually contingent on the amount of effort it took to produce.

Separately, I think that would be a terrible metric for valuing art. Breakdancing is certainly an art from. Rachel Gunn certainly put some effort into breakdancing. But nobody in the world values her art, no matter how hard she worked on it. Not even you.
 
theprestige said:
I contend that you do not in fact value art because of the effort involved, because I am confident this is not a metric you apply to anything else. You don't value wars of aggression, for example, even though they generally involve a titanic amount of effort. I'm also confident that your valuation of a given work of art is not actually contingent on the amount of effort it took to produce.
Click to expand...
Wars of aggression are art now?
 
theprestige said:
I contend that you do not in fact value art because of the effort involved, because I am confident this is not a metric you apply to anything else.
Click to expand...
Just saying it doesn't make it true.

theprestige said:
You don't value wars of aggression, for example, even though they generally involve a titanic amount of effort.
Click to expand...
I do. I have a nice collection of WWI and WWII military models which I admire for the 'art'. Without those wars of aggression I wouldn't have that. I have to keep reminding myself of the purpose of that tech and the enormous suffering it caused, yet that doesn't diminish its beauty in my eye. Millions of military modellers around the world face the same dilemma.

theprestige said:
I'm also confident that your valuation of a given work of art is not actually contingent on the amount of effort it took to produce.
Click to expand...
Another bare assertion. So when people spend good money to see a live concert, only to find the performers lip-syncing to prerecorded music and the instruments not plugged in, you think they don't care? Anyone who has tried to play eg. a guitar or paint in oils knows the amount of effort required to get good results. The appreciation isn't just about the art itself, but the efforts of the people who created it. We praise them not just for the end result, but for bringing us joy and contributing to society, which encourages them to do more. This is a large part of what makes us successful as individuals and as a species.

You may say that AI can produce the same result so what's the difference, but it can't. The AI isn't actually creating art, it's stealing from the people who did. And because AI is a machine, not a human, it doesn't add anything human to it. All it does is ape human style with no intelligence, no emotion and no meaning. There is no mind behind it to identify with.

So what's the problem, you say, if people still enjoy it? The problem is that it displaces art made by humans and lowers the perceived value of art in general, making it harder for artists to live. AI doesn't innovate, so we don't get anything truly new or interesting. Instead of only 90% of it being 'crap', 99.9% is, drowning out the 0.1% of art still made by humans. This will eventually lead to a breakdown of society as we become mere consumers of meaningless dross.

theprestige said:
Separately, I think that would be a terrible metric for valuing art. Breakdancing is certainly an art from. Rachel Gunn certainly put some effort into breakdancing. But nobody in the world values her art, no matter how hard she worked on it. Not even you.
Click to expand...
The exception proves the rule. If nobody ever valued effort you wouldn't have to come up with an example where they don't.
 
Last edited:
Solitaire said:
AI Has Solved One Of Math's One Million Millennium Prize Problems
Click to expand...
Both AI-enabled teams relied heavily on work by Diego Córdoba of the Institute for Mathematical Sciences in Madrid and Luis Martínez-Zoroa of CUNEF University, researchers who had developed a strategy to attack the problem that radically departed from the methods most mathematicians were using.
Click to expand...
So AI didn't solve it, humans did - with the help of AI for certain tasks. Nothing wrong with that, but we shouldn't give credit where it isn't due.

Promoters of AI are doing this all the time, which is annoying and deceitful. It's giving the public a false impression of what AI is actually capable of. No wonder 85% stock market gains are coming from AI companies, as investors pour money into what is effectively a scam.
 
Last edited:
arthwollipot said:
And that has exactly what to do with art?
Click to expand...
You tell me. You said we appreciate art because of the effort involved. But I know that's not true for me, and I'm pretty sure it's not true for anyone else, including you.

There's something that distinguishes art from war, for you, that makes art valuable to you but not war. And it isn't the effort.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom