Hi, new guy here. @radicaledward pointed me to your newsletter (not necessarily this post tho). I'll be upfront -- I love AI art. I love playing with it. And I feel a bit puzzled as to why the hate for it is so tangible you can taste it in the air as it metastasizes from the pulsating anger of some folks. Don't get me wrong, I can understand why they don't like it, I just feel the level of hate is somehow disproportionate to the "threat" it somehow poses. As an (hobby) author, I view AI art the same as my learning another author's style (which at minimum I only pay something like $8 to learn -- is that enough?). As a translator (my day-time, full-time job), I use AI tools to speed my work. People laud AI tools when they benefit us. Some translators were shaking in their boots couple years back with the rise of AI translation. Did the public care then? Heck no, they embraced it and gladly fed the AI engines millions of examples a day (perhaps a slight exaggeration) as they globetrotted. So... what's my point? I think, perhaps, just a little, we are blowing this out of proportion. Should there be laws and protection for human works? OF COURSE. But perhaps could we leave the palpable hate for anyone who enjoys and plays with AI art at home? Please? Heck, I love my little AI projects. Am I ever going to try and pass them off as something I did? NEVER. Do I recognize that the AI learned from others to create it? ABSOLUTELY. But so did Picasso, and all the other "great" artists and composers and authors and... who came before us. We all start somewhere. We all learn and grow. I hope AI does, too.
Hey, thanks for reading and commenting! I think your points are completely valid, and that it's okay to love AI art. What's interesting to me about revisiting this post, even just a couple months after I wrote it, is how much change there's been in the conversation - and people's attitudes - around AI-produced content. It seems we've already accepted it into the culture, and are in the process of learning to compartmentalize it. Will it have a real, tangible effect on people's working lives? Yes! Will it replace "real" art? Not completely. Is it inherently evil? Probably not?
"I’m also a big believer in the idea that to name something is effectively kill it. Or, at the very least, by naming it you sort of lock it in place. Which makes me wonder if generative-AI art is going to be looked back on as a revolution in art for a very different reason than AI evangelists think it will be. It’s basically going to make everyone want to make stuff that DOESN’T look like this."
And I think this is very true. AI art may continue to improve to the point that it's as good and interesting as human made art, but human artists will definitely adapt to this (probably they already are). And that's pretty cool.
Humans cannot contend with the quality and quantity of AI artistic output. The fact is that AI art is, on average, better than human art (at least when using various generally-accepted aesthetic metrics). So, then, what is the incentive for the human artist to make art? It won't be profitable for companies to feature human art as anything other than "niche", "quaint" and "indie". They'll make more money featuring (better) AI art.
So what happens to the human dreamer when they can no longer create? Human art will become an (even more) intensely personal exercise, rarely ever to be shared with a wider audience. What does that do to our species? I envision a future where we are all mindless consumers of AI art, carefully curated to hit all the right neuroreceptors. If humanity as a species has any kind of spirit (e.g. we talk about how art motivates the human spirit - both as a catalyst and a mode of expression), then it has never been in more danger than it is right now with the dawn of AI art as a popular form of entertainment.
PS: If it is not immediately apparent to readers, I am that nay-saying friend mentioned in the thoughtfully-written blog post above.
Yes you are, and thank you for finding your way here and chiming in!
I can also envision the scenario you're describing, and it is indeed fear-inducing! I think that if art becomes (exclusively) a tool for helping companies to generate profits, then the definition of "art" will necessarily morph into something else. Perhaps what we now think of as "art" will be subsumed into the all-encompassing non-word, "content."
I hope that the human spirit will continue to prove indomitable, and find new ways to express itself. Forms of expression we have yet to witness will arise in response to "content" and those forms will be what is thought of as "art" in the (not all that distant, it turns out) future.
That feels like the best-case scenario to me, at this point.
That, and/or, art and commerce will finally be freed from one another! Hey, we can dream.
To answer the question of whether you are part of the problem now. The answer is: yes, yes you are.
I, for one, welcome our robot overlords.
Hi, new guy here. @radicaledward pointed me to your newsletter (not necessarily this post tho). I'll be upfront -- I love AI art. I love playing with it. And I feel a bit puzzled as to why the hate for it is so tangible you can taste it in the air as it metastasizes from the pulsating anger of some folks. Don't get me wrong, I can understand why they don't like it, I just feel the level of hate is somehow disproportionate to the "threat" it somehow poses. As an (hobby) author, I view AI art the same as my learning another author's style (which at minimum I only pay something like $8 to learn -- is that enough?). As a translator (my day-time, full-time job), I use AI tools to speed my work. People laud AI tools when they benefit us. Some translators were shaking in their boots couple years back with the rise of AI translation. Did the public care then? Heck no, they embraced it and gladly fed the AI engines millions of examples a day (perhaps a slight exaggeration) as they globetrotted. So... what's my point? I think, perhaps, just a little, we are blowing this out of proportion. Should there be laws and protection for human works? OF COURSE. But perhaps could we leave the palpable hate for anyone who enjoys and plays with AI art at home? Please? Heck, I love my little AI projects. Am I ever going to try and pass them off as something I did? NEVER. Do I recognize that the AI learned from others to create it? ABSOLUTELY. But so did Picasso, and all the other "great" artists and composers and authors and... who came before us. We all start somewhere. We all learn and grow. I hope AI does, too.
Hey, thanks for reading and commenting! I think your points are completely valid, and that it's okay to love AI art. What's interesting to me about revisiting this post, even just a couple months after I wrote it, is how much change there's been in the conversation - and people's attitudes - around AI-produced content. It seems we've already accepted it into the culture, and are in the process of learning to compartmentalize it. Will it have a real, tangible effect on people's working lives? Yes! Will it replace "real" art? Not completely. Is it inherently evil? Probably not?
Could not agree more.
I really like the Garbage Day substack because he researches trends online and I find that kind of stuff fascinating, but he wrote a good segment on AI art as well: https://www.garbageday.email/i/107209078/whats-coming-next-for-ai
The part that struck me:
"I’m also a big believer in the idea that to name something is effectively kill it. Or, at the very least, by naming it you sort of lock it in place. Which makes me wonder if generative-AI art is going to be looked back on as a revolution in art for a very different reason than AI evangelists think it will be. It’s basically going to make everyone want to make stuff that DOESN’T look like this."
And I think this is very true. AI art may continue to improve to the point that it's as good and interesting as human made art, but human artists will definitely adapt to this (probably they already are). And that's pretty cool.
It is pretty cool! And I think this conversation is only just getting started.
Thanks for pointing me toward Garbage Day. It's definitely up my street.
Will read.
I guess, for me, it all comes down to whether or not you like the art. Does it resonate with you? If so, does it matter how it came about?
My knee-jerk response is to say, "Yes, to an extent."
The issue is manifold and cannot be understated.
Humans cannot contend with the quality and quantity of AI artistic output. The fact is that AI art is, on average, better than human art (at least when using various generally-accepted aesthetic metrics). So, then, what is the incentive for the human artist to make art? It won't be profitable for companies to feature human art as anything other than "niche", "quaint" and "indie". They'll make more money featuring (better) AI art.
So what happens to the human dreamer when they can no longer create? Human art will become an (even more) intensely personal exercise, rarely ever to be shared with a wider audience. What does that do to our species? I envision a future where we are all mindless consumers of AI art, carefully curated to hit all the right neuroreceptors. If humanity as a species has any kind of spirit (e.g. we talk about how art motivates the human spirit - both as a catalyst and a mode of expression), then it has never been in more danger than it is right now with the dawn of AI art as a popular form of entertainment.
PS: If it is not immediately apparent to readers, I am that nay-saying friend mentioned in the thoughtfully-written blog post above.
Yes you are, and thank you for finding your way here and chiming in!
I can also envision the scenario you're describing, and it is indeed fear-inducing! I think that if art becomes (exclusively) a tool for helping companies to generate profits, then the definition of "art" will necessarily morph into something else. Perhaps what we now think of as "art" will be subsumed into the all-encompassing non-word, "content."
I hope that the human spirit will continue to prove indomitable, and find new ways to express itself. Forms of expression we have yet to witness will arise in response to "content" and those forms will be what is thought of as "art" in the (not all that distant, it turns out) future.
That feels like the best-case scenario to me, at this point.
That, and/or, art and commerce will finally be freed from one another! Hey, we can dream.