local anon · 2mo
genuine question and I hope it doesn't make you feel uncomfortable answering. If it does feel free not to!!
I know LLM's, like whatever the fuck we call AI nowadays, are basically googling words and generating a picture with blip blops and there's nothing creative to it, but how would you define this as different from a person given references and making something out of them? To make this as less vague as possible if there's even a need for that, say there's The birth of Venus and someone's asked to make Venus floating on a dorito instead of a scallop. A human and a computer would produce similar results, especially if the artist doesn't take many artistic liberties outside of the pictures given to him. I know there is a difference to it, but I can't express it. I am stuck in a confusion of "what is different then?"
What would your take be on this?
Apologies in advance, this is going to sound harsh.
'What is different then?' It's not complicated. A computer is not a human. A computer can't think. A computer can't feel. A computer can't experience. A computer can't learn. To equate a computer's ability to copy and regurgitate data to a human's ability to communicate through art is so existentially offensive as a premise that it's inherently bad faith, even if you yourself aren't asking it in bad faith. You may as well be asking me what's the difference between a plagiarist and a writer, because if that difference between those two things is even entertained as a debate, then either you're being made an idiot or you are indulging idiots. At worst, both.
No one seems to debate this when it comes to the idea of, say, athletes. A machine can ostensibly produce the same results as a basketball player, throw a ball in the hoop and score points against other machines. But that's patently ridiculous, isn't it? People don't watch sports for the concept of throwing balls in hoops, people watch sports for human spectacle and physical ability.
It's a mistake to think art is only about the results, that's capitalist thinking in that only the end conclusion of the process has any value (fiscally or otherwise). Propaganda made by mediocre people who think being an 'idea guy' is the only important part of any project. Art is about ability, it's about expression, it's about making history. It's about human labor and craftsmanship. It's about being alive.
