Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
I don't think that AI devalues art.
Nobody looks at AI products and goes, wow, this is art.
At least not in and of itself. There could be something to be said for using AI as part of a larger artwork, and that does not devalue the artwork, in my opinion, but AI by itself is not art.
I've came across plenty of AI pieces that I genuinely like.
I understand liking AI stuff, but calling it art, I think, is deceptive at best.
I think art requires the intentional minuscule effort of a human being in its foundation. And AI is like other art that has been ground into paper mache and then plastered into the shape of something that resembles art rather than art itself.
While the case could be made that if a human being did that, that that would be art, the fact that a human being did not do it is the reason why it isn't art.
GenAI doesn't generate anything on its own either - it too needs the intentional minuscule effort of a human being in its foundation. I don't think the "effort" argument holds up here anyway. People happily accept as art a photograph that took me 30 minutes to capture and edit, but they reject a GenAI piece I spent 3 hours tweaking until I got exactly what I wanted.
Of course they do. Every single person making prompts for it certainly does, and lots of other people as well.
Well, in fact, I have seen such people and they directly called it real art. But it was hard to disagree with them, given the highest quality of the content generated.
As for art in general, I know very well what it is and am completely disappointed with it.
Well, over time we will see if this is true.