• 1 Post
  • 234 Comments
Joined 4 months ago
cake
Cake day: June 25th, 2025

help-circle








  • The impact on livelihoods is important, but it’s ultimately unrelated to defining what art is. My consideration of art is not one born of fear of losing money, but purely out of appreciation for the craft. I don’t think it’s entirely fair to suggest all the criticisms against generated art is solely borne of self-preservation.

    In regards to corporate “art”, all the things you listed, even stock images, are certainly not the purest form of artistry, but they still have (or, at least had) intent suffusing their creation. I suppose the question then is - is there a noticeable difference between the two for corporations? Will a generated logo have the same impact as a purposefully crafted on does? In my experience, the generated products I’ve noticed feel distinctly hollow. While past corporate assets are typically hollow shells of real art, generated assets are even less. They’re a pure concentration of corporate greed and demand, without the “bothersome” human element. Maybe that won’t matter in their course of business, but I think it might. Time will tell.




  • I made a comment about a week ago about how copying people’s art is still art, and it was a bit of an aha moment as I pinpointed for myself a big part of why I find image generators and the like so soulless, inwardly echoing a lot of what Inman lays out here.

    All human made art, from the worst to the best, embodies the effort of the artist. Their intent and their skill. Their attempt to make something, to communicate something. It has meaning. All generative art does is barf up random noise that looks like pictures. It’s impressive technology, and I understand that it’s exciting, but it’s not art. If humans ever end up creating actual artificial intelligence, then we can talk about machine made art. Until then, it’s hardly more than a printer in terms of artistic merit.







  • Ech@lemmy.catoScience Memes@mander.xyzStick Insect
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    5 days ago

    People put far too much faith the idea that we as a society know most, or even all there is to know. Humanity has advanced far and increasingly faster in recent years, but we still know basically nothing in terms of the grand scale of things to discover and know.

    Even now, our methods of discovering things like new species are far less advanced than people like this probably imagine - it basically boils down to time, persistence, and luck.