[ nostalgia intensifies ]

Just use Windows.
(uno reverse on ya’ll)

As far as the role of man versus machine, using AI as a tool is more like being a director or composer. You determine the composition. The setting. The subject. The style. Let the machine do the labor of simply outputting, and then you tell it what you don’t like about this output.back and forth, until you arrive at whatever finished is. It’s as much art as a conductor in a symphony, or a director on a set, simply giving direction to a machine.

Now replace “AI” with an artist, and yourself with any mouth-breathing supervisor, that micro-manages artists.

You are employing something to do the art for you.

Amd my fucking god, comparing entering a prompt to a conductor. Techbros really are high on their own farts.

Art has always been limited by access. Either to the tools, or to the ability to learn and practice.

Hard disagree.

AI, at least in its current form, with open source models readily available, is only allowing more people to create who never could before.

So are poeple are doing the creating or the machine? Because even the techbros are saying that it’s the machine.

Getting into any art is expensive, both in money and time.

Tell that to the poeple who did cave-paintings

Anyone with a half decent rig can get something set up and add a touch of art to their world, and begin to express themselves in SOME way.

Google “Mona Lisa” and print it out. That’s about the same amount of art as entering a prompt and receiving an output.

Well, they aren’t. Until they are, let’s keep the conversation to what they are.

Sure, my auntie will use a generator instead of paint for her yard sale poster. But we’re assuming Llms are going stay free and accessible to all at zero cost. That’s just not a reality we live in.

But comparing the current garbage that comes out of llms with “big name company’s ads” is purposeful misonformation from a person, who is likely never done graphiscs design professionally.

“AI” tools will not make the world a more artistic place. Art has never been limited by tools.

I could agree that the generated stuff could make the world slightly more pleasing visually, at the cost of environment.

But easily accessible graphics weren’t even the limiting factor. There are many tools online that can help you mock things up in seconds without “AI”. Canva, mockups, simple websites that generate decent templates.

It’s people’s willingness to put in the effort, and comprehension of aesthetics, and IT literacy that are the limiting factors.

People are still confusing art with output… Even if llms caould generate a 1:1 replica of the Monalisa, do people thing it’s going to have the same value and be held in the same regard?

Generated output is a gimmick that will be used by people who have no intention of making art.