• @Varlus@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    41 year ago

    As an artist who grew up when those exact same arguments were happening, I’ve always found it odd people went with the “AI is bad because it’s not art” argument. Instead of focusing on something like real people losing their jobs because of it. Which is such more legitimate reasons to hate how AI art is currently being used vs “b-but all you did was type prompts! You didn’t spend years learning like a REAL artist!” as if early photography/digital art wasn’t given the exact same criticism of “The tech does everything for you”

    • @RotaryKeyboard@lemmy.ninja
      link
      fedilink
      English
      41 year ago

      Instead of focusing on something like real people losing their jobs because of it.

      Ironically, it was the rise of one of those job-killing changes that made it possible for me to get in to a job in art in the first place. I think the same thing will be true for generative images. Some people who relied on the high bar for entry to protect their jobs will lose them, and some people who couldn’t get access to those jobs will suddenly find themselves able to enter artistic fields.

    • @DanteFlame@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 year ago

      But then you also fall into the trap of arguing against advancements in technology like the Industrial Revolution or globalisation, it’s affects on the environment aside, you could say it was bad because once machines were doing human work faster and more efficiently and cheaper, then so many people ended up losing their jobs. Yes it’s a real concern but it’s not a new concern and historically we know which side won, so either way we know which way things are gunna shake out, just gotta accept it and prepare.

      Or do what a lot of mining and industry towns in the US did and just sit around unemployed or in poverty hoping for the day those jobs come back - exaggeration and hyperbole but you get the idea