• rekabis@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 days ago

    A large part of art - and I would argue, the majority of it - is the sapient being behind the art who understands the art they are creating.

    Doesn’t matter if it is a painting, a novel, or a sculpture, the art is a product of the artist.

    And when a non-sapient and even non-sentient machine makes said “art”, it isn’t art any more than if a salamander accidentally dropped from a tree onto the freshly-loaded palette, and then crawled over the canvas.

    • Gamdrocauliuetal@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Too many people have an instrumental view of art. They want an image of a tree or anime tiddies or whatever and as long as the object functions as such. they don’t care about anything else.

      “thing is pritty” is all that matters.

      • AVincentInSpace@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        This is the core of it, really. AI lets you skip the creative process and fast-forward to the end product, and people always forget that “the boring parts” are where a lot of important decisions happen and the art is lesser for letting a statistical model make them.

        That fact is why I am immensely disappointed, but not surprised, by how popular LLMs are among programmers.