Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by username_my1 1178 days ago
Is it really a big problem though?

Isn’t most creativity mashing things together that no one before thought of putting together?

1 comments

I spent about 10 hours one day trying to convince my professional artist friend that AI could produce legitimate works of art, against his insistence that they could at best produce "kitsch" collections of art-like patterns, the kind of stuff that belongs on the wall at malls and not being discussed by academics in galleries.

I have to say that, although I still disagree with him, I was unable to get GPT to produce midjourney prompts which I would consider creative. Even when I prompted GPT to take the perspective of a known artist, it produced an endless series of banal landscapes, cliche compositions, overplayed metaphors, and insipid imagery.

Midjourney only really accels when a human is involved with the prompting.

I had to concede to him at the end of the discussion that /today's/ AI are not creative.

I firmly believe though that the inclusion of all mankind's perspectives possesses the raw material to generate creative ideas. My understanding is that current AI lack the ability to "turn off" the vanilla oversaturation of averages that pervade when you are exposed to all stimuli. One day, perhaps soon, there will be AI able to combine ideas they are exposed to without trying to combine ALL of the ideas at once.