[sycamoretrees]

Art is about more than just imitation. It’s about the meaning behind the work. I am not talking about Marvel movies, which might as well be totally AI-generated at this point.

I would suggest having some empathy for those affected. It’s not just gatekeeping, it’s people reacting to being told that the meaning they put into what they make doesn’t actually add any value.

In the Human Condition, Hannah Arendt outlines three parts of the Vita Activa. The first is labour, at the bottom of the pyramid. It is by definition consumable and has limited meaning in itself. The second is work, through which we build a world (i.e. something bigger than just the cyclical and physical properties of the ecosystem). The third is action, or politics, which ripples through the world and inspires linear change. Put together, these three parts make up what it is to be a living human. Giving meaning-making away, by replacing it with mere imitation, is tantamount to revoking those qualities which make us human.

[Emma_Goldman]

I couldn't agree more. The idea that AI will mean that 'creative people' suffer from a 'total decline in cultural relevancy' is extreme philistinism. Culture is meaning and meaning is human; AI predicts from a training sample, and cannot genuinely create, by its nature.

[theage]

Humans also invent to make hard things easier. Glorifying toil has worked fantastically as a ranking mechanism for society so far but it is surely going to fail going forward, so too indirect democracy.

I suspect a lot of art lovers like not knowing that an artist's work has very exact beginnings and egoistic motivations al a marvel movies. Rather prefer the altruistic mystery that muses were involved curating the work out of nothing for the enjoyment of all. Maybe when you know the AI has exact origins it ruins the illusion of art for you because maybe deep down you liked to be tricked by human creativity.

Are you only going to watch certified AI/CGI free movies going forward?

[sycamoretrees]

Art, or creativity, is the part of the movie that is not toil.

Art being made purely for the enjoyment of all is purely commercial, and so it is in some ways equivalent to toil: it is something whose sole purpose is to be consumed.

Yes, being “tricked”, in your words, by human creativity is precisely the appeal. If art were simply an equation, it wouldn’t have any meaning to it - it would simply be fact.

I’m sorry, but I think we’re talking about two diametrically opposite conceptions of art here.