[vouaobrasil]

> So all the highly unique, contextually relevant and aesthetically pleasing AI art that I am seeing pop up in blogs, chats, documentation, presentations, etc where before there would have been nothing or maaaybe some ultra-generic clipart, this explosion of creativity is slowly erasing the human spirit? Nah. Looks like the opposite, if anything.

None of that art represents the individual experience of a person any more. It's all a psychotic averaging. I've seen that art too and I find it disgusting.

I don't see anything people are producing with AI as representing the human spirit. I see it as humans being plugged into a machine pushed to create and create and for what? What's the next step? It's horrific and should be destroyed.

[doug_durham]

So someone who has lost the use of their voice and uses a text to voice program is disgusting and has no human spirit? I would disagree. In the same way new AI tools allow people who could not express themselves otherwise to express themselves. Does it mean they have good taste? Not necessarily, but it is authentic communication.

[neuralRiot]

I’d argue that the person who lost its voice have no choice, the people choosing to draw by AI to express themselves do it by sheer laziness and to get quick gratification, but that seems what technology is mostly about, putting any effort in any pursuit is so old school.

[vouaobrasil]

> So someone who has lost the use of their voice and uses a text to voice program is disgusting and has no human spirit?

You are twisting my argument. I never said a PERSON using AI doesn't have human spirit. Rather, that in GENERAL, the content generated by AI does not have the subtelty of human expression compared to the human-made stuff. Of course, the person that lost their voice naturally loses some expression by using an artificially-generated one.

That doesn't mean that they can't express themselves in other ways.

Come on, these counterarguments are too easy to refute...