[chefandy]

the very idea that art requiring a significant amount of deliberate action is a problem to be overcome and not part of what makes it fulfilling-- like artists have just been practicing to so they can produce more work more quickly-- betrays a foundational lack of understanding of why people do it.

[muzani]

To put it one way, some mine blocks as art, some carve sculptures as art. Some build walls as art, some build buildings as art.

The ones building buildings and carving statues want machines to do the work of gathering the resources. Those who make games and movies want graphics and audio.

To the pixel artists, getting their drawing in a game is part of the art, but to the game dev, working with a pixel artist may be a chore.

We'll see a lot of reshifting of these forms of art - the pixel artist will be able to use AI to make games or variations and such, and may find art in becoming an art director instead.

[chefandy]

Yeah I’m a tech artist— I definitely see the commercial appeal and as someone that traversed a pretty smooth gradient from dev to design over a couple of years, I’m very familiar with what the majority of developers think about designers.

But it’s really hard to overstate just how badly these takes misunderstand art as an entity. So much “as a super brain genius developer, I know that true art is [glib definition that excludes nearly all artists] so any true artist must think X about AI, so if you don’t think that, you’re not a true artist and I can feel good about ignoring any reasonable ethical business boundaries.”