[ordinaryradical]

I’m an artist and also work in tech. Enjoy using AI for work, no interest in using it for my art.

Using AI for art is an idiotic proposition for me. If I was going to use AI to write my novel, I would literally be robbing myself of the pleasure of making it myself. If you don’t enjoy perfecting the sentence, maybe don’t be a writer?

That’s why there’s a disconnect. I make art for personal fulfillment and the joy of the creative act. To offload that to something that helps me do it “faster” has exactly zero appeal.

[dmarcos]

AI will probably enable new workflows and forms of expressions. “Old” ways will still likely be around in some form. Photography didn’t kill portrait painting or movies theater.

[danielbln]

But using AI for art doesn't have to mean "AI does all the art from start to finish", does it? Somehow the discourse about AI art is always weirdly maximalist.

[username223]

> If I was going to use AI to write my novel, I would literally be robbing myself of the pleasure of making it myself.

The same would be true if I were going to use AI to read it. If we just wanted to trade Clif Notes around, why bother with novels at all?

Cyber-Leo-Tolstoy types a three-page summary of "War and Peace" into ChatGPT and tells it to generate an 800-page novel. Millions of TikTok-addled students ask ChatGPT to summarize the 800-page novel into three pages (or a five-paragraph essay). What is the point of any of this?