3 ms·

I'm not necessarily in disagreement with the general thrust of your comment. That last point about feelings and emotions however is not clear cut, imo. Typical

I'm not necessarily in disagreement with the general thrust of your comment. That last point about feelings and emotions however is not clear cut, imo. Typically the process is itertive, so it's a loop and there is a feeling agent in that loop. Also if you yourself make art, you must have noticed how sometimes even the simplest of tools (say a brush or nib) create ~accidental features of the work that one finds entirely pleasing. This happens a lot to me with ink and brush :) The general input is distincly my line, it is my hand w/o a question, but I have a few works which feature engaging aspects that were partly accidental, and part of the delight is precisely that: me, the supposed author, is surprised.

LegitShady 4y ago
>Typically the process is itertive, so it's a loop and there is a feeling agent in that loop. Is someone who continually commissions art until they arrive at a painting they like making artistic decisions in the work? I don't think so. >you must have noticed how sometimes even the simplest of tools (say a brush or nib) create ~accidental features of the work that one finds entirely pleasing. This happens a lot to me with ink and brush :) The general input is distincly my line, it is my hand w/o a question, but I have a few works which feature engaging aspects that were partly accidental, and part of the delight is precisely that: me, the supposed author, is surprised. That is unquestionably something you authored, even the mistakes, even the mistakes you liked. But at no point of commissioning artwork are you making artistic decisions.
- eternalban 4y ago
  The 'commissioning' notion is how you wish to reduce the equation. I on the other hand consider AI as tool a reasonable proposition for the reasons noted. And from a purely practical point of view, getting worked up over this is tilting at windmills. Change is the constant. And there will be undoubtedly 'artist commissioners' that will outshine others, using the same 'artist'..
  - LegitShady 4y ago
    The commissioning notion was brought up by the copyright board in their march advisement on the eligibility of neural network produced works under copyright - which are not eligible. It's an accurate description of whats going on. Commissioning paintings until you get the one you want isn't artistic expression, or artistic decision making, and the human coming up with prompts will be replaced by a machine learning program trained on prompts, as they bring the least value to the process and are the most easily replaced. > And from a purely practical point of view, getting worked up over this is tilting at windmills. I'm not worked up at all. I'm explaining whats going on. Is anyone who thinks differently from you getting worked up? Are you getting worked up for imagining emotions I'm not experiencing? In the future just argue ideas instead of imagining emotions across internet mind reading. >Change is the constant. And there will be undoubtedly 'artist commissioners' that will outshine others, using the same 'artist'. It will all approach zero value, so it doesn't matter. It's inauthentic, uncopyrightable stuff based on the misappropriation of the work of actual artists. The expert 'commissioners' will also be replaced by machine learning faster than anyone else.

LegitShady 4y ago

>Typically the process is itertive, so it's a loop and there is a feeling agent in that loop. Is someone who continually commissions art until they arrive at a painting they like making artistic decisions in the work? I don't think so. >you must have noticed how sometimes even the simplest of tools (say a brush or nib) create ~accidental features of the work that one finds entirely pleasing. This happens a lot to me with ink and brush :) The general input is distincly my line, it is my hand w/o a question, but I have a few works which feature engaging aspects that were partly accidental, and part of the delight is precisely that: me, the supposed author, is surprised. That is unquestionably something you authored, even the mistakes, even the mistakes you liked. But at no point of commissioning artwork are you making artistic decisions.

eternalban 4y ago
The 'commissioning' notion is how you wish to reduce the equation. I on the other hand consider AI as tool a reasonable proposition for the reasons noted. And from a purely practical point of view, getting worked up over this is tilting at windmills. Change is the constant. And there will be undoubtedly 'artist commissioners' that will outshine others, using the same 'artist'..
- LegitShady 4y ago
  The commissioning notion was brought up by the copyright board in their march advisement on the eligibility of neural network produced works under copyright - which are not eligible. It's an accurate description of whats going on. Commissioning paintings until you get the one you want isn't artistic expression, or artistic decision making, and the human coming up with prompts will be replaced by a machine learning program trained on prompts, as they bring the least value to the process and are the most easily replaced. > And from a purely practical point of view, getting worked up over this is tilting at windmills. I'm not worked up at all. I'm explaining whats going on. Is anyone who thinks differently from you getting worked up? Are you getting worked up for imagining emotions I'm not experiencing? In the future just argue ideas instead of imagining emotions across internet mind reading. >Change is the constant. And there will be undoubtedly 'artist commissioners' that will outshine others, using the same 'artist'. It will all approach zero value, so it doesn't matter. It's inauthentic, uncopyrightable stuff based on the misappropriation of the work of actual artists. The expert 'commissioners' will also be replaced by machine learning faster than anyone else.