3 ms·

Anyone can learn to draw, and it's not hard. If you want to create, you can and will learn to draw. Therefore, I would say most people hyped for SD and friends

Anyone can learn to draw, and it's not hard. If you want to create, you can and will learn to draw. Therefore, I would say most people hyped for SD and friends are the capitalists and consumers of the art world - not the creators.

dragonwriter 4y ago
> Anyone can learn to draw, and it's not hard. Repeating an assertion more times doesn’t make it true. > If you want to create, you can and will learn to draw. “Drawing”, even when it comes to imagery, is far from the only form of creation, and, even if it were, will is not determinative of capacity. But, yeah, I mean, people have said similar things about basically evey new means of creation ever.
- whateveracct 4y ago
  SD isn't creation imo. I have used it + followed stuff made with it, and I don't care how much people rebrand it as prompt engineering. Its consumption. Just because some imagination is involved in the query doesn't make it creation.
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    > SD isn't creation imo. I have used it + followed stuff made with it, and I don't care how much people rebrand it as prompt engineering. Its consumption. Just because some imagination is involved in the query doesn't make it creation. No, the fact that something is made with it makes it creation. Imagination makes it creative, on top of being creation. The problem I see here is you are trying to insert your moral/aesthetic judgement of the quality/value of the mechanism/process of creation into the objective description of whether creation is happening, probably because you have subscribed to a worldview which valorizes creation and denigrates consumption so accepting something you don’t want valorized as “creation” is incompatible with that worldview. You can just say you don't like Generative AI and wish people wouldn’t use it. You don’t need to declare that creating things with it isn’t creation to try to mask your (valid as any other) aesthetic preference in a very silly circumlocution designed to resemble an objective description, albeit a patently self-contradictory one.
    - whateveracct 4y ago
      I mean I actually do think AI art isn't actually art - philosophically. It's not being snooty it's based on years of studying and thinking about art from a philosophical perspective.

dragonwriter 4y ago

> Anyone can learn to draw, and it's not hard. Repeating an assertion more times doesn’t make it true. > If you want to create, you can and will learn to draw. “Drawing”, even when it comes to imagery, is far from the only form of creation, and, even if it were, will is not determinative of capacity. But, yeah, I mean, people have said similar things about basically evey new means of creation ever.

whateveracct 4y ago
SD isn't creation imo. I have used it + followed stuff made with it, and I don't care how much people rebrand it as prompt engineering. Its consumption. Just because some imagination is involved in the query doesn't make it creation.
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > SD isn't creation imo. I have used it + followed stuff made with it, and I don't care how much people rebrand it as prompt engineering. Its consumption. Just because some imagination is involved in the query doesn't make it creation. No, the fact that something is made with it makes it creation. Imagination makes it creative, on top of being creation. The problem I see here is you are trying to insert your moral/aesthetic judgement of the quality/value of the mechanism/process of creation into the objective description of whether creation is happening, probably because you have subscribed to a worldview which valorizes creation and denigrates consumption so accepting something you don’t want valorized as “creation” is incompatible with that worldview. You can just say you don't like Generative AI and wish people wouldn’t use it. You don’t need to declare that creating things with it isn’t creation to try to mask your (valid as any other) aesthetic preference in a very silly circumlocution designed to resemble an objective description, albeit a patently self-contradictory one.
  - whateveracct 4y ago
    I mean I actually do think AI art isn't actually art - philosophically. It's not being snooty it's based on years of studying and thinking about art from a philosophical perspective.