3 ms·

A coder that can't draw, becomes a creative when s/he uses tools for drawing. I don't think the argument is in this, it's that the tools embody the collective c

A coder that can't draw, becomes a creative when s/he uses tools for drawing. I don't think the argument is in this, it's that the tools embody the collective creativity of all the world's previous-gen artists.

ChrisMarshallNY 3y ago
> the tools embody the collective creativity of all the world's previous-gen artists. And doesn’t reward them for their contributions, thus, removing the “feeder” creativity. Soon, schools stop teaching art, because no one wants to become one, and the algorithms end up using the output of other algorithms as their input, and original creation dies. Original creative output can be ugly and disturbing, but it is original human creation. Tools can help this (my example is 3D modeling. When the tools were still “raw,” then only engineers could produce 3D art, and it showed. Once the tools and standards progressed, real trained artists started to use them, to produce awesome creations). I hear, all the time, non creative people drooling over not having to pay or deal with creative folks. This is nothing new. Just a new venue for typical human greed and laziness. We’ll figure it out, and, I guarantee, some creative folks will figure out how to use these tools to become quite successful. And those non creative folks are still gonna have to pay them.
- sircastor 3y ago
  > And doesn’t reward them for their contributions, thus, removing the “feeder” creativity. Soon, schools stop teaching art, because no one wants to become one, and the algorithms end up using the output of other algorithms as their input, and original creation dies. This implies that without a support structure, people are not interested in creativity. Which is absurd. People are still interested in creating even if they're not compensated for it. Many people are proactively creative at great personal expense. People painted long before it was taught in a formal setting, and people will continue to paint even if they can't use it to pay the bills (as - quite frankly - most painters do)
  - ChrisMarshallNY 3y ago
    But they don't like having people treat their work like crap. I know of what I speak. BTDT, got the T-shirt. One of the issues with noncreatives, is they have this illusion that creatives don't work hard, or don't "earn" their money (which can sometimes, be a great deal). I run into that attitude on a regular. I'm routinely asked to do $20,000 worth of work for free, "because it's fun for me." I suspect that a lot of us have dealt with that. Development of software and hardware is a creative (and valuable) effort, but people sometimes think we don't work hard at it, because our fingernails aren't cracked. In my career, I've worked with some of the top people in the design field (and my company paid them a lot of money). They were worth every nickel. One of the problems with being good at something, is that we make it look easy, so people think it will be easy. I posted this a while back: There's the old story I've heard about the retired engineer (apocryphal, I'm sure): This engineer worked for a corporation for 40 years, and retired. A few months into his retirement, his old company frantically calls him, begging him to come in, and help fix an issue with the system he worked on. Apparently, the new team had managed to hose it, and couldn't figure out how to fix it. He comes in, sits down at a terminal, looks at it for five minutes, and says "Here's the issue. If you do this, it should be fixed..." He then presents an invoice for $10,000. The beancounters go "There's no way we can pay $10,000 for five minutes work! Itemize it!" He sits down, scribbles a bit, and presents an invoice that says: Time to fix bug: Five minutes. $20 Six years of college, and forty years of experience, so I can fix a bug in five minutes: $9,980 Lots of people, on this very forum, would love creatives to do their work for free, so they can grab that work, and use it for stuff they will sell. There's an unfortunate culture of "Everyone [but me] should do work for free, and publish it on the Internet, so I can use it, and make money [because my own work will never be free]."

ChrisMarshallNY 3y ago

> the tools embody the collective creativity of all the world's previous-gen artists. And doesn’t reward them for their contributions, thus, removing the “feeder” creativity. Soon, schools stop teaching art, because no one wants to become one, and the algorithms end up using the output of other algorithms as their input, and original creation dies. Original creative output can be ugly and disturbing, but it is original human creation. Tools can help this (my example is 3D modeling. When the tools were still “raw,” then only engineers could produce 3D art, and it showed. Once the tools and standards progressed, real trained artists started to use them, to produce awesome creations). I hear, all the time, non creative people drooling over not having to pay or deal with creative folks. This is nothing new. Just a new venue for typical human greed and laziness. We’ll figure it out, and, I guarantee, some creative folks will figure out how to use these tools to become quite successful. And those non creative folks are still gonna have to pay them.

sircastor 3y ago
> And doesn’t reward them for their contributions, thus, removing the “feeder” creativity. Soon, schools stop teaching art, because no one wants to become one, and the algorithms end up using the output of other algorithms as their input, and original creation dies. This implies that without a support structure, people are not interested in creativity. Which is absurd. People are still interested in creating even if they're not compensated for it. Many people are proactively creative at great personal expense. People painted long before it was taught in a formal setting, and people will continue to paint even if they can't use it to pay the bills (as - quite frankly - most painters do)
- ChrisMarshallNY 3y ago
  But they don't like having people treat their work like crap. I know of what I speak. BTDT, got the T-shirt. One of the issues with noncreatives, is they have this illusion that creatives don't work hard, or don't "earn" their money (which can sometimes, be a great deal). I run into that attitude on a regular. I'm routinely asked to do $20,000 worth of work for free, "because it's fun for me." I suspect that a lot of us have dealt with that. Development of software and hardware is a creative (and valuable) effort, but people sometimes think we don't work hard at it, because our fingernails aren't cracked. In my career, I've worked with some of the top people in the design field (and my company paid them a lot of money). They were worth every nickel. One of the problems with being good at something, is that we make it look easy, so people think it will be easy. I posted this a while back: There's the old story I've heard about the retired engineer (apocryphal, I'm sure): This engineer worked for a corporation for 40 years, and retired. A few months into his retirement, his old company frantically calls him, begging him to come in, and help fix an issue with the system he worked on. Apparently, the new team had managed to hose it, and couldn't figure out how to fix it. He comes in, sits down at a terminal, looks at it for five minutes, and says "Here's the issue. If you do this, it should be fixed..." He then presents an invoice for $10,000. The beancounters go "There's no way we can pay $10,000 for five minutes work! Itemize it!" He sits down, scribbles a bit, and presents an invoice that says: Time to fix bug: Five minutes. $20 Six years of college, and forty years of experience, so I can fix a bug in five minutes: $9,980 Lots of people, on this very forum, would love creatives to do their work for free, so they can grab that work, and use it for stuff they will sell. There's an unfortunate culture of "Everyone [but me] should do work for free, and publish it on the Internet, so I can use it, and make money [because my own work will never be free]."