3 ms·

Hopefully AI will make those uncreative designers redundant, freeing them to do something more aligned with their talents.

by dun44 3y ago

passwordoops 3y ago
That's way too hopeful. AI is not creative, it's a tool that gives you what it calculates to be the best solution which is taken from the space of all pre-existing solutions. So if anything it will double down on the lack of creativity and keep showing whatever worked before referring us down a cycle of dull, but very machine-predictable mediocrity. AI is not the solution for making things more creative.
- ungamedplayer 3y ago
  I think that was what op was saying. They will make the boring samish logos.
- Xenoamorphous 3y ago
  It’s also way too hopeful to think that most people being made redundant by AI will suddenly discover something else they’re talented at (and not disrupted by AI nor the sudden influx of competition) and live merrily ever after.
- dun44 3y ago
  >AI is not creative Neither are those designers. My point is, AI will make producing uncreative designs even cheaper, which in turn will make career in uncreative designs unprofitable, which means fewer uncreative designers.
- Al-Khwarizmi 3y ago
  > AI is not creative Are you sure? I'd say for example here it shows creativity: https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.08433 https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.08433
127361 3y ago
Some of the AI art I've been browsing is far better than many human artists could create, it totally lacks the blandness and dumb trend-following of human creators.
- furyofantares 3y ago
  Some examples?
gwern 3y ago
AI will need to get much better, unfortunately, for that to happen. And AI will trigger even more minimalism in the short run. This is because minimalism encourages extremely precise, exact abstracted designs where a single pixel being wrong is visible. While generative AI always has, and will indefinitely, be best at a profusion of exuberant detail where errors or repetition are concealed by the density. You can generate great photographic images or montages right now with MJ or DALL-E 3, but you will struggle to get anything which is a crisp sharp vector. Even vector-generating services like Recraft.ai aren't that good. (Note also how long it took generative AI to be able to do pixel art. We were trivially generating photorealistic faces while pixel art GANs weren't working at all.) So, as a reaction to generative AI, designers & fashion will flee to minimalism in order to not look 'cheap'. The vector art & typography will be a proof-of-work that a human made it and a costly signal of 'quality'. While anything photographic or painting-like, especially if presented as a single large raster image, will increasingly feel untrustworthy, cheap, and mass-produced.

Hopefully AI will make those uncreative designers redundant, freeing them to do something more aligned with their talents.

by dun44 3y ago

Hopefully AI will make those uncreative designers redundant, freeing them to do something more aligned with their talents.

passwordoops 3y ago

That's way too hopeful. AI is not creative, it's a tool that gives you what it calculates to be the best solution which is taken from the space of all pre-existing solutions. So if anything it will double down on the lack of creativity and keep showing whatever worked before referring us down a cycle of dull, but very machine-predictable mediocrity. AI is not the solution for making things more creative.

ungamedplayer 3y ago
I think that was what op was saying. They will make the boring samish logos.
Xenoamorphous 3y ago
It’s also way too hopeful to think that most people being made redundant by AI will suddenly discover something else they’re talented at (and not disrupted by AI nor the sudden influx of competition) and live merrily ever after.
dun44 3y ago
>AI is not creative Neither are those designers. My point is, AI will make producing uncreative designs even cheaper, which in turn will make career in uncreative designs unprofitable, which means fewer uncreative designers.
Al-Khwarizmi 3y ago
> AI is not creative Are you sure? I'd say for example here it shows creativity: https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.08433 https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.08433

127361 3y ago

Some of the AI art I've been browsing is far better than many human artists could create, it totally lacks the blandness and dumb trend-following of human creators.

furyofantares 3y ago
Some examples?

gwern 3y ago

AI will need to get much better, unfortunately, for that to happen. And AI will trigger even more minimalism in the short run. This is because minimalism encourages extremely precise, exact abstracted designs where a single pixel being wrong is visible. While generative AI always has, and will indefinitely, be best at a profusion of exuberant detail where errors or repetition are concealed by the density. You can generate great photographic images or montages right now with MJ or DALL-E 3, but you will struggle to get anything which is a crisp sharp vector. Even vector-generating services like Recraft.ai aren't that good. (Note also how long it took generative AI to be able to do pixel art. We were trivially generating photorealistic faces while pixel art GANs weren't working at all.) So, as a reaction to generative AI, designers & fashion will flee to minimalism in order to not look 'cheap'. The vector art & typography will be a proof-of-work that a human made it and a costly signal of 'quality'. While anything photographic or painting-like, especially if presented as a single large raster image, will increasingly feel untrustworthy, cheap, and mass-produced.