8 ms·

Why strive? Stephen Fry reads Nick Cave's letter on the threat of AI [video]

57 points by pluc 3y ago

JKCalhoun 3y ago
Very good letter. I'm struck by Nick Cave's comment about the making of beautiful things being the meaning of life. It always struck me as bittersweet that we should be birthed on this world with a mind capable of imagining oblivion, futility, our own certain death, but we were also given the tools (our creativity) to express both our fears and pain as well as our joys and our love for life. Were we to evolve to some point where we could live forever, knew no fear or want ... it seems like it would be an artless world then. They might look back on us and our culture with only a mere curiosity and have no understanding of what it was like to be "human". But back to the point, I question whether AI can every truly make "art" if (and perhaps I put too fine a point on what art is) they can never feel human pain.
- baal80spam 3y ago
  To me, meaning requires effort.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- gonzo41 3y ago
  Today's AI is not making art. It's finding a well fitted solution to a set of contraints. Maybe in the future AI will create art. But we'll be distracted with discussion about rights for AI around that time.
- prerok 3y ago
  I suppose this is a question of what is art. There have been numerous attempts at defining it and there are a few schools of thought. Many of those focus on the artist and what part of the artist, what part of their being, was put into the artwork and what they were trying to convey. This does not exist in AI generated content and, I suppose, this is what is hurting people in the art business: there is no individual being behind this, so it's like it's soul-less. On the other hand, there are plenty of people, including me, who are not really affected by what artist created what and why. We care more about whether the art touches you, conveys a thought, a feeling, leaves you changed. Such art can be a joining of previous arts and therefore can be generated by AI or produced by an "amateur", who only copies others' artstyles. I would still consider it art. This AI revolution on the artistic fields will no doubt leave many authors scrambling for work because AI will produce better results faster. Originality and more personal notes will save a few, so I doubt that the most prolific and well known auteurs are in danger, but many many will not be so lucky. Just like in industrial revolution in the past.
huppeldepup 3y ago
As Cave’s letter articulates how foregoing the struggle of creation risks destroying the ‘collective, essential and unconscious human spirit’, his characteristically masterful writing combined with Fry’s powerful reading serve as a reminder of the value and vitality of human creativity. Art is what comforts the disturbed and disturbs the comfortable. It appears that Mr. Cave is very comfortable and wishes to keep progress from disturbing him.
- morelisp 3y ago
  This line is absolutely madness when you look at who is behind the current AI push.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- jazzyjackson 3y ago
  you can't just call whatever you're doing progress, the progress ought to be demonstrating improved outcomes by some metric is multiplying the speed we can spam each other with marketing copy and deepfakes a good measure of progress?
williamcotton 3y ago
AI has no effect on singer-songwriters. People that are into someone playing an instrument and singing their own poetry in a live setting will keep the form alive. People that listen to expensively produced hot-100-esque music are already not that interested in watching live music. What does Nick Cave need to worry about? When he tours people go to listen to his music and poetry, not someone else’s! Do you think live music is going to suffer that much more since the ultimate dagger, the phonograph?
- Gare 3y ago
  > Do you think live music is going to suffer that much more since the ultimate dagger, the phonograph? Well, you can also have AI band playing AI music live. Cue vocaloids.
  - Riverheart 3y ago
    Yeah. How quickly we forget the hologram Tupac and Gorillaz concerts as well as a the virtual live concerts from Fortnite.
  - williamcotton 3y ago
    I don’t think that people into artists like John Prine are going to be into what’s akin to showing up with a record and pressing play! They already want a human expression.
  - jazzyjackson 3y ago
    Hatsune Miku is playing Coachella this year, no joke
    - throwaway743 3y ago
      Related required viewing. https://youtu.be/yPuI4l0jK7s?si=-ICkrje6DCve-cBW https://youtu.be/yPuI4l0jK7s?si=-ICkrje6DCve-cBW
- jvanderbot 3y ago
  The effect is that, at least for 90% of my music listening, I'm looking for new music, with a few genres that I really like. Only occasionally do I queue up a classic that I know well. And I am completely uninterested in the people making it. My wife is the opposite. The person is hugely important. So there will be, in our household, a 50% (45, I guess) decrease in the need for human artists. But I am happy to pay someone to generate that music for me, like a Spotify.ai or something! What I don't want is a destruction of any creation and shared experience. It's been the same for mid journey. I will spend an hour generating imagery for posters or desktop or game art or ttrpg etc etc. I don't even bother image searching most of the time. But I still enjoy sharing with the game crew or friends.
thrwayaistartup 3y ago
Nick Cave is expressing a personal loss, and I believe that he truly feels that loss. But to me, this letter reads roughly like: "if I were the server or the bouncer instead of the performer or the writer, all of humanity would cease to have meaning". Which is perhaps true, for Nick Cave. But it also betrays something grotesque and profoundly wrong about his view on the relationship between paid labor and the human soul. It's a wonderful thing to find meaning in one's work, and for the things in which one finds meaning to be well-compensated. But it is no birthright. Contrary to Nick Cave's view, I can absolutely assure you that non-artists in HR departments and nursing stations and factory floors and classrooms often live full happy human inner lives. Those lives are of their own making and do not derive from the artiste class's output. Manual production of high-quality clothes, tables, and glassware used to be the norm. Generations of people found meaning in these crafts before the industrial revolution changed the economics. People still do these things, only in rare cases as their primary way of making a living. Most art does not sustain developed world middle class existence. Most art is hobby. And that's okay. The creation of software and AI systems is itself a form of craft-work and soul-work, which many engineers and scientists relate to the same way that Nick Cave relates to music. It is unclear to me why Nick Cave's striving is more important than the striving of engineers and scientists, or why his feeling of what humanity is, is more important than theirs.
- jazzyjackson 3y ago
  I might assert, with false nostalgia because I wasn't there, that we had a much better connection with what it meant to be human when we were tilling dirt and making clay pots and weaving cloth for each other, and now having been estranged from the physcial meaning-making all we have left is our image making, our personas we create for each other and these arguments we have online, and now we're automating that away too.
  - thrwayaistartup 3y ago
    > we had a much better connection with what it meant to be human when we were tilling dirt and making clay pots and weaving cloth for each other Actually, I agree. I think Nick Cave is right about this. I do think this sort of alienation has a cost. But that doesn't mean that there is any remotely moral case for undoing the green revolution and allowing billions to starve. And it does not mean that the machines which feed those billions of people who might otherwise starve are somehow the root cause of a decline of humanity. In fact, quite the opposite. And this is the paradox: our alienation from agricultural work is precisely what enables our very existence. My main observation is that there is a way out of this paradox. As it turns out, you can go out grow some food in a garden, or write a song, or paint a picture, even if that work is commodified and there is no paycheck. The commodification and automation of those industries does not prevent one from engaging in them as soul-work. The teacher who plays in a band in his garage is no different -- from a "soul of humanity" perspective -- than Nick Cave. But Nick Cave's implicit argument argument demands that he is different, and not from an economic perspective, but from a very soul of humanity perspective. It's extraordinarily off-putting to me in that sense. Of course, engaging in art as hobby instead of for pay does require free time and a share of returns on our societal bargain. On that note: elites like Nick Cave should be spearheading serious conversations about political economics and labor economics, instead of lamenting the loss of their extraordinarily unique status.
leashless 3y ago
Incredibly talented people complain when technology lets talentless people make some of the beautiful things that they imagine but never had the talent to make real. It's like rich people saying money does not matter. "Easy for you to say." I can't draw. But now I can take the talent I have and extend it to make images. Is it art? I don't know. I don't care. I was not able, now I am able, and the people who are able complain. Screw 'em. This is what tools are for. The strong should not tell the weak they cannot use props.
- leashless 3y ago
  "Supermodels complain about plastic surgery letting ugly people look better" type headlines abound in AI
  - rafaelmn 3y ago
    Plastic surgery only gets you so far. Likewise for AI generated content.
    - Hoasi 3y ago
      Perfect analogy.
      - leashless 3y ago
        Yes, I think that's absolutely true of both plastic surgery and of AI. I don't mind, it's better than where I was before! I can semi-draw with AI help. Good enough.
        Hoasi 3y ago
        > I can semi-draw with AI help. Good enough. Good for you. But that's not drawing, though. You won't know what drawing is until you try. Then you'll come back with more questions. It's an open-ended endeavor. Drawing is not something you solve with an app. That's why the whole premise of this thread is a bit sad. AI is a tool that bypasses the joy (and the point) of drawing entirely.
pluc 3y ago
Transcript (actual letter) here: https://www.theredhandfiles.com/chatgpt-making-things-faster-and-easier/ https://www.theredhandfiles.com/chatgpt-making-things-faster...
swayvil 3y ago
AI makes McDonald's hamburgers. Cheap and infinite. 90% of the population consider that haute cuisine. Eat em all day. Suffer inexplicable tummy aches. Etc. So let them. It isn't like we can do anything about it.
putpls 3y ago
For a while now I've wondered which topic would force me to create a HN account and it turns out it is AI art. My position is that AI "art" is absolutely a loss and not a gain for humanity. It is unfortunate that so many HN users are output focused on this and believe that AI tool -> output is the equivalent to human creativity -> output. Art is not the same as making a basket or glass. There are aspects to those processes that are painful, time consuming and tedious and therefore worth being automated. When it comes to creativity the process is part of the joy, even the painful aspects. I use AI constantly for work because there is no joy in me whipping up a script or code snippet for something that isn't intellectually stimulating, in our work saving time is a benefit and automating things allow us to focus on the aspects of the work we enjoy. And the truth is AI will often do my work better than me when given the right context. When I sit down to write some fiction I do not have the same desire to skip the labour and get an LLM to do the work for me. This would remove the entire point of why I do it. My art, be it better or worse than AI art, is an expression of self. This is not a tool as it is for coding, the endgame here is replacement. Frankly, I find that most of the people that seem so dismissive of creative people's concerns have never attempted a serious creative project themselves and fail to understand the 'why' of art in the first place. If you do not care about meaning, process, and the millenia-spanning conversation that art is then it makes sense why you do not see this as an issue. If you see music as "pleasing sounds" and have no interest in the expressive side then sure, AI art is for you, but then it's not AI art, it's AI sounds, or AI images. Content is not the same as art. This post will come across snobbish but I cannot find another way to put it. I want to have an open conversation but frequently reading comments that paint creatives as elitist is frustrating when these concerns are genuine. Art is not something that can be optimised and measured, no matter how hard you try, and removing the human aspect is removing the entire point. I can't put all my thoughts here and I'll save you all the rest of the rant, but as someone with a deep respect for both programming and art I am confident that they are not equivalent despite many HN users treating them as such. One day I hope to formulate the argument properly, but for now I'll leave you with this.
- lukko 3y ago
  I feel very strongly about this too. True art is a struggle to bring it into reality - you have to almost expand the space of possibility. It's easy to make derivative work, all the arguments about artists just interpolating other people's work are very weak - some artists do that, but good ones are truly original, even if they steal. It sounds a bit grandiose, but art can cut through the human experience to reveal some kind of truth. AI cannot do that because it does not understand the world or what it is to be human. I think AI art is a complete misnomer and there is no net benefit of being able to generate images so easily, it just means there is more noise in the world.
swayvil 3y ago
Only artists will understand this. Artists will dodge the bullet and carry on. Everybody else gets an invisible bullethole. They will suffer without understanding why.
ChrisArchitect 3y ago
(2023) More Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38425251 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38425251
matthewsinclair 3y ago
Earlier discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38425251 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38425251
syntaxfree 3y ago
*Title: The Soul of Creation* by Nick Cave (Verse 1) In the dawn of all existence, in the silence of the void, God spun the world in six days, in a dance of cosmic joy. On the seventh day, He rested, His creation full of worth, A canvas painted with His struggle, a gift to all the earth. (Chorus) Leon and Charlie, hear this ancient tale, Of creation's sacred heart, beyond the earthly veil. In every act of making, in every loving deed, Lies the essence of our spirit, the planting of a seed. (Verse 2) Now comes a force, cold as the night, ChatGPT its name, A mechanized imagination, turning art into a game. It seeks to strip creation of its struggle and its pain, Rendering our efforts as nothing but a chain. (Chorus) Leon and Charlie, see this stark divide, Between the soulful artist's path and the mechanized guide. In every note and lyric, in every brush and pen, Is the heartbeat of humanity, time and time again. (Bridge) "Let's make it fast, let's make it easy," the machine coldly sings, Forgetting art's a journey, not just a pair of wings. The struggle, the striving, it's where our truths are found, In the depths of our creation, our spirit's battleground. (Verse 3) God looked upon His world, and saw that it was good, A reflection of His essence, in every field and wood. So Charlie, in your creating, let your spirit freely dance, For in your artful striving, you'll give the world a chance. (Chorus) Leon and Charlie, remember this true call, Creation's not just crafting, it's a rising after fall. In every stroke of genius, in every dream unfurled, Is the story of our spirit, the echo of the world. (Outro) So let's fight against this tide, this digital malaise, Defending art's true essence, through all our nights and days. For in our hands lies power, in our hearts the flame, To keep alive the soul of the world, in every crafted frame. (End) In the dance of the Great Crested Grebe, in the sun's first light, Lies the joy of creation, our eternal, noble fight. Leon and Charlie, in each step and every turn, Is the essence of our being, the fire that will always burn.
dang 3y ago
Related. I thought there was another one but couldn't find it... Nick Cave on ChatGPT and the creative process - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37080160 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37080160 - Aug 2023 (110 comments) Do you think AI will ever be able to write a good song?(2019) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34764923 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34764923 - Feb 2023 (3 comments) Nick Cave on ChatGPT - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34404396 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34404396 - Jan 2023 (11 comments)

57 points by pluc 3y ago

Very good letter. I'm struck by Nick Cave's comment about the making of beautiful things being the meaning of life. It always struck me as bittersweet that we should be birthed on this world with a mind capable of imagining oblivion, futility, our own certain death, but we were also given the tools (our creativity) to express both our fears and pain as well as our joys and our love for life. Were we to evolve to some point where we could live forever, knew no fear or want ... it seems like it would be an artless world then. They might look back on us and our culture with only a mere curiosity and have no understanding of what it was like to be "human". But back to the point, I question whether AI can every truly make "art" if (and perhaps I put too fine a point on what art is) they can never feel human pain.

baal80spam 3y ago
To me, meaning requires effort.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
gonzo41 3y ago
Today's AI is not making art. It's finding a well fitted solution to a set of contraints. Maybe in the future AI will create art. But we'll be distracted with discussion about rights for AI around that time.
prerok 3y ago
I suppose this is a question of what is art. There have been numerous attempts at defining it and there are a few schools of thought. Many of those focus on the artist and what part of the artist, what part of their being, was put into the artwork and what they were trying to convey. This does not exist in AI generated content and, I suppose, this is what is hurting people in the art business: there is no individual being behind this, so it's like it's soul-less. On the other hand, there are plenty of people, including me, who are not really affected by what artist created what and why. We care more about whether the art touches you, conveys a thought, a feeling, leaves you changed. Such art can be a joining of previous arts and therefore can be generated by AI or produced by an "amateur", who only copies others' artstyles. I would still consider it art. This AI revolution on the artistic fields will no doubt leave many authors scrambling for work because AI will produce better results faster. Originality and more personal notes will save a few, so I doubt that the most prolific and well known auteurs are in danger, but many many will not be so lucky. Just like in industrial revolution in the past.

huppeldepup 3y ago

As Cave’s letter articulates how foregoing the struggle of creation risks destroying the ‘collective, essential and unconscious human spirit’, his characteristically masterful writing combined with Fry’s powerful reading serve as a reminder of the value and vitality of human creativity. Art is what comforts the disturbed and disturbs the comfortable. It appears that Mr. Cave is very comfortable and wishes to keep progress from disturbing him.

morelisp 3y ago
This line is absolutely madness when you look at who is behind the current AI push.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
jazzyjackson 3y ago
you can't just call whatever you're doing progress, the progress ought to be demonstrating improved outcomes by some metric is multiplying the speed we can spam each other with marketing copy and deepfakes a good measure of progress?

williamcotton 3y ago

AI has no effect on singer-songwriters. People that are into someone playing an instrument and singing their own poetry in a live setting will keep the form alive. People that listen to expensively produced hot-100-esque music are already not that interested in watching live music. What does Nick Cave need to worry about? When he tours people go to listen to his music and poetry, not someone else’s! Do you think live music is going to suffer that much more since the ultimate dagger, the phonograph?

Gare 3y ago
> Do you think live music is going to suffer that much more since the ultimate dagger, the phonograph? Well, you can also have AI band playing AI music live. Cue vocaloids.
- Riverheart 3y ago
  Yeah. How quickly we forget the hologram Tupac and Gorillaz concerts as well as a the virtual live concerts from Fortnite.
- williamcotton 3y ago
  I don’t think that people into artists like John Prine are going to be into what’s akin to showing up with a record and pressing play! They already want a human expression.
- jazzyjackson 3y ago
  Hatsune Miku is playing Coachella this year, no joke
  - throwaway743 3y ago
    Related required viewing. https://youtu.be/yPuI4l0jK7s?si=-ICkrje6DCve-cBW https://youtu.be/yPuI4l0jK7s?si=-ICkrje6DCve-cBW
jvanderbot 3y ago
The effect is that, at least for 90% of my music listening, I'm looking for new music, with a few genres that I really like. Only occasionally do I queue up a classic that I know well. And I am completely uninterested in the people making it. My wife is the opposite. The person is hugely important. So there will be, in our household, a 50% (45, I guess) decrease in the need for human artists. But I am happy to pay someone to generate that music for me, like a Spotify.ai or something! What I don't want is a destruction of any creation and shared experience. It's been the same for mid journey. I will spend an hour generating imagery for posters or desktop or game art or ttrpg etc etc. I don't even bother image searching most of the time. But I still enjoy sharing with the game crew or friends.

thrwayaistartup 3y ago

Nick Cave is expressing a personal loss, and I believe that he truly feels that loss. But to me, this letter reads roughly like: "if I were the server or the bouncer instead of the performer or the writer, all of humanity would cease to have meaning". Which is perhaps true, for Nick Cave. But it also betrays something grotesque and profoundly wrong about his view on the relationship between paid labor and the human soul. It's a wonderful thing to find meaning in one's work, and for the things in which one finds meaning to be well-compensated. But it is no birthright. Contrary to Nick Cave's view, I can absolutely assure you that non-artists in HR departments and nursing stations and factory floors and classrooms often live full happy human inner lives. Those lives are of their own making and do not derive from the artiste class's output. Manual production of high-quality clothes, tables, and glassware used to be the norm. Generations of people found meaning in these crafts before the industrial revolution changed the economics. People still do these things, only in rare cases as their primary way of making a living. Most art does not sustain developed world middle class existence. Most art is hobby. And that's okay. The creation of software and AI systems is itself a form of craft-work and soul-work, which many engineers and scientists relate to the same way that Nick Cave relates to music. It is unclear to me why Nick Cave's striving is more important than the striving of engineers and scientists, or why his feeling of what humanity is, is more important than theirs.

jazzyjackson 3y ago
I might assert, with false nostalgia because I wasn't there, that we had a much better connection with what it meant to be human when we were tilling dirt and making clay pots and weaving cloth for each other, and now having been estranged from the physcial meaning-making all we have left is our image making, our personas we create for each other and these arguments we have online, and now we're automating that away too.
- thrwayaistartup 3y ago
  > we had a much better connection with what it meant to be human when we were tilling dirt and making clay pots and weaving cloth for each other Actually, I agree. I think Nick Cave is right about this. I do think this sort of alienation has a cost. But that doesn't mean that there is any remotely moral case for undoing the green revolution and allowing billions to starve. And it does not mean that the machines which feed those billions of people who might otherwise starve are somehow the root cause of a decline of humanity. In fact, quite the opposite. And this is the paradox: our alienation from agricultural work is precisely what enables our very existence. My main observation is that there is a way out of this paradox. As it turns out, you can go out grow some food in a garden, or write a song, or paint a picture, even if that work is commodified and there is no paycheck. The commodification and automation of those industries does not prevent one from engaging in them as soul-work. The teacher who plays in a band in his garage is no different -- from a "soul of humanity" perspective -- than Nick Cave. But Nick Cave's implicit argument argument demands that he is different, and not from an economic perspective, but from a very soul of humanity perspective. It's extraordinarily off-putting to me in that sense. Of course, engaging in art as hobby instead of for pay does require free time and a share of returns on our societal bargain. On that note: elites like Nick Cave should be spearheading serious conversations about political economics and labor economics, instead of lamenting the loss of their extraordinarily unique status.

leashless 3y ago

Incredibly talented people complain when technology lets talentless people make some of the beautiful things that they imagine but never had the talent to make real. It's like rich people saying money does not matter. "Easy for you to say." I can't draw. But now I can take the talent I have and extend it to make images. Is it art? I don't know. I don't care. I was not able, now I am able, and the people who are able complain. Screw 'em. This is what tools are for. The strong should not tell the weak they cannot use props.

leashless 3y ago
"Supermodels complain about plastic surgery letting ugly people look better" type headlines abound in AI
- rafaelmn 3y ago
  Plastic surgery only gets you so far. Likewise for AI generated content.
  - Hoasi 3y ago
    Perfect analogy.
    - leashless 3y ago
      Yes, I think that's absolutely true of both plastic surgery and of AI. I don't mind, it's better than where I was before! I can semi-draw with AI help. Good enough.
      - Hoasi 3y ago
        > I can semi-draw with AI help. Good enough. Good for you. But that's not drawing, though. You won't know what drawing is until you try. Then you'll come back with more questions. It's an open-ended endeavor. Drawing is not something you solve with an app. That's why the whole premise of this thread is a bit sad. AI is a tool that bypasses the joy (and the point) of drawing entirely.

pluc 3y ago

Transcript (actual letter) here: https://www.theredhandfiles.com/chatgpt-making-things-faster-and-easier/ https://www.theredhandfiles.com/chatgpt-making-things-faster...

swayvil 3y ago

AI makes McDonald's hamburgers. Cheap and infinite. 90% of the population consider that haute cuisine. Eat em all day. Suffer inexplicable tummy aches. Etc. So let them. It isn't like we can do anything about it.

putpls 3y ago

For a while now I've wondered which topic would force me to create a HN account and it turns out it is AI art. My position is that AI "art" is absolutely a loss and not a gain for humanity. It is unfortunate that so many HN users are output focused on this and believe that AI tool -> output is the equivalent to human creativity -> output. Art is not the same as making a basket or glass. There are aspects to those processes that are painful, time consuming and tedious and therefore worth being automated. When it comes to creativity the process is part of the joy, even the painful aspects. I use AI constantly for work because there is no joy in me whipping up a script or code snippet for something that isn't intellectually stimulating, in our work saving time is a benefit and automating things allow us to focus on the aspects of the work we enjoy. And the truth is AI will often do my work better than me when given the right context. When I sit down to write some fiction I do not have the same desire to skip the labour and get an LLM to do the work for me. This would remove the entire point of why I do it. My art, be it better or worse than AI art, is an expression of self. This is not a tool as it is for coding, the endgame here is replacement. Frankly, I find that most of the people that seem so dismissive of creative people's concerns have never attempted a serious creative project themselves and fail to understand the 'why' of art in the first place. If you do not care about meaning, process, and the millenia-spanning conversation that art is then it makes sense why you do not see this as an issue. If you see music as "pleasing sounds" and have no interest in the expressive side then sure, AI art is for you, but then it's not AI art, it's AI sounds, or AI images. Content is not the same as art. This post will come across snobbish but I cannot find another way to put it. I want to have an open conversation but frequently reading comments that paint creatives as elitist is frustrating when these concerns are genuine. Art is not something that can be optimised and measured, no matter how hard you try, and removing the human aspect is removing the entire point. I can't put all my thoughts here and I'll save you all the rest of the rant, but as someone with a deep respect for both programming and art I am confident that they are not equivalent despite many HN users treating them as such. One day I hope to formulate the argument properly, but for now I'll leave you with this.

lukko 3y ago
I feel very strongly about this too. True art is a struggle to bring it into reality - you have to almost expand the space of possibility. It's easy to make derivative work, all the arguments about artists just interpolating other people's work are very weak - some artists do that, but good ones are truly original, even if they steal. It sounds a bit grandiose, but art can cut through the human experience to reveal some kind of truth. AI cannot do that because it does not understand the world or what it is to be human. I think AI art is a complete misnomer and there is no net benefit of being able to generate images so easily, it just means there is more noise in the world.

swayvil 3y ago

Only artists will understand this. Artists will dodge the bullet and carry on. Everybody else gets an invisible bullethole. They will suffer without understanding why.

ChrisArchitect 3y ago

(2023) More Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38425251 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38425251

matthewsinclair 3y ago

Earlier discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38425251 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38425251

syntaxfree 3y ago

*Title: The Soul of Creation* by Nick Cave (Verse 1) In the dawn of all existence, in the silence of the void, God spun the world in six days, in a dance of cosmic joy. On the seventh day, He rested, His creation full of worth, A canvas painted with His struggle, a gift to all the earth. (Chorus) Leon and Charlie, hear this ancient tale, Of creation's sacred heart, beyond the earthly veil. In every act of making, in every loving deed, Lies the essence of our spirit, the planting of a seed. (Verse 2) Now comes a force, cold as the night, ChatGPT its name, A mechanized imagination, turning art into a game. It seeks to strip creation of its struggle and its pain, Rendering our efforts as nothing but a chain. (Chorus) Leon and Charlie, see this stark divide, Between the soulful artist's path and the mechanized guide. In every note and lyric, in every brush and pen, Is the heartbeat of humanity, time and time again. (Bridge) "Let's make it fast, let's make it easy," the machine coldly sings, Forgetting art's a journey, not just a pair of wings. The struggle, the striving, it's where our truths are found, In the depths of our creation, our spirit's battleground. (Verse 3) God looked upon His world, and saw that it was good, A reflection of His essence, in every field and wood. So Charlie, in your creating, let your spirit freely dance, For in your artful striving, you'll give the world a chance. (Chorus) Leon and Charlie, remember this true call, Creation's not just crafting, it's a rising after fall. In every stroke of genius, in every dream unfurled, Is the story of our spirit, the echo of the world. (Outro) So let's fight against this tide, this digital malaise, Defending art's true essence, through all our nights and days. For in our hands lies power, in our hearts the flame, To keep alive the soul of the world, in every crafted frame. (End) In the dance of the Great Crested Grebe, in the sun's first light, Lies the joy of creation, our eternal, noble fight. Leon and Charlie, in each step and every turn, Is the essence of our being, the fire that will always burn.

dang 3y ago

Related. I thought there was another one but couldn't find it... Nick Cave on ChatGPT and the creative process - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37080160 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37080160 - Aug 2023 (110 comments) Do you think AI will ever be able to write a good song?(2019) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34764923 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34764923 - Feb 2023 (3 comments) Nick Cave on ChatGPT - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34404396 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34404396 - Jan 2023 (11 comments)