5 ms·
Hardware is better at this: notebook, pencil, baseball bat. "AI art" is plagiarism and not an art at all.
by dwnw 2y ago
Hardware is better at this: notebook, pencil, baseball bat.
"AI art" is plagiarism and not an art at all.
- latexr 2y ago> baseball bat Could you expand on this? How does a baseball bat help you in songwriting?
- dwnw 2y agoSure. With rock & roll, the pencil is sometimes not large enough to rage against the machine properly and a heftier implement is necessary.
- mattpope 2y agoI went to a Slipknot concert back in 2022. They had a "junk set", a bunch of trashcans and kegs that they hit with aluminum bats. Not completely the same, but it did have a dissonant sound!
- SOLAR_FIELDS 2y agoAh yes, I remember as a kid a common joke we would make when talking about easy jobs is that we wanted to be the guy from Slipknot whose job was simply to swing a baseball bat at a trash can. No need to rehearse for that!
- __d 2y agoI’m interested in the plagiarism perspective. I feel like LLMs are not too dissimilar to humans. We listen to a lifetime of music, read text, watch videos, etc. and when we come to create something all of that influences what we produce. Like if you’ve listened largely to western music, and you look for a note to complete a provided two-note sequence, your choice is informed by that listening history. A non-western trained person is likely to pick a different note. Similar analogies can be made for eg English phrases, or even topics for songs. There’s clearly a boundary between influenced by and copied. Is it the same for generative AI as it is for humans?
- dwnw 2y agoArt is about the human experience of the artist reflected in the art. LLMs have no human experience. They just try to statistically trick you into thinking they made art through mass plagiarism of art. It's an illusion, and also rather boring/lame/uncool. You can do it, sure. But you'll probably also start to wonder why nobody really wants to listen to it, and you can count me out before I do.
- __d 2y agoI’m not disputing that human produced creative works have, at their best, qualities that computer generated works don’t, and maybe can’t. I am however interested in the claim of plagiarism and how what generative AI does is different to what humans do. It’s not clear to me how it’s different.
- dwnw 2y agoYou can make the weak argument all you want, it is still a weak argument. I get it, you think there is no such thing as an original thought therefore mass scale plagiarism (even for profit) is all cool and fine, like a technical loophole or something. Just like the music AI will create, the end result will be that nobody will want to listen to you. Good for you. Enjoy your AI generated art. By yourself. You've missed the whole point of art.
- HenryBemis 2y ago
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]