3 ms·

When you say "worth" are you talking strictly monetary value? If so then you're clearly right. But to me the "worth" of the Mona Lisa isn't it's monetary valu

When you say "worth" are you talking strictly monetary value? If so then you're clearly right. But to me the "worth" of the Mona Lisa isn't it's monetary value. It's the feelings I get when I look at it. There is some clear historical value in that it captured images of the time, but that doesn't diminish with a reproduction in my mind either. Unless we can all get on the same page about what we mean when we say "worth" or "value", we're not likely going to get anywhere in this discussion

ceejayoz 1y ago
> It's the feelings I get when I look at it. I'd agree. But those and the monetary worth are often related. The Mona Lisa's original is worth a lot, in part, because of human feelings about it being The Real One. My kids made some art in kindergarten I treasure to this day. I would probably not treasure a mass-produced perfect copy of it; if I saw one in Target it wouldn't be worth a dollar to me.
freedomben 1y ago
I had another thought on this that might be where the disconnect is. When I say it adds value, I'm not saying equivalent value. AI generated Shakespeare or Star Trek etc wouldn't (likely) be the same value as the originals, but they add some value, even if that value is just a couple hours of entertainment for a single individual. Part of the beauty of AI is the empowerment it will give to the individual that previously required huge amounts of investment and work by professionals, which necessitated that films/books/etc be widely marketable and economical. Even consider the difference between 1930s films and films today where originally it was "mass appeal to all audiences" but now there is a ton of variety for all sorts of different tastes. When AI gets to the point it can produce stuff people actually want to watch, the potential for hyper customization is huge. I don't think that will eliminate broadly appealing productions as we humans still love to share and talk about what we watched, and jump on bandwagons for the shared culture (Severance being a good example haha), but it will add more arrows to our quivers.

ceejayoz 1y ago

> It's the feelings I get when I look at it. I'd agree. But those and the monetary worth are often related. The Mona Lisa's original is worth a lot, in part, because of human feelings about it being The Real One. My kids made some art in kindergarten I treasure to this day. I would probably not treasure a mass-produced perfect copy of it; if I saw one in Target it wouldn't be worth a dollar to me.

freedomben 1y ago

I had another thought on this that might be where the disconnect is. When I say it adds value, I'm not saying equivalent value. AI generated Shakespeare or Star Trek etc wouldn't (likely) be the same value as the originals, but they add some value, even if that value is just a couple hours of entertainment for a single individual. Part of the beauty of AI is the empowerment it will give to the individual that previously required huge amounts of investment and work by professionals, which necessitated that films/books/etc be widely marketable and economical. Even consider the difference between 1930s films and films today where originally it was "mass appeal to all audiences" but now there is a ton of variety for all sorts of different tastes. When AI gets to the point it can produce stuff people actually want to watch, the potential for hyper customization is huge. I don't think that will eliminate broadly appealing productions as we humans still love to share and talk about what we watched, and jump on bandwagons for the shared culture (Severance being a good example haha), but it will add more arrows to our quivers.