2 ms·

I'm not sure I manage to follow accurately. If you don't save the art you make then it's gone, generative or not. If you do save the output in some way (either

I'm not sure I manage to follow accurately. If you don't save the art you make then it's gone, generative or not. If you do save the output in some way (either by saving the output itself or saving the full information needed to regenerate the output) what is special about doing so on the blockchain vs anywhere else beyond the aforementioned proof of ownership? One is of course allowed to care about proof of ownership and the method used to do so if they like :). I just didn't follow the response in context of the question of how it's different from doing the same without the blockchain otherwise. Unrelated: Kickass you're the Monokai author - I still use that today! Have you ever posted a retrospective about Monokai?

monokai_nl 7mo ago
A generative system can produce an infinity of outputs. An art platform combined with a blockchain allows you to store a finite number of outputs from the same system definitively without knowing upfront what the outputs would look like. This forces you to think carefully about your system: it should produce interesting works with each iteration. Some people call this long form generative art. Regarding Monokai, I’ve written some history about it here: https://monokai.pro/history https://monokai.pro/history :)
- sdenton4 7mo ago
  Yah, I think the question really comes down to: what's so special about a block chain vs any other public record or database? For example, it's just as easy - and more accessible - to put the code and example configurations with output in a github repository.
  - monokai_nl 7mo ago
    The special thing is that it’s decentralized. I know this discussion will not resolve and I’m not a blockchain zealot. I do think it’s an elegant decentralized storage system for algorithmic art where you make outputs definitive and collectible after initiating a run.
    - zamadatix 7mo ago
      I think that's more than fair - "I like blockchain for decentralized proof of ownership more than other methods for the same." is as fine a preference as any other, of course.
- deleted 7mo ago
  [deleted]
- zamadatix 7mo ago
  Thanks for the history page :).
crooked-v 7mo ago
Of course, "proof of ownership" with generative art isn't, because pure generative art is ineligible for copyright protection (https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-supreme-court-declines-hear-dispute-over-copyrights-ai-generated-material-2026-03-02/ https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-supreme-court-de...).
- monokai_nl 7mo ago
  You’re conflating AI art with algorithmic art. This is the reason why I wrote the article.
  - t0bia_s 7mo ago
    You mean images? Art cannot by generated by definition.
    - zamadatix 7mo ago
      This seems, either intentionally or unintentionally, an extremely narrow view of art. E.g. are the artists who worked on Flow (2024) no longer artists because the resulting images are generated rather than drawn? Most people would disagree, and hold/put forth a very different definition as a result, given even they were already credited as the artists on the piece before I asked the question. Even the arguments in the courts about AI, which is a very different kind of "generated" output, stuck to showing the outputs can't be copyrighted rather than trying to argue whether the outputs were still art as the problem.

monokai_nl 7mo ago

A generative system can produce an infinity of outputs. An art platform combined with a blockchain allows you to store a finite number of outputs from the same system definitively without knowing upfront what the outputs would look like. This forces you to think carefully about your system: it should produce interesting works with each iteration. Some people call this long form generative art. Regarding Monokai, I’ve written some history about it here: https://monokai.pro/history https://monokai.pro/history :)

sdenton4 7mo ago
Yah, I think the question really comes down to: what's so special about a block chain vs any other public record or database? For example, it's just as easy - and more accessible - to put the code and example configurations with output in a github repository.
- monokai_nl 7mo ago
  The special thing is that it’s decentralized. I know this discussion will not resolve and I’m not a blockchain zealot. I do think it’s an elegant decentralized storage system for algorithmic art where you make outputs definitive and collectible after initiating a run.
  - zamadatix 7mo ago
    I think that's more than fair - "I like blockchain for decentralized proof of ownership more than other methods for the same." is as fine a preference as any other, of course.
deleted 7mo ago
[deleted]
zamadatix 7mo ago
Thanks for the history page :).

crooked-v 7mo ago

Of course, "proof of ownership" with generative art isn't, because pure generative art is ineligible for copyright protection (https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-supreme-court-declines-hear-dispute-over-copyrights-ai-generated-material-2026-03-02/ https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-supreme-court-de...).

monokai_nl 7mo ago
You’re conflating AI art with algorithmic art. This is the reason why I wrote the article.
- t0bia_s 7mo ago
  You mean images? Art cannot by generated by definition.
  - zamadatix 7mo ago
    This seems, either intentionally or unintentionally, an extremely narrow view of art. E.g. are the artists who worked on Flow (2024) no longer artists because the resulting images are generated rather than drawn? Most people would disagree, and hold/put forth a very different definition as a result, given even they were already credited as the artists on the piece before I asked the question. Even the arguments in the courts about AI, which is a very different kind of "generated" output, stuck to showing the outputs can't be copyrighted rather than trying to argue whether the outputs were still art as the problem.