3 ms·

I understand and even agree with these sentiments, but in the back of my head is a voice which says "artists have been copying and even stealing from one anothe

by beardyw 6mo ago

I understand and even agree with these sentiments, but in the back of my head is a voice which says "artists have been copying and even stealing from one another since there has been art - what is it that makes this different?"

spicyusername 6mo ago
What is it that makes this different? That the artists don't get paid anymore. Nobody likes picturing a world without art, and if nobody gets paid to make art... where does the art come from? Nobody likes thinking where this trend goes. If we automate all the jobs away... everyone will starve.
- m00x 6mo ago
  Good artists get paid plenty. The hard part of art was always about either representing emotion, or a story. AI can't do that as it has no emotion, nor story.
  - mingus88 6mo ago
    > Good artists get paid plenty. Absolutely false. You don’t even have to try hard to find scores of examples of great artists who died penniless. Artists who lived in squalor for decades until they broke through, and even then made only a modest living. 0.001% of which get “paid plenty” and that’s more due to business acumen. Creative fields are cutthroat, brutal and soul crushing. LLMs have proven that most people don’t care or can’t tell the difference between human expression and a probabilistic approximation of it. On the other hand, this article is about a sports bar logo. Only in Santa Cruz would you see people lose their shit over something so trivial. Are we supposed to be moved to tears by the human expression of a cartoon otter on a tacky surfboard?
dijit 6mo ago
Laziness and cost cutting, the generated logo doesn’t even look good. A logo is quite literally one of the first things you see, it informs your first impression of a company. If they really care so little about that: then it does follow that they also care little about food standards, quality ingredients and paying their chefs/waiters appropriately. All of this leading to a poor experience. A bit of artistic inspiration is fine, not everything has to be the pinnacle of design: but you know what? Those blatant mcdonalds logo ripoff logos or “falafel king” don’t inspire confidence either.
- JumpCrisscross 6mo ago
  I think this is the honest answer. We can wax lyrical about AI ethics. But using AI to make a crappy logo and then getting into a fight with locals over it doesn’t scream hospitality savvy.
tracerbulletx 6mo ago
I would prefer a vibrant marketplace for human artists more than I want cheap design to be available for businesses. I want thriving passionate creative people cooking the food, making the art, writing the articles, and being able to pay their bills off of it. Maximum efficiency is not a goal I care about at all costs, we already have enough efficiency to house, feed, clothe, and educate everyone. And efficiency to what end? Obviously what I want isn't that important in the grand scheme of things, but its why I don't support using AI for anything creative over and above the ethics of companies capturing all of the value of everyone's past artwork, which also is soulless and aesthetically disgusting, much more so than an artist spending 1000s of hours learning from studying other art and synthesizing a similar style.
slabtickler 6mo ago
all art has lineage, but all art is not simply reducible to mimicry. the act of creative endeavor is not to just be a parrot

by beardyw 6mo ago

spicyusername 6mo ago

What is it that makes this different? That the artists don't get paid anymore. Nobody likes picturing a world without art, and if nobody gets paid to make art... where does the art come from? Nobody likes thinking where this trend goes. If we automate all the jobs away... everyone will starve.

m00x 6mo ago
Good artists get paid plenty. The hard part of art was always about either representing emotion, or a story. AI can't do that as it has no emotion, nor story.
- mingus88 6mo ago
  > Good artists get paid plenty. Absolutely false. You don’t even have to try hard to find scores of examples of great artists who died penniless. Artists who lived in squalor for decades until they broke through, and even then made only a modest living. 0.001% of which get “paid plenty” and that’s more due to business acumen. Creative fields are cutthroat, brutal and soul crushing. LLMs have proven that most people don’t care or can’t tell the difference between human expression and a probabilistic approximation of it. On the other hand, this article is about a sports bar logo. Only in Santa Cruz would you see people lose their shit over something so trivial. Are we supposed to be moved to tears by the human expression of a cartoon otter on a tacky surfboard?

dijit 6mo ago

Laziness and cost cutting, the generated logo doesn’t even look good. A logo is quite literally one of the first things you see, it informs your first impression of a company. If they really care so little about that: then it does follow that they also care little about food standards, quality ingredients and paying their chefs/waiters appropriately. All of this leading to a poor experience. A bit of artistic inspiration is fine, not everything has to be the pinnacle of design: but you know what? Those blatant mcdonalds logo ripoff logos or “falafel king” don’t inspire confidence either.

JumpCrisscross 6mo ago
I think this is the honest answer. We can wax lyrical about AI ethics. But using AI to make a crappy logo and then getting into a fight with locals over it doesn’t scream hospitality savvy.

tracerbulletx 6mo ago

I would prefer a vibrant marketplace for human artists more than I want cheap design to be available for businesses. I want thriving passionate creative people cooking the food, making the art, writing the articles, and being able to pay their bills off of it. Maximum efficiency is not a goal I care about at all costs, we already have enough efficiency to house, feed, clothe, and educate everyone. And efficiency to what end? Obviously what I want isn't that important in the grand scheme of things, but its why I don't support using AI for anything creative over and above the ethics of companies capturing all of the value of everyone's past artwork, which also is soulless and aesthetically disgusting, much more so than an artist spending 1000s of hours learning from studying other art and synthesizing a similar style.

slabtickler 6mo ago

all art has lineage, but all art is not simply reducible to mimicry. the act of creative endeavor is not to just be a parrot