3 ms·
Trying to “level the playing field” is antithetical to what art is. Art is about self-expression and communication. If we viewed art as some sort of competitio
by strogonoff 4mo ago
Trying to “level the playing field” is antithetical to what art is. Art is about self-expression and communication.
If we viewed art as some sort of competition or race, then someone using neural–network-based generative tools could avoid losing the race; however, everybody would be participating in some sport A and the person using ML participates in a completely different sport B. Everyone is running, but one person is riding a scooter.
However, art is not a finite zero-sum game[0]. Despite what formal music education for kids sometimes tries to make it look like, it’s not a competition, there is no global ranking and scoring system for your skill. Many people have an intuitive understanding of that; try going to a live jam to see people participating regardless of their hypothetical skill level.
[0] As further reading on this topic more generally, I recommend Finite and Infinite Games by James Carse.
- mbonnet 4mo agoI agree. Art isn't a playing field!
- delis-thumbs-7e 4mo agoIf you mean kids playground it is, you get to imagine anything you want andmaybe other human beings join you imagining and then you get to have fun. Sometimes ot doesn’t quite work and it is not so fun. Imagine one day one of the dads coming with a robot and saying the kids that instead of you playing you vcan tell this robot what to play and it will play for you. No needto get all tired and muddy.
- strogonoff 4mo agoThe term “playing field” as far as I am aware usually implies the context of competitive sport, not play in the playful sense.
- delis-thumbs-7e 4mo agoI know. I’m intentionally expanding the meaning.
- mbonnet 4mo agowhat makes you think you can unilaterally expand a very well-accepted meaning of a term, especially in a discussion that is basically semantics of the term?