As an artist, I think it is a net negative for us. Disregarding the copyright issue, I think it’s also consolidating power into large corporations, going to kill learning fundamental skills (rip next generation of artists), and turn the profession into a low skill minimum wage job. Artists that spent years learning and perfecting their skills will be worth nothing and I think it’s a pretty depressing future for us. Anways thoughts?
the people complaining about AI art are not complaining about AI - they are complaining that AI is taking away their livelihoods. But the problem here is capitalism. Under socialism, and eventually the final stage, communism, everyone’s lives will be ultimately provided for, giving them the freedom to explore art as a hobby, for fun, and for whatever drives them.
Automation is always good under socialism as it only increases human capability, and can be managed by the workers. Just as automation in many cases replaced many other forms of production that I’m sure people cared about, there should be no difference or special status given to art.
I am frustrated by the notion that art is different from any other form of human experience. I think this is the least materialist way of understanding art possible. In fact, I see a few users parroting a very idealist and individualist conception of art - acting as though it is about seeking a so-called “creativity”, which in my opinion feels like a petite bourgeois mindset that relies on seeing art as above the material and functional, and independent of the mode of production. Their attempts to differentiate themselves from other proletarians, for whom under socialism automation would be a massive benefit, is personally, asinine. ESPECIALLY BECAUSE UNDER SOCIALISM, NOONE WILL STOP ARTISTS FROM DRAWING FOR FUN - ONLY THAT THEY MAY NOT BE ABLE TO DRAW FOR THEIR WORK. If these artists are truly not creating because of their desire for money but because of their love for art, they should be able to tolerate another job. Especially because, for example, in the USSR, workers were already working extremely short hours relative to western countries of the same development level, and socialism was reducing them very quickly - they would have plenty of free time for art.
Finally, the “stealing art” argument, which is equally infuriating to me. In my personal opinion, as someone who regards science as the only truth, the process through which human beings, as meat sacks full of chemicals, produce art from references throughout their lives, should be considered not particularly different from the process through which AI(especially as it becomes more sophisticated) creates art. As if human brains aren’t also following some mathematical/physical process(which, again, if you believe in science, and not some metaphysical “soul”, should absolutely be true!) to remix the things they have seen in their lives.
Also, intellectual property is bullshit. if you believe in intellectual property as a principle, you are just straight up not a communist.
I do personally think China’s take - that all automated art ought to be watermarked, is good, but purely for the purpose of combatting disinformation. It should not be prominently visible. In fact, I think AI art allowing non-artists to enjoy the feeling of getting to create unique and vaguely coherent images is cool, good, valid, and just a natural consequence of technological progress.
TL;DR - under socialism, automation is good. proletarian artists are oppressed by capitalism, not automation(just like all other proletarians)
My takes might not all be good, and I don’t mean to be hostile. I’m sure this will at least be a controversial post, if not one that gets me mass downvoted, but I don’t think I’m the only one with this opinion.
Whether the process by which a human being produces art, and the process by which a deep learning model produces art, are isomorphic, is orthogonal to whether or not the process itself constitutes theft. Nobody likes this guy:
The boundaries between imitation, and remix, and so-called “original” works, are all fuzzy, but they do exist. And they will continue to exist under any politico-economic system.
Authorship exists independently of politico-economic systems, and each such system will need to determine the extent to which it values and respects it. Under capitalism, the point of so-called intellectual property, like all commodities, is profit. Not public benefit. Not expression. Not for the ego boost. Not for-the-fuck-of-it. Just profit. As much of it and for as long as possible. Communism will need its own answer. And ideally, it will be an answer that balances the material needs of the people who make it, the material costs of making it, and the broader public good.
You have definitely given me a lot to think about and your replies want to make me learn more. Thanks for offering some solid discussion here (I know I keep replying but honestly I don’t know how to message people individually).
Some people want to draw for work. What would be the point of just drawing “for fun” if your work is just kept to yourself and piled under a bunch of soulless AI generated images?
If everything gets automated, and nobody does anything since art can just be reduced to prompting, then what are people going to do? Sit in a room and rot? I’ve asked this question in the thread before but I didn’t get an answer.
The topic at hand here is art. It’s how I connect with the world. It is how I met my wife. It’s what motivates me to move forward when the world completely sucks.
I feel like it’s really unrealistic to assume that AI will create some kind of utopia that is free of work. What will people do? Tell me what a typical day will look like if literally everything, including art, is automated? If art is not going to be valued as an effective form of communication or experiencing the world, and that it is useless to learn and gain skills in because AI can do it better, then what is the point?
I believe that some arguments and statements are not worth listening to and that is so many of the comments in this thread. Unless you are an artist yourself you can’t speak on behalf of them.
It is sad that something actually makes life meaningful is being taken out of human hands. It’s akin to taking away hope and faith in itself.
I don’t feel motivated to live in a world where I would never get the opportunity to work toward something I cared about, and to be demoralized every step of the way because a computer can replace me at any second. On top of that, being reminded of it at every second of the way.
Even on top of that, from a purely scientific perspective, humans’ brains are the way they are because we have the need to be valued and feel useful and fulfilled. There is a reason why people work and always have worked toward something. There has never been a society that has not had some form of work in human history. Even during my time in West Africa as a Peace Corps volunteer, people worked very hard even if they didn’t have jobs in the western sense. I’ve met African women who have worked harder than anybody I’ve ever known and they didn’t work a job.
I guess I’m alone in feeling the way that I do about it and maybe I just fundamentally disagree with someindividuals’s interpretations of the situation, but it is just very sad. A very sad future indeed. Imagine a world that is controlled by people trying to convince you that you should be fine with this. I guess all I can do is keep it to myself that I hate it or be seen as crazy for thinking that people are so quick to jump on a bandwagon for what the majority or the most domineering opinions in the room.
Edit: I also see and understand your idea that people could just do art as a hobby if AI automates everything, but the reality is that it won’t do that. Likely the only available jobs will be the ones that are physically and emotionally all encompassing (such as home health care or something) and people won’t have the energy to even do art as a hobby. And AI will just take away every job opportunity anyway. Do you honestly see socialism being integrated into the US (at least) any time soon? It is creepy to just deduct humans to chemicals and meatsacks. Where is the empathy? Also, if you are implying I’m an idealist when it comes to art, are the people in this thread who argue against me really so naively idealist to believe that socialism and communism will be integrated any time soon? And even so, would it be utopia if it is seen as worthless to do anything because AI can do it better?
Not going to go over this very long(and expanding) post in its entirety, only focusing on the particularly cohesive ones, as I don’t feel like you totally understand my point. I am not saying “AI art good”, but rather that I think the root problem is capitalism. So the answer to this question:
has nothing to do with my point.
I do not think that this is a position devoid of empathy - I find myself able to love myself as a sack of meat, as I do not treat myself as more than I am. I understand that I care about other sacks of meat, in other words, other people. But I do not hesitate to claim that I absolutely am driven by chemicals, electrical signals in the brain; my ideas come from reality, from material processes, just like that of a computer.
Talk to their friends, play games, eat food, fall in love, study science, literature, and culture, and create art, and share it for the sake of human communication, not work and production. You yourself mention this is an important aspect of art, and indeed AI art does not even take away from this aspect. In fact, even in the status quo, people don’t need to draw fantastic things that are on par with professional artists to share art as a form of socialization, and similarly, people don’t necessarily learn to draw in hopes of making it a profession but just drawing to draw for yourself and for your friends. I myself have drawn something terrible multiple times and shared it with my friends - that’s fun, and under socialism, even with AI, this would be no different!
This fixation on mechanical materialism is disturbing. We are more than sacks of meat. We are each other and ourselves. We are social, biological, geographical, ideological, dialectical beings. Comparing ourselves to an AI is sophistry.
It’s kind if creepy that you’re deducing people to chemicals and their thoughts and life experience to be the same as a computer.
I’m not going to try and pull out a bunch of fancy theories and flowery language to get my point across but I still feel like everything that I have read here leaves me feeling hopeless that people don’t care about what happens with AI and how people are going to be affected materially and spiritually.
Sure, that sounds nice in theory, that people will just chill and fall in love and eat food together and there will be sunshine and gumdrops and roses if AI takes over and communism is realized. But that isn’t what is going to happen. That is why I’m saying that AI is a really bad thing for everyone in reality and where we stand with the world right now.
The reality is what people will be replaced by AI. Capitalism will continue to be the driver of the world, and a lot of people will live in abject poverty. There will be no opportunities to work except maybe for the people who are caregiving for the elderly and disabled (if robots do not take over that). And people will continue to shit on artists or people who are critical of AI replacing them. Information, education, art, culture, music, research will be centralized to corporations that use AI and the few that upkeep it. This is bad for a lot of reasons. And even if people start colonizing Mars, what will there be to do if robots and AI are doing all the work? I guess people will get bored enough to just start making their own creative works, but that goes back to what I was saying before that it will be met with a lot of resistance from people who hate artistsorr believe that people don’t deserve to have anything materially or spiritually.
People need a reason to live. Like I said, even if you are going to reduce people to “meatsacks” there is a reason why people NEED things outside of food, water, and shelter. I believe in Maslow’s hierarchy of needs but depending on the person and situation those needs can be moveable.
Can we stop this progression? I don’t know what is to be done - I guess we can only see it unfold and time will tell. But honestly I haven’t seen an argument that is giving me hope other than going back to the core of why I choose to be alive and keep going, and that is keep learning more and not give up. I guess that’s all I can do. Even if people tell me it’s futile.