Should AI-generated art receive the same praise as that made by hand? No. But I do appreciate how it helps people, specifically those who may not have the time or patience for the arduous years of practice art skills usually take to hone, to create and visualize things that would otherwise be stuck in their head. As long as it’s not passed off as handmade, I don’t really have a problem with it personally.
I also think that AI is great for general comedy purposes, whether that’s audio, video, or meme images. I’ve seen great uses in this way whether it’s the various AI U.S. president videos where they make them say silly shit, or the Jack Black Elden Ring movie trailer that was posted here recently.
Basically, if AI is used for stuff like that, I don’t think it deserves the same hostility as when it’s used in it’s worst possible ways (Tech bros putting far too much faith in it and replacing people, usually leading to their regret).
It gets a lot more simplee if you view it through the lens of what it will actually be used for which is exploitation, extremely potent disinformation that will absolutely cook the average American internet user and continuing to boil the ocean to mine even more fake than regular currency currency.
That’s the point. Viewing something through a particular lens simplifies the issue by ignoring parts of the conversation. A dead hypothesis can be comfortably ignored.
You won’t get bogged down in a convesation or argument that ignores the 99% of Hitler that was genocide related to focus on the 1% of Hitler that was not genocide related.
what if i just want to talk about shitty art
No worries, I’m not the boss of your mouth. I can’t tell it what to say.
For the purposes of propaganda or a conversation where you’re wanting to change somebody’s mind (or just let them know they are unequivocally wrong), put the goggles on.
(that was a joke about the non-genocide 1% of hitler, which did double duty in a post about gen ai)
slaps self in foreheard
Forgot about the art thing.