I think AI will, in a sense, gradually strip every layer from the ugly state of modern art until only a universal beauty remains. I think the scare around the Artist being "killed" is Noble in Spirit, but I can't imagine a world in which specialization in both Taste and Method will just cease to exist.
Even if the traditional creative process comes to an end, the sheer diversity of experiences in the future population will keep specialized (group particular) Art alive.
If anything, I find the concept of Man dreaming up ever more distinct worlds via the medium of omnipresent AI tools to be much more enticing than what we have now.
Mediocre art will always exist thanks to the masses and bad art won't disappear- so not much will change in that regard, but for genuinely Creative and Beautiful collectives and people? This technological revolution will catapult them to new heights.
Tldr... Basedworld will be built in tandem with the Machinic Dreamscape. ☀
The article itself is interesting, it sure conceives an interesting idea, but there are a few points that are not very clear or selective at best.
>All the evil people in the world oppose AI Art. - source: trust me bro.
>You don't write about the fact that art in general has lost value due to AI not only on the market but in general. And therefore there will be less people attempting to create art at all. Especailly when people don't understand the value of art.
He's suggesting that whilst AI has led to fewer artists nevertheless it could reframe what is valuable away from subjective commodity and back to objective beauty. And that would create opportunity for a rise in aesthetic, pro-social artists.
You're not a native English speaker are you? The article is very interesting but it would be heaps better if someone edited your language - meaning is not always immediately clear.
I think you're misinterpreting my motive. Of course not all native speakers of any language can write lucidly. I think the article is interesting enough for it to be worthwhile improving its accessibility. I'm not suggesting that English is 'better' than other languages but it is the language of the article, and it could be improved. Purely to widen the appeal of the article. Is that so heinous a suggestion?
Speaking of artificial intelligience-
I think AI will, in a sense, gradually strip every layer from the ugly state of modern art until only a universal beauty remains. I think the scare around the Artist being "killed" is Noble in Spirit, but I can't imagine a world in which specialization in both Taste and Method will just cease to exist.
Even if the traditional creative process comes to an end, the sheer diversity of experiences in the future population will keep specialized (group particular) Art alive.
If anything, I find the concept of Man dreaming up ever more distinct worlds via the medium of omnipresent AI tools to be much more enticing than what we have now.
Mediocre art will always exist thanks to the masses and bad art won't disappear- so not much will change in that regard, but for genuinely Creative and Beautiful collectives and people? This technological revolution will catapult them to new heights.
Tldr... Basedworld will be built in tandem with the Machinic Dreamscape. ☀
The article itself is interesting, it sure conceives an interesting idea, but there are a few points that are not very clear or selective at best.
>All the evil people in the world oppose AI Art. - source: trust me bro.
>You don't write about the fact that art in general has lost value due to AI not only on the market but in general. And therefore there will be less people attempting to create art at all. Especailly when people don't understand the value of art.
He's suggesting that whilst AI has led to fewer artists nevertheless it could reframe what is valuable away from subjective commodity and back to objective beauty. And that would create opportunity for a rise in aesthetic, pro-social artists.
You're not a native English speaker are you? The article is very interesting but it would be heaps better if someone edited your language - meaning is not always immediately clear.
If you want to donate for an editor, I'll be happy to take the money ;)
as if native english speakers can always get their point across perfectly. Just enjoy the damn article nerd.
I think you're misinterpreting my motive. Of course not all native speakers of any language can write lucidly. I think the article is interesting enough for it to be worthwhile improving its accessibility. I'm not suggesting that English is 'better' than other languages but it is the language of the article, and it could be improved. Purely to widen the appeal of the article. Is that so heinous a suggestion?