I look at these works of art created by artificial intelligence and I think: yes, it’s beautiful, yes, it’s good, but… What’s the point? Where’s the story, where’s the work, if everything is so simple, then what’s the point? It’s no better than a store where you come and buy, although no, you come, take everything you need for free and leave. I don’t see any value in it, it’s just boring.

  • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    16 hours ago

    People said the same thing when Daft Punk went on stage just pressing buttons, and more broadly about all digital art.

    • lemmy_outta_here@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      This is fundamentally different, though. I remember when some reactionaries thought digital instruments somehow invalidated the work. But Daft Punk were still people. They took human ideas and transformed them into reality, creating something new. Buttons and knobs can be instruments in the hands of an artist. With AI, it is the plagiarism engine that is doing the creation. Tape two AIs together and they can create “art” all day. None of it will be anything more than a sad imitation of what humans made.

    • SugarCatDestroyer@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      Well, to be honest, I think digital art is, how can I say it, too shiny and pretty or something like that… So it seems dead, although the old digital art seemed to have a soul. I can answer you exactly like this, I think you will understand.