Actors say Hollywood studios want their AI replicas — for free, forever - eviltoast

The reveal came as SAG-AFTRA actors confirmed they were going on strike.

  • socsa@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I don’t think the question is art vs not art. “Art” is an abstraction bestowed upon something by the viewer.

    I think a lot of people are still struggling with this, but popular “art” is already largely devoid of humanity, and reduced to formulaic focus group fluff, and has been for a long, long time now. AI just streamlines the processes we already have.

    Any additional debate on this will reduce to linguistics. You can - “I know it when I see it” - all you want, but that’s a cop out. The reality is that media which produces a specific neurochemical response in humans doesn’t, and never has required human input. A breathtaking landscape. A feeling of tranquility during snowfall. A kinship with an animal. An AI generated image. These are all the same process.

    • jandar_fett@lemmy.fmhy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Really well said. The definition of art could be argued ad infinitum, and nobody will be any closer to an answer. What is a fact, is that at it’s core art requires a recipe, and each element can be interchangeable, whether it is colors, perspective, medium, tools, pressure, speed, shapes, etc etc, & with A.I., it is just a streamlined process like you said, of taking these elements and mixing them in novel ways. The argument that A.I. could never match human art is such bullocks since as we all know, there is nothing wholly new. It is all recycled content at this point, with variations and arguably, A.I., will be able to add and subtract for those variations a lot faster than humans ever could.