As an art teacher I was worried AI would come up as an issue of "why should I learn how to draw when I can use AI instead."
But the real issue is that my middle schoolers CONSTANTLY believe all art I show them is AI. Digital art. Photography. Oil paintings from the Western canon. "A human couldn't do that"
Being convinced that humans can't make great art is kind of terrifying
Not only can humans create great art, but ONLY humans can create great art.
The "art" on AI is all stolen from human sources. If you cut off the supply of human "training data" from an AI, it degenerates into gibberish. That's why the AI companies are pushing so hard to break copyright law because they want to suck up as much human art as possible into their plagiarism machine.
@FediThing @small_cypress not only this but — even if we could imagine a scenario where an AI could be trained on a vast source of legitimately acquired data, it still couldn’t create art.
Only humans can create art because art has intent behind it. Software has no intentions so it can’t create art. What an AI produces are just images, not art.
Sorry, but I tend to disagree. Humans get inspired by the works and ideas of other humans too.
AI mixes works and stiles and maybe it/she/her gets lucky and creates an output, that we humans can admire.
But in the amount of slob that gets spat out it can be overlooked.
AI isn't being inspired, it's just wholesale copying with no understanding. There is no artistic judgement at work.
Human works don't turn to gibberish when their access to other humans is switched off. They can do art on their own if they have to, and develop it too.
AI cannot do anything on its own, it is entirely about randomly throwing stolen material together with no plan or understanding. When the stolen material stops, so does the AI.
Art isn't randomly mashing together stuff, it's channeling the feelings within you to express it via a medium.
small cypress
lobster
FediThing 
ben
ErnstGucker
Forbearance
sidereal