⁂ L. Rhodes"Slop" is a pretty effective dismissal at the moment, but I fully expect the term to get hijacked by marketing the same way "hallucination" did. Soon you'll hear CEOs boasting that their AI generated 62% less slop, or whatever.
It's all slop. The prettiest, most convincing genAI image in the world is still slop. A heart-breaking work of staggering genius produced by an LLM is still slop. Slop is slop not because it's poorly done, but because it's produced by a process that by definition cannot care about what it's creating.
DDRitter🎗️
@lrhodes So the value of art should not be based on the receptor's feelings but the creator's?
@DDRitter Art is a form of communication. Its meaningfulness is a function of two minds touching through the medium of the work. You can't reduce its value to one end of the exchange, but it does require minds on either end. The more you reduce mindfulness on one side or the other, the less the work functions as art.
blausand 🐟So much this and I want to deduct:
1. Art that doesn't care about the receiver is therapy. Whether having the creator as the receiver makes it art, is up for discussion.
2. Art that doesn't care about the sender is entertainment. Whether having the jockey, curator or prompt-engineer as sender makes it art, is up for discussion.