Counterpoint: previous technologies also enabled people to do what wasn’t possible before. Photography allowed for perfect captures of a place and time. Electronic music can create sounds that no physical instrument can. So far, AI hasn’t made anything “impossible” possible, it only makes what a skilled artist or writer could make but super fast.
Open Blender and animate a photorealistic Kim Jong Un winning a pie-eating contest.
If you want to say, a professional studio could do that, given enough time and money - what’s left? What imagery remains impossible? If the answer is nothing, then congratulations, we won art. Anything is possible, for anyone. Super easy, barely an inconvenience.
And not just possible - feasible. Anyone can make anything, practically, to-day. Not in the abstract like how anyone could learn piano. Any idiot child can bring an idea from their head to your eyeballs, with alarming clarity, right now.
That gets into the problem of, to paraphrase doc Malcom, “you were so worried with whether you could, that you didn’t stop to think whether you should”
Yes, anyone can make that now, thanks to AI. But why should they?
Describing your imagination onto the screen is so obviously desirable that it still sounds like witchcraft. Be serious. Are new abilities relevant to your conclusion, or not?
Results come with some limitations, especially regarding videos, many of which cannot be overcome with current tech, so yes, people can get a “good enough” approximation of whatever they imagined or wanted - but I still ask, why should almost everyone be able to do it? Why is it desirable have nearly everyone be able to do it?
As opposed to what? Jealously guarding this effortless magic?
Mumbling ‘well it’s not flawless’ cannot excuse how you objected over new possibilities. Do not turn around and ask, ‘but why should peasants get these new abilities?’
‘It does nothing new!’ Sure it does. ‘But who wants that?’ Lots of people. ‘Well why should they get it?’ To do new things. ‘Well I don’t like what they’re doing.’ Who fucking asked?
Your retreat from bailey to motte is tacit admission you’re just plain wrong. As if you cannot imagine doing something worthwhile with a program that effortlessly renders whatever the hell you want. As if your imagination is even relevant, to say this technology does new things. As if novelty is the only metric - as if there’s no benefit to making desirable tasks a million times easier.
When computers made music easier to make and distribute, a lot of shitty music got passed around. Ninety percent of everything is crap. Do you care how that relates to things you wrote, or did you not mean anything when you typed them?
My exact quote was: “Counterpoint: previous technologies also enabled people to do what wasn’t possible before.” - Not exactly what you accused me there. I never said it “doesn’t do anything new”, I said “it hasn’t made anything “impossible” possible”.
But who wants that?
I never said that or anything like that.
Well why should they get it?
Mind you, I asked this twice. Your first reply was “People want it”. So, people should have access to AI because they want it, according to you. That’s about as a non-answer as it can get. In this current comment, your answer is now “to do new things”, which I will go out a limb and assume “new abilities” are some of these new things, and the main ability is “making their imagination a reality”, which circles back to my question because when I first asked it, you had already made that point of “AI enables people to generate images of anything they want”.
Well I don’t like what they’re doing
True, and while “nobody asked” me, I am forced to sift through a lot of AI whenever I do even a simple image search, because even tools to auto hide them will still let some slip by. There’s also the problem of it multiplying the amount of scams and fake news spam since it’s “a million times easier” to fake images and videos nowadays, but hey, who fucking asked me, right?
“Any tool can be used for evil” yes, i know, everybody knows, doesn’t mean one should turn a blind eye to what sometimes feels like the main use case
As if you cannot imagine doing something worthwhile with a program that effortlessly renders whatever the hell you want.
That’s a philosophical argument of whether the end result has any worth because it had no/very little effort. I won’t go there because neither of us has the time to really sit and go through it
Ninety percent of everything is crap.
You don’t like what others are doing? Who fucking asked?
Do you care how that relates to things you wrote, or did you not mean anything when you typed them?
I care because that percentage of crap is steadily increasing thanks to AI.
Counterpoint: previous technologies also enabled people to do what wasn’t possible before. Photography allowed for perfect captures of a place and time. Electronic music can create sounds that no physical instrument can. So far, AI hasn’t made anything “impossible” possible, it only makes what a skilled artist or writer could make but super fast.
that’s already making an “impossible” into a “possible”… and in my books, that’s a useful tool if you take all the value judgements out of it.
Open Blender and animate a photorealistic Kim Jong Un winning a pie-eating contest.
If you want to say, a professional studio could do that, given enough time and money - what’s left? What imagery remains impossible? If the answer is nothing, then congratulations, we won art. Anything is possible, for anyone. Super easy, barely an inconvenience.
And not just possible - feasible. Anyone can make anything, practically, to-day. Not in the abstract like how anyone could learn piano. Any idiot child can bring an idea from their head to your eyeballs, with alarming clarity, right now.
That gets into the problem of, to paraphrase doc Malcom, “you were so worried with whether you could, that you didn’t stop to think whether you should”
Yes, anyone can make that now, thanks to AI. But why should they?
Describing your imagination onto the screen is so obviously desirable that it still sounds like witchcraft. Be serious. Are new abilities relevant to your conclusion, or not?
Results come with some limitations, especially regarding videos, many of which cannot be overcome with current tech, so yes, people can get a “good enough” approximation of whatever they imagined or wanted - but I still ask, why should almost everyone be able to do it? Why is it desirable have nearly everyone be able to do it?
As opposed to what? Jealously guarding this effortless magic?
Mumbling ‘well it’s not flawless’ cannot excuse how you objected over new possibilities. Do not turn around and ask, ‘but why should peasants get these new abilities?’
looks over the endless slop flooding social media
Yea, it certainly was a good idea
This is failure to argue.
‘It does nothing new!’ Sure it does. ‘But who wants that?’ Lots of people. ‘Well why should they get it?’ To do new things. ‘Well I don’t like what they’re doing.’ Who fucking asked?
Your retreat from bailey to motte is tacit admission you’re just plain wrong. As if you cannot imagine doing something worthwhile with a program that effortlessly renders whatever the hell you want. As if your imagination is even relevant, to say this technology does new things. As if novelty is the only metric - as if there’s no benefit to making desirable tasks a million times easier.
When computers made music easier to make and distribute, a lot of shitty music got passed around. Ninety percent of everything is crap. Do you care how that relates to things you wrote, or did you not mean anything when you typed them?
Let’s go point by point.
My exact quote was: “Counterpoint: previous technologies also enabled people to do what wasn’t possible before.” - Not exactly what you accused me there. I never said it “doesn’t do anything new”, I said “it hasn’t made anything “impossible” possible”.
I never said that or anything like that.
Mind you, I asked this twice. Your first reply was “People want it”. So, people should have access to AI because they want it, according to you. That’s about as a non-answer as it can get. In this current comment, your answer is now “to do new things”, which I will go out a limb and assume “new abilities” are some of these new things, and the main ability is “making their imagination a reality”, which circles back to my question because when I first asked it, you had already made that point of “AI enables people to generate images of anything they want”.
True, and while “nobody asked” me, I am forced to sift through a lot of AI whenever I do even a simple image search, because even tools to auto hide them will still let some slip by. There’s also the problem of it multiplying the amount of scams and fake news spam since it’s “a million times easier” to fake images and videos nowadays, but hey, who fucking asked me, right?
“Any tool can be used for evil” yes, i know, everybody knows, doesn’t mean one should turn a blind eye to what sometimes feels like the main use case
That’s a philosophical argument of whether the end result has any worth because it had no/very little effort. I won’t go there because neither of us has the time to really sit and go through it
You don’t like what others are doing? Who fucking asked?
I care because that percentage of crap is steadily increasing thanks to AI.