this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2023
1739 points (98.5% liked)

World News

39004 readers
2665 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] RidcullyTheBrown@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There’s no objective to why it was created, an AI writing something that evokes emotion is a party trick.

Then it's not valuable. The question still stands: if something is truly valuable, does it matter how it was created? You are not answering this question, you are simply pointing out why AI in your opinion cannot produce art. My question is a bit "tongue in cheek", of course. It cannot be truly answered without a specific example of creation. I'm asking it to prove a point: we're dismissing something we don't understand.

All it really does is promote consumption and demoralize innovation

I'd argue that this is what Hollywood already does. And as you rightly argued through your comment, it brings little artistic or creative value.

[–] kmkz_ninja@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

To me, it's the same feeling as the teachers that wouldn't accept papers written on a computer (after an age where we know how to write) because "it's less honest".

I'm not good at drawing. I would love to try to make a game. Anti-AI luddites are happy that I will never produce something because I am incabable of doing something that an AI could easily accomplish.