<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: How Many Artistic A.I.s Can Dance on the Head of a Pin?	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://nathanshumate.com/how-many-artistic-a-i-s-can-dance-on-the-head-of-a-pin/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://nathanshumate.com/how-many-artistic-a-i-s-can-dance-on-the-head-of-a-pin/</link>
	<description>I make things, and I make things up.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 Jan 2025 13:05:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Nathan Neff		</title>
		<link>https://nathanshumate.com/how-many-artistic-a-i-s-can-dance-on-the-head-of-a-pin/#comment-4287</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nathan Neff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Jan 2025 13:05:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://nathanshumate.com/?p=36694#comment-4287</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Honestly I suspect in our lifetimes AI will get so good that while there may always be a difference between genuine human art and AI art, the AI part will be &quot;good enough&quot;.   And grimly I suspect that will be the case for almost everything humans do.  It really is different this time.   My current job could likely be replaced by AI right now, (or at least 99% of it could be) and definitely in the next 10 years or so.  Honestly I&#039;m not so upset that AI will replace me as that the AI will actually do my job MUCH better then I can. That is pretty demoralizing.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Honestly I suspect in our lifetimes AI will get so good that while there may always be a difference between genuine human art and AI art, the AI part will be &#8220;good enough&#8221;.   And grimly I suspect that will be the case for almost everything humans do.  It really is different this time.   My current job could likely be replaced by AI right now, (or at least 99% of it could be) and definitely in the next 10 years or so.  Honestly I&#8217;m not so upset that AI will replace me as that the AI will actually do my job MUCH better then I can. That is pretty demoralizing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: RK		</title>
		<link>https://nathanshumate.com/how-many-artistic-a-i-s-can-dance-on-the-head-of-a-pin/#comment-4285</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[RK]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Jan 2025 07:08:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://nathanshumate.com/?p=36694#comment-4285</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I would say it&#039;s &lt;i&gt;remixed&lt;/i&gt; art: A.I. image generators are after all &quot;trained&quot; on drawings and paintings and photographs originally generated by humans which they then mash up according to their calculations while attempting to generate what the user orders. Remixing art is something humans were doing long before computers and the internet, as Picasso did with his—in my opinion, ugly—chaotic cubist &quot;remakes&quot; of Goya&#039;s &lt;i&gt;Las Meninas&lt;/i&gt;. While one can argue over the &lt;i&gt;value&lt;/i&gt; of remixed art (not very high, in my opinion), I dare say art made from other art is still art.

The real danger of A.I.—I speculate—is not that it&#039;s going to &lt;i&gt;replace&lt;/i&gt; us (as some who&#039;ve gotten a little too immersed in their reading and viewing of apocalyptic science fiction fear), but that it&#039;ll make us increasingly artistically and intellectually lazy in all our creative endeavors. Why spend the years teaching ourselves how to write, draw, paint, sculpt, etc. when an A.I. generator can whip up something aesthetically and/or intellectually pleasing for us in a few minutes? Also, what will happen to those A.I. generators&#039; &quot;creativity&quot; if they&#039;re increasingly being &quot;trained&quot; on their own regurgitated works?

As with other technology we&#039;ve used to make our lives easier, there will likely always be cultural rebels among us who insist on doing their creative works the more difficult &quot;old school&quot; way (e.g. the Amish with their decidedly agrarian low-tech lifestyles), but chances are they&#039;ll be few and far between. So what becomes of popular culture when its creativity is sterilized? Seems to me our A.I. might be luring us toward a saccharine dystopian future in something like the style of Aldous Huxley&#039;s &lt;i&gt;Brave New World&lt;/i&gt; more than a &lt;i&gt;Matrix&lt;/i&gt; or &lt;i&gt;Terminator&lt;/i&gt;-style robotic revolt.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would say it&#8217;s <i>remixed</i> art: A.I. image generators are after all &#8220;trained&#8221; on drawings and paintings and photographs originally generated by humans which they then mash up according to their calculations while attempting to generate what the user orders. Remixing art is something humans were doing long before computers and the internet, as Picasso did with his—in my opinion, ugly—chaotic cubist &#8220;remakes&#8221; of Goya&#8217;s <i>Las Meninas</i>. While one can argue over the <i>value</i> of remixed art (not very high, in my opinion), I dare say art made from other art is still art.</p>
<p>The real danger of A.I.—I speculate—is not that it&#8217;s going to <i>replace</i> us (as some who&#8217;ve gotten a little too immersed in their reading and viewing of apocalyptic science fiction fear), but that it&#8217;ll make us increasingly artistically and intellectually lazy in all our creative endeavors. Why spend the years teaching ourselves how to write, draw, paint, sculpt, etc. when an A.I. generator can whip up something aesthetically and/or intellectually pleasing for us in a few minutes? Also, what will happen to those A.I. generators&#8217; &#8220;creativity&#8221; if they&#8217;re increasingly being &#8220;trained&#8221; on their own regurgitated works?</p>
<p>As with other technology we&#8217;ve used to make our lives easier, there will likely always be cultural rebels among us who insist on doing their creative works the more difficult &#8220;old school&#8221; way (e.g. the Amish with their decidedly agrarian low-tech lifestyles), but chances are they&#8217;ll be few and far between. So what becomes of popular culture when its creativity is sterilized? Seems to me our A.I. might be luring us toward a saccharine dystopian future in something like the style of Aldous Huxley&#8217;s <i>Brave New World</i> more than a <i>Matrix</i> or <i>Terminator</i>-style robotic revolt.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
