If they could draw or make music, they wouldn’t need a robot to do it, and they clearly want to but don’t have the skills.
What it’s actually highlighted is how overworked and underpaid everyone is now. When a single salary could comfortably support a whole family, people had more time. When only one person needed to leave the house to earn money, the rest of the family had time during the day to help with the domestic work: dishes, laundry, gardening, etc. Then the evenings could be spent indulging hobbies.
Now that we live in a world where you need to have a dual income to barely get by, both partners are working 8-10 hours per day for the paycheck and then coming home to another 2-3 hours of domestic work. It’s fucking exhausting and there isn’t time to focus on quilting, whittling, playing music, or any of the other fun and creative hobbies that my grandparents got to be into.
So these AIdiot tech bros come along and offer to sell you the feeling of doing those hobbies without having to spend the time or energy to actually do them? It’s shitty, but I understand why a lot of people are taking that deal.
When a single salary could comfortably support a whole family, people had more time
was there really time like that tho? just sounds like rose tinted glasses tbh. maybe because i’m not US based but people here were poor af back then and things got much better these days.
If you look at the history of work in the US though, there was only a short window of time that you had that extra time. Unless you were wealthy, your kids started to work at a very young age. Have you seen the pics of kids where they look like they could haggle with you and rob you? The teenage years are a relatively new concept.
Also, most of the boomer and older generations:
- Had no therapy
- Had no entertainment or education to let them know what’s possible. It was by who you had contact with.
- If you were a POC, your life was most likely hell
- If you were gay, your life was most likely hell.
- If you were a woman, you life was most likely hell.
Yes, the goal is for everyone to get back to the lives of upper middle class, white men.
The middle class sprung out of a post war boom and the ruling class snatched that shit right back.
I think not everyone who wants to be artistic can be. I sort of hear music composition in my head. But despite playing a musical instrument all through college, I could never play anything by ear. And memorizing music was really hard. So if AI could get what I hear in my head out, that would be astounding. It can’t yet, but you get my point. I also have poor fine motor skill, so drawing is out. Even with a computer and mouse it just is too hard. That said, I think what this really says is that people have a desire to consume more art, and they are willing to use AI to get it.
If you had the education, you’d know how to do all the things you say you want to do.
Perhaps how I said it wasn’t clear. When I said playing an instrument through college, I meant getting lessons and playing with official school and college bands. I had lots of education. I understand logically how to do the things. But I was unable. It takes more than education to be an artist.
I genuinely disagree.
Making something, regardless of skill level or whether you achieve what idea you had in making it, is what makes an artist. A poor artist or one that’s not the best ever is still a valid artist, right? Then that should apply to you as well.
Hm, I suppose it is a question on semantics then. In the context of the original post, there is art I would like to create, but cannot, and if AI could help me achieve what I envision, that wouldn’t be a bad thing. So I suppose I could ohrase it as, not everyone can be the artist they want to be. In my case, sure, I could compose some music technically. But the massive gap from what is in my head and what would come out would be so frustrating I would not enjoy the hobby. And that is why I don’t do it. So if AI could make it so I would be willing to do it, that would be a good thing.
That would be a good thing? You don’t want a challenge or to grow? Develop a skill? You don’t get a sense of accomplishment if you just have a computer steal other people’s effort for you.
What? I want the computer to help me make the art I have in my head. How is that stealing? I want to say more crescendo, or make the low line lower. Or have me hum something and it write it. Then combine it with something else I hummed.
And I have plenty of areas to be challenged, and to develop. But only 24 hours in a day. I can’t be an expert in everything. But that doesn’t mean I couldn’t enjoy a greater variety of things if I had help.And where do computers take the pictures they mash together for your convenience?
You aren’t making anything. You’re tracing.
lol people down voted you. People be nuts
C’est la vie
Doubt.
You spend so much time using your clock and calculator on your phone you clearly want to be an engineer but don’t have the skills.
If that were true, there would be people saying they are engineers for doing this.
There aren’t.
But there’s people saying they’re artists and musicians for making slop…
Creating a piece of art myself is different than enjoying someone else’s creation. There’s a place for both. Lots of respect for, say, professional musicians. They have natural skills and years of hard work that I don’t and no amount of hobbying will get me close to them. But I still find satisfaction in twiddling around on a piano and writing my own tunes. AI helping people enjoy their hobby more is a good application, IMO.
Contrast that with people using it to “side-hustle” and try to scrape up some easy dollars by flooding the world with passionless slop, that’s a different thing.
This… this is the reasonable course that’s shunned by our divisive culture nowadays. I personally don’t have the time or the space, but I do have a computer, so I use what tools I have. Local models ftw
I’ll take my downvotes now 😞
Jk, I’m on an instance that disables downvotes. Meaning folks have to write coherent comments for me to be aware they think I’m dumb/wrong/eeeeevil.
I could see tinkering with local models being a very satisfying hobby. I’ve always been curious about how accurate they can get on sentiment. E.g., a southern US woman saying “bless your heart” can have implied condescension while other regions it may be more of a straightforward good-faith comment; how and how well does a model get trained on that sort of thing.
The question has never been whether people want it. I think it’s pretty clear they do. The problem is whether people want to spend the time in money, or skill, to get it.
I would love to be able to paint sci-fi pinups. But do I want to trade 10k hours of other stuff I’m already better at to do it? Once I painted them, would I truly love the work, or would I just see all the imperfections and be grumpy about it?
Artists have it hard. They spend unending hours on their passion and, in the end, see everything through a critical lens. And when they spend a month of time on something amazing, no one wants to trade a day of salary to own a copy, or a month of salary to own the original.
AI is so wildly popular because it’s cheap, and through the lens of the consumer (read untrained eye), the best of it evokes emotions they get from a piece that would go for hundreds or thousands of dollars.
The true fucked up part. If the courts all say NFG, dump all your diffusion models that are full of copyrighted material. They’d just go back and commission artists in distressed places and rebuild the models from properly purchased material and we’ll be right back where we are.
Still image diffusion isn’t even expensive to run,
Have you considered the end result is not the purpose? The doing of art is what gives it meaning, to the artist and the viewer. It’s what makes it satisfying, even if it didn’t turn out how you wanted exactly.
is not the purpose? The doing of art is what gives it meaning, to the artist and th
I’m in a business that has a lot of artists. These are observations I make.
I’m also in the business of art abd I’m standing by what I said.
have a nice one
edit: Ohh a downvote from agent_nycto on “have a good one”, in that case, welcome to my blocklist of people that aren’t worth hearing from, don’t worry you’re in like company with all the other trolls.
The end result is what other people see and what gets you paid. That’s why people want to do it via AI.
Personally, I could sink 10k hours into whatever visual art and I’ll never be good at it. I don’t enjoy it either. I can only hire an expensive artist or use AI if I want something made. Since using AI art sucks, I’ve opted not to continue work on the video game I started work on a while ago. An alternative is to pay for asset packs from a studio that sells them, but then it’s just an asset flip.
How soullessly capitalist it is to think the only purpose of art is what money you can make off of it. Who cares about meaning, the almighty dollar is the only thing important in life.
There’s “skills,” and then there’s innate talent, and then there’s practice. Anyone who embraces AI art clearly doesn’t have the innate talent to recognize it’s crap, and their rabid eagerness to jump on the latest trend implies they probably doesn’t have the patience required for practice either.
Not that music and art classes and exposure aren’t important, but 12 years of mandatory gym classes definitely didn’t turn me into an athlete (if anything, it made me hate physical activity. Maybe if we had gone on hikes instead of playing dodgeball…)
But you know how to play dodgeball. Do you know what composition is?
If not, or even the fact that question is tricky for people, is to illustrate my point. People want to be able to draw, and we aren’t being taught how.
Sure I know how to play dodgeball, and I’ve had many, many gym classes worth of practice, but I was always absolute shit at it. Similarly, you can teach composition (or color theory or whatever other art technique you want), and have your students practice it, but most are never going to be more than just okay at creating art. “People just need to be taught the arts and then they won’t be seduced by the siren song of AI!” assumes that education can overcome innate limitations. I will never be a good athlete, just as most people will never be good artists/musicians/writers. Meanwhile here’s a tool that will produce (what AI users think is) an impressive facsimile of the real thing, and at a fraction of the effort with almost no barrier to entry.
I feel that the idea that only certain magically wired people can be artists is a myth. I also think that our idea that only good artists are valid is some capitalistic nonsense. “Bad” artists are also valid artists, and our attitude around people creating things should change.
They’re not even really using the ai correctly. If you really absolutely must use ai, there is a way to do it without ripping people off, harming artists, or being a petulant jackass on the internet.
Draw something. Draw something, upload it to your precious ai, “ok llm, here is what I can draw at my current level, tell me what I need to work on and give me exercises I can do to improve.”
Boom. You can actually become a better artist, still use your precious ai, not hurt anyone, and actually develop a skill, and improve your life without a single artist getting harmed or a single person getting ripped off.
