It be like that all the time. Instead of embracing chance people attack change. Until the wake up call happens and they realize that all art is AI. Every single piece of Art created was done by AI. The government has been keeping this a secret for centuries. The computer chips in our heads tell us what art to make and how to make it.

This is why I have an old school medieval helmet I wear everywhere. Except the airport, I won’t make that mistake a fifth time.

Finally someone that understands

::: spoiler what art is about.

Gatekeeping, ofc.

:::

AI artists don't exist, the AI is the "artist". You're the proverbial "ideas guy" that can't do anything themself and can't even come up with a style that doesn't exist already so the AI can copy it. You're heating up a factory-made frozen pizza and calling yourself a chef.

Oh, I'm sure that you write those prompts super artistically. I wasn't intending to gatekeep.

This. Especially important these days, where people can literally throw money at even this social problem to buy an armada of LLMs to manipulate public opinion. Facebook, Twitter, Instagram etc. are dead platforms for that reason, there's no reason to engage in any debate or really anything anymore. Best to just state the facts when public people say bullshit again and then go on, muting any reply.

There is a tool called ComfyUI, which is THE tool for audio/video/image generation, and it looks just like the node editor for creating shaders. So there is some kind of skill and artistic choice involved for sure.

They're about as much of an artist as the dude that operates the wave machine at the water park is Poseidon.

I don't. I'm no artist.
I've seen very intricate ComfyUI setups that get pretty wild results run locally, though, which does make me wonder about merit.

After reading the first sentence I wasn't sure if you were anti-AI "too lazy to learn how to paint" or pro-AI "too lazy to learn prompt engineering"

As for your actual comment, while I'm also generally against AI, I feel like a shift in perspective is inevitable and has already happened to an extent.

I think it makes sense to compare image genAI to photography. It also made it far easier for people without "artistic talent" to produce images. Same as with AI, it is technically a purely mechanical process, a machine designed to make images. Also similar to AI, most of those images were kind of trash. However, it soon became its own separate art form, with its own language and a set of rules for "what makes a picture good". Would you say that photographers are not artists because they use a mechanical (or, nowadays, electronic) contraption for their art?

I feel like something similar is happening with AI. There are be certain kinds of AI-generated images that people like, and it will take increasing amounts of effort and skill to generate new, interesting ones. As time goes on and the hype wears off a bit, there will be a relatively small community of hardcore AI prompt engineers making something novel and interesting, while most people just use AI for practical purposes or just fun, similar to photography.

The main differences between photography and genAI are the insane amount of energy required for generating batches of images, and the fact that it steals from human artists to produce its results. This is the reason I'm opposed to the current AI hype, not just because it's mechanical.

art requires some form of effort, AI "art" does not have that

I think it makes sense to compare image genAI to photography.

As a photographer, nope.

Legit, I'm not even reading the rest of what you said. This photography point is so mind numbingly boring at this point.

To put it simply. I do use AI and I do prompt, but I don't consider any of it art.
About Prompting, i think that's more like learning to speak a couple of words in Chinese to order some fancy food in a foreign restaurant. You (may) get a more complex and peculiar food of many others, but that doesn't make you a cook.

Now explain that to people who brainstorm for hours on a prompt to put into AI to create something lol. Both parties make an effort wether it's physical or mental to create something /s although without AI the range in art is quite limitless and you don't have any boundaries so it's more preferred and logical. I never used AI but I could make up why people would use it for, because you need to have a serious talent and experience to turn it into perfection but i do agree that, ai should not count as art or such

sure thing ill do.

typing a few prompts is no effort. you literally just type what you want, then just slightly adjust your prompt. it doesn't even take me 5 minutes to achieve a satisfactory result, and not even 10 to get exactly what i want. you may generate to your hearts content but dont call it art. and especially dont call it "my art".

Oh boy you really poked the bees nest with this one

So, you are so artist as that italian kid who want a tsunami with a happy face...

Memes like this wants me to use the word "Reddit" like a slur...

I don't think that's quite the right analogy. You're not talking to humans to get your images. You are using a tool that's designed to generate images from written language.

A better analogy would be an invention of a mechanical cook. While it will sometimes make edible food if you just give it regular language instructions, to get something truly tasty and interesting out of it you need to learn how it works and even understand its inner functioning. And while doing that may or may not make you "a cook", it does give you the ability to produce new interesting food and share it with others, which is useful&cool in its own right.

Given how vague most definitions of "art" are, I feel like we can call some AI-generated stuff a form of art (but that's not a strong opinion of mine). I don't think we should gatekeep what "art" is - if it allows you to express your emotions and feelings and share it with others, I say why not call it "art"? It's definitely not the same as painting or drawing or photography, but it can produce interesting and/or aesthetically pleasing results, and the results improve with skill.

Slot machine

I can get an AI to generate some code for me. Now I'm a programmer despite never having done code in my life, nor do I understand the first thing about what goes into coding.

Oh, or how about I get it to generate law stuff for me and I call myself a lawyer?

Generating papers on medical or psychology stuff and now I'm practically a doctor or a psychologist.

The way I see it, AI can be a useful tool that can help optimizing processes, but to use them as a replacement of real work and effort is a mistake at best and incredibly lazy and delusional at worst.