Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

SpinCharm OP t1_ja2hf0u wrote

I agree that things are not valuable just because they are made by human hands. That woman using AI to design a dress results in a dress that was made by AI from a human's ideas. AI in this example is a tool, like the chisel that carves the marble statue.

But a dress made entirely by AI with no guidance by a person? To me, these lose value quickly regardless of the uniqueness of the product. I subscribe to several r/architecture r/architecturePorn etc. subreddits in here and there are frequently posts of images of buildings created by AI. They are fantastic! Original, innovative, breakthrough concepts. But after the first dozen of these the wow factor dims; after the first 100 of these they lose their lustre completely.

Why? Because for me at least, they are no longer original creations of someone's imagination. They become an endless line of computer-generated imagery that holds no emotional connection or value.

Perhaps I bore easily or I have a low tolerance for repetition. I felt the same way about those tik tok videos that morph a plain face into a fabulous one. After a year of seeing them, they are meaningless. Valueless. Even though each one is a product of a person's ideas, they become all the same at a higher, perhaps meta, level. "Oh, there's software that can make a person look like anything. Oh look - here's the thousandth person using software to change their features.". Yawn.

I suspect when the first person wears an AI-generated outfit, it will be noticed and probably raved about. But when the 1000th person does it, will it generate the same enthusiasm, or will most people switch off? And at a broader level, when the millionth person uses AI to create something, or the billionth, will anyone take notice? Will anyone care? I suspect not, because there will be little value in something that is mass produced for the individual, in the same way that there's little value in something mass produced for the masses today.


aim456 t1_ja2kkrh wrote

I think the point I’m making is how would you know? Dalle2 at least has a marker in the corner but anyone could take a picture of several building they like and input them to an algorithm that would give them something unique that they can even modify to the finest of details. How would you know if that level of interaction/back and forth happened or not? Are you just going to say “bah, just another AI invention”. In fact, how do you even know something is AI in the first place never mind all the possibilities to have a human made it.

Your provided examples are pretty basic. The kind of crap we see shared on social media. But the actual possibilities are endless. To continue my own example, just imagine the ability to take that picture of a building you refined with AI and now have the structural schematics including all the load values and other architectural requirements generated for you to meet building codes. This could even go so far as to create an IKEA style instruction guide on how to build along with truck full of parts delivered by machine and, well even have machines put it together for you.

Have we really lost out creatively with this or gained infinitely from it?

This reminds me of the origin of the word sabotage in that the cottage industry workers, who feared losing their jobs to machines threw their wooden shoes called sabots into the machinery. But mass production has made all our lives so much easier. AI had the ability to turn our world into Eden and unlock the stars and even the secrets to space and time itself.


RoosterBrewster t1_ja2pu23 wrote

Well people are enthused by AI currently because it can create things in fractions of a second. It's like when people were creating images in Photoshop when it came out. I don't think it's viewed as a panacea of "museum-level" art. It will likely be used more as a tool to refine things.

But I imagine there will be a point where it is indistinguishable from human created art. Then how will you value any image then?