thetwitchy1 OP t1_j1yr904 wrote on December 28, 2022 at 11:43 AM

Reply to comment by HeinrichTheWolf_17 in AI art is the ‘machine made fabric’ of tomorrow. by thetwitchy1

It cannot surpass human art until it has the ability to do more than synthesize human art. I’m not saying that an AI doing so is impossible, just that the technique we currently use does nothing more than synthesize human work.

HeinrichTheWolf_17 t1_j1yxrjr wrote on December 28, 2022 at 12:59 PM

The human brain learns and produces original content in the exact same fashion via reference, you do it from the moment you step out of your mother’s womb, this is exactly how infants learn everything, through repetition of reference. Neural Networks just require a lot more examples until they understand the concept of what it is they’re looking at (adult humans have one shot learning when it comes it understanding a concept). But one shot learning will be solved soon enough.

Diffusion models don’t take existing art and put new ones together, it only manages to make an image of a raccoon playing a guitar while on a chair under a window at night in the style of deco until it understands what a raccoon, guitar, a chair, the concept of the raccoon sitting, night time and deco are by looking at all of those things and understanding what they are, and then put those different concepts together in the manner requested via prompt.

This is, note for note, how the Human brain learns and trains. Looking at other references in the world around you to learn what something is isn’t recycling the same content, everything Diffusion Models produce is original content.

Everything humanity has produced is plagiarism though, that’s true.

thetwitchy1 OP t1_j1z1psx wrote on December 28, 2022 at 1:38 PM

2 things:

Most artists do what you are saying. 99% of human art is a recycling of other human art. But without that 1% that is new and creative, there would be nothing for the others to copy, and we would still be looking at stick drawings on cave walls.
Human art, even when purely derived from other works, is put together in a particular way to communicate a message. Sometimes that message is “This looks nice”, but there’s always a message. AI art is not CREATED with a message. It is chosen with a message, usually through iterations of prompts and repeated requests, but the act of creation is separated from the message. Which is not necessarily a bad thing; this allows people who can’t create the ability to communicate in this media. It is, however, a noticeable difference between unassisted art and AI art.

HeinrichTheWolf_17 t1_j1z4usx wrote on December 28, 2022 at 2:05 PM

Right, which is also a great reason to combine the Human with the Tech, this will be more profound when content generation is out of it’s infancy of relying on prompts. I’m a massive proponent of Brain Computer Interfaces to conjoin man and machine, this way you’ll be able to create what you want just by thinking about it, this kind of thing has already been demonstrated in a lab with crude BCIs, so proof of principle is there, Transhumanism+Posthumanism is the meta move. No need to remove the Human, have the best of both.

As for your second point, see above. Our tools are extensions of ourselves. Human beings evolved for tool manipulation, it is in every single way apart of us.