Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why strive? Stephen Fry reads Nick Cave's letter on the threat of AI [video]

aeon.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 90 posts

Re: Why strive? Stephen Fry reads Nick Cave's letter on the threat of AI [video]

#71

Post by messiah_complex »

leashless wrote: post #62
dorkwood wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is it art? I don't know. I don't care. I was not able, now I am able, and the people who are able complain. > Screw 'em. This is what tools are for. The strong should not tell the weak they cannot use props. Really? This famously maligned group of people, who have endured a lifetime of jokes about their useless art school degrees and student loans they'll never repay, we're now calling "the strong"? Artists aren't…

When a talented person tries to ban the tools that make an average person able to do the same stuff the talented person can do, this is intentionally disabling people to preserve a class privilege . If there was a pill that gave people +40 points of IQ would we have born-smart people trying to ban it? Yes, some. If we had a machine that put knowledge right into people's heads by nanobot magic would we have people try…

>When a talented person tries to ban the tools that make an average person able to do the same stuff the talented person can do, this is intentionally disabling people to preserve a class privilege.

And now we're back to denigrating merit again. No denominator. No distinction. Everybody gets the same gold star.

Re: Why strive? Stephen Fry reads Nick Cave's letter on the threat of AI [video]

#72

Post by minsight »

thrwayaistartup wrote: post #70
minsight wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cave was expressing an answer to a question about cutting corners in the process of creating music. ( https://www.theredhandfiles.com/chatgpt-making-things-faster... ) There is certainly value in the work of nurses, bouncers and servers, and my interpretation of Cave's other written works leads me to believe that he is a proponent of finding joy and creative expression, even in tasks which don't have an obvious artis…

> AI lacks insight and lack of insight is what can turn a succulent feast of a life into biweekly deliveries of Soylent. Does a picture of a humming bird lack insight? Does collage art lack insight? Do remixes lack insight? Does mass-produced formulaic pop music lack insight? Maybe. Or maybe some artists enjoy those creative processes and some audiences enjoy the output. Maybe oil painters who critique photography, a…

The insight I was talking about was required by the producer. Products don't have insight.

Re: Why strive? Stephen Fry reads Nick Cave's letter on the threat of AI [video]

#73

Post by leashless »

messiah_complex wrote: post #71
leashless wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When a talented person tries to ban the tools that make an average person able to do the same stuff the talented person can do, this is intentionally disabling people to preserve a class privilege . If there was a pill that gave people +40 points of IQ would we have born-smart people trying to ban it? Yes, some. If we had a machine that put knowledge right into people's heads by nanobot magic would we have people try…

>When a talented person tries to ban the tools that make an average person able to do the same stuff the talented person can do, this is intentionally disabling people to preserve a class privilege. And now we're back to denigrating merit again. No denominator. No distinction. Everybody gets the same gold star.

No, I don't want a gold star, I want a robot that can draw for me when I want something done.

I'm not trying to pretend AI image generation is art. I have no interest in that question right now.

What I'm saying is that it's completely unreasonable to ban a tool that ordinary people find massively useful and empowering to protect people who have training and talent.

Billions can't make the images in their heads real to protect the class privilege of a few hundred thousand professional artists worldwide?

No.

Re: Why strive? Stephen Fry reads Nick Cave's letter on the threat of AI [video]

#74

Post by messiah_complex »

leashless wrote: post #73
messiah_complex wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>When a talented person tries to ban the tools that make an average person able to do the same stuff the talented person can do, this is intentionally disabling people to preserve a class privilege. And now we're back to denigrating merit again. No denominator. No distinction. Everybody gets the same gold star.

No, I don't want a gold star, I want a robot that can draw for me when I want something done. I'm not trying to pretend AI image generation is art. I have no interest in that question right now. What I'm saying is that it's completely unreasonable to ban a tool that ordinary people find massively useful and empowering to protect people who have training and talent. Billions can't make the images in their heads real t…

You're not thinking about the consequences of your position. What I said stands.

Re: Why strive? Stephen Fry reads Nick Cave's letter on the threat of AI [video]

#75

Post by leashless »

messiah_complex wrote: post #74
leashless wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I don't want a gold star, I want a robot that can draw for me when I want something done. I'm not trying to pretend AI image generation is art. I have no interest in that question right now. What I'm saying is that it's completely unreasonable to ban a tool that ordinary people find massively useful and empowering to protect people who have training and talent. Billions can't make the images in their heads real t…

You're not thinking about the consequences of your position. What I said stands.

"Billions can't make the images in their heads real to protect the class privilege of a few hundred thousand professional artists worldwide?"

I thought about that extensively before I wrote it down.

If you think it is flawed explain why, please.

Re: Why strive? Stephen Fry reads Nick Cave's letter on the threat of AI [video]

#76

Post by Hoasi »

leashless wrote: post #61
Hoasi wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Incredibly talented people complain when technology lets talentless people make some of the beautiful things that they imagine but never had the talent to make real. If we are speaking about the democratization of tools, this is not what is happening here. In effect, prompting Dall-E or Midjourney does not make you a creator. And herein lies the problem. It doesn't enable the talentless to create something beautifu…

This is entirely not the point. I want to see a picture of a 5 kilometre high tower surrounded by spiralling cones of line on an infinite plane made of tessellating fractals. Now I have that picture. Great. I did not make than image "to be an artist". I made that image because I wanted that image. If it came out of a search engine rather than an AI, I wouldn't care. This kind of utilitarian creation of images is like…

> This is entirely not the point.

It's not the point for you. Fine.

For the record, I'm not advocating for laws or banning AI. It's an impressive technology you can use in a myriad of ways. Ethical ways would be preferable.

Using AI does not make you an artist, just as having a pencil in your hand doesn't make you a qualified draughtsman.

AI's whole value, the dada, was obtained without living artists' consent. That's a fact. Without data, there are no images, no spirals, nothing. The unfortunate side effect is that, at scale, it devalues these artworks. Prompting AI tools, you get a synthetic substitute for art made by real people.

If that is what you want, why not? If you sell this spiral as your art, it becomes slightly more complicated.

> Be very careful that in banning AI learning you do not also ban human learning. A law that covers one might also cover the other.

False equivalency.

And again, I'm not advocating for banning anything. AI art, or imagery, if it's not art, who cares, is not going away. Whether AI output is stunning, incredibly beautiful, or cheap, synthetic, the equivalent of junk food, is already pretty clear. The question becomes: who owns it?

Perhaps artists will find ways to make it better and truly impressive. That said, it's not unreasonable for artists to ask back some of the value they unwillingly provided. Or just for their work to be removed from the pool of data scraped by AI companies.

Re: Why strive? Stephen Fry reads Nick Cave's letter on the threat of AI [video]

#77

Post by Hoasi »

leashless wrote: post #64
Hoasi wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perfect analogy.

Yes, I think that's absolutely true of both plastic surgery and of AI. I don't mind, it's better than where I was before! I can semi-draw with AI help. Good enough.

> I can semi-draw with AI help. Good enough.

Good for you. But that's not drawing, though. You won't know what drawing is until you try. Then you'll come back with more questions. It's an open-ended endeavor.

Drawing is not something you solve with an app.

That's why the whole premise of this thread is a bit sad. AI is a tool that bypasses the joy (and the point) of drawing entirely.

Re: Why strive? Stephen Fry reads Nick Cave's letter on the threat of AI [video]

#78

Post by jkic47 »

viraptor wrote: post #27
jkic47 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think so? I can see the AI being trained with crowdsourced input like "does picture A look more like a Mondrian than picture B".

You're still screwing Mondrian in this case and the training system would not exist without Mondrian.

Take a minute to extend your argument, and it will fall apart: SNL is "screwing" Trump/Biden because their jokes wouldn't exist without Trump/Biden. Movie critics are "screwing" actors, because the review wouldn't exist without the movie.

Re: Why strive? Stephen Fry reads Nick Cave's letter on the threat of AI [video]

#79

Post by jazzyjackson »

jkic47 wrote: post #78
viraptor wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're still screwing Mondrian in this case and the training system would not exist without Mondrian.

Take a minute to extend your argument, and it will fall apart: SNL is "screwing" Trump/Biden because their jokes wouldn't exist without Trump/Biden. Movie critics are "screwing" actors, because the review wouldn't exist without the movie.

that's a fair counter but there are laws about this, and your examples are parody and commentary, neither of which effect the market value of the original

the "screwing" is in the form of getting paid for reselling the work of others (depriving the others of the ability to sell their own work - less downloading a movie for free and more like selling bootlegs in front of the record store), not merely being, like, chronologically dependent.

Re: Why strive? Stephen Fry reads Nick Cave's letter on the threat of AI [video]

#80

Post by famahar »

leashless wrote: post #12

Incredibly talented people complain when technology lets talentless people make some of the beautiful things that they imagine but never had the talent to make real. It's like rich people saying money does not matter. "Easy for you to say." I can't draw. But now I can take the talent I have and extend it to make images. Is it art? I don't know. I don't care. I was not able, now I am able, and the people who are able…

I wish people had a bit more confidence about making art. Not everything needs to be a flashy colorful realistic looking drawing. I'd argue they weren't talentless, just unconfident and narrow minded towards what art can be. Grab a canvas and go wild. People will be surprised with how easy it is to make art and you'll quickly shape your own unique art style.
Post reply on HN