Why AI Will Never Rival Human Creativity
persuasion.community
Why AI Will Never Rival Human Creativity
1–10 of 18 posts
Re: Why AI Will Never Rival Human Creativity
#2> AI operates by making high-probability choices: the most likely next word, in the case of written texts. Artists—painters and sculptors, novelists and poets, filmmakers, composers, choreographers—do the opposite. They make low-probability choices. They make choices that are unexpected, strange, that look like mistakes.
Interesting take on the creativity that humans seem to display.
Re: Why AI Will Never Rival Human Creativity
#3Last paragraph is the upcoming reality, and if the economic incentive to hone your craft is eliminated, the quality of human generated art will just get worse and worse.
Re: Why AI Will Never Rival Human Creativity
#4Last paragraph is the upcoming reality, and if the economic incentive to hone your craft is eliminated, the quality of human generated art will just get worse and worse.
Indeed, the tenor of the article is that AI will not reach the levels of creativity that humans display, instead our expectations of creative process will be lowered by the sheer quantity. Our expectation on quality will decline so far that we consider what AI produces to be creative and since that is produced far cheaper than humans can, AI creativity will become the new baseline.
Re: Why AI Will Never Rival Human Creativity
#5It already surpassed it.
Re: Why AI Will Never Rival Human Creativity
#6In the age of mass production, people have shown an unending willingness to accept cheap crap in place of costlier quality: in food, in consumer goods, and, more recently, thanks to the internet, in culture
I would add that in part the virtue signaling society has also created the right environment for AI art's rapid adoption. Much of it driven by social media where the game is all about increasing engagement at all costs. Social media influencers and everyone else seeking a following have found it as an easy tool to increase engagement and their income. Social media has increased the number of people who are happy pretending to live an existence they do not in reality.
AI might put artists out of business. It will not, however, replace them. It will not—cannot—make good art, great art: true art.
I disagree with this viewpoint, with the nuance that AI art will indeed become better than real artists as measured narrowly through the lens of visual impact. This is because it is the narrow criteria on what is currently improving the models. It is not art as meaning, but how impactful art is within the one second viewing that someone gives feedback to the machine if it was good or bad.
FYI, I've elaborated further on AI on the topic of creativity with some uncommon viewpoints. See the section "AI owns creativity" for the relevant portion - https://dakara.substack.com/p/ai-and-the-end-to-all-things
Re: Why AI Will Never Rival Human Creativity
#7What IDIOTS like this poster don't understand is that "true" art doesn't sell ads!
AI will cheaply deliver us the "art" mankind actually salivates for: superficial, stimulating hits of sensation. They may not mean anything or reveal truth, but they keep the attention-manipulation gravy train humming.
What a time to be a alive!
Re: Why AI Will Never Rival Human Creativity
#8'Never' is a long time given the pace at which AI is advancing.
Re: Why AI Will Never Rival Human Creativity
#9Why did a "creative" person make the high-probability choice to shout out the ten thousandth version of the same misunderstanding of AI. This is just arguing about categories, again. AI "can't" make art by definition, because I decided what the definition is. And my definition is basically just vomiting Cartesian dualism.
And the tide keeps going out. Even this criticism is only worthy of a C-.
Re: Why AI Will Never Rival Human Creativity
#10This is simplistic: "AI operates by making high-probability choices". AI has parameters like "temperature" (GPT) or "--creative" (Midjourney) which can trivially steer the AI towards lower probability choices.
My guess is we'll end up with a 2nd "author" neural net to do highly "creative" work. The second net represents the POV of the author, its "life experience" and political leanings. It will choose lower probability options very mindfully, with deep meaning relative to the author.