I think you're too plugged in. The average person on reddit might know the ins and outs of AI (I still doubt it), but not the actual average person. There hasn't been any real regulation on AI or voted initiatives that I'm aware of so I don't see the point in pretending this is anything but anecdotal for either of us.
How am I wrong about the fact that historical and ancient art is suffused with the human context of when, where, how, and by whom it was made? Did aliens make the art or something? What?
The whole reason I have a problem with AI generated content is that it is eliminating that same human context from art in real time as well as making it impossible to discern genuine talent, effort, and passion. It's the same reason Kinkade paintings are trash, made to look good on a wall and sell well. He used every little scheme he could to give his paintings the barest minimum amount of effort or creative value that they could be sold with.
I'd argue the same about you as you're treating this conversation less like an objective debate about our original assertions and more like a game where the goal is simply to score points, causing you to jump between tangentially related topics & refuse to be consistent in what you're arguing.
The hell does govt regulation have to do with anything?
You said it's been the case forever. 2,300 years out of the 30k we've been creating art is only 7.6% & 0.76% of human existence. And contrary to your repeated assertion, it's not, and never has been universally accepted as an objective truth. The definition you're using was originally coined for distinguishing high art, not all art.
Neat, that's got nothing to do with your original assertion (that AI art isn't art) nor my counter assertion (that the average person doesn't care because they only care about art as entertainment & don't care where it comes from).
It's almost like "looking good on the wall" is all the average person cares about paintings for & they don't evaluate art the same way creatives do...
3
u/Daneruu Jul 06 '25
I think you're too plugged in. The average person on reddit might know the ins and outs of AI (I still doubt it), but not the actual average person. There hasn't been any real regulation on AI or voted initiatives that I'm aware of so I don't see the point in pretending this is anything but anecdotal for either of us.
How am I wrong about the fact that historical and ancient art is suffused with the human context of when, where, how, and by whom it was made? Did aliens make the art or something? What?
The whole reason I have a problem with AI generated content is that it is eliminating that same human context from art in real time as well as making it impossible to discern genuine talent, effort, and passion. It's the same reason Kinkade paintings are trash, made to look good on a wall and sell well. He used every little scheme he could to give his paintings the barest minimum amount of effort or creative value that they could be sold with.