Do we really want to live in a world without artists?
Vložit
- čas přidán 5. 09. 2024
- Technological advancements have always shifted art - look at photography as a medium. Is the advent of #ai (Artificial Intelligence) any different to the development of cameras, and how they challenged creators who practised their art on canvas and through sculpture? Professor Rebecca Giblin discusses this phenomenon, and how generative AI is only possible because of artists.
Professor Rebecca Giblin is an ARC Future Fellow at Melbourne Law School, where she works at the intersection of law and culture. She is Director of the Intellectual Property Research Institute of Australia (IPRIA) and leads the ARC-funded Author’s Interest (authorsinterest.org) and eLending projects, as well as Untapped: the Australian Literary Heritage Project.
Watch the full talk here:
www.acmi.net.a...
Learn more about the event :
AI & Art: Exploring the Connections Between Creativity and Technology
21 Sep 2023 at ACMI
www.acmi.net.a...
_____________________
Let's talk about the future of screen culture.
ACMI is Australia’s only national museum of film, TV, videogames, digital culture and art. Every donation, large or small, helps us inspire the next generation of storytellers, coders, makers, watchers and players.
DONATE: tickets.acmi.n...
Follow us
Facebook: / acmionline
Instagram: / acmionline
Twitter: / acmi
www.acmi.net.au
When people claim that AI will replace artists, I always wonder who they suppose will be operating the AI. You can't just type "work of genius" into Stable Diffusion and expect it to generate one.
AI won't replace all artists but it will replace the mediocre ones whose work isn't very original and is based on existing art styles/schools/traditions, because AI is simply better at that than humans are. What gets me most about these discussions is how arrogant and egotistical most artists are. They're arrogant because they still believe their work is somehow more valuable and of a higher standard than that which non-artists produce and their indignation that their work too can be automated and not just the lowly non-artist jobs is palpable, and they're egotists because they never mention the majority of rest of the workforce that's going to lose their jobs to AI just as well (or they simply claim they don't believe AI will replace other people's jobs too in spite of evidence to the contrary like this lady does). The gut punch that AI handed their elitism is well deserved.
@@JerehmiaBoaz AI is good for art in the sense that it's forcing artists to refocus upon what makes their style or expression original; on producing art that speaks to people in a unique way, rather than basing their self-worth as an artist upon technical ability alone.
Some people's jobs will be replaced by AI, but I think that in many cases it will simply change how those jobs are performed. I expect that attitudes will change as more people use AI and discover how useful it is to have a virtual apprentice who can take less-skilled tasks off your plate so that you can focus on the higher-level stuff that requires human imagination, empathy, etc.
You could ask, will we need engineers. The world doesn't need anything. But to have the ability to do explore your passion, whatever you choose. That might be a cool thing in itself.
China and job outsourcing wont be an issue either.
Once all our manufacturing are able to be automated within our borders, then we can establish a UBI.
Globalism will collapse with the advent of AGI.
Immigration will slow down dramatically, and we will focus our UBI and social services soley within our own people.
I can see many sides to this issue. Sure, there is A LOT of mediocre human-created art out there, and that mediocre art and those artists have much to fear from AI-generated art AI art is at least as good as they are, if not better, as well as being more consistent, faster, and cheaper.
Under those circumstances, it's hard to feel very sorry for mediocre artists, but here's what gives me pause - what if some of those currently-mediocre artists would have developed into great artists, but never get that chance thanks to AI hollowing out that middle stage of their art creation journey?
I don't just mean the psychological issue that competing with AI art might suck away their inspiration to get better, I mean the practical possibility that it sucks away a source of income and regular practice that is the motivator and cause of them becoming better artists.
I don't have an answer for this that isn't tyrannical. There may not be an answer.
"Under those circumstances, it's hard to feel very sorry for mediocre artists..."
Well, I might disagree with you there. Artists have never been price-gougers or exploitative in their practice; even if some of them can be incorrigibly pretentious, they've never been materially harmful to... basically anyone.
Rather, throughout all of art history, artists have struggled under the restrictions of their era to make a living doing what they love. They're very easy to see as unnecessary, even without AI.
I see some people proclaiming that AI art will "democratize" creativity. Aside from the blatant dishonesty of their motives, it's obvious that art is not a democratic process. It's a personal one.
If anything, AI aren't going to democratize art---they're just going to outcompete it. And that's what I think is truly scary.
@@arthas4870 agreed, Tech entrepreneurs use the word "democratisation" in very strange ways (did anyone VOTE for this?). As for feeling sorry for mediocre artists (a category I wouldn't fit into myself, BTW, because I'm not good enough), I wasn't trying to be mean, but it's difficult to morally defend the idea that we should protect mediocrity when a better, faster, cheaper alternative comes along. If five years from now there is more beauty in the world at the expense of a few shattered, mostly unrealistic dreams, then I'm afraid that's a good deal - for the world. With the exception of what I mentioned earlier, about snuffing out the career paths of the tiny minority that might have been great. But I have no solution for that. Does anyone?
? It will create MORE artists, despite what 'gatekeepers' say. Not to mention, let's be honest here. Digital artists who are worried about AI WOULDN'T want the whole world to be filled with artists because they care about art as a job, as their niche.
Yep. Art will be more about being innovative instead of regurgiating the same styles.