You are getting at a core of the issue I have with people who are against AI art and AI in general. The issue needs to based on who benefits materially from the use of AI and not on these abstract ideas of “it looks bad” or “it’s stolen”.
The fundamental problem with this is “it looks bad” is subjective and not unique to AI produced art. And “it’s stolen” is also a bit silly because I’m sure everyone has heard “all art is derivative”. Artist inspire other artists and work from that inspiration.
So, while I don’t really disagree with these arguments in theory. They get you nowhere.
The discussion needs to be focused on what a complete flaw it is in our society that only a small number of billionaires and capitalist are the ones actually gaining material benefits from the use of AI. Not to improve workers conditions, not to make our lives easier, not to give artist more tools for inspiration. But to increase profits by removing the cost of our labor all together.
Fundamentally, no one would be upset with AI art if it was used by existing artist and non artists to make cool looking shit. We are only upset that artist are being exploited and having their livelihood threatened. AI and AI art especially are just exposing that already existing structure of labor exploitation to a massive degree.
I really hope people can see past the existing structures to a better way. These technologies that SHOULD just be a tool to use, or not use, are instead controlled for the interest of capitalists profit. In the short term this means fighting for unions and worker protections. But we need to understand that in the long term you can’t overcome the invention of the latest “Loom” of the industry. We need to fight this concentration of ownership and interest and move past these outdated forms of labor relationships that only benefit the rich.
You are getting at a core of the issue I have with people who are against AI art and AI in general. The issue needs to based on who benefits materially from the use of AI and not on these abstract ideas of “it looks bad” or “it’s stolen”.
The fundamental problem with this is “it looks bad” is subjective and not unique to AI produced art. And “it’s stolen” is also a bit silly because I’m sure everyone has heard “all art is derivative”. Artist inspire other artists and work from that inspiration.
So, while I don’t really disagree with these arguments in theory. They get you nowhere.
The discussion needs to be focused on what a complete flaw it is in our society that only a small number of billionaires and capitalist are the ones actually gaining material benefits from the use of AI. Not to improve workers conditions, not to make our lives easier, not to give artist more tools for inspiration. But to increase profits by removing the cost of our labor all together.
Fundamentally, no one would be upset with AI art if it was used by existing artist and non artists to make cool looking shit. We are only upset that artist are being exploited and having their livelihood threatened. AI and AI art especially are just exposing that already existing structure of labor exploitation to a massive degree.
I really hope people can see past the existing structures to a better way. These technologies that SHOULD just be a tool to use, or not use, are instead controlled for the interest of capitalists profit. In the short term this means fighting for unions and worker protections. But we need to understand that in the long term you can’t overcome the invention of the latest “Loom” of the industry. We need to fight this concentration of ownership and interest and move past these outdated forms of labor relationships that only benefit the rich.