this post was submitted on 22 Apr 2025
98 points (93.8% liked)

Fuck AI

3480 readers
725 users here now

"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] vga@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Busty dragonesses are not art, but this is.

[–] ekZepp@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

The future is approaching. When society will collapse a new Furry-Stone age will begin...

[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 1 points 2 months ago

Supreme Court: that's not art that's pornography. I cant exactly define pornography, but "you know it when you see it."

:P

[–] WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 0 points 2 months ago (8 children)

But why give a lizard boobs? They don't have boobs!

[–] slappypantsgo@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Because they don’t need no AI to sexually objectify women’s bodies!

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Hegar@fedia.io 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If all it takes to be a "real artist" is drawing proficiently, then every ai artist who has also learned to draw is a real artist and every performance or installation artist who can't draw is not an artist.

I don't like AI slop, but this argument against it just doesn't make sense.

[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (8 children)

It isn't saying that drawing is the only art form, just that having the ability to create art from scratch is what makes someone an artist. Drawing was an example, performance art, music, and other forms of art are also criteria for being an artist.

Hell, you don't even have to be proficient if you are able to create art that conveys something.

every ai artist who has also learned to draw is a real artist

Yes, they are an artist if they are able to create art although the label only matters in reference to the things they create. It doesn't mean everything they do is art.

Using AI prompts is like using a web search to find art someone else created, it isn't creating art. Does writing down an idea for a book make someone an author? No, it does not.

[–] yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

having the ability to create art from scratch is what makes someone an artist

This implies photographers aren't artists though. They rely on a specific tool - the camera - and utilize it to create art. This ranges from "just" taking pictures to setting up elaborate scenes.

Another example - for which I have forgotten the name - is art utilizing computers. Not in the sense of anything digital but rather electronic calculating machines built to beep, boop and blink. I've been to an exhibition which featured this type of art by one artist. Some were interactive, some weren't, some were (partially) broken after decades of age and some were still functioning. Most were built during the 60s to 90s by the way. I believe the artist never did created any other art, at least publicly. He was an artist nonetheless.

I'd say AI art is art. Any definition of artistry which attempts to exclude AI art must also exclude other unconventional art forms.

The question shouldn't be what art is or isn't anyways. Such questions often lead to gatekeeping or nazis. Rather, it should be about the meaning of art. And most of AI art has the sole meaning of looking decent. AI art cannot ever replace more meaningful art as it alone lacks much meaning. It may at most supplement it, with some artists perhaps using AI deliberately as part of a work.

[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

This implies photographers aren’t artists though.

I mean if you think it is necessary for the person who works with sticks to grow the plant from a seed first to count as 'from scratch' that would make sense.

It isn't about which tools are used, but the process. A photographer, without a camera, can still block off a shot and consider lighting and what exposure they would use if they had the tools handy. It is extremely likely they could do a bare bones sketch of what they would take a picture of. They are considering details and how it would impact the way the picture turns out and the feelings that might be invoked in whoever looked at the photo down the road.

A tech bro using AI is just throwing words into a blender and seeing if something comes out. We aren't talking about possible AI refinement tools, we are talking about AI tech bros who throw shit out with shitty and inconsistent lighting, terrible textures, and other bland shit that is rehashed crap vomited forth from the AI system that is no more art than doing a web search, saving one of the results, and saying "I made this".

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Sludgeyy@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

the ability to create art from scratch is what makes someone an artist

What is "scratch"?

That's the whole argument against AI art.

Did you make spaghetti with pre-made noodles?

Did you make your own noodles?

Did you grind up your own wheat?

Did you make easy mac in the microwave?

Which one is a true chef?

Maybe

Probably

Definitely

Probably not

Does the AI make the "art" or does the artist use AI as a tool.

The chef creates the easy mac. A person cooks the easy mac.

Having AI create the "easy mac", then trying to claim cooking the "easy mac" makes you a chef is what's wrong

But if you get the AI to create the noodles, sauce, meat ball seasoning, etc. And you put it all together well. Then you can claim you're somewhat of a chef.

[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

That is another good example. Using a text prompt of an AI is like microwaving a premade meal.

But tech bros using AI who can't create anything without the AI aren't artists just like someone who can only microwave premade meals isn't a chef.

Hell, adding some additional cheese or making informed substitutions and maybe a tiny bit of some seasoning is being a chef.

But if you use the AI to create the meal entirely you aren't choosing the noodles, sauce, meat balls, or anything else. You are picking items from a menu at best and hoping for random chance to spit out something you like.

Intentionally applying an AI filter to something intentionally chosen with an expected outcome could be used to create art just like algorithm based filters. But the meme is referring to people who can't actually create anything without an AI text promp.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 0 points 2 months ago (4 children)

How about people who need a camera to create their art? Are they less of an artist than a painter?

I'm sick and tried of people re-hashing a discussion that has been settled for almost two centuries. Yes, photography can be art. There's art in how you use the tool. Not all people making photographs are artists or are even out to create art, and then it isn't art, and that's also fine. Why are people having such an issue applying the same to AI as a tool, saying not "Your shit sucks because it's AI" but "Your shit sucks because you're a hack".

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›