Conversation

Notices

1. f00f/eris/continuum/etc (f00fc7c8@kind.social)'s status on Sunday, 15-Jan-2023 04:15:36 JST f00f/eris/continuum/etc

   I don't think AI art would be as hotly debated if artists didn't have to make money to survive

   without that, it's whatever. art is about fun and personal expression, not skill. so some people could use an AI if they like that, and it'd be much easier to find public domain images because artists don't need to retain intellectual property for money. other people who like to put in the more meticulous effort, can do that too. maybe AI would even be able to help them

   • Adrian Cochrane repeated this.
   • James Dreben :mw: (jdreben@mastodon.world)'s status on Sunday, 15-Jan-2023 04:16:20 JST James Dreben :mw:

     in reply to

     @f00fc7c8 100%. They have to make money to survive and before these tools existed their ability to do make money off such art was greater and/or it is now threatened.

     What happened to the economics of portrait painting when photography came about? If tools make parts of making products much easier then their value goes down and that hurts the market I guess.

     Adrian Cochrane repeated this.
   • James Dreben :mw: (jdreben@mastodon.world)'s status on Sunday, 15-Jan-2023 04:17:29 JST James Dreben :mw:

     in reply to

     @f00fc7c8 I hope we protect artist’s livelihoods somehow because they’re more important than the tools. But now that the tools exist it really seems like the nature of our relationship with the product they are selling must adapt.

     This is separate to me from the art itself which by nature of society must be commodified for the artist to make money.

     If we had #UBI we could embrace rather than have to handle the transition into a world with these tools... #ImagineTheEndOfCapitalism