cross-posted from: https://programming.dev/post/3974080

Hey everyone. I made a casual survey to see if people can tell the difference between human-made and AI generated art. Any responses would be appreciated, I’m curious to see how accurately people can tell the difference (especially those familiar with AI image generation)

  • @CoderKat@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    19 months ago

    Agree and I sympathize with all the points.

    On the financial point, we, as a society, badly need to stop depending on jobs for survival before it’s too late. But I know that we’re unlikely to change until a lot of people get hurt.

    And on the self-worth point, it feels awful to be replaced, even if the money isn’t an issue. People take pride in their work and want their work to be celebrated. Yet, we’re quickly approaching a point where it’s going to be very difficult for people to create art by hand that can hold a candle to AI art. Sure, there’s still many master artists, but they got where they are through hard work. How many new potential artists will be willing to put in that hard work when any random Joe Blow can generate something better in seconds? Human made art (from scratch) won’t go away, but it is harder to feel good about what you create when it feels like your art has no place anymore.

    • FaceDeer
      link
      fedilink
      29 months ago

      I suspect that society isn’t going to stop depending on jobs for survival until it’s too late. That is, it’ll only implement something like UBI or equivalent solution once most jobs have been replaced and there’s a legion of permanent unemployed who are forcing the issue to be addressed. Unfortunately that just seems to be the way of things, very few problems ever get addressed preemptively.

      IMO this isn’t really a reason to try to slow down AI, because that will only slow down the eventual UBI-like solution to it. At this point I don’t think “change human nature first” is a viable approach.