>AI can't be creative
Why do we pretend like this sentence makes any sense? It's absolute cope and we let artists and humanity NPCs get away with meme-ing it into reality.
AI right now is capable of creating text, images and sound that did not exist prior. That is objectively creative. Cope and seethe however much you want but AI will prevail in the end and take every single one of your jobs, you slimy lying fucks.
If ai could be creative, stable diffusion images wouldn't all look the same, and I wouldn't have to look for stimulation elsewhere, if you know what I mean.
By that metric anime artists are not creative. Art styles are not creative. Pepe memes are not creative. You just have a bias against AI cause it hurts your human ego to call non human things creative. Just grow out of it.
You'll never get paid for your shitty 'art', anon. Go back to whatever tumblr hole you crawled out of.
>anime artists are not creative
They are, they can keep getting me horny no matter how many anime images I have already looked yet. AI doesn't generalize outside the training domain.
>Pepe memes are not creative
You got one right.
>if you are against stupid picture making apps that aren't creative you must be an artist
kek, you retards ARE really this stupid holy fuck
>fighting an underground war against artists
????????? hahhahahahahaha so fucking dumb, get a hobby
Why did you capitalise this? Are you shouting? Why are?
oh, i guess you don't understand english that well.
you must be posting from outside the united states. you're from a shithole in that case. it's called emphasis, your little brown middleschool coombrain wouldn't understand.
Why did you emphasise are?
here, i'll help you out, i'm not that anon, but it's pretty obvious.
>kek, you retards ARE really this stupid holy fuck
the emphasis on the are is supposed to covey feigned surprise, as in they are surprised at how stupid "you retards" supposedly are. you can play around with emphasizing different words and you can see how it changes the meaning of the sentence.
>You retards really are this stupid
Maybe this would be more appropriate
no, because that doesn't convey the same thought. you wouldn't understand because you're a dumb foreigner from a shithole outside the united states, you see. if you capitalize ARE it emphasizes surprise in that i really didn't know you to be stupid as you appeared to be, but you are. you actually ARE this stupid. you actually are, unbelievable.
In my example you wouldn't need to emphasise like a child
So far, AI is not writing stories - picrel is the original webcomic art of one punch man. If we can combine AI art + storytelling, oh boy.
>NOOOOOO!!!!!!!! AI IS CREATIVE!!!!!!!!!
>mashes already made images together
lol, 4chink losers obsessed with picture making app are extreme fucking idiots and will die fucking virgins LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
you need to go back.
you're a retarded CS major who doesn't understand statistics
if AI was creative it wouldn't need 100,000 lifetimes worth of books and messages to produce 2 coherent paragraphs
A human also need 100000 lifetimes worth of books and messages. It's called education. Your point being?
the easy answer is that creativeness requires intention, so until (if at all) agi becomes is a thing ai can't be creative. the people that make ai art have to be creative, sure, but to a much lesser extent than traditional artists, since they don't have to create an image from scratch with their minds. So in my opinion ai art is art but to a lesser degree than trad, it's really sad how shallow most people's understanding of art is, as demonstrated by your post and many similar posts expressing the same sentiments.
But it DOESN'T MATTER.
Artists are sperging out about AI not being truely creative, only doing the work that someone else puts in as an input - but NEWSFLASH, that's 90% of 'art' most 'art' created is intermediate cells for cartoons, drawings for corporate advertising, etc - it's all soulless, non-creative /work/ in the first place.
Why was it when everyone else was losing their jobs to automation that it was 'freeing man of the burden of meaningless labor' but that's suddenly not true for all that meaningless busywork 'art'?
AI won't replace true artists, no.
AI will replace most artists though - 'and that's a good thing'™
this is the correct take. i've been saying this for years.
>that's 90% of 'art' most 'art'
Not really, you can draw that dog realistically or make an icon of a dog without having to feed yourself a miriad of pictures or works from others. The interpretation of the data a human does differs from that of the AI.
the opinion you're expressing is a byproduct of socio-historic generation. it's as creative as AI creation: null.
What do people even mean by creative? Humans spend countless hours learning techniques and studying other art. How is AI different?
It isn't, but artists and retards alike can't possibly risk having their egos and snowflake feelings hurt. If AI can be creative they suddenly don't feel special anymore.
I wonder how these people would react if aliens showed up.
everything is a remix
ai can be productive, but we've know that since the days of "certain random collections of r/g/b pixels are illegal". creativity is a human trait.