you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 0 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Human time costs resources, and human aren't that energy efficient. Would it take more energy & resources for a person to inefficiently grind away at a task they dislike than for a machine that can perform it fairly quickly?

There's also opportunity cost, eg, shit we'd rather do. Time spent on an unwanted task is time we don't get to spend on something better.

Drawing's been figured out by better artists, and there are better problems to solve that those artists absolutely suck at.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    It super does take more energy and resources to generate an image with ai than someone drawing it, yes.

    I think your perspective of art is scewed. No two people make art the same. Everyone has their own style and it's always a reflection of that person and their experiences. It's something no other person or robot can make.

    Drawing is not a monolith. No art is.

    So saying "oh a robot can do that for me" is false, it can't make your unique art.

    Doing the art is also kind of the point, but if you really care only about the end result, just write a bot to play video games for you so get a perfect score. After all beating the game is all that matters, right?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    It super does take more energy and resources to generate an image with ai than someone drawing it, yes.

    Where's your super scientific analysis comparing them?

    unique art

    They may not want unique.

    if you really care only about the end result

    Sometimes that's all we care about.

    After all beating the game is all that matters, right?

    Sometimes it is.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment