AI makes uncreative people pretend to be creative.

The point of art isn't getting it done quickly. It's the journey, the painstaking hours and the satisfaction of the finished piece.

The only people who think making art faster is good are marketing ghouls.

Financial obesity is neurotoxic.

It actually does cause brain damage. I mentioned it in an essay (What if I paid for all my free software?):

For one, power causes brain damage which renders rich people literally incapable of knowing what is best for others:

“Subjects under the influence of power, he found in studies spanning two decades, acted as if they had suffered a traumatic brain injury—becoming more impulsive, less risk-aware, and, crucially, less adept at seeing things from other people’s point of view.”

“And when he put the heads of the powerful and the not-so-powerful under a transcranial-magnetic-stimulation machine, he found that power, in fact, impairs a specific neural process, “mirroring,” that may be a cornerstone of empathy.” ―Power Causes Brain Damage, by Jerry Useem for The Atlantic.‍[16]

Love that he thinks "if you know how to tell a great story you will love AI." The whole point of AI is to cut out the telling a story part. In reality it's "if you think you have a good idea for a story but don't know how to tell one you'll love whatever the AI spits out." People who know how to do creative things don't need AI to do it for them.

Proof once more, as if we needed it, that the people who have traded their humanity for buying into the capitalist mindset, only ever think of things as if they were marketable products, and in terms of outcomes and productivity.

Fuck the creative process, the journey it takes you on, and the necessary introspection and connection to the world that needs to occur for it. Fuck the joy you can find in effort, failure, and in finally having an epiphany. Fuck being able to hone your skills without depending on a corporate tool that can be taken away from you at a minute's notice. All of it be damned, you can now (allegedly) get to the same end result quicker without the effort (or pleasure, or self-discovery, or personal growth). We all know that the end result is what counts, and nothing else.

But yeah, people be mad because meanie artists gatekeep poor ol' Mark, and nothing says "democratising" art like "automating the process out of your hands with corporate approved tools and ideology".

Fuck sake.

Fuck's sake.

What the fuck would Mark Cuban know about creating art?

People let these business ghouls way the fuck out of their lane.

I don't trust anyone who talks about 'creators' instead of artists.

This is in fact an insidious form of gatekeeping. It is shutting out people who are excited to learn new skills and become the next generation of creative people by collaborating with other talented humans, receiving apprenticeship, and being rewarded for their labor. Their opportunities and newfound capabilities are being thwarted by the slop machines, and it stinks.

There is no gatekeeper like a Capitalist trying to convince you that Yet More Automation™ is good for everybody!

Said by someone who is as creative as a rock.

The creative iterations part is funny to me. Sure, it cuts the time-span of each iteration down, potentially, if you are not proficient with what you are doing. However, because of the wild innaccuracies and lack of context of a physical world, you are also doing 5-10x more iterations than you otherwise would have, except you don't get to learn and grow along the way.

Literally turns everything into worker-bee level stuff. Usual shareholder mentality to go for quantity over quality.

With the amount of energy put into GenAI and the sheer bulk of content generated, why don't advocates have at least one example of something artistically interesting, unique, or beautiful to showcase their claims? Has it yet made anything of cultural importance that will illicit more than a chuckle and a 'like'?

It seems to me I keep hearing non-artists assert that this will be a great thing for art, while real artists who disagree are labeled Luddites or not genuinely creative in some way. It's frustrating to watch them openly say easily disprovable things. This isn't speculative anymore these systems have been in production for years at this point. Let's look at the actual results.

Creative iteration is hard work. if it is only taking minutes, it is because it is not creative. Sure, it is hard to sit down and draw or write or do any work, but the best ideas happen during that process

Ai makes it more obvious why very rich people don't deserve their wealth but they will say some of the dumbest shit and act enlightened.

Dear shitheads, creative people don't hate ai because it create what they create, they hate it because it is build with stolen labor and used to push them out of the market. People like new tools that make their life easier... people don't like when big companies steal their labor and push them out of the market.

Are you kidding me? AI doesn't make creative people more creative. Actually picking up a crayon or a pencil or whatever your jive is, and actively creating more, makes creative people more creative.

Also, lol, a former Shark Tank host pushing a grift, the jokes write themselves.

Also also, if you want to make art fast, cutting up some construction paper and playing with that is better, and more fun, than using AI by a longshot, and construction paper cutouts are the most basic form of art and one of, if not the first forms of art, that everyone in here has probably ever done.

Ah yes of course, the ITERATIONS! Thats all art ever is, it’s all just ITERATIONS!

As an artist, I LOVE being told what i should like and not like by an out-of-touch never-been-cool rich asshole. Thanks, dickwad!

So smart, thank you for blessing us with your words of wisdom, Mr. Rich Person who is also an expert in art!

I feel vindicated. A few months/years? ago, everyone was saying Mark Cuban was the exception to the rule "all billionaires suck". I always claimed otherwise, fuck Mark Cuban, he also sucks. And here we are, the guy is just as hated nowadays...

Creativity is fundamentally an exercise in brain plasticity. Enjoy your early onset dementia/Alzheimer's when you don't learn a damn thing for years on end.

mark has a vested interest in the success of AI. anything he says is for the enrichment of his investments.

don't listen to mark, he's a shill.

Ai conceptual art is still scraped from artists who physically made the art in the first place . Without humans building art by hand it wouldn't have existed.

I literally saw the word Disney plastered in a language learning ‘AI’ story on YouTube. It wasn’t even Disney related material. That’s how bad and lazy it is at scraping. It’s even scraping the logos from the creators it’s stealing from.

It’s not AI. It hasn’t created anything. So we should stop calling it that.

It’s just plaigerism. Just call it plaigerism. “I plaigerized a story. I plaigerized all the concepts for it” stop pretending you created a damned thing. You’re fooling nobody

(Directed at the original post, not the OP who posted it here)

If AI increases productivity, where's the shovelware? Why haven't we seen a hockey stick graph of code commits/lines/repos?

https://mikelovesrobots.substack.com/p/wheres-the-shovelware-why-ai-coding

I hate upvoting these things but they’re in a f AI community so it’s appropriate

Just goes to show it wasn't intelligence that made them rich.

Why would I want to create some soulless approximation of my creative idea, when I could use my own brain, hands, and heart to create my idea exactly the way I imagine it?

Putting work into art can be a cathartic labor of love. I enjoy making things with specific people, music, or senses & imagery in mind. There’s also a distinct sense of accomplishment that comes from completing a work and saying, “I made this.” Putting a prompt into a machine can’t give me that.

It's true in the sense that it's fantastic at laying down a template for your ideas, which you can then refine and finesse yourself.

The only issue is what capitalism is doing with it. I use AI a lot for my daily job, but it fills me with dread knowing how limited my future is because of it.

The Luddites didn't smash all those machines because they were afraid of them. They were more than happy to use the fancy new tools to make them more efficient. They just didn't want to sacrifice their standard of living to do it.

But the AI also tells stories. So even if your story is great, it will be drowned in thousands of AI slop stories. Publishing houses can already not screen new novels anymore because they are getting flooded with hundreds of AI generated books every day (complete with AI generated, fake authors).

Cuban used AI to prepare to go on Pablo Torre's podcast and made an ass out of himself, so I don't trust his evaluation of AI's capabilities.

It's definitely a pathology.

My fave thing about creativity is raw efficiency. When I sit down to paint, I've already mapped out the most efficient way to create a completed painting (i.e. a product).

It's to put the paintbrush down and immediately Google what I was going to paint and just print out a picture of that instead. WAY quicker. I can do that in minutes as opposed to what used to take months!

Was this written by an LLM?

Artistic mastery isn’t gatekeeping, but I understand the sentiment. It’s nice to have the ability to do rapid prototyping, but I’m against AI being used in place of craftsmanship. “The art advances but the artisan recedes.”

curious that every single artist i know hates this shit

I'm not sure, they didn't say whether I'll LOVE AI enough...

even i, the uncreative one, understood that art is about the creating part. How you do it. The finished work can give a hint on what creating might have looked like. If someone spends hours fighting an LLM to get some results, hey that's art too. Good luck on telling an interesting story though.

No one needs to "LOVE Ai" though. It is generally pretty shitty. Sit back down, Mark!

I don't need AI to replace my creativity and imagination. This is what someone writes when they only care about the end product, and not about the actual creative process.

"Why use your brain when you don't have to?" Mark has had some surprisingly good takes for a billionaire but way off on this one.

Ah yes I too love it when I get results with none of the actual creative process, because the end result is all that matters

Signed a fellow human

Those AI folks need to see it as the journey taken, not the destination. Until that happens the AI "Art Kit" for adults will always be a balloon floating towards a pin.

AI is a new financial gatekeeper, we're just not paying for it yet because they're trying to get us hooked.

The number of gatekeepers drops because AI people are desperate to keep the ship afloat. Why worry about drowning when you have a built-in buoy, your natural brain, effort, and human perseverance?

All of the inadequacies and personal failures that prevented you from doing what GenAI does for you now are still there. Those things are why you were a failure before AI, and why you will be a failure after AI. The quicker you recognize that, the less time you'll spend being an obnoxious asshole and making a fool of yourself by larping as the artist you've always fantisized of being. You were nothing before, you are nothing now. Get over yourself, otherwise you will continue to be nothing until the day you die. Once you truly understand this, maybe you'll be able to fix it. Not before.