AI ‘art’ is not a threat – Scot Scoop News

The term “artificial intelligence” (AI) has become intimidating to many artists. This year, images generated by machine learning programs, including the popular SLAB and Mid Road, have taken over the Internet. The comment sections of posts showing AI talent, however, were filled with people expressing growing concern that artists were being replaced by technology and becoming the next factory workers.

In order to assess the seriousness of the threat these machine learning programs pose to artists and creative minds, it is essential to understand what they are and how they work.

Developer Open AI defines DALL-E 2, the more advanced successor to DALL-E, as an “AI system capable of creating realistic images and artwork from natural language description”. Almost every other AI art system fits this mold. All generators also follow a similar process: a user enters a prompt, and within seconds to minutes, a machine learning algorithm will combine, modify, and form images that match what was written. Simply put, this is possible through the “training” of technology to associate images and their relationships with textual descriptions.

Most people used these programs for casual fun, testing the technology’s capabilities with ridiculous prompts. Certainly, I’ve seen some remarkable results and spent some time learning about the variety of art styles and scenes the AI ​​can render. It’s just as fun to submit a nonsensical or overly complicated prompt and see what the AI ​​will put together.

But the products of artificial intelligence cannot really be considered art. Art aims to invoke emotions, convey a message or represent a concept through creativity and imagination. Therefore, we cannot consider AI-generated images as art, despite their visual impression. These programs use references like we do, but without the independence of a real artist. The “art” of AI is, at best, an extension of the human intellect in its responses to our prompts and, at worst, elaborate plagiarism.

With these definitions in mind, it’s clear that humans are infinitely more valuable as artists than artificial intelligence. Not only do we have the ability to conceptualize, but we can also incorporate abstract ideas – business principles, symbolism and cultural references – into our work.

Artificial intelligence is still too rudimentary to match the intellect of an art school graduate or any human being with a developed brain, for that matter. At least for now, all it can do is imitate our paintings and photographs, reconstructing pre-existing images.

Another possibility is that he could follow in the footsteps of photography in terms of its influence on artwork. Along with photography driving impressionism, AI can push us into a more introspective style of creation.

Undeniably, AI-generated images pose a threat if used to spread misinformation, featured as original creations in art competitions, or other inappropriate activities. Apart from that, however, it is safe to say that until AI gains sensitivity, it will remain a complement to human activities. We need to recognize this technology as a tool that inspires us and helps us create our own visuals, not as a competitor.

Comments are closed.