I generally dislike AI for a swathe of fairly generic reasons, but their rebuttal doesn’t refute the accessibility argument. AI art is miles more accessible than any other art. You just shouldn’t be comfortable claiming it as your art.
In the west, education and time are less accessible than electronics. It’s, unfortunately, that simple. There are arguments to be made elsewhere and elsewhen, but that is the current state of things.
In that case, I don’t think this is an accessibility I respect.
Skill in any medium is accessible only to those who have been educated in that skill. I get that it’s expensive, but that is unfortunately just how attribution works.
I’m not interested in the musings of a philosopher whose philosophy is written for them. I’m not interested in the artistic expression of someone whose expression is decided for them. Your ideas have to come from you.
If someone wants a colorful backdrop to something else they’re doing, then images are more accessible, but art is not.
image generation ran on at least 4 gigabytes of gpu chugging datasets of millions of artists - accessible
VS
Picking up a pen accesible.
Ai media generation is not more “accesible” to make art, people don’t need an education to make art. people don’t need technical talent or proficiency to make art. Generative media is a convenient vending machine to churn out something resembling a product. The whole point of our current generative art systems is in making something that has some kind of production or market value without a care of where that content was scraped.
I’m going to argue that stealing and masquerading to manufacture a product is a lot more effort than just picking up a pencil.
What is more accessible, staying in a shack or your own home? The shack is several miles away, but required only hours to construct for the small family that crafted it. Your home required months to finish by a large team of skilled laborers. Which is more accessible to you?
What is more accesible for me at the moment is pointing out that you are really straining this metaphor. This is typical, we are talking about accessibility IN ART and all of the sudden it’s all about living in a shack, skill laborers and the most out there metaphors one could muster!
I generally dislike AI for a swathe of fairly generic reasons, but their rebuttal doesn’t refute the accessibility argument. AI art is miles more accessible than any other art. You just shouldn’t be comfortable claiming it as your art.
What makes it accessible?
I would think a pencil and paper is much more accessible than a thousand dollar phone or computer.
[edit] Is it that people with hand tremors can type instead of draw?
In the west, education and time are less accessible than electronics. It’s, unfortunately, that simple. There are arguments to be made elsewhere and elsewhen, but that is the current state of things.
Oh.
In that case, I don’t think this is an accessibility I respect.
Skill in any medium is accessible only to those who have been educated in that skill. I get that it’s expensive, but that is unfortunately just how attribution works.
I’m not interested in the musings of a philosopher whose philosophy is written for them. I’m not interested in the artistic expression of someone whose expression is decided for them. Your ideas have to come from you.
If someone wants a colorful backdrop to something else they’re doing, then images are more accessible, but art is not.
It sounds like you’re agreeing with my original comment, in that case.
I did just re-read it, and yes, kind of.
I guess I just disagree with what it should be called.
image generation ran on at least 4 gigabytes of gpu chugging datasets of millions of artists - accessible VS Picking up a pen accesible. Ai media generation is not more “accesible” to make art, people don’t need an education to make art. people don’t need technical talent or proficiency to make art. Generative media is a convenient vending machine to churn out something resembling a product. The whole point of our current generative art systems is in making something that has some kind of production or market value without a care of where that content was scraped.
I’m going to argue that stealing and masquerading to manufacture a product is a lot more effort than just picking up a pencil.
What is more accessible, staying in a shack or your own home? The shack is several miles away, but required only hours to construct for the small family that crafted it. Your home required months to finish by a large team of skilled laborers. Which is more accessible to you?
What is more accesible for me at the moment is pointing out that you are really straining this metaphor. This is typical, we are talking about accessibility IN ART and all of the sudden it’s all about living in a shack, skill laborers and the most out there metaphors one could muster!