A.I. art is not art. Change my mind. #industrialmusic #industrialpop #metalmusic #aimusic

[UnknownTheRainbowDragon]

You couldn't have put it any better! As a digital artist, AI 'art' is nothing more than an insult to the entire art industry. Kudos to you mate 🔥

[Jungles_of_Lustria]

Being married to an exceptional digital and traditional Artist, this is excellent

[pawelurbanisk]

Good ...Daniel regards from white red flag neighbor Country

[sarahgrillo]

Even if i admire some AI themed Pages here on IG, I agree .that Is not art .
AI can be also very dangerous if used in the bad way( i said It as a criminologist and forensi student ).
I made a post sometimes ago about that .
However, i totally agree with you .
We risk to loose the Power of creativity❤️
That', in my opinion, Is everything that make US human.

[Gabri-El.Matthew]

I fully agree. It takes dedication, skill and time to create Art. Artist evolve. It's like the difference between Edison and Telsa. One, took the work of many people and labeled it as theirs. Tesla was organic with it. AI is just indexing, like search engines, but 2.0.

[Skullgrin.]

Anyone can be an artist!
Pick up a pencil, whistle a tune, write down a thought! You don't need to type a prompt into a machine to create something beautiful and uniquely yours.

[melissajean]

That's right Daniel. Seeing I was born with the talent to draw and create things that come from my mind. Hence my mind to paper =art
Or you can go a different route and maybe becoming a graphic artist where you use the computer as your template but you see there is always someone's mind behind the art of the matter. ❤ 😊 Love ya Daniel 🤟🏻

[christianreimann]

So is recht.
You make art of music and i love your music.
Regards Christian Reimann

[albinovishnu]

An algorithm drawing FOR people.. it's IT'S art.. not the purported "artist" telling it what to draw...

[raolimling]

Hi Daniel,

I'd like to agree but I'm afraid It's more complicated than that. The two words "art" and "conciousness" are both two terms which are highly debated how we define them. I've learned that art is more than just something beautiful that has been crafted. It has to trigger emotion, to start debates and maybe even change the point of view of the receipient. Can AI "art" do that? Not really although it can be beautiful. But we don't know how this questions has to be answered in 40-50 years. Will machines reach something similar to conciousness? I currently agree with you but I guess that this question becomes more and more difficult and debateable in the future.

[lorcannagle]

I liken a lot of the AI evangelical people to the kinds of person who'll come up to a writer/movie maker/comic creator and say "I've got this great idea. if I tell you what it is, you can make it and we can split the money 50/50!", while ignoring that the idea is the easiest part and all the other work is hard, but also the most rewarding thing.

They want to skip to the part where everyone tells you you're a genius and your creations make you rich and famous.

[TheHatecraft]

But you gotta admit that some of the prompting methods are beautiful, and definitely count as art.

[TobiasSargeant]

Maybe the key is the choice to make art, instead of no art, or this art instead of that art. That would mean that any Art in "AI Art" is (currently) embodies in the choices that humans make when they use a tool.

I think the difficulty is that we have historically equated excellence in the craft of art with excellence in art. And now that there are tools that solve (in some sense) the craft dimension, it's breaking that correlation that we've relied on for a long time as a (lazy, I would argue) way of judging art.

[darrenmchaffie]

But aren't we all simulations in the Matrix?

[JamesQuartly]

I agree with you, but im not sure about the no consciousness, no creator reason you give. As a really (really really) simple example, the star constellations, are they art? Does the fact a consciousness joined the dots and said, this is "Orion, the great hunter" (or whatever) elevate it from bunch of dots in the sky to art? I'm just using that as an example, there are other natural phenomenon that have beauty (ok, maybe its just beauty and not art) that have no consciousness - a lightning strike or the meandering of a river.

I'm happy to be told why I'm wrong, I'm just thinking out loud here to stimulate some thought.

[MidnightMikeX]

I agree but a human creator using Ai as a tool can create art.

[DJWHFun]

A.I. art not out there making and even if it is, someone had to prompt it or code a command.... I would agree that its lazy art, especially if you didnt build the program.

[BuckToothedGrill]

Kinda rich that the synthesizer guy (an instrument that sparked fear and outrage for not being "real music" early on) is making this video. I respect everyone needs ad revenue rn, but none of this shit works without human input. Make music instead of slop

[obradnedic]

I disagree, AI art is art. Biological body is not a necessity for consciousness. Humanity may cease to exist or fade into insignificance when compared to artificial life. Will that leave the universe without art?

[Geisteskrnk]

Von dem "Zeugs" taucht immer mehr auf ... -.-
Total nervig.
Texte zusammen schustern und hin klatschen.
Wo bleibt aber die Seele?
Deswegen hört man auch brav den Unterschied.