• aname
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Why would human art be then?

        • aname
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Those are not new ideas. Those are based on persons experiences up to that point. There is nothing magical in human brain that we cannot eventually implement in AI.

        • atan@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Those ‘new’ ideas can be inputted as a prompt into an AI image generator. Would the output of that satisfy your criteria for OC?

            • atan@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              And would you say that an idea formed from the combination of multiple old human ideas is not original? If the influence of an existing idea disqualifies it from being original then very little could be considered original. If something additional to existing ideas is needed for originality then that what is that thing which is beyond the capability of an AI?

              Personally, I would argue that any new combination of existing ideas is inherently original (i.e. a fresh perspective.)

              Talking specifically about image generators (rather than LLMs) which are trained on billions of images - some of which would be widely considered as artwork (old ideas?) and others documentary photographs.

    • atan@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      How so? What is it that makes art OC that cannot be applied to AI created art? I think it would take an extremely narrow definition which would also exclude a significant amount of human created art.