Thumbnail artist: Edikt
Those who follow me on social media know my exact opinions about AI generated art. I only take slight exception to the plight of my friends who are authors who likely will use it to make book covers so they have a better shot at turning a profit from their books.
A little over a week ago, Art Youtube channel Proko (great channel to follow, btw) released a video discussing the ethics behind AI making art and how it will effect artists like myself. Stan Prokopenko (host) was joined by two guests: Karla Ortiz and Steve Zapata to unpack the topic.
See the video below. The opinions expressed are overall spot on minus the ideas governments should be involved in deciding what is an ethical way to use AI which the inevitable result no matte what will be a huge loss in creative jobs.
The premise of the discussion from Stan's side is what I mainly want to focus on and it will lead into my thesis which I will continue to cry until my face turns purple. To note for those who don't want to listen to the full discussion, Steven is only presenting the point of view he learned from an AI developer by the name of Evan Conrad.
According to Conrad (through the mouth of Stan), AI generating art was a total fluke, a freak accident, in the grand overarching goal of AI developers. I'm not joking when I say this but Conrad was quoted saying the end goal for these developers is "Utopia". Utopia including the development of AGI which stands for Artificial General Intelligence. This means we will have AI which behaves exactly like humans in every way.
The discussion focuses mainly on the legal and ethical aspects of AI usage to make art. AI has become a disruptor in the art world which, now that it's here, there is no stopping it or being rid of it. The biggest complaint about AI has been how it goes about producing the pretty pictures people become enthralled over. Works of art have been "scraped" (stolen) from all corners of the internet without regard to IP rights of its owners. With no legislation in place to protect artists at any level, we are seeing the greatest art heist in history under the guise of a shiny new whistle to play with.
A prime example is the DeviantArt scandal. Section 24 of their User Terms and Conditions, to paraphrase, states any artwork posted on their site is up for grabs for their AI art generator the site uses. You have the option to opt out. Steven in real time, pulls up section 24 to prove he isn't fooling around.
However, this isn't what I want to focus on. I want to focus on the most important part of art: the spiritual side.
As a Catholic, I firmly believe man's ability to create anything is the greatest gift we've been given because "In the beginning there was nothing. . . " and so from God's own thought and imagination, from His words, He created existence. We humans are able to imitate such great power and ability through art, crafts, and procreation. I hold creativity in the highest respect in that regard.
As the Death Cult tries to claim your bodies, through AI and its end goal of Utopia, it is aiming for your soul as well. Art is a spiritual activity for its direct connection to God's ability to bring something from nothing (more than an idea). An AI taking a fundamental task of a human being is immoral. Man was made to work, he was made to create, and to have an AI take that livelihood from him is Death Cultish.
The mantra is "You will live in pods, you will eat bugs, you will consume the latest product.", tack on "You will have what art the machine allows you to." AI on the surface is making something novel but it really can't. Its only function is to copy. Like a Chimera, it is just a copy and paste of what it has been fed. There is no free will (an intangible spiritual element to humans) to make creative decisions otherwise deciding the fate of the final product. It's completely removed from the artist. The act of making art through AI has all but removed the human from it. By the standards set by AI, art has been reduced to just words. AI reducing artists to writers is an insult (no offense to any writers reading this because our craft is so much more. What you imagine when you read a book is what we as artists try to replicate in what we draw or animate.
I'm a big opponent of AI art because of its violation of the spirit. There reaches a certain point where technology so far removes the human element from an activity, the human becomes obsolete. Are we not worth more than that? Are we not made in the image of God? Do we not have value? Are our capabilities not worth something? To deny a man meaningful work is to starve his soul.
Tell me this, is it really Utopia if man is allowed to do nothing? With AI making art we are telling artists "You can still make art, but you aren't allowed to do it at the mountain top. That's reserved for AI." This is creating an artificial ceiling for artists like myself. The mountain top is working for big studios but we will see that mountaintop overcrowded by soulless robots being fed by a single artist to train the AI the style needed for the given project. I too have concerns for that attitude lowering the ceiling down to the independent level. How quickly will decisions be made on account of Mammon rather than man? How quickly will those who criticize the Right for making decisions based purely on profit when it comes to their fellow artists? Time will tell, because let's face it, AI is free, it makes some good looking stuff most of the time and take seconds to produce works. Your average consoomer won't care.
This Chimera stands at the gates of Utopia ready to devour your body, so what lies on the other side can consume your soul.
Comments