Are we allowed to like AI art?

[Reiwa]

Originally Posted by shovelquest [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If AI ever writes a joke that funny I will worship it and ban all religions.

Mig15's aside, a faggoter was someone who was by fate or fortune unable to acquire proper firewood otherwise, so they had to collect small bits of fallen wood to cook their food and heat their hovels. A poor person.

Society was pretty mean back then.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by shovelquest [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It's actually quite good in the "creative" conceptual phase of a project.

Often giving new ideas and thinking outside the box!

Unique patterns, crazy vistas, strange characters.

It's quite good at creating strange new things.

Sure ... but it produces mountains of crap also, which is why you need the human to decide what's interesting/creative and what's crap.

Originally Posted by shovelquest [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If AI ever writes a joke that funny I will worship it and ban all religions.

As proof of the above, go watch AI Seinfeld aka Nothing Forever. I watched it for maybe 20 minutes, and there wasn't even an inadvertently funny joke, let alone an actual one. Maybe if you watched it long enough you'd find one ... but again, at that point it's just a human using a tool.

[shovelquest]

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Sure ... but it produces mountains of crap also, which is why you need the human to decide what's interesting/creative and what's crap.

Well previously you were saying AI couldn't create anything new, yet it's being used to do exactly that.

Here is another example:

Researchers use AI-powered database to design potential cancer drug in 30 days

https://www.utoronto.ca/news/researc...r-drug-30-days

I'd say a cure for liver cancer is pretty new.

But we shouldn't use this cure, because it's "theft" right?

BTW it seems to me you are not saying anything that disagree's with anything Ive said, and to double check I asked chatgpt to try to parse this current discussion over teh last few pages:

Conclusion:
While they seem to be debating, Shovelquest and Loramin are largely in agreement on the fundamental point: AI is a powerful tool that can enhance creativity in game development, but it requires a human touch to shape and refine the output into something special. The debate is more about the extent of AI's creative capabilities and the balance between AI's role as a creative assistant versus a primary creator.

[shovelquest]

Look at this poor retch! Gathering his wood, instead of cutting it from waist height like us, Thor!

[sajbert]

12 pages. I give up.

[Duik]

A.I wouldnt give up.
It would just draw hands badly until you dumbarse humans feed it enough info to finally get it right.
Keep feeding it and ask it for an EQ game based on Shadowbane or Pokemon or whatever your poison.

Then, when the A.I owners have enough training material ingested they will sell the fuck outta that shit and screw you (us) dumbarses over.

Pff. 12 pages is nothing. You lack the intestinal fortitude to outlast the A.I. Toughen up, princess.

[shovelquest]

What's your problem with R2-D2!

[loramin]

Originally Posted by Ekco [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If we weren't burdened by ethics... tests like this could be done lol.

there is a story about one kid who got locked in a room by religious parents who were attempting to find the first human language like Tower of Babel story shit by preventing the kid from having any contact with the outside world or teaching it anything not to let a tragedy go to waste linguist and psychologists learned a lot from that case.

Actually, it's been done, and there's even a movie of it: L'Enfant sauvage (the Wild Child). (There have been other "wild children" also, but this one is the most studied.)

Some true asshole back in the late 1700's tried to kill his very young son, and left him in the woods to die. The kid didn't though: it grew up, and was later captured. People studied him while trying to "civilize" him.

This is no happy Tarzan story though: what they learned is that when you delay key milestones in human development, it's impossible to recover. Because the kid was wild for so much of his adolescence, he was basically an animal for the rest of his life.

TLDR; If you lock a kid in his room, he won't speak the universal tongue ... he'll just never speak (and never think like a human either).

[shovelquest]

The moral of that story is that as humans, we fight.

With AI we can see that we're on the same team!

Long live R2-D2!

What AI is capable of:

[shovelquest]

This is an interesting take.

https://lithub.com/nanowrimo-defends...hole-internet/

Ableism and privilege standing in the way?

National Novel Writing Month’s general take on AI is that they don’t want to dismiss AI, because “to categorically condemn AI would be to ignore classist and ableist issues surrounding the use of the technology, and that questions around the use of AI tie to questions around privilege.” In their framing, AI allows everyone to write despite differences in financial abilities, differences in physical and mental ability, and differences in access to resources. Overall they don’t want to stand in the way of new resources that could be useful to writers, explaining that they “see value in sharing resources and information about AI and any emerging technology, issue, or discussion that is relevant to the writing community as a whole,” and adding that “it’s healthy for writers to be curious about what’s new and forthcoming, and what might impact their career space or their pursuit of the craft.”

Anyone Being able to tell their story without the privilege of being raised in a world where you have the time and education to may only enrich the creative world.