zlacker

>>dredmo+(OP)
I've been finding that the strangest part of discussions around art AI among technical people is the complete lack of identification or empathy: it seems to me that most computer programmers should be just as afraid as artists, in the face of technology like this!!! I am a failed artist (read, I studied painting in school and tried to make a go at being a commercial artist in animation and couldn't make the cut), and so I decided to do something easier and became a computer programmer, working for FAANG and other large companies and making absurd (to me!!) amounts of cash. In my humble estimation, making art is vastly more difficult than the huge majority of computer programming that is done. Art AI is terrifying if you want to make art for a living- and, if AI is able to do these astonishingly difficult things, why shouldn't it, with some finagling, also be able to do the dumb, simple things most programmers do for their jobs?

The lack of empathy is incredibly depressing...

>>meebob+kc
being afraid is the best way to run away from what's coming. If a computer can easily do some work, simply use that work to your advantage, and do something more complicated. If a computer can generate art, use what's generated to your advantage and do something better.

As long as the world is not entirely made of AI, there will always be some expertise to add, so instead of being afraid, you should just evolve with your time

>>Famoso+Md
You are assuming that AI will always be "open" and accessible to anyone.

>>ameliu+me
I do, because I don't see why it wouldn't be. If it's revolutionary and a lot of people need it, or if it change completely the way people work/live/are entertained, it will certainly evolve to be as much accessible as possible. A succesful product is a product used by many.

If it's not, why worry about it ?

>>Famoso+Fg
I mean, nuclear bombs are not free and available to anyone, yet quite a few people on this planet are involved in worrying about them.