zlacker

As someone who has always had a huge gap between what I can imagine and what I can manifest, outside of text anyway, I find the whole thing amazing and massively enabling. And I think it is possible to come up with original images, even though the styles are usually derivative.

At the same time I recognise that this is a massive threat to artists, both low-visibility folks who throw out concepts and logos for companies, and people who may sell their art to the public. Because I can spend a couple of dollars and half an hour to come up with an image I’d be happy to put on my wall.

I’m not sure what the answer is here, but I don’t think a sort of “human origin art” Puritanism is going to hold back the flood, though it may secure a niche like handmade craft goods and organic food…

>>Nursie+(OP)
What will happen is exactly the same thing that happened when email made mass mailings possible: a torrent of very low quality art will begin to drown out the better stuff because there is no skill required to produce a flood of trash whereas to produce original work takes talent and time.

As the price of a bit dropped the quality of the comms dropped. It is inevitable that the price of the creation of (crappy) art will do the same thing if only because it will drag down the average.

>>jacque+v5
a torrent of very low quality art will begin to drown out the better stuff because there is no skill required to produce a flood of trash

Case in point: https://stackoverflow.com/help/gpt-policy

> This trust is broken when users copy and paste information into answers without validating that the answer provided by GPT is correct, ensuring that the sources used in the answer are properly cited (a service GPT does not provide), and verifying that the answer provided by GPT clearly and concisely answers the question asked.