Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="OB1" data-source="post: 9314444" data-attributes="member: 6796241">I can see the same argument being made against the invention of the photographic camera in the 1800s.&nbsp; But there are even more artists today, because a tool is available that allows for a different type of art to be created, that is suited to a different talent set.&nbsp; People who value hand painted portraits can still purchase those (often for a premium as their perceived value is higher), or someone can hire a professional photographer for a portrait, or they can buy their own camera and take it themselves.&nbsp; AI is just one more tool for humans to express themselves creatively with.&nbsp; Like any tool, it needs to be regulated by the will of the people to ensure it doesn't directly harm (the IP considerations with LLMs and Image generators are a real harm, but the concerns about the employment of artists are not direct harm, imo) but that doesn't mean the tool itself is worthless.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="OB1, post: 9314444, member: 6796241"] I can see the same argument being made against the invention of the photographic camera in the 1800s. But there are even more artists today, because a tool is available that allows for a different type of art to be created, that is suited to a different talent set. People who value hand painted portraits can still purchase those (often for a premium as their perceived value is higher), or someone can hire a professional photographer for a portrait, or they can buy their own camera and take it themselves. AI is just one more tool for humans to express themselves creatively with. Like any tool, it needs to be regulated by the will of the people to ensure it doesn't directly harm (the IP considerations with LLMs and Image generators are a real harm, but the concerns about the employment of artists are not direct harm, imo) but that doesn't mean the tool itself is worthless. [/QUOTE]

Verification