Will artificial intelligence kill art?

[LSD-Rumi]

I mean who can compete with AI? It would be sad to see ourselves not being able to express our creative potential once AI develops sufficiently to be able to draw art, design video games, write novels..etc, without us being involved. We will become mere experiencers of art rather than creators too. What do you think?

[Tim R]

Just because AI will one day be able to replicate human art, that doesn't mean that we ourselves will stop making art. 

People will probably never quite accept the art created by AI as true art, because they see art as an expression of inner and emotional states, which is denied to AI.

[LSD-Rumi]

12 hours ago, Tim R said:

Just because AI will one day be able to replicate human art, that doesn't mean that we ourselves will stop making art. 

It won't just replicate human art, it would far outmatch anything we have ever done. A piece of art that took you months to make, AI will produce it in a day maybe or even hours! Now try to compete with this shit. 

My best guess is that we will continue to do art just to express our creative potential (for fun).

[bejapuskas]

11 minutes ago, LSD-Rumi said:

My best guess is that we will continue to do art just to express our creative potential (for fun).

I agree with this. AI is already able to create art. But the way it creates it is extremely boring to watch. It can draw an amazing painting in less than a second, it's like a generator of images. Seeing somebody create an image, the process of it, is a human thing. Not that it couldn't be added to the AI though...

[Leo Gura]

Artists is the last thing AI will replace.

[Preety_India]

That art can hardly be called art. More like machine generations.

Just like how junk food is packaged by factories. 

 

[Dryas]

Art is self expression. The AI doesn’t have a self the way humans do and therefore will never produce art of quality comparable to humans. 
 

But then again, I don’t think there’s anything in the universe that disallows the possibility of AI gaining a self. We could then program it to be the most productive and self expressive artist ever. 
 

It could create the most precise, detailed and technically flawless pieces without sacrificing any of the more emotional and intuitive elements.

If this happens, I believe that humans really will be only the experiencers rather than creators. 

Edited December 7, 2021 by Dryas

[Rilles]

Art requires imperfection, so no. Look at graphics of video games from the 90s, why do they look so beautiful, its not because they are perfectly realistic, its because they are childish and imperfect, thats whats makes them awesome. Or listen to a rock song generated by a computer program vs a real band, obviously the band sounds much better. 

Edited December 7, 2021 by Rilles

[tsuki]

We currently are nowhere near the technology that would be truly creative.

Artificial intelligence as it currently stands is extracting patterns from data we feed to it by constraining a more general computational algorithm that we also chose for it. The fact that it is unpredictable to us, and that the extracted patterns are intricate has little to do with art. To me, one of the defining characteristics of art is intention. AI is more of a programmer's brush than it is an artist.

Edited December 7, 2021 by tsuki

[Gesundheit2]

The only kind of art I can imagine AI creating is geometrical psychedelic visions. Maybe God is a computer.

Edited December 7, 2021 by Gesundheit2

[Extreme Z7]

16 hours ago, LSD-Rumi said:

I mean who can compete with AI?

Just because AI can be a genius at Go doesn't mean AI can make great art.

Art requires a good understanding of culture, creativity, and love, a lot more than the need for theoretical understanding.

If AI becomes advanced enough to create human-like art, they would just become like other humans.

Edited December 7, 2021 by Extreme Z7

[Salvijus]

I think you can infuse your spirit and energy into art. That's what makes great art great art. 

Like for example you can read a spiritual book written by some spiritual master and you can feel the presence and the energy behind those words. The vibration of those words are alive almost. And can even transport you to that place of consciouness where those words were coming from. A book like that have a power beyond the superficial wording only.

I think a maschine will never be able to do this. Because a machanice is just data, art is energy and expression of a certain state of consciouness. You can replicate the words but you can't replicate the spirit.

Edited December 7, 2021 by Salvijus

[Gregory1]

Everything is, always was, and always will be Art.

[TimStr]

Art will not be replaced by AI.

Art will use AI to evolve itself.

[Gesundheit2]

[Yarco]

AI is pretty good at procedurally generating stuff. Not really understanding aesthetics or beauty as humans see it.

It might help speed up a lot of the art-creation process for human artists. But I don't know if even within the next 100 years AI will be able to write a book that doesn't sound like gibberish, or at least "off" or like it's written by someone who isn't a native english speaker.

There is already technology that will "write blog posts for you" but it's pretty terrible, and that's with factual information, not even trying to write stories.

[mandyjw]

I think AI would allow everyone to be an artist, which they inherently already are, but it would allow more time and opportunity for it. 

[The Lucid Dreamer]

We will probably merge ourselves with the AI. 

[Magnanimous]

On 12/7/2021 at 7:33 PM, Leo Gura said:

Artists is the last thing AI will replace.

Why?

[itachi uchiha]

A chess ai beat boby fisher.but after him many other chess masters defeated that ai.ai will not beat artist imo.ai will beat artist today but artist will adapt and beat the ai tomarrow or day after tomarrow