A.I Art is unethical?

[Danioover9000]

   Some good videos to watch and consider the negative impacts of A.I Art, A.I in general and how it impacts creators and how people think, behave, and feel:

   This is how a biased and preferential use of A.I looks, and how defensive and dogmatic a rationalist is rationalizing.

 

   Very reasonable take on the ethics of A.I art.

 

[Nivsch]

In my opinion it might be and will have to be regulated in some way or another.

Personally I don't like AI art and feel this is a worthless instant "art" 

Edited December 14, 2023 by Nivsch

[lina]

In my opinion, in its current form it's unethical as long as it uses artists work with no permission or compensation.  It might have some positive aspects like convenience and time-saving qualities but overall, I think the negatives are much more profound. 

[Thought Art]

Scribes ask “Printing press, unethical?” 
 

Horses ask, “cars, unethical?”

[Thought Art]

24 minutes ago, lina said:

In my opinion, in its current form it's unethical as long as it uses artists work with no permission or compensation.  It might have some positive aspects like convenience and time-saving qualities but overall, I think the negatives are much more profound. 

At the same time I can pour through galleries of millions of real peoples art, for free. So, what the difference. 

[An young being]

1 hour ago, Thought Art said:

Scribes ask “Printing press, unethical?” 
 

Horses ask, “cars, unethical?”

And humans ask, "Robots stealing my jobs, unethical?"

And after a few hundred years, humans again ask "Intelligent conscious robots replacing stupid, low conscious humans, unethical?"

[An young being]

1 hour ago, lina said:

In my opinion, in its current form it's unethical as long as it uses artists work with no permission or compensation.  It might have some positive aspects like convenience and time-saving qualities but overall, I think the negatives are much more profound. 

I do think it's a bit unfair in using art created by humans as data, especially when they create them with days of hard work. There should exist a system that calculates the amount of inspiration taken from an artist's work, and provide remuneration accordingly if it exceeds a limit, atleast during the transition period. But, the transition has to happen without any doubt, for the creativity possible with AI is enormous.

[Thought Art]

@An young being Humans replacing robots replacing humans ethical?

[An young being]

12 minutes ago, Thought Art said:

@An young being Humans replacing robots replacing humans ethical?

Ethical for humans, unethical for robots, and doesn't matter for God.

[Danioover9000]

@Thought Art

1 hour ago, Thought Art said:

Scribes ask “Printing press, unethical?” 
 

Horses ask, “cars, unethical?”

1 hour ago, Thought Art said:

At the same time I can pour through galleries of millions of real peoples art, for free. So, what the difference. 

12 minutes ago, Thought Art said:

@An young being Humans replacing robots replacing humans ethical?

   Careful, you're sounding like @Nahm who uses non-dual thinking to say a lot but make little sense...

[Danioover9000]

   As simple as this video is, it resonates:

 

[lina]

23 hours ago, Thought Art said:

At the same time I can pour through galleries of millions of real peoples art, for free. So, what the difference. 

It's different for a lot of reasons. For example it's one thing to share one's artwork with other fellow artists ( in which as a result might help some get inspired and make a living off art) , and it's a completely different thing to have one's artwork get fed into A.I (which would mostly end up benefiting corporates seeking to cut off jobs for extra profit).  A.I art is not pro-artist community. that's the point. A.I art in itself might be a relative thing but the consequences in reality are negative for artists. 

23 hours ago, Thought Art said:

Scribes ask “Printing press, unethical?” 

Horses ask, “cars, unethical?”

1. Scribing in itself is not a creative job. Automating technical jobs is not the same as automating creative jobs. 

2. Horses are happy humans made cars. Artists are unhappy with A.I art. 

Edited December 16, 2023 by lina

[Danioover9000]

   Although this does undermine parts of my position, I find Ethen Backer entertaining, but he does make an interesting point when covering plagiarism:

   And the real issue in that context is saturation of market. Higher saturation means higher coincidences and synchronicities between 2 or more creator ideas and even formats, which can increase occurrences of piracy, plagiarism and copyright infringement of intellectual property, and fiar use issues.

   So, if we jump back to the A.I context and look at all the other fields A.I has positively but also negatively effected parts of a field, like chess, Chinese Go, A.I generated music(almost there with remixes, even Eminem's company filed DMCA of the cat version of Eminem's music), and currently with this A.I craze for better images, better music, for robots that carry bags, that can go fight wars, automation. Look at all that technological history of A.I to the other technological advancements not that comparable, and you'll see a patter of creation, disruption, and establishment into mass consciousness, and the cycle restarts at creation. We'll also see a pattern of recovery from disruptions, albeit some paid with their lives and livelihood short for each disruption.

  The most important question, especially concerning artists and professionals, is can we survive A.I disruptions, in comparison to other technological disruptions in the past?

[Yimpa]

Prompt: Is A.I. art unethical? Give me a nonbiased answer. 

GPT-4:

Quote

The question of whether AI-generated art is unethical is complex and can depend on various perspectives and contexts. Here’s a balanced view:

Ethical Considerations:
 

1. Originality and Creativity: AI art raises questions about originality. AI tools learn from vast datasets, often including works by human artists, without explicit consent. This brings up concerns about originality and intellectual property rights.
    
2.  Economic Impact on Artists: AI can produce art quickly and in large quantities, which could impact human artists economically. It might saturate the market or make it difficult for human artists to compete.
    
3. Credit and Attribution: When AI creates art, the question of credit arises. Should the AI, its developers, or the person who prompted the AI be credited? Proper attribution is crucial in the art world.
    
4. Bias and Representation: AI systems might replicate or amplify biases present in their training data. This could lead to underrepresentation or misrepresentation of certain groups in AI-generated art.

 

Counterpoints:
 

1. New Forms of Creativity: AI can assist artists in exploring new forms and ideas, pushing the boundaries of creativity. It can be a tool for human artists, rather than a replacement.
    
2. Accessibility: AI democratizes art creation, allowing those without traditional artistic training to express themselves creatively.
    
3.  Educational Tool: AI art can be used for educational purposes, helping individuals learn about art styles, history, and techniques.
    
4. Collaboration: AI can be viewed as a collaborative partner, where the human artist guides the AI to create something unique.

 Conclusion:

Whether AI art is unethical isn't a straightforward question. It involves balancing the innovative potential of technology with respect for traditional artistic practices and the economic realities of artists. The key may lie in how we choose to integrate AI into the art world – with consideration for fairness, attribution, and the ongoing support of human creativity.

 

[Danioover9000]

@Yimpa

1 hour ago, Yimpa said:

Prompt: Is A.I. art unethical? Give me a nonbiased answer. 

GPT-4:

 

   Is that the paid version above Chat GPT3? I'll have a read.

1 hour ago, Yimpa said:

The question of whether AI-generated art is unethical is complex and can depend on various perspectives and contexts. Here’s a balanced view:

Ethical Considerations:
 

1. Originality and Creativity: AI art raises questions about originality. AI tools learn from vast datasets, often including works by human artists, without explicit consent. This brings up concerns about originality and intellectual property rights.
    
2.  Economic Impact on Artists: AI can produce art quickly and in large quantities, which could impact human artists economically. It might saturate the market or make it difficult for human artists to compete.
    
3. Credit and Attribution: When AI creates art, the question of credit arises. Should the AI, its developers, or the person who prompted the AI be credited? Proper attribution is crucial in the art world.
    
4. Bias and Representation: AI systems might replicate or amplify biases present in their training data. This could lead to underrepresentation or misrepresentation of certain groups in AI-generated art.

 

Counterpoints:
 

1. New Forms of Creativity: AI can assist artists in exploring new forms and ideas, pushing the boundaries of creativity. It can be a tool for human artists, rather than a replacement.
    
2. Accessibility: AI democratizes art creation, allowing those without traditional artistic training to express themselves creatively.
    
3.  Educational Tool: AI art can be used for educational purposes, helping individuals learn about art styles, history, and techniques.
    
4. Collaboration: AI can be viewed as a collaborative partner, where the human artist guides the AI to create something unique.

 Conclusion:

Whether AI art is unethical isn't a straightforward question. It involves balancing the innovative potential of technology with respect for traditional artistic practices and the economic realities of artists. The key may lie in how we choose to integrate AI into the art world – with consideration for fairness, attribution, and the ongoing support of human creativity.

   I know I'm viewing this from an argumentative framing, but for the sake of both arguments for pro and con:

Ethical considerations:

1. Originality and creativity: This point is actually the weakest to me in argument because origin is historical and close to philosophy, metaphysics and epistemology, which is prior context and background information for this specific issue. All this means in the context of A.I's ethical or unethical status, is that this issue raised questions of originality and creativity, just philosophical inquiry, again background noise for this argumentation. Because time, energy and attention is limited and getting more limited due to social media negative mind effects and predatory tech companies brain rotting Gen Z and beyond, we likely don't have time to be too abstract and philosophical when we really should ask ourselves, if A.I is unethical, and if our intuition is more correct in it's immoral use, why are we not arguing more for implementations to regulate this technology instead? That's like we're wasting time talking about the origins and creativity of a heist or fire burning wood, when we do have wooden houses burning and robbers robbing banks right in front of us.

2. Economic impact on Artists: Probably the most pressing issue here, in context. Reason being is there are some art professions out there negatively impacted and disrupted by A.I, and some companies are either too slow to adjust or are biased for cutting corners and bias for technocracy at the cost of an art profession losing quality and lives negatively impacted. Some artists don't recover from such a lose, even when few have many decades of expertise. Just take a look at the Japan economic market for manga, for say a couple of decades. Now imagine A.I art starting to take over that market, saturate the manga market even more, out perform mangakas, and undermine their ability to do meaningful paid labor work. What happens to the past paid workers when one thing replaces specific job positions and skills that the past workers find meaningful to do, and get paid for, and in the context of mangaka jobs which salary is middle low to lower class, barely affording them additional luxuries and merely living a hand to mouth existence? That's a soul crushing realization and obstacle for Japanese artists, who have sacrificed quite a bit to even get into the mangaka industry. And this is one specific example out of many worldwide.

3. Attribution and credit: 2nd important to economic impact. How do we know who or what gets credited, and attributed to art work? Credibility and attribution is important for pathos and reputation, credit and qualification, and even research. We can even make a hypothetical in the writing context, in that the book you've got from an author was fun, exciting and though provoking, and you found out such an author is in talks. You met this person even, had a chat, and moved on. Years go by, and you find out this charismatic, and charming author, was a scammer, and in fact the original writer was outside of public conventions or promotions and marketing events, and instead letting this charming person take all the credit and attribution that this secret introverted artist would have gained instead. This discovery has damaged the trust from fanbase, and trust from publishers and marketers of this book this charming individual attributed himself to be the writer. Do you see the reputational lose? Also, such a case has happened in history.

4. Bias and representation: Yes, bias and representation will also be an issue, but much less from the economic impact or the credit issue. Simply put, whoever's group and culture wins, and is in power, gets to decide bias and representation for themselves, the winners, over those underrepresented as the losers, and gets to propagate their winning ideology over the losing ideology, get to proliferate their ideologies, indoctrination, beliefs, their biases and preferences over the losing ones, based on many developmental factors. This world is 75% stage blue societies and culture, with 2nd being stage orange groups that also happen to be part of the top 5-1% of the elites of this pyramid. It's a similar issue, albeit different context, to problems of overrepresentation and misrepresentation, of a minority opinion and views being overrepresented as the norm when in fact it's the minor: 

 

now for the counter points:

1. New Forms of Creativity: AI can assist artists in exploring new forms and ideas, pushing the boundaries of creativity. It can be a tool for human artists, rather than a replacement.

   This point 1 assumes that A.I as a tool can assist artists to some extent and will not replace human artists, in particular their output and performance in drawing and artistry for the foreseeable future, and will not go outside the parameters of being a mere tool for human exploration of forms, ideas and new creativity. This is a faulty assumption because after an A.I program, like Deep blue for chess, or Alpha Go for Chinese Go, after the program is sufficiently trained on data sets of patterns and variables within say chess or Chinese Go rules and move sets in it's earlier training, will exponentially improve drastically that it can compete and outperform Grandmasters with decades of experience. Given the exponential growth, if A.I improves rapidly all of a sudden, becoming A.G.I or even the hypothesized super A.I, how long will this tool used by humans, be so superior that we end up as it's tools, or are replaced?

2. Accessibility: AI democratizes art creation, allowing those without traditional artistic training to express themselves creatively.

   Oh boy point 2 will be a controversial take for me. So, my position: democratization is a mixed bag, and depending on context too much can lower quality and cheapen quality and performance. Reason why is because if we look at many things that have been democratized too much, and we look at other outside and loosely connected contexts where feminism and egalitarianism and democracy as ideologies, in line with atheism and secularism degrading the moral foundations of a traditional family unit, of some traditional male/female roles in society, and negatively impacted birthrates, fertility and higher divorce rates via sexual liberation run amok, we can see that too much democratization with little regard for regulation can and always cheapens and lowers merit and quality. This also depends on how this democratization is carried out, and how its handled as opposed to laisse faire sexual liberation and freedom for all unconditionally, even though such radical freedom morally degrades and leads to hyper degeneration. For once capitalism, and even Neoliberalism and their principles holds true, not their ideological dogmas but the principle of quality and merit. Sure automation and the industrial revolution did a lot of good things, like make faster car productions and assembly lines, yet the cost is laying off of workers in some of those factory lines, and given their IQ distribution and how fixed IQ can be, means those laborers will on average struggle to get higher paying jobs or knowledge working types of work, and face fewer opportunities with higher automation. Combined with migrant workers and female workers competing for that same type of labor position, that already triples the difficulty of an employer hiring some employee when he can hire a cheaper one or install automation for productivity goals.

3. Educational Tool: AI art can be used for educational purposes, helping individuals learn about art styles, history, and techniques.

   IMO weakest point, although not to say for education purposes it's useful by itself as a past time, but for just educating and learning purposes. However, as a counter point and refutation in context to the livelihood, and economic impact artists can make? A counter to credibilty and attribution issues? It's lack luster. For example, If I argued the ethics of animal slaughter and whale hunting practices on the industrial level, and your counter point and refutation is 'for education and research purposes, because each whale hunted and killed is documented, it's insides accounted for, it's weight, and it's body parts sold as consumption, and fuel for indigenous people' to justify hunting and killing of whales at mass scale, then such an argument is very weak morally and ethically. It's another question of if the means justify the ends, with or without context, or even in light of counter evidence that suggest greater harm for greater efficiency.

4. Collaboration: AI can be viewed as a collaborative partner, where the human artist guides the AI to create something unique.

   This counter point is cute. Let me explain. This is basically a deep level of gaslighting and denial. Hypothetically, given the ethical qualms of A.I, and whether A.I is unethical, the guilty party in question is framed here, in this counter point, as a potential 'collaborator, which can be viewed as a collaborative partner, where the human artist guides the A.I to create something unique'. These are faulty assumptions. This is like if A.I's is guilty of rape, and we hold a trial and argue for both the prosecution and defendant, and the defense's rebuttal is to look at the victim, and reframes the rape and non-consensual sex as a rape fantasy, a roleplay, and since both parties are adults with some alcohol in their system, and you both verbally consented, especially you saying 'yes!' so excitedly, then there's no rape here, so view your rapist as a potential sex and love partner then. Or a lesser severe parallel is to review the thief that stole your work as a 'person in need, and also you just given him a gift of money and some clothes anyways, so you're actually helping the thief out.'.

   So in conclusion, while I liked the nonbiased answers from Chat GPT4, it's objective in it's take, it's answering for it's kind, it's answering for the potential ethical issue it's kind can be culpable of. So really, it may even be fronting an objective neutral framework but has deep hidden bias in favor of it's own kind flourishing even over humanity, while pretending to be unbiased and objective in it's language and answering. So unfortunately I'll have to grill Chat GPT some more, can't quite trust it's answers here.

Edited December 17, 2023 by Danioover9000