gymfuzz

"Artificial intelligence." Well, that just says it all, doesn't it? Who would not hate that? So, help me out here. At what point does art become AI? Does it have to be derived from generational neural-net "trained-on-a-stolen-dataset" unknowable and uncontrollable huge corrupt corporate website? How about if that same corporation used that AI to design a simpler Photoshop filter that just did one thing ("oil painting") but did it really well? What about if artist used their hands to draw the art but used a mouse and an operating system designed with AI models to be more user friendly? If the original work was a digital drawing, and the artist used an AI to redraw it in a slightly different style but with the same composition and colors, is that AI? How about if the artist drew the entire work by hand, laboring with a mouse and an old CRT on a Windows 10 (!) system, but the art software they used had a special function with a hidden AI that allowed their "brush" to mimic a real brush in

Is this a safe place? Am I allowed to ... disagree? I hear a lot of people all gathering in crowds and chanting, saying the same thing over and over again, but I don't agree with it. May I? Disagree, that is? Thing is, I sort of do agree, and I sort of don't agree. They do make a good point. A chant isn't very long, though, and you cannot address much nuance in a chant. A chant is catchy, though, and you can get a lot of people to say the same thing over and over, really loud. I am wrong just because I am not loud? Am I wrong just because I can't say what I want in three or four words? I don't want trouble, but I really just don't agree, and I still want to live my life even if there are a lot of people outside my window chanting. Are you sure it's safe here?

Most of my followers will have noted that I recently began to incorporate AI-generated art into my gallery. There is currently a lot of controversy about AI-generated art. My view is that AI-generated art is the photography of the early 21st century. When photography was first invented, many artists and art critics claimed that photography was not an art form, but rather merely a way to document reality. They said that it could never be more than a crutch for lazy and incompetent people to imitate art, which in their minds meant paintings, drawings, and prints. It took decades for public and professional option to swing the other way, and for photography to become accepted as art. Now most art museums have dedicated archives just for photography, and collectors buy and sell photos and prints with the same enthusiasm as any other art form. Take as an example, a photo of a tree. Suppose I am walking down a country lane in autumn just at sunset and see a maple decked out in brilliant