.toml

I talk about culture and the future mostly

[.toml @LogOffTom]

https://t.co/K6oiEHNweI

[.toml @LogOffTom]

@raypleat Modernity is at war with all three.

[.toml @LogOffTom]

Flexing never using a smartphone while employing a personal assistant.

[.toml @LogOffTom]

Open Source ideology killed the industry. They shouldn't be allowed to forget it.

[.toml @LogOffTom]

@atelicinvest The disconnect is because they were marketing to investors and large-scale employers not consumers or workers. They should have obviously done so privately.

[.toml @LogOffTom]

Plato would have been a frat boy.

[.toml @LogOffTom]

@NerdPropellant @RezabekA @suzania The vast majority have honest objections. The responses aren't representative.

[.toml @LogOffTom]

@suzania @RezabekA I'm defending your own position lol. Those comments underneath the Monet post are not representative of the majority of people who object to AI art. Myself included.

[.toml @LogOffTom]

@catholicbirder @RezabekA @suzania Exactly, he set out to solicit them. He even made a second post underneath further guiding responses to focus entirely on image comparison.

Still, most people who object to AI art didn't comment, as to them it doesn't matter if a machine can make a 1:1 copy.

[.toml @LogOffTom]

@RezabekA @suzania To engage in the discussion is to accept the frame that reproduction is significant to begin with.

[.toml @LogOffTom]

@Tiga_Tuga1 @pfau Writing is a skill.

[.toml @LogOffTom]

@RezabekA @suzania 'That’s a selection effect though.'

[.toml @LogOffTom]

Mechanical skill was once required for visual art, but it has never been what makes the form art. Writing words with a pen is likewise a mechanical requirement, but writing by hand is not itself the art form.

[.toml @LogOffTom]

@Tiga_Tuga1 @pfau Mechanical skill was once required for visual art, but it has never been what makes the form art. Writing words with a pen is likewise a mechanical requirement, but writing by hand is not itself the art form.

[.toml @LogOffTom]

@catholicbirder @RezabekA @suzania Because you’re observing a form of selection effect when reading those comments.

[.toml @LogOffTom]

@RezabekA @suzania That’s a selection effect though. The majority of objectors would object to a perfect 1:1 representation, or even creating new works ‘in the style of’ 100% accurately.

[.toml @LogOffTom]

@SHL0MS @AlystyrX That's fair, I don't mind the trick used as it pushes discussion further, ultimately bringing clarity.

[.toml @LogOffTom]

@SHL0MS @AlystyrX Questions that reveal a fundamental misunderstanding of the subject can reasonably be criticised.

[.toml @LogOffTom]

@SHL0MS @AlystyrX You're asking the wrong question, and doing so purposely to confirm the bias you entered the discussion with. That's what the commenter here is pointing to, and they're right to do so.

[.toml @LogOffTom]

Clever trick in this post. But taking it at face value, the reason a 1:1 replica is inferior is that an original embodies the artist’s vision as a process, not just as a final image. It contains artistic decisions made under uncertainty and constraint. A replica lacks the original’s event of existence; it arrives after the fact. A perfect double of a signature may look the same, but it is not the same act.

I could go on. There are countless reasons why, and we arrived at most of them long before AI image generation.

[𒐪 @SHL0MS]

i just generated an image in the style of a Monet painting using AI

please describe, in as much detail as possible, what makes this inferior to a real Monet painting

[.toml @LogOffTom]

You used epanorthosis in your comparison, a rhetorical device old enough to have an ancient Greek name. Obviously, this means your post was generated by cutting-edge technology.