I don't know. This decision doesn't sit entirely well with me. I agree that a flood of AI generated images are not necessarily good for anyone but AI algorithms are just tools. In a sense it feels like the same sort of snobbishness that might lead someone to say that digital art isn't real art because there's an undo button and tools like blurs and filters which function automatically. That's all true, it's not the same as hand-drawn art but it takes skills to use those tools effectively. When it comes to using AI art, I imagine the better artists will be those that can envision more interesting scenes and write better prompts to generate those images.
As for the algorithms analysing thousands (I'd guess it's closer to millions) of artworks, so? That's what artists do too. You're supposed to look at art from different artists and learn from it. Sometimes that means studying how the poses work, how to lay out the individual aspects of a piece or even copying a style or technique. That's how art movements are born; people liking and copying a particular way of drawing or painting. Whether that's pointillism or chibi or so on. It's how the way we do things changes. Look at the dolly zoom from Vertigo or the circling camera around a frozen scene from The Matrix. Those have been copied, adapted and reused over and over. The AI is not doing anything that humans haven't been doing already.
The fact that some AI art includes a signature is not evidence that it's somehow evil, just that it doesn't understand what it's doing. It has no concept of a signature or fox or anything else. It knows there are words associated with certain features and it tries to figure out what your new words will look like based on the examples it's seen before. People do the same thing; they will copy the behaviour of others around them, even if they don't understand the reason why people are doing that behaviour. If anything this makes the AI a little less artificial and a little more human.
"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~
I don't know. This decision doesn't sit entirely well with me. I agree that a flood of AI generated images are not necessarily good for anyone but AI algorithms are just tools. In a sense it feels like the same sort of snobbishness that might lead someone to say that digital art isn't real art because there's an undo button and tools like blurs and filters which function automatically. That's all true, it's not the same as hand-drawn art but it takes skills to use those tools effectively. When it comes to using AI art, I imagine the better artists will be those that can envision more interesting scenes and write better prompts to generate those images.
As for the algorithms analysing thousands (I'd guess it's closer to millions) of artworks, so? That's what artists do too. You're supposed to look at art from different artists and learn from it. Sometimes that means studying how the poses work, how to lay out the individual aspects of a piece or even copying a style or technique. That's how art movements are born; people liking and copying a particular way of drawing or painting. Whether that's pointillism or chibi or so on. It's how the way we do things changes. Look at the dolly zoom from Vertigo or the circling camera around a frozen scene from The Matrix. Those have been copied, adapted and reused over and over. The AI is not doing anything that humans haven't been doing already.
The fact that some AI art includes a signature is not evidence that it's somehow evil, just that it doesn't understand what it's doing. It has no concept of a signature or fox or anything else. It knows there are words associated with certain features and it tries to figure out what your new words will look like based on the examples it's seen before. People do the same thing; they will copy the behaviour of others around them, even if they don't understand the reason why people are doing that behaviour. If anything this makes the AI a little less artificial and a little more human.
"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~