• starman2112@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    12 hours ago

    I’m starting to get bored with this, and I feel like my entire opinion can be summed up by

    If I tell a human to draw a cool red dragon sitting on a pile of gold, then I didn’t draw that dragon, that other person did. Replacing that human with an AI doesn’t suddenly mean that I drew it. Ergo, prompt engineers are not visual artists.

    Art necessitates intent on the part of an artist, and machines have no intent. The machine has no opinion about why the bouncer is there, nor the implications of children accessing the internet without actual age verification. Those elements are there on the picture solely because that is what was described in the text, and not to convey any meaning.

    It is meaningless because the “artist” didn’t mean anything when they made it.

    It’s also just not a very interesting piece in general. It’s shallow at best. Just because I can see that the different elements represent different things doesn’t mean it means anything. It doesn’t have anything to say about its very subject matter. They’re just there.

    • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      A flimsy guard against children acting adult on the internet has nothing to say, says meaning understander.

      Someone should’ve scribbled it on a napkin, then it would intend to communicate an idea. It would be art!