the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.
HUMAN creative skill. AI is not human, has no creativity, no skill. It is not art.
Credit: thank you to the San Francisco Public Library for their subscription to what would otherwise be an impossibly expensive Oxford English Dictionary
alt-text (OED screenshot)
“I.
Skill; its display, application, or expression.
I.1.
c1300–
Skill in doing something, esp. as the result of knowledge or practice.
c1300
Þu [sc. the Devil] schalt telle me of ȝoure art,…Whi werrie ȝe cristene men among alle oþere mest?
St. Margarete (Harley MS.) l. 194 in O. Cockayne, Seinte Marherete (1866) 30
a1425 (a1400)
Couth never telle, bi clergy, ne arte…þe thowsand parte.
Prick of Conscience (Galba & Harley MS.) (1863) 7434
[Composed a1400]
1549
As the spyder spynneth her webbe with muche arte, [etc.].
J. Ponet, Def. Mariage Priestes sig. Dvi
1581
A most pure and true Church, without wrinckle or spotte, paynted as it were in tables with conning Craftesmans Arte most merueilous to view.
J. Bell, translation of W. Haddon & J. Foxe Against Jerome Osorius f. 308
1611
Golde, or siluer, or stone grauen by arte, and mans deuice.
So once again, AI does not have skill, it cannot practice, it has no knowledge. I will not change my mind on this. AI generated slop is built off the backs of real artists, is terrible for the environment, and is not art.
If I may say something to be funny (comic relief?), “boring!“ (I kid!!!)
OK no, it’s not boring—it’s very important. I do mean to say the argument has played out quite well since folks started playing with DALLE. But I had never considered how we might talk about what a spider does compared to what humans do. (ah I’m sure it’s come up if I took the time to search it)
It’s not art
You don’t understand what the word ‘art’ means then
the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.
HUMAN creative skill. AI is not human, has no creativity, no skill. It is not art.
Holy cow peep this
Credit: thank you to the San Francisco Public Library for their subscription to what would otherwise be an impossibly expensive Oxford English Dictionary
alt-text (OED screenshot)
“I.
Skill; its display, application, or expression.
I.1.
c1300–
Skill in doing something, esp. as the result of knowledge or practice.
c1300
St. Margarete (Harley MS.) l. 194 in O. Cockayne, Seinte Marherete (1866) 30
a1425 (a1400)
Prick of Conscience (Galba & Harley MS.) (1863) 7434
[Composed a1400]
1549
J. Ponet, Def. Mariage Priestes sig. Dvi
1581
J. Bell, translation of W. Haddon & J. Foxe Against Jerome Osorius f. 308
1611
Bible (King James) Acts xvii. 29”
So once again, AI does not have skill, it cannot practice, it has no knowledge. I will not change my mind on this. AI generated slop is built off the backs of real artists, is terrible for the environment, and is not art.
If I may say something to be funny (comic relief?), “boring!“ (I kid!!!)
OK no, it’s not boring—it’s very important. I do mean to say the argument has played out quite well since folks started playing with DALLE. But I had never considered how we might talk about what a spider does compared to what humans do. (ah I’m sure it’s come up if I took the time to search it)
Thanks for bearing with my bad jokes.