Re:Is AI killing the stock photo industry? A data perspective
by GaggiX on Wednesday June 07, 2023 @04:39AM
(#36224401)
I don't know where the concept of "consciousness" came from in the discussion but as I said in the first comment these models already empirically show intelligence and creativity, proving otherwise would be much more meaningful than aligning with the evidence.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Is AI killing the stock photo industry? A data perspective
by wilimitis on Thursday June 08, 2023 @12:17AM
(#36237123)
Yeah I think my point flew over your head, which is fine.
And you're incorrect - you cannot "empirically prove creativity". As a professional artist I don't think you quite understand that the type of creativity we are interested in is not just "permutation", there is clearly a human component.
I'm trying to show you that you are falling into the reverse of the AI effect by assuming that permutation is creativity.
Re:Is AI killing the stock photo industry? A data perspective
by satvikpendem on Thursday June 08, 2023 @12:31AM
(#36237226)
It doesn't seem like you can even define creativity in the first place for any of us to even attempt to answer your supposed point that flew over everyone's heads.
Re:Is AI killing the stock photo industry? A data perspective
by wilimitis on Thursday June 08, 2023 @01:52AM
(#36237759)
I have defined it in your other comment, relax dude. No need to jump threads because you're emotional.
Re:Is AI killing the stock photo industry? A data perspective
by GaggiX on Thursday June 08, 2023 @02:44AM
(#36238144)
>you're incorrect - you cannot "empirically prove creativity"
Do humans even have creativity at this point or do you require a formal proof even for that? Ahah
>As a professional artist
Now I understand where the friction against accepting that even machines show signs of creativity comes from, I imagine you're an illustrator, so the feeling of becoming obsolete is the bias against machines.