Raw LLM Responses

I think there's a couple pieces of nuance that routinely get left out of the conversation, and I kinda call it the "instagram filter effect". And spoilers, I'm not anti AI but I am against claiming something as yours when you didn't develop the skill to create what you're so proud of. When instagram was new and "filters" were the punching bag there was an explosion of self proclaimed "photographers". But a garbage picture with a filter on it is still garbage. Real photographers/videographers use presets and LUTs all the time, but the art isn't the color shift, the art is what they're communicating with their craft. You're not an "author" if someone else ghost-wrote your book, but using spell check and google docs doesn't undermine your artistic integrity. Generative AI is different in that it gives the illusion of technical ability, but I've never met an artist didn't derive joy from developing a craft. Generative AI isn't disrupting creative expression, it's disrupting human generated slop, and artists are going to create a counter movement that's critical of Gen-AI that's going to have a huge cultural impact. To me this all feels the same as the Jackson Pollock discourse. He was revolutionary for is work which was at the time a reaction and commentary on the world that he lived in, but all the wannabe knockoffs who just splashed some paint on a canvas and called it "Abstract Expressionism" completely missed the point. Today the AI prompt jocky is just doing that, dripping paint on a canvas claiming to be the same thing as Pollock and completely missing why anyone liked the original. Art moves people, it says something. AI slop is just high gloss slop, an instagram filter on a meaningless photo, a "designer" who can only make clothes from patterns. It is in and of itself a criticism of the capitalist commodification of artistic ability, and all these prompt jockeys don't realize they are the ones being critiqued. Generative AI has limitless technical ability, and absolutely no soul.