There is so much drama and contro-versy in this comment stream: this takes away from the vital issue of WHAT IS ART - a question which has been completely obscured in recent decades, and which is being further muddied with the combattive dialogue here.
This in turn takes energy-time-attention from the actual Art, and therefore weakens our human relationship with Art and with our Divine Co-Creative vitality which should be at the centre of all that we do.
Original content in regards to what is being shared on Hive is unique and created by the hands, mind, heart, spirit and/ or vital force of a living woman or a living man. It comes from our whole being, or part of a whole being which represents the whole.
AI-generated content or 'art' is that is simply is not Art. Then again, a lot of what is presented in the world, and on Hive, is also not Art per se - but it is a beautiful expression of human being.
Art by its natural meaning has to be original: anything else is mimicry and is not original. This is not easy to police: many folk in this day and age are living in a purely mental construct, and therefor may be writing the same words but projecting a VERY different meaning (or a lesser depth of meaning) from them, even if they are the same words.
Similarly, pixels and algorithms can be used to 'create' imagery, but this will have nothing like the power of depth and meaning, and no essence of expression, like a hand, spoken word or brushstroke could have.
Many folks are using computer programming effects or AI algorithms to not only act like brushstrokes, but to mimic the external layer of a complexly constructed visual language, which in Real Life would have not just multiple levels of expression, development and construction under that outer layer (which would have taken weeks months or years of sincere toil to create), but which also come from a Living Woman or a Living Man who has dedicated multiple years OR A FUCKING LIFETIME THANK YOU to their craft.
Real Art is not dabbling with paint, nor is it a hobby or passtime, nor is it something that can be copied or mimicked: it is a dedicated life practise, evolved through hard graft, sacrifice and the walking of a path of non-compromise, not settling for comfort and conformity. Few folks comprehend this: 'art' as it is presented to us through 'cult'-ure is nothing of the sort, so any argument using the mainstream concept of 'art' as the premise - will only create more mud.
The use of complex, 'exciting' and fantastic imagery to distract and enter'taint' the human mind is a drug of our age: it fills our superficial senses and brings us out of the deeper sentience that should be embodied in our Living mindbodyspiritcosmos: Art is nothing less than that which anchors us in the mindbodyspiritcosmos. In a world in which most of us are floating like satellites outside of ourselves, Art is the umbilical that can bring us back down home: soul inside body, aligned and in natural hierachy, instead of being controlled by preprogramming and brainwashing to be separate from our true identity and the Art Of Life.
ART is ART - no mater how is made. It is just personal opinion, period.
You use PC to do write here, so for one writer, who use pen, you are a bad actor here. Do you should be banned and blacklisted?
The same is with the art. One that use PC or AI as a tool to draw something with ideas, very fast, is a bad actor for those who use pen.
So, where we go? AI is here and will stay here, we should embrace it, like other things we have to.
And, it is personal opinion, how someone thinking about this, but, I'm not fine to go and ban and blacklist people, just because of own opinion, and because, you have the power. That's my point here, and that's what HW team is doing right now.
It is essential to address the notion that both art and information generated by artificial intelligence lack value or meaning. The claim that AI-generated content is not art overlooks the fact that art, in its essence, is a form of expression that can manifest in various ways, including through algorithms and technology.
Art is not limited to manual creation; it can also represent ideas, emotions, and concepts that we have yet to explore. Artificial intelligence can facilitate the generation of works that challenge our perceptions and invite us to reflect on new creative possibilities. Just as an artist uses tools like brushes and canvases, AI is simply another medium available to us for exploring creativity.
Moreover, the argument that articles produced by AI are invalid solely because of their origin is equally problematic. The quality and truthfulness of information are what truly matter, not the medium through which it was created. If an article provides valuable and well-founded analysis, its origin should not disqualify it. The ability of AI to process and present information efficiently can be a powerful tool for researchers and creators, allowing them to bring their ideas to paper more quickly.
Insisting that AI-generated content is inferior or inauthentic can be seen as an attempt to maintain control over what is considered valid in the realm of art and information. Instead of rejecting innovation, we should embrace these tools and use them to enrich our conversations and expand our understandings.
Ultimately, the responsibility lies with us, as consumers of information and art, to discern the quality of the content we encounter, regardless of its origin. Creativity and knowledge should not be limited by prejudices about how they are produced; instead, we should focus on the value they bring to our lives and society.
Thanks for this stimulating comment, @topospunk - it is valid of course within a certain context and with a certain level of comprehension around what the divine co-creative capacity of humans actually is.
At the same time, AI right now is carving out a great (and profoundly destructive) distraction from what our potential is: BECAUSE of our ingrained, super-significant separation from spirit, from deep imagination and from our immense collective co-creative power (and because of the occulting of this separation) we cannot return to source or expand/ create from source, if we enter a smaller creative orbit with AI - no matter how titillating and thrilling the imagery appearing before our eyes on the screen is.
This is similar to the discourse or metaphor of gender confusion; we cannot collectively comprehend anything of the potential of the sacred feminine to flourish in these times, until we return first to the actual womb-centred holistic view of Reality: men playing at being women is a huge distraction from the vital work that we have to do, in returning to our centres and our centredness as Womb-Ones.
Similarly, a 'creative practise' or 'art' lacking profound, holistic unblocked relationship-with-all-things is by definition open to distortion and manipulation, and AI has NOT been designed as a neutral or benign tool, at this point in our story.
@exoexplorer @vincentnijman @in2itiveart - you may all be interested in this discussion?
Thank you for the response. Allow me to be direct and address some key points.
First, it is mentioned that AI lacks a "deep, holistic, and unblocked relationship with all things." But let’s think about this: do we disqualify the work of architects who now design using computers just because they no longer use pencil and paper? Technology has advanced, and with it our creative tools. The fact that something is done with technology does not make it less valuable or authentic.
Regarding the idea of "returning to the source" or to the spiritual, it is essential to remember that not everyone shares those beliefs. For many, AI is a tool that allows for the expression of ideas, exploration of emotions, and projection of thoughts in ways that were previously unimaginable. It’s not that technology is in conflict with creativity; rather, it empowers it.
On the topic of technology, it is crucial to clarify that none is intrinsically good or bad. A knife can be used to prepare food or to cause harm, depending on who uses it and with what intention. The same goes for AI. It is not a matter of technology being "benign" or "malign," but how we use it. Like any tool, the power of AI depends on the hands that wield it.
Furthermore, no one should have to conform to the policies of a small group of Luddites who consider themselves the police of art and information, dictating what is valid and what is not. Hive is a diverse platform with many communities and different perspectives, and it makes no sense to limit oneself to the opinions of a few who try to impose their visions. There are many other communities that value innovation and creative diversity.
Finally, while all beliefs are respected, it is vital to recognize that we live in a world where ideas, tools, and forms of expression are constantly evolving. AI is part of that evolution, and for many, it is a valuable tool that opens up new creative possibilities. No one should feel obligated to justify their use of these tools to those who do not wish to adapt to modern times.
I hear your view, and hear the great limitation of the projection onto spiritual Truth and holistic Oneness: there is no further discussion to grow from this. 🙏🌟 Be well.
Thank you for your response. I would just like to clarify that no one possesses absolute truth, and not all of us fall for the deceptions of 'new age' and similar ideas. However, I appreciate you sharing your perspective. Have an excellent day. 🙏✨