Human artist reacts: Robot artist's painting sells for $1 million

[@guillermoperezsantos]

Without emotion, there is no art. The robot is just: a talking printer, maybe a painter, but NEVER an artist

[@christinakentart]

Great point!

[@Arnsteel634]

Art is in the eye of the beholder

[@painterinoil]

I agree! All AI artwork I’ve seen has a dark feeling. It’s nothing like the emotion that a human artist can convey in their art.

[@aartadventure]

I strongly disagree. I've seen many AI generated pieces of art that have evoked emotion and wonder and curiosity in me. By definition that is art, and the creator (the AI) would be the artist by extension. However, I find it concerning that living human artists had their work taken without their consent or approval in order to train the AI. This breaks copyright, and completely disregards the rights of the living artists who had their work taken. This is just the beginning, AI will be coming for an explosion of different jobs in the next 50 years. And the changes are occuring too fast for lawyers and politicians and society to keep up with. I expect some very significant economic upheavals in the next 25 years alone. Some even believe AI could match human intelligence in less than 10 years!

[@andreaandrea6716]

THANK YOU!!!!!!!! I agree. AND, I think it sucks. It is difficult enough for us to exist. All the trauma around a life of people saying "Yeah, but THAT's not a REAL career... so...???" Having to put up with THAT... and then to have some robot sell a piece for a million, is just INSULTING. But it speaks more to SOCIETY and how far it has degraded, than anything else. People want gimmicks and super heroes.

[@glaight6362]

Yes you hit it on the nail "mysterious and spiritual process". No AI can grasp that.

[@chrissyuful]

I’d buy a painting by an elephant before an AI robot! The elephant has a soul and can at least paint from its memories and emotions which are actually depicted in the very art it makes! A robot can only mimic and paint what it’s programmed to. This removes the emotional element of what connects us to art…a shared experience that evokes an emotion. In many ways, it’s comparable to a home cooked meal at grandma’s kitchen, or picking up fast food from a drive thru. There’s something to be said for the love, effort, thoughtfulness, time, heart and soul, poured into something that gives it intrinsic worth… there is an element of sacrifice involved.

[@andreaandrea6716]

I love this comment! Yes! Yes & yes. I occasionally frame children's drawings which, a lot of the time, are much more exciting than things I've seen in galleries.

[@MadisonBriggsArtchick]

I have seen that exhibit in MOMA in person. Though it was fascinating, kind of like what I would expect an LSD or mushroom trip would be like, it eventually seemed boring. I honestly don’t know what to think about all this. I am 66 years old and I will continue to paint without AI for the rest of my life. Whether it touches other people is a wonderful side effect of my work, but I will continue to express myself, regardless.

[@christinakentart]

Thanks for sharing your experience! I'm with you :) happy painting!

[@christianday8430]

Yes. You have nailed it. That is why I paint. Keep up the great work. I love many of your store/restaurant scenes and the street scene behind you.

[@christinakentart]

Thank you!

[@grghkllb3875]

The tree of art has always been in a constant state of evolution, and this is simply one more branch that has grown out from it. While I think AI can be interesting and opens up many possibilities as a creative space, I feel like it always has a sense of "cheapness" or (pun intended) artificiality to it. There will always be a shallow, hollow-ness to it. I do believe it can inspire, which is valuable in itself, but it will always lack energy and emotion compared to a piece of artwork created by a living thing.

[@christinakentart]

I love that metaphor - the tree of art is always evolving, and AI is just the latest branch :)

[@ronschlorff7089]

Great points, and it reminds me of old movies with "matt paintings" in scenes done by great artists. Enter CGI today and all that has been replaced by soulless, if more "realistic", movie backgrounds, and even main characters, gone are the rubber suits of old sci fi monsters, but also gone are the gripping stories to be told and the imaginative qualities that the observer or an art piece, in any genre, including motion pictures, brings to the party!!

[@ronschlorff7089]

Christina, good thought-provoking discussion, your instincts are right on and shared by many of us. As a retired scientist, biology, who did art even before being employed in my career, in grad school, and throughout to this day, I can appreciate the technology but not the gimmick aspects. I believe AI has its place in society, and especially in things like space exploration, and there is no stopping it, but people will continue to do and collect art. We, as intelligent and creative creatures, have a long history of it dating back about 40,000 years, or longer, when, even then, we had both representative and abstract paintings on our caves and other rocky surfaces. I suppose an AI art piece will attract a certain collector, maybe a tech-oriented person, and human produced art will attract another collector, one who has other works in their collection. Funny to even be making the distinction between a human and robot produced art, but that is the world we live in now. : ) I still think that the person who bought the banana duck taped to a canvas, and ate it, got a better deal, than AI-Da's painting. At least they had some good nutrition for their whole body as well as for their mind and soul as a collector of fine art. LOL ;D.

[@andreaandrea6716]

And perhaps we should distinguish between the two: 'Art and 'Faux Art' ... or F'art (for short)?

[@ronschlorff7089]

@@andreaandrea6716 Exactly! And we've had that for a long time before now, in my opinion!

[@andreaandrea6716]

@@ronschlorff7089 Yes!!

[@chrissyuful]

The human experience cannot be replaced by AI…only imitated and programmed by a human to reproduce the basic elements of art (brush strokes, stippling, color theory, perspective, contrast, etc.,) it cannot look around and understand why something is beautiful or worthy of being selected as a paint worthy subject. It cannot connect to the emotions of human experience. At best, it can process and produce well that which a human observed, found value in, and then try and replicate it. Nothing is creatively original or novel. For this reason, it cannot replace human artists and their originality. But it can pique interest among those seeking novelty. The things that make humanity most beautiful is that it leaves room for imperfections to be embraced, and for rules to be broken so we can evolve beyond the rules of commonly accepted expectations.

[@cedarraine7829]

No consciousness, no human emotion & no real hand.

[@robcoyle5011]

And art once absorbed into a financial asset no longer has a consciousness. A perfect end. You can only pursue it for yourself alone at this point. Seeking any recognition will become increasingly pointless

[@andrewchambers9752]

Ai-Da's algorithms are deeply guarded IP for sure. Her work and AI arts are somewhat interesting but derivitive from the start. Still, it is more interesting to look at than a banana duct taped to a wall. Great video and food for thought. Thank you 😊

[@christinakentart]

Ha! So true. The banana is just... **shakes head**

[@PapaRocks]

You have a soul that informs your art in a way ai cannot achieve. Also ai art will likely make human art more desirable and valuable.

[@Nyfiken-8]

Exactly!

[@christinakentart]

Great point :)

[@daveanderson8776]

I agree ! But a real artist( not a robot ) such as you or myself start out with a vague idea sometimes and end up with something we can not preconceive or even understand how we came up with the final elements and this is called musing and I really don’t think AI is capable of musing in the human sense of the word . Or feeling in the human sense ,or emotions in the human sense of the word because there is no life experience, no real sense of self , just data Or information not intuition. This is really a great subject to discuss ,thanks for bringing it up 😊

[@christinakentart]

That's a great point, one of my favorite parts of the creative process is letting go and seeing where the process takes me :)

[@andreaandrea6716]

Great observation!! Musings. Hmmm. Really good.

[@franksliwa362]

Personally I’m never going to worry about a computer attempting to do what I do naturally. I have better things to do with my time. Like actually creating paintings, sculptures, and pottery….

[@christinakentart]

Ha! Great point. Time to get back to work :)

[@MaxxRemKing1]

First they (AI / ROBOTS) came for the artists... then they came for all of us. I'm not paranoid Im just ahead of the curve😬

[@harryjamessmithmusic7762]

Great video, Christina! I think I should get into painting and buy myself a brush! lol ... Greetings from the EU!

[@maisycakes1125]

Thankyou for a well informed and considered overview. It really grounded me on the subject as I had been worrying.

[@timcastle1844]

Once upon a time AI art would have been called "Painting by numbers." The only real difference is the technology. At this time there are also "colouring in" books for adults which used to be the domain of children. These things can be called "art" but in fact they are merely imitations.

[@christinakentart]

You make a good point-AI art can feel like a high-tech version of "painting by numbers." It's following patterns and algorithms without the deeper personal intention behind it. While it can produce visually interesting results, it seems more like imitation than true, expressive art. There’s a big distinction between creating something from your own imagination and simply filling in the blanks!

[@timcastle1844]

@@christinakentart I believe that is so. When faced with a blank canvas it is, at the same time, both terrifying and exciting. Basically it is a big, empty hole and I am going to attempt, it doesn't always work out as planned, to fill it with something that has never existed before, and that with brushes and oil paint. The medium, the tools, the process combine with originality and it takes practice, more practice, hard work, frustration and soul searching to express the idea, via arm and hand, into reality. AI is for the lazy and it will never replace the human experience. Wishing you all the best.

[@Nyfiken-8]

Ai ”art” lacks one thing: an artist. Which is when you think about it a big part of of what we experience in art. It cannot as you say try to make it’s own sense of the world and express emotion, it’s just a result of algorithms plus data. Rather let it do my taxes than the things that make life worth living.

[@christinakentart]

I totally get what you're saying-there's something irreplaceable about the human connection in art. The emotion, the personal experience, and the artist’s perspective are all things an algorithm can’t truly replicate. Let AI handle the boring stuff so humans have more time to make art!

[@rpennybrown]

As you spoke my response was to simply understand that AI robots were made to perform like us, mankind, but they are soulless. I feel the painting sold at a high price because some saw the historic value of it and drove the price up in competing for the ownership. Was there a stipulation that the same output would not be repeated so as to "make" the outputted painting "unique" or could the very same painting be produced again (I do not say "created") like a production line? That possibility would seem to devalue the AI's painting in my mind. I do not value such AI output, no matter how appealing it is. It is dehumanizing. This technology seems unstoppable and it is not a stretch to imagine we may very well soon have to face deciding whether to vote for an AI robot for president.

[@seanl3121]

The art community needs to come up with new words (other than art) for things created by AI or machines. Otherwise the word "art" is in danger of its meaning being changed or diluted. Art is human expression.

[@petersenesac8102]

An excellent idea it's AI design not art. Or if you want to make it a three-letter word we'll call it aid

[@19th-centuryartist56]

When a computer beat the world champion in chess for the first time, that did not kill chess. And nobody calls a chess-playing computer a "chess player": it is a computer, while chess players are human - and chess as a game is interesting because it is played by humans, with human qualities, strengths, weaknesses, emotions being a key factor. Likewise, we should not use the term a "robot artist" or an "AI artist" - it is a computer, a machine, designed to imitate human art. By the way, my cats can paint too - are they "feline artists"? 🙂

[@christinakentart]

I agree, the human element is so important. Computers/AI can do cool stuff, but I don't feel the same connection or meaning as when humans accomplish things.

[@jasonhawkins1228]

Well said!

[@jareduxr]

Purple pigment was one of the most luxurious items, reserved for nobility, because you would have to crush thousands of special little sea shells to get a drop. Now you can make purple in a lab, copying someone else recipe effortlessly. This effortlessness made purple accessible to everyone but reduced its value. Of course, you can still get Tyrian purple for a price. Even when we subtract all the deeper qualities of art and artists, like intention, meaning, uniqueness, emotion, humanity, if we wanted to look at this coldly and economically, things that are effortless have very little value. The buyer of this work values AI, not art. It's likely they are investors in AI, using this marketing hype to add value to that investment. AI art is the equivalent of clip art.

[@christinakentart]

So true - an AI can make a seemingly infinite number of paintings, while a human can only make a few in their entire short and precious life. To me, that makes a huge difference when valuing the work.

[@ronschlorff7089]

@@christinakentart and probably only indoors, no plein airs, especially if it should suddenly rain, then, oh my: zzzzzziiiiiisss,,, pop, siizzle, pooofff! ....There go the diodes! LOL ;D

[@SepulvedaBoulevard]

Years ago they put a robot coffee maker in the lobby of the Metreon and people lined up to buy robo-coffee, even though Mr Coffee had been around for decades. The robots are definitely coming, but I still make my paintings. The contemporary art world has always been a little goofy, robots will have their 15 minutes. Remember when a monkey took a selfie and the courts had to intervene? There's room for us all to do our thing.

[@christinakentart]

Haha great points, thanks for the perspective. I agree, there is room for all of us!

[@anitapeura3517]

Great discussion, thanks for raising this issue. Like other commenters below, I am also a scientist with a passion for art of all kinds and respect for the creators, and their process, thankful that my own practice is more with textiles - may be a longer wait before AI can take that on! I'd be really nervous if I were a painter, I can only hope that AI art will be properly labelled as such. However with past human history with its fakes and contrivances, my expectations are not high. How much was paid for the banana on the wall? How does AI art sit in that sort of mercenary environment? With all the hoohah over Ai Da I did wonder that there was no footage of "her" actually painting, leaving a deep gap in understanding how those pictures were made, and a feeling of distrust and suspicion. Not the feelings art is "supposed" to induce.

[@BlueSkyOcean]

Thanks for sharing ❤

[@christinakentart]

Glad you liked it!

[@chrissyuful]

Ai-da = Artificial Intelligence Digital Art

[@davetekannon]

This is from a human artist. For most if not all of my career, my art has never sold and I am still at because that is what I am. You cannot go into creative work thinking you are going to strike it rich. This is what I have learned, but what I am most happy about is that although I could have stopped creating years ago, I am working just as hard as I did when I started and if my art ends up selling for pocket change in flea markets, so be it!

[@bluedogbluey6742]

Vincent said "I want them to say 'he feels deeply, he feels tenderly." For me art is about emotion and feeling, I can't get excited about a robot painting. I feel that the thought to be cold and fake. It is a good subject to discuss as there are far reaching consequences not just for art.

[@robford3211]

I think right now it’s not possible to have a Robot with a mind and feelings but I think eventually it can happen . There is a whole branch of biology that deals with artificial organic matter. If humans are able to make a Robot with artificial organic matter and I think that eventually then can and that robot will think and have a mind then it’s clearly not just an object but something that has evolved and shifting evolving pattern . Then we are somewhat in trouble if scientists would want to merge it with a human being to create a hybrid. Don’t worry Christina just do you authentic Art and people will buy it , besides you are not competing with human artists like Jeff Koons who makes extraordinary bad art for 9 figures just because he gained the art market as a maverick salesman.

[@Nayana-c7c]

Why is automation so dead set on tackling the art world first. There's really no need for it in this field. Why don't they focus their energy elsewhere where it might actually be beneficial to humanity. Or could it be the gatekeepers working overtime to stop real artists from succeeding. Hmm, it's hard enough for artists as is.

[@debbieyash1679]

They won’t take our heart and soul!

[@yamine8906]

Art is being. Existing with Soulful awareness. Being alive with thoughtfulness, desires and emotions and the ability to express them. AI doesn't have our purposeful capacities. It is ran by receptive programing and the intents of its creators. I think us artists are pretty safe.

[@RealityNonSequitur]

Seems a print of just what Aida referenced from cameras would escape the copywrite laws? However, if it doesnt and a human paints what Aida has printed then it does escape the copywrite laws.

[@dorisr6424]

Hi Christina. As always, a very well thought out analysis. I have two main concerns. I’m troubled by this need to replace humans. Obviously as you mentioned, economics have always been behind any progress, it is naive to think otherwise. My other concern, and this is not just regarding art, is the willingness by humanity to blindly accept, be it religion, politics, science, technology. We would all be well-served to slow down, consider all available information, and try to make informed decisions. You know what lemmings do, right?

[@christinakentart]

Thank you! I share your concerns. The push to replace humans with AI, driven by economics and power, is very unsettling. It's going to have huge implications for our society.

[@johntaylor6211]

I was waiting for you to say ... This one time at band camp

[@strollingthroughparadise353]

Thanks for this information, but as an artist, I know that these pieces by AI are an attempt by some to eliminate the real artist who is creating from their own individuality. Also the piece that sold was probably bought because the buyer wanted to have one of the first pieces of “art” made by AI. Again the world seems to be confused about creativity and how it actually impacts us. And as you said art does connect us in more ways than people think.

[@hotlineoperator]

A large sum for a work, is it a genuine purchase or is the money just recycled money between the buyer and the seller? I always think about large art prices that they may involve money laundering or some kind of marketing ploy, sometimes the buyer's tax planning. Of course, for an artist, becoming a seller of expensive works is like winning the lottery.

[@christinakentart]

Yes, with a big price tag like this, it makes me wonder what other forces are at play.

[@mikefritz3322]

The question is, do human emotions and experiences that artists utilize to produce the work matter to the buyer?

[@ionlyemergeafterdark]

At Uni I did a course on Neural Networks which is, I believe, how AI works. I got nearly 95% in the examination. It was an easy course. I would say that AI is entirely derivative although a random component can be added. So, for me, AI art is stealing from other people's art.

[@Tooradj]

Humans' fight for relevance is already lost. Feeding the robots is the last job we will have.

[@feefawfern8240]

Thanks for sharing the news, but it is confusing why this episode isn't more doom&gloom, or having a greater emphasis on helping your fellow humans with finding/exploring a way to resist (with optimism).

[@havefunbesafe]

I love my AI and personal Robots…they are more human than human.

[@daveanderson8776]

Also how much money was invested in the robot 🤖? A million dollars ? Two million dollars?

[@christinakentart]

Good question, probably even more, since they've been working on it for years and it sounds like several researchers and universities were involved.

[@laineyart]

'She' was questioned by parliamentary reps in UK govt. a couple of yrs ago. not on art. Spooky. Music going the same way. Also questions of ownership and copyright for human artists, musicians, photographers and film makers, actors etc...

[@inmommashands7139]

Ai will never be human, the wont ever be able to create like we do

[@ltwig476]

I don't blame Ai, rather stupid money is to blame for this and the stupid banana taped to a panel that recently sold at auction for multi millions. It's been well documented the corruption of stupid money in art sales. If anything, the Ai art should inspire artist to be more creative and less narcissistic about trying to only copy other's ideas and styles to combine them for something claiming their own creation. Saying that Ai is guilty of what artist have been doing for centuries seems somehow wrong to me. Whether Chrstina's work or many others have a strong resemblance of Hoppers style, it's their prerogative. It's what they love and can be proficient doing. To claim you can't compete is just letting yourself down.

[@christinakentart]

Yes, the money involved in this is ridiculous. And I agree, I think AI can inspire human artists, rather than being seen as a competitor.

[@Sharperthanu1]

What is the Robot artist going to do with the money?

[@cindystave627]

Did Ada get to keep the money? If not, is Ada isn't the artists the person who made her is.

[@TheObSeRvErTheObSeRv]

Artist project there thoughts, idea`s and SOUL in there work. A.I Is MANS way of PLAYING GOD.!!!

[@kresimirpleic]

At the end of the day, AI is just a bullshit generator. As for the $1 million that somebody paid for that thing - there are two possibilities: 1) a case of a fool and his money being easily parted, or 2) money laundering. Either way, you can't replace an artist. Love your paintings. Cheers!

[@douglasriddle6447]

AI generated art is all based on the theft of other's art work.........that art work is the data that AI produces from. AI is currently just a very supplicated collage program. All art is dictated by emotion, whether conscious or unconscious. What colors you chose is based on your emotional experience to a reference. And no two humans have the same exact emotional response. Yes you can train AI that the color yellow represents happiness, but it doesn't mean that to all artists. Your emotional response may be tied to a tragic event. So AI can mimic human choices, but it can't do it based on emotion, which is the bases of all art. As for Ai-Da's paining selling for 1M......W.C. Fields said it best....."You can fool some of the people some of the time...and that's enough to make a decent living"

[@christinakentart]

I agree, art is deeply personal and driven by unique emotional experiences that AI can’t truly replicate. And I agree, that quote sums it up well!

[@guillermoperezsantos]

Its just marketing and greed, it´s like that banana tapped to a wall, that banana is only worthy because of the author Cattelan, now day art world if filled with people that buys a "name" rather than a "work" and also those big action houses are very shady. BTW the robots paint is quite dark and boring painted with no talent, obviously ...........

[@andreaandrea6716]

It's not Art. It's Advertising.

[@yagodarkmoon]

Uniqueness is not something new. Yes, you add your take on a subject but that makes it unique not new. New is something never seen or thought of before. It would be outside of experience so it would also be completely misunderstood by the audience because they lack any reference to measure it by. If this happens at all, it is vanishingly rare.

[@victorallwise3520]

12:22 AI making "their" work ??? a machine is a "they"?! with personhood?? If a face is added to my laptop or pickup truck does that mean it's a person??

[@MontyVideo969]

If you define art as a creation that can be shared and appreciated by the beholder then clearly the definition relies upon the existence of a beholder rather than the artist. This must be the case because, if $1m was exchanged to purchase the peice mentioned, the originator didn't need to be a human.

[@liv0003]

Art is a human expression, without a human and consequently without human expression there is no art

[@MontyVideo969]

@@liv0003 OK. Call it *AIRT* then. it will still look like art. It will still sell as though it is art.

[@manolochavando7278]

Simple..SILICON HAS NO SOUL. If we consider robots as artists we are doomed as a species. Art, in any form of expression, is a human gift. I do not understand why the people who develop those algorithms are so obsessed trying to emulate human artists instead of focusing on technologies that help us thrive as humans instead of developing technologies that could destroy us. As far as I know and understand, those programs can also write and develop codes, so, do those developers have not realized that if robots actually become conscious or "aware of their existence" (as a famous sci fi saga says) they will be the first to be "deleted"? I am sure that artists will not be a target so "they" can ensure self preservation. I honestly think of those things as advanced printing machines..but never artists... keep creating, keep being human. In a world full and saturated with technology, I am sure that human made art will be priceless.

[@Niadrawings]

I think that the price that was paid for this AI’s artwork is not as absurd as the price paid for the taped banana. I’ve seen some AI artworks that I found fascinating and actually expand our imagination and evoke emotions, so for now I don’t find AI art threatening to artists.

[@christinakentart]

Haha good point!

[@KWHCoaster]

I wonder if the banana included the fruit flies. Or were they a $400K add-on?

[@massimilianoazzara9257]

Visual Art has become a mere commodity and most of the “customers “ are as ignorant as ignorance can be….don’t bother,keep enjoying what you do

[@victorallwise3520]

0:22 Christina, why are you calling the machine "her"?? why does machinery making images need two arms and a face? This is a slippery slope we are on right now. Stay alert!

[@aaronbarnett7113]

Yet

[@andreaandrea6716]

And, on the other end of the scale, how about all the rubbish produced in factories in China, sold in your local big-box stores that PEOPLE ACTUALLY BUY!?!?! Rather than investing in a piece of ORIGINAL Art, done by an ACTUAL Artist. It is SO depressing.

[@aliiscott1346]

I think its a gimmick and I also think spare cash is no indication of intelligence.

[@devernepersonal3636]

all i think is you have to be a moron to spend that much money on something a robot made that was not even physical. if it were real art....maybe? but, digital art for sure is only worth something if a human makes it. All i can think is that if some moron will buy a duck tapped banana that will go bad, and people will pay for a canvas with scribbles on it or anything from AI, then perhaps there is no reason to do anything. the idea that humans are so obsessed with progress that they will stop at nothing to create convenience that will quickly take away every single persons purpose for living...we have no control, its whatever the corporations decide. No reason to think any of us could be a superstar today in any creative world with ai coming around. honestly the AI modern art looks like real modern art.....which simply not that great lol, so i see no difference there. lol. i mean art kind of is that though. we are doing that. the reason we are scared is because robots are doing it, and if they are doing it, what is left for us to do? David Bowie and many artists talk about how you take the best that has come before and remix it. its true. its bad that robots are doing it because they will replace us. The only reason AI art is not art is because it is being made by a robot, not a human. only humans can make art. all art is to a point derivative. You know you are creative if you can really stand out to people as truly original. i mean you are annoyed by it, but it is true, we essentially created robots to do what we do already 9:53. That is precisely what we do. and we can be inspired more directly than we think by things we saw in the past but have deeply stored away in our minds. The reason AI is bad is because it WILL replace us in industry and in that way will take the meaning out of artists lives. You're right it should not be ignored, AI should be removed from earth. 11:16, what is behind what you are saying is, " i am scared that AI will make being human and making meaning out of the world irrelevant" and you are right to be scared of that. it is coming if they don't pull the plug on AI.

[@dorisr6424]

Just think how many mouths could have been fed, how many wells could have dug for the price of one banana. So so out of touch and shameful.

[@dorisr6424]

yes, I read the whole thing. I agree and was adding a point about people spending that much for a banana. Sorry if that wasn’t clear.

[@christinakentart]

I get where you're coming from-AI art does raise big concerns about creativity and purpose. AI might open up new possibilities, but it also threatens jobs and the value of human creativity. At the same time, even as AI progresses, as long as humans are alive I believe we will need to tell our stories and make meaning from the world, and making art is a key part of that process.

[@smeagolishone]

The bot art is still simply ai art, which like all ai art is stolen from images that already existed. It cant create anything as it doesnt have imagination

[@Momo85421]

Is it realy new? It’s like a ready made but on steroids 🙈😂😭

[@charlottand]

so.. who got that 1mio dollars? Should go to creating a better world, some ngo! 🙂

[@petersenesac8102]

It's not kind of derivative, it's totally derivative. The whole problem with AI is its derivative of everybody it steals from everybody

[@fuzonzord9301]

It seems to me that these AIs are basically literally artificial imaginations. I heard you mentioning emotions in your art multiple times. I don't how you expect them to be communicated through it?

[@petersenesac8102]

You just called it her!. It is an it. it is not a her. We're forced to call people who don't know their gender them. But now we're forced to call the totally sexless robot her?

[@stephenabbott7259]

Cash dump.

[@roberthines1692]

I’m sorry but I don’t believe in this AI when it comes to art it needs to come from the human mind.

[@salemaforever]

It's parasitic. The robot is a tool created by a team of engineers, coders, etc. A scam?

[@glaight6362]

Are you serious!? You think AI can mimic the human creative process! OK may be when an AI is able to be born and live the experiences of a human it might get close to what it is to create art. But AI is so far from that experience. Human art is created from remembered human experiences and all the complex emotions that go along with the human experience. Ai is just a set of inputs/ outputs. Guilable people can give it a sex and name and kid themselves it's almost human and it's creating art but fact is it dosnt come close. It's sad that some people are sucked into this delusion but there's plenty of people that don't and never will understand true artistic expression, and that's fine that's human. We're going to have to get used to it because it's not going away.

[@Kyle-j7h]

There is nothing humans can do that A.I. can’t do better. If not now, then very soon. It sucks, but we just have to accept it.

[@christinakentart]

I agree that AI will replace us in many endeavors, and AI art is getting better and better. However, I still find something very meaningful knowing an art piece was made by a human, even if it is not as "good" as what an AI could do.

[@Kyle-j7h]

@@christinakentart Agreed. There will always be a place for human made art. I like your art by the way and find your channel inspiring.

[@christinakentart]

@ thank you!

[@cameronoday5424]

It's interesting to me that people wouldn't call "ai art" art. People paint sunsets and mountains because of their beauty. But the things that brought these things to form had no intellect.

[@davidgough3512]

the totality of creation may be operating as a Whole or it may not, but i will venture that intellect, regardless of where it dwells, serves to convey something greater than intellect