Parah Dice & Marsias - Motive

[@Samurai_Marcin]

Wonderful song🎵🎵🎵

[@OscarNunes-pc5dt]

Withe and Blue, Interaction in the garden of consciousness. 💐 🔷🔵

[@TheMakiepoo]

Fire

[@iceninja2612]

This was a really good House song. ^-^

[@thedeeprot]

[@xbsjfbsjd]

the last time I heard from Parah is from the Everybody Scared srsly

[@nelsontordera1]

wonderful track, thanks xkito for the dope upload

[@kyuokuo]

This art and the music are both great! Loving the new direction you have been taking things in! Making it harder for your videos to be taken down is always a win in my books!

[@PumaDac3]

biboo

[@mindfree7155]

👁️🖤

[@irisu469]

Nice

[@martyluciano533]

Fire art selection like always!

[@MagnaFae]

I think it’s AI-generated…

[@Justalilcyn]

​@@MagnaFae so? It's still a cool image

[@MagnaFae]

@@Justalilcyn It’d be cooler if an actual person drew it.

[@kyuokuo]

@@MagnaFae just because it would take longer then? Because sometimes that is the only difference between one and the other...

[@MagnaFae]

@@kyuokuo I disagree. Images made by AI are not art, no matter how “pretty” they might be. AI cannot synthesize new art, only splice and recombine existing images with no comprehension of what it’s doing. There’s no thought to composition or symbolism. AI has no artistic intent, no passion or creative vision. To deny the significance of the human soul in the process of artistic expression is to divorce art from all meaning. Art is meant to be created and consumed by and for people, and digital tools are meant to be only that. Tools. AI cannot approach the creativity and originality of the human mind. Likewise, people who input a prompt into an AI are not artists.

[@asevis1425]

First?

[@loganking6631]

AI art isn't inherently problematic. People using AI to make art and then claiming they made it is.

[@Akuda_Pearl]

Aren't there more artist out there who you could support than those using ai? It is not even hidden, the "artist" clearly states that it is ai-generated, it is no mishap -.-

[@thecrevetteisnotdead]

You know music is just music. I don't really care who is behind the making of it, if it's a human or not. It's just rhythms that makes me wanna live

[@kingderpington6082]

The pictures dont have the usual artifacts of being ai, im guessing the artist generates an image than fixes it/touches it up if they are ai generated at all

[@roxxi3089]

​@thecrevetteisnotdead I'm so excited for the future of music tho! Next time xkito will upload AI generated music 🎉

[@maringlavas5117]

So what?

[@X-x8n]

​@@thecrevetteisnotdeadMusic is Music :O

[@saizinko2737]

888

[@CanaanTheWingedOne]

yeah no the ai art is way too annoying you keep posting that people should ask the artist's permission to use their works and then you steal others' art yourself? This channel used to be worth something.

[@MagnaFae]

Don’t use AI “art”.

[@MagnaFae]

@Generic877 It isn’t fine. Even on a technical level, it isn’t. If you follow the shapes with your eyes, they don’t make any sense. Like that crystal-looking thing on the forehead that doesn’t connect to anything.

[@MagnaFae]

@Generic877 Again, it isn’t art if it isn’t made by a person. An artist who draws imperfect hands can still look at the hands and recognize that they don’t meet realistic proportions. Said artist could then practice their anatomy and improve over time. An AI doesn’t “know” anything, and cannot critique itself. It just mindlessly smashes images together based on data it has been fed, and its ability to generate more accurate hands is limited by the sophistication of its coding. AI has no artistic intent. I will always praise a piece made by an amateur artist over a “perfect” AI-image.

[@MagnaFae]

@Generic877 Very mature of you, to throw a thinly-veiled death threat at me simply because I dislike AI-generated “art”. But, frankly, I’m confused about why you seem so insistent on defending the use of AI in creative spaces. What do YOU gain from this? Are you just trying to be a contrarian? Are you responsible for programming AIs like these? Or do you just want to “win” this argument? Maybe you just like annoying me because I keep responding to you. Regardless, I will not be responding to any more messages you send. Frankly, nothing you say is going to convince me that I’m in the wrong for defending the integrity of human artistry. You clearly aren’t a naturally creative or artistic person if you don’t see the problem with substituting human artists with image-generating AI. The fundamental purpose of art is to aid in the expression of the human soul. Art is the medium by which people share meaningful conversations that bypasses language barriers. It conveys the significance of the human experience and every culture. If you don’t believe in the importance of preserving that, then yours is a vapid and empty existence. Contrary to what you might believe, I’m not a technophobe. I believe that AI should be used to make people’s lives easier and more fulfilling. There are some things that AI does well and should be used for. Complex calculations and dangerous industrial tasks and data storage that would otherwise be too time consuming or hazardous for a person to do themselves. Artistic use of AI doesn’t do that. The images it produces can only achieve a pale and hollow imitation of human expression, utterly meaningless. I’m not going to reject technology that implements AI in helpful ways. AI is meant to be a tool. It shouldn’t replace people. And if you think doctors and scientists deserve to be fully replaced by AI, then what function is there left in society for people? Where do we draw the line? Would you have us endlessly consume AI-generated media and eat factory-produced nutrient paste? Should we live unproductively, our lives devoid of meaning and connection? Consider that.

[@SlaaneshiMook]

The song 👍 The art 👎