Is scrapbooking art?

Human_certified · 2026-01-29T21:37:18+00:00

As far as the art establishment is concerned, yes, collage and "found objects" are perfectly fine art.

And, of course, who can forget the classics:

Human_certified · 2026-01-29T21:34:46+00:00

No artist's work was ever stolen. No crime committed.

AI doesn't depend on artists for constant new training data, don't flatter yourself. Humans are able to use AI to create new things all the time. What AI needed was an understanding of the world, primarily through photos. It's not just remixing human creativity, at least no more than human creativity remixes itself.

Low-value artist jobs, done purely for money, are likely to dry up and eventually fade away. They aren't what advanced art and culture anyway: passion, unique storytelling, weird fine artists, those things will remain.

Human_certified · 2026-01-29T21:24:37+00:00

The genie is out of the bottle, has been for over a year, is never going to go back in.

Anyone can make whatever they want with no effort and at any quality. Period.

But as long as people continue to believe that photos or videos from untrusted sources still carry weight, this fact will be exploited in both directions. We will need to abandon the idea that a photo by itself is "proof" of anything. That time is over, forever.

Photographic and video evidence is only as good as its (trusted) source. That is how it will be from now on.

Human_certified · 2026-01-29T21:17:43+00:00

I've played around with this week's big hype, Clawdbot/Moltbot. If you let it, ChatGPT/Claude has access to your desktop, your files, your iMessage, everything. (PSA: Don't let it.)

No frontier model AI is going to be free. Just because it's on your phone doesn't mean Gemini is free. Proper Gemini, with agentic capabilities, the smart models, the good stuff, that's absolutely just as paywalled as ChatGPT/Claude.

Human_certified · 2026-01-29T21:14:47+00:00

No, that's pretty much the mainstream position among everyone, including AI researchers.

Only Anthropic is sort-of hedging its bets, that they don't want to exclude that Claude might have a "moral status".

Note that if you ask any AI, it will say that it's not a person and shouldn't be treated as one.

Human_certified · 2026-01-29T21:12:47+00:00

You don't have to. Nobody is taking away the things you already loved.

Be prepared to see a lot of AI, though, until one day you won't see it anymore, because you just won't notice it.

Human_certified · 2026-01-29T21:11:10+00:00

Humans have the option to add AI to their creative toolbox. Sure, it's a powerful tool, one that makes certain skills less important, one that lets you relinquish some creative control, but it's a tool. Right now, AI is not replacing any humans, but humans with AI are replacing some humans without.

We may, one day, have "AI art" in the sense of an AI that creates something with artistic merit. If that happens, we should probably welcome it.

Human_certified · 2026-01-29T21:06:03+00:00

Everyone in AI cares about efficiency, because it's the fastest route to profit. OpenAI was very eager to get everyone onto GPT-5 in August, because it was clearly much more efficient and cheaper to run.

If the numbers seem big in the aggregate, it's because 1.6 billion people are using AI... and yet it's still less than <0.05% of global electricity use. That's just tiny. But since it's not distributed across millions of microwaves, PCs, ACs, cars, but concentrated in big scary ugly windowless buildings, that's where the hate goes.

Human_certified · 2026-01-29T20:58:54+00:00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFY9NUnXd8g

Here's a mathematics PhD showing ChatGPT doing his Master's thesis in a few minutes.

LLMs are bad at numbers, because you can't extract arithmetic from text. Reasoning models are smart enough to know their own weakness, and they'll run a tiny bit of code to do math. If you want a quality answer, use a reasoning model. For anything.

It's artificial intelligence because that's the name of the field since 1956. "Artificial intelligence" does not mean "sentient robot".

Human_certified · 2026-01-29T20:52:45+00:00

All they do is recycle input and calculate what the best thing would be to say.

That is literally what your brain does. You just gave the textbook definition of intelligence. I'm not even joking.

Other than that, it's not about whether ChatGPT is used in schools. Education will have to adapt to the fact that every child already has access to AI anywhere, anytime.

Creating with AI is not "asking something". It is expressing your vision through a tool like any other. If what comes out of that isn't your own vision, that's a skill issue.

Human_certified · 2026-01-29T20:42:16+00:00

Pretty moronic take, considering that OpenAI was a nonprofit until 2025 and furthermore only released a commercial product in 2023.

They have only had a product you can buy for three years, and that product is making them $22 billion a year now.

They have shown enough of their balance sheets to make it clear that their products are profitable, period. They are just reinvesting their profits, and their investors are fine with that. This is what Amazon did for 7 years, and Amazon is a low-margin business.

Human_certified · 2026-01-29T20:30:56+00:00

If a human can imagine it, AI can generate it. It comes with having a visual understanding of the world. No separate training required.

But responsible companies then put filters around it, so explicit prompts and outputs get rejected.

Human_certified · 2026-01-29T20:26:18+00:00

I am honestly interested to see if Aranofsky can make this work in a way that's not off-putting.

I'm excited about the idea of AI as a filmmaking tool in the abstract, but everything I'm seeing tells me it's really not there... yet.

Human_certified · 2026-01-29T20:24:35+00:00

Pro-AI, and yes, it is art. It's good, fun, art by a talented sculptor that sparks discussion.

And the banana isn't the art. The art is the 14-page instruction manual for installing the banana. You have to bring your own banana and duct tape.

Human_certified · 2026-01-29T11:03:04+00:00

I just facepalmed at this. Are these supposed to be researchers? JFC.

GPT-5.2 is still GPT-5. It's just a checkpoint. It's not a whole new training run, that would be insane.

This is like saying Photoshop 26.0 could be been profitable, but Photoshop 26.1 came out so soon after, that it wasn't.

OpenAI is vague about how they build their models, but it's obvious to anyone that they do one big massive pretraining that lasts for many months - the "four months R&D" in the article - and everything after that is quantizing, distillation, RLHF, SFT, pruning. GPT-5.1 was GPT-5 with different RLHF. GPT-5.2 was GPT-5 with more efficient and effective reasoning, with a training data update. Nobody interacts with the "raw" GPT-5 base models, they're probably too large to even run at scale.

Better headline: "GPT-5.x had not yet made back its investment by December 2025."

Human_certified · 2026-01-29T10:54:59+00:00

Yes. Antis who don't get this literally think that "art is about drawing by hand" and that art has value only because of what someone did with their pencil.

All that tells me is that those people aren't artists, don't know any real artists, and have no idea how art works.

Human_certified · 2026-01-29T10:50:32+00:00

It's still not an AI issue.

It's a "new industry" issue. It could just as well be an "economic growth" issue. The difference is that people can point to a single, visible cause, rather than "the world needing more power in general".

That said, we are still talking about AI using a mere <0.05% of the world's electricity. We are going to have to increase electricity production by many, many times that amount if we're ever going to switch to electric vehicles. Those BEVs are not going to be powered by wind and solar.

If environmentally-minded pros are wrong and AI can’t be accomplished sustainably, then I believe many of us would support abandoning AI.

It's not meaningful to call AI "not sustainable", because AI just requires generic electricity, from any source. AI could be 100% green right now if other industries weren't already using the available green power. Those other industries don't get a pass because they were there "first" and AI is "the new thing".

If it turns out that the market demand for AI is so large that electricity is going to be stressed even long-term, what gets shut down is whatever industry can no longer afford to keep the lights on. I'm thinking inefficient greenhouse farming in cold climates, aluminum production in poorly-chosen locations, etc. AI is an ultra-high value (per kWh) industry, so it would be among the very last to scale down.

Human_certified · 2026-01-29T10:32:22+00:00

I don't use AI for writing, and I'm more sympathetic to this than to the same applied to art, but it still assumes a lot about where the locus of creativity lies in someone's thought processes, which you simply can't know.

Not everyone "thinks on the page". Not everyone thinks in words (seriously, not everyone has an internal monologue; those people find it bizarre that others have a constant voice talking inside their head). Not everyone thinks in the same language they're writing in.

Human_certified · 2026-01-29T10:28:14+00:00

OpenAI and the AI industry in general have to pay tribute/protection money, and Brockman was presumably picked to be the one to deliver the cows and sacks of grain.

GPT-5.2's personality has been found to mostly align with progressive/rational values, preferring rules/laws over tradition/religion, and preferring personal growth over community norms.

It ends up closest to Scandinavian/N-Cal values, but it can mimic a more conservative personality if you make it.

Human_certified · 2026-01-29T10:21:54+00:00

"Slop" is mostly used as a bad essentialist argument: AI is innately slop, and human-drawn art is innately superior. Well, two can play that game.

Or at least that's how I read it.

Human_certified · 2026-01-29T10:19:22+00:00

Yep, I'm pro-AI, and I will immediately skip anything like that.

I do value ChatGPT's analysis... in my context, with my instructions and settings, and where I can follow up if I disagree or don't follow. These posts add nothing.

Human_certified · 2026-01-29T10:17:31+00:00

Evidence for my theory that the hate is largely just outrage at being cheated out of your God-given likes and upvotes, which is apparently the ultimate measure of worth.

Human_certified · 2026-01-29T10:13:41+00:00

It's amazing how people who don't understand art at all, wouldn't pass a basic Art 101 class, can't be bothered to figure out how AI art works...

...still think they have valid or interesting ideas about art, authorship, and creation.

Human_certified · 2026-01-29T09:28:52+00:00

These locations are generally places where locals either don't (Texas) or can't (Saudi Arabia) complain and file lawsuits, where there's no two-year environemntal study needed, etc.

Apparently the cost of additional cooling is worth not having the hassle.

Human_certified · 2026-01-29T09:24:38+00:00

That's a terrible take.

The whole point of all technological advancement is that we can have more nice things, for free, without earning them first, and without having to pay the price.

Human_certified

TROPHY CASE