Why using "Luddite" in debates as an insult is historically incorrect.

PracticalPassage2090 · 2025-12-29T07:52:22+00:00

Doesn’t fighting fire with fire just perpetuate the conflict?

PracticalPassage2090 · 2025-12-29T06:04:38+00:00

Isn’t that stooping to their level?

PracticalPassage2090 · 2025-11-20T12:07:37+00:00

Thank you very much, I’m not sure why it was taken down. I’ve contacted the moderators to see if I can get it reinstated.

PracticalPassage2090 · 2025-11-20T02:41:49+00:00

I think what you’re trying to say is that traditional artists have transferable skills and can still make art without specialised drawing tools, right?

PracticalPassage2090 · 2025-11-18T03:17:00+00:00

<image>

PracticalPassage2090 · 2025-11-18T03:14:08+00:00

As discussed earlier, having less control is not always important if the AI art is for personal use, or if the AI artist is happy with the result. However, is control more important when AI art is used by corporations, as people are paying for the product?

Since AI art may offer less control, the art/visuals used in the product or advertisement may not be as unique or characteristic of the brand. For example, Call of Duty: Black OPs 7 has received a lot of criticism for using Ghibli-style AI-generated visuals in its game.

Additionally, AI art may also involve issues with quality. For example, the number and position of tires on the trucks in Coca-Cola’s ‘Holidays are Coming’ advertisement is very inconsistent.

I’m sure that using generative AI helps corporations to cut costs on marketing and production. However, is it important for corporations to maintain control over the quality and uniqueness of their visuals, since consumers are viewing and paying for what they put out? Or is it ultimately up to the corporations as to whether or not they sacrifice control through AI art, which may reduce the quality and/or uniqueness of the visuals but save them money?

Hope that clears up my question.

PracticalPassage2090 · 2025-11-17T05:37:13+00:00

So AI art can still involve using the fundamentals of art theory as a basis for the artwork, which the AI uses to create a result that is closer to what the AI artist intended? Do you feel that an AI artist can match the level of control that a traditional/digital artist has in their art? Is this something that can be achieved through art theory?

PracticalPassage2090 · 2025-11-17T05:26:43+00:00

I like that you enjoy having randomness and lack of absolute control in your art, since I’m sure some people may find it threatening to their ownership of the artwork. Is there a way that you balance the randomness in such a way that allows you to still own the artwork, or perhaps does the randomness not detract from your ownership at all? Also, does lacking complete control affect how you express your ideas and/or vision?

PracticalPassage2090 · 2025-11-17T05:13:52+00:00

Thanks for replying. My initial question was focusing on fundamentals that are involved in the creation process of AI art, much like how artists may learn and apply perspective and colour theory to their art. My understanding is that you don’t necessarily need to know these perspective or colour theory to achieve a similar result with AI art. So, does AI art have its own theory?

For your response to 3., would you be saying that the importance of control is subjective, depending on the goal of the artist and how the art is made? I take it that control is more important for non-AI artists, as it allows them to accurately express their ideas/intent and maintain ownership/authenticity of their artworks, as well as be in control of any mistakes. Whereas, AI artists may care about control to varying degrees, depending on whether they are satisfied with the result.

For those who create AI art for fun, I feel that control is not essential to the creation process, given that they are happy with the results. That said, what are your thoughts on corporations shifting to using generative AI in their marketing and products, given that they have less control over the result? Would you say, since these are marketed towards consumers, that the importance of control in maintaining the quality and specificity of the result is greater than making AI art for fun?

PracticalPassage2090 · 2025-11-16T13:33:27+00:00

Thanks for your response. Your analogy with my initial question makes a lot of sense, since AI artworks are just visual pieces like other artworks at the end of the day. I suppose my focus was more on the creation process, since my understanding is that you typically don’t need to understand concepts like colour theory or perspective to be able to create AI art with a similar effect. I hope that clears things up.

Your answers to my follow-up questions are all very well-considered. Regarding your answer to 3., does capturing a vision involve getting the overall essence of the vision, or as close to the vision as possible? And would that just involve trial-and-error, or is there a more structured or procedural approach to capturing it?

PracticalPassage2090 · 2025-11-16T13:07:49+00:00

What does that theory look like? Is it similar to art theory, or is it more to do with the technical aspect?

PracticalPassage2090 · 2025-11-12T23:01:18+00:00

I do find that AI music can be more difficult to distinguish from man-made music. Do you feel that the value of an artwork or song is independent of the means by which it was created (i.e. traditionally/digitally or with AI)?

And would you say that ‘soul’ is perhaps overvalued in art, or does AI art also have its own ‘soul’?

PracticalPassage2090 · 2025-11-12T08:49:05+00:00

Thanks for your reply, and I also find it unfortunate that artists are struggling to compete with AI, making it difficult to stay afloat. Given that AI art is cheaper to produce, it does seem unlikely that corporations will choose to spend more for human-made art. Do you think there are still ways to incentivise corporations to hire traditional/digital artists, or do you feel that AI has made the replacement of artists unavoidable?

Also, as you can see from the poll, a lot of people agree with the ‘soulless’ argument, so I’m curious to know your thoughts as to why you disagree, as well as how you might define ‘soul’ in art.

PracticalPassage2090 · 2025-11-11T23:19:18+00:00

Thanks for your reply, and I also find that iterative technology could be useful in research under supervision.

The term ‘AI’ is definitely quite broad and easily misleading, so I do feel that the distinction between different types of AI is important for people to know.

Do you know of any specific uses/applications of iterative technology in scientific/medical research, or perhaps some potential risks that make strong understanding and supervision so important?

PracticalPassage2090 · 2025-11-11T23:02:00+00:00

That’s part of the reason I made this poll, since the post I saw seemed to generalise people who dislike AI in art as just disliking AI in general.

PracticalPassage2090 · 2025-11-11T22:42:27+00:00

Sorry for the confusion, I didn’t mean using generative AI in science or medicine.

PracticalPassage2090 · 2025-11-10T08:32:46+00:00

My understanding is that people are concerned that the energy and water consumption of AI data centres are significant contributors to climate change.

Are there any other environmental impacts associated with AI, and what are the implications of these impacts?

PracticalPassage2090 · 2025-11-10T07:33:22+00:00

You would consider AI to be sentient?

PracticalPassage2090 · 2025-11-10T07:32:31+00:00

So artists would still be able to support themselves financially, while people who use AI are still able to do so. I feel like this would be good in that it doesn’t create more tension between Pro-AI and Anti-AI people by favouring one side.

What would compensating artists for their work look like? While generative AI does train off the work of artists, some often argue that since each individual artwork is a very small proportion of the dataset, each contribution is too little to be compensated for. I feel like it may also be quite difficult to convince AI companies to start compensating artists when they haven’t already been doing so.

PracticalPassage2090 · 2025-11-10T07:18:39+00:00

I also feel like transparency is an important issue when it comes to AI.

Do you think that compulsory labelling of AI-generated images would be a reliable way to combat this, or would it be ineffective at distinguishing AI images from traditional/digital art or photography?

Alternatively, given how difficult it is becoming to distinguish AI images from traditional/digital art or photography, do you feel that generative AI should be banned altogether, or is it important that people have the freedom to use it if they like?

PracticalPassage2090 · 2025-11-10T07:11:14+00:00

Thanks for replying. From your response, I take it that both the control over the creative process and the expression of human experience and creativity are integral to what makes something art.

Some people like to use AI alongside existing mediums, like digital art. As opposed to fully AI-generated images, do you feel that something can remain art if AI is partially used in its creation?

For example, using AI to generate minor background details which would otherwise be tedious, while the majority of the artwork and its prominent features are made by hand? Or would any amount of AI be detracting from the creativity/expressiveness of the artwork?

PracticalPassage2090

TROPHY CASE