Is there any point in writing?I mean it for real. I know AI writing is shit, but it's now capable of producing stories that while aren't good in content or prose, they make sense. I think really is just a matter of time, maybe a few years, until we humans cannot compete with computers in producing art. I remember when it was unthinkable a computer could play chess, but now it's been more than 20 years since we know a human has no chance against a computer. I am thinking it will be similar to writing fiction, or producing art in general.I'm just confused about what the future of art will be, and whether is any point in producing or even consuming any of it.
>>24683101>Is there any point in writing?Yes.>But AI So?>I remember when it was unthinkable a computer could play chessAre you 40 years old or something? If so, you should know better than to sperg out over this.
>>24683101>I remember when it was unthinkable a computer could play chess, but now it's been more than 20 years since we know a human has no chance against a computer.Chess has a massive resurgence in popularity several years ago. There's more money in the game now than there has been previously. People still enjoy it. Quit with the myopic doomerism.
pointfags and pedants both completely retarded and should both be exploded via petard posthaste. regardless you ask if there is a point to writing. i ask if there is a point to shitting. reading without (any) writing is like an earthworm with a mouth but no exit hole. where shall the dirt go? the dirt will gather within the worm’s body until it swells and the entire creature bursts at the seams.
Obvious bait thread. You should assume the following responses to be the OP samefagging to bump the thread.
>>24683101Playing chess and writing a book are completely distinct tasks. Chess is a game with a limited number of possible movements at every turn, movements which can be compared in terms of how much they can create an advantage or a disadvantage before the algorithm chooses the best possible choice. It's a straightforward task: compute every movement and consequence you can, pick the best one.Needless to say, art does not operate under the same constraint and you can't write a single paragraph by computing 10,000 options and picking the best one. Especially when "the best" is not even a well-defined concept in this situation. The simplest poem written by the best of LLMs will still be a mediocre stylised average of all of the poems fed into the machine.
AI denialists are coping hard and usually their copes just amount to insisting there’s something special and inimitable about human minds that probably doesn’t actually exist. It’s over writer/artist bros.
>>24683210AI is the quintillion monkeys with typewriters situation, it doesn't matter that it cannot be "solved" in the same way. And that's before considering that AI absolutely could become good at art without the crutch of RNG. Whether you are talking about painting a wall, playing chess, or writing a book, if you thrown enough machines at it, the only difference is the numbers of solutions they will come up with to reach the desired outcome.
>>24683101your mind has been colonized and raped by tech oligarchs who have tricked you into thinking that everything you do needs to be seen and appreciated by millions of people and the value of art is determined by how many clicks or views or updoots your creation receives. creating art for the sake of creating art will always be a worthwhile endeavor and no soul sucking ghoul can ever take that away from you. i can think of almost no better feeling than actualizing something you feel deep inside of your heart and channeling it into a physical form. in other words if all you care about when creating something is how much meaningless appreciation your it will receive ultimately your art probably has little value to begin with.
>>24683101if you haven't already devised a defense, it's already too late.https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OHQRo3Uz_VQ
>>24683266AI isn't good at art it just copies other good art
>>24683101Being able to express your thoughts on paper with pen yes
>>24683555That's also how human artists train and develop.
>>24683101>Why do something just because I like it?Are half the people on this board in high school, retarded, or just faggots?
Lot of cope in this thread.>AI just copies other art!So do humans. All art is derivative.>AI writing is bad!A study showed AI poetry was rated as better by humans. Regardless, even if this were true, AI will only get better with time.Writing, the art-form as we know it, will go extinct. This is normal; it has happened before, the camera killed painting. Increased literacy in the Dark Ages killed bards à la Homer. I actually see this as a good development; the literary world which we are accustomed to is something very new, it was born in the late 19th century. I hope we return to a more ancient attitude to writing.
>>24683947>labubu killed pokemon>dubai chocolate killed salt bae>mr beast killed rick and morty
>>24683101>there's no point in making art if I cant make money from it Go jump into a nuclear reactor, you mongoloid.
>>24683907>>24683947If all humans did was copy, we would never have had anything new and art would have stayed the same for thousands of years. If you train AI on X data, you will get a regurgitation of it. Humans can take inspiration and actually build on it, and come up with completely novel things. AI can't, and (at least the current generative AI) won't.
>>24683995There's no such thing as novelty. Only the Greeks can boast of having done things never done before. >Solomon saith: There is no new thing upon the earth. So that as Plato had an imagination, that all knowledge was but remembrance; so Solomon giveth his sentence, that all novelty is but oblivion.>Tout est dit, et l’on vient trop tard depuis plus de sept mille ans qu’il y a des hommes, et qui pensent. Sur ce qui concerne les mœurs, le plus beau et le meilleur est enlevé ; l’on ne fait que glaner après les anciens et les habiles d’entre les modernes.
>>24684024Worst take of the thread so far
>>24683266More like quintillion high schoolers with typewriters consulting the same material and regressing towards a mean. There's a reason why AI generated images and AI text have a distinct AI style to them. There isn't a monkey problem because AI isn't acting randomly or spontaneously. In our case, there is something about the monkeys, whether you assume it to be their genetic coding or the conditioning they received, that makes all of them end up writing variations of the same rubbish with the same formatting and style.
>>24684074—And that’s rare
>>24683995>art would have stayed the same for thousands of yearsAny meaningful advances in art have been the result of exploring new mediums and technologies and developing their potential to their fullest extent.
