Music and movies and VG’s are arguably some of the most valued things we have. Unless you mean.. idk some very specific kind of “art”

The jealousy of the untalented, the deep ENVY many feel towards real Artists, is because they do not understand either Art nor Artists. So, in their depravity and frustration, they will always seek to make Artists and what we do seem less credible or worthy of attention anything they themselves can manage. Which is BEING TOLD WHAT TO DO AND HOW TO LIVE. And because they comply, and the Artist does not, their ethical cowardice is exposed and magnified that h more by their willingness to participate in not just the destruction of the artist, but themselves as well. Guilt & Shame drive people to levels of self righteous frenzies that simply cannot be sustained without going totally mad themselves from agreeing to participate in creating a sterile ugliness and cruelty in the world. And yet, the artist carries on in spite of them, which bears out the utter waste of their own lives they're willing to participate in ny doing nothing more than devaluing and despising those who can still see and represent the beauty in the general spirit of Life itself. Finally, remember: there is Art and there is the Business of Art and they are as different as wet and dry, fire and ice, and night and day. Be wise, whenever possible.

That's such a good point!

The Arts (e.g., dance, theater, sculpture, etc) are definitely undervalued in the US’s education system. And they’re underfunded, in general. There’s an appreciation for *profitable creativities like concerts, popular music, etc ..

But what happens when we are lied to? What happens when we don’t know whether or not it is a mimicry?

@@bubbyskittles4802 I think you have misunderstood both the quote and the letter.

@@KickassUncle In what sense?

@@KickassUncle I think the question is incredibly relevant in the context of the viability of human art. If we cannot distinguish one from the other as consumers, how will we make it practically possible for true art to persist?

I love it. Plato and Aristotle did it better, but I love it nonetheless.

That was Quite Interesting, thanks.

I always took it to be the omnipotence of god, hmm.

Nick Cave is really a great artist.

@@JALOPPY Thanks for the pun. That gave me a good laugh!

He is a God. @@littlestbroccoli

Here here 👏👏

Too bad it's all bullshit.

@@pandoraeeris7860Maybe AI can help you overcome you cynical view on life.

@@pandoraeeris7860The story of the Bible's creation passages is being used as a metaphor, not literally. Nick Cave's using it just as an expression.

If you like this type of speech, you can look at how old school musicians disregarded electronic music in the 70s and 80s for not being "played" on a real instrument

Plot twist, it was written by Facebook's Llama model

@@GarethDavidson 😂

​@@AquaFyrreBut it tries. The very example to which Nick Cave was responding was of a man writing songs with ChatGPT.

@@AquaFyrre Well yes, but that's the danger of using it for creating 'art' as people are trying to do. It isn't real art but that doesn’t change the problem.

@@AquaFyrre Think of what as a challenge? I don't understand what you're saying.

Great take! Thanks for the good message

Art connects people and helps them help each other and themselves. It is a way to make things make sense

Well said. As an aspirant writer, I echo every word.

dot your Ts cross yer Is

@@joekiernan6037 cross your eyes?

Using ChatGPT in artistic scenarios is safe; mistakes are merely quirky/funny, and can teach us much about its limitations. Relying on it in complex technical areas could lead to disastrous mistakes and may even ultimately cost lives.

@@horrortackleharry Specifics of technical/scientific applications may vary, but it all boils down to due diligence. For example, ChatGTP may be used for writing simple scripts for data processing, but the end result needs to be manually verified. Likewise, it can be used for preliminary sifting through/summarising of scientific literature, but a researcher should always then check the references at the source (examples form my field, that is life sciences). As for artistic use, it's not as innocent when big corporations (that treat art as a commodity and never pass on an opportunity to screw over creators) get involved.

@@Qba86 TBH in recent years I haven't seen or heard too much non-AI artistic endeavour that I find in any way inspiring. The commodification of art happened years ago, and AI might even be a way of democratizing production. Although not an artist, I am a chess player- and some of the ideas seen in games played by self-taught AI programmes such as AlphaZero are truly stunning. Not at all dry and technical, but truly 'creative'- stuff not even imagined by human players over hundreds of years of practice.

If ChatGPT lifts the constructs culture has imposed to define being intellectual, and by that middle class, then the outcome will be a more harmonious society, though the path for those trapped in cultural pretensions of grandiosity will be painful. Art, the play, exposed the ridiculous state of creative appreciation and its middle class audience to an age obsessed with materialism. This age is obsessed with experiences oblivious it’s buying into them as fervently as its materialistic precedents. The illusion of creativity being of any real value in a world of such inequality. Creatives spawned the advertising that’s promoted lifestyle over life. Maybe ChatGPT will, devoid of emotions, find itself unmoved by the emotional triggers of creatives and finally mock what’s been holding us back for decades. A winning style marketed avidly for financial gain, once discovered, is just that, a repetitive construct pushed as creative. Truly great artists perished penniless. Today’s bask in luxury, creative value admired more than substance. Less creativity might not be such a bad thing. Less is more.

@@horrortackleharry In terms of chess, are there not always a finite set of moves for every position? AI is good for problem-solving in a finite set. And it does not diminish what a human chess player is capable of achieving. But art is infinite. There will always be commodified art, and technology has always further expedited it but there has never been such a shortcut as ChatGPT. It floods the 'market', as it were, and has the ability to diminish the value of what a human creates honestly.

You make Nick Cave feel like a side of beans. Ouch.

@@fishtolizard3930 Don't blame him/her. The love for Stephen Fry tends to obliterate anything else, even Nick Cave

ross6753: no one or no thing can obliterate Nick Cave.

God isn't real tho. but AI is.

@@richfromtang as another philosopher the great Tigger roughly said: "Read betwixt the lines" It's all about delivering a good message. Also you will find that Mr Fry is not much of a believer in existance of God but is big enough to see the beauty in that letter. Cheers and have a great day.

How exactly will a chat bot rob anyone of their creativity? Aren't we really talking about hacks losing a paycheck? True artists create whether they're paid or not.

⁠​⁠@@pakde8002Yes artists will continue to create but with the introduction of AI making it look so easy kind of takes the wind out of our sails. That’s from my perspective anyway. For some artists the joy comes from the act itself but for others like me it’s like why grow your own food when I can get it already grown and harvested from the store? The joy and the pride you get from making something gets diminished when you know there’s an entity that can do it in the blink of an eye without any effort whatsoever and maybe even done better than you could’ve ever dreamed. It’s demeaning. You can say there’s still creativity involved by coming up with prompts and directing the AI but it’s just not the same. Maybe I’m being too gloom and doom about it but so far I don’t like where it’s going.

@@pakde8002 It won't 'just' be a chat bot for very long. Recent rumours show artificial general intelligence is just around the corner, if it isn't already here. AGIs are the point at which we don't have to give it its goals, it can teach itself and other agents, it's affectively reached adulthood. It's been said that artificial super intelligence will arrive within the decade. That is to say that AI is approaching the human brain in capability and is expected to soon exceed it. They never forget, don't die short of a massive coronal ejection powerful enough to kick us back to the iron age and only get cleverer and more inventive and that at a supernatural speed. This is serious stuff.

What exactly is a soul?

@@linmonPIE I am in two minds about this. On the one hand I understand what you say but on the other I wonder if e.g. the act of applying brush to canvas is what makes the painter? Was it Picasso's brush work that made him a great? I think it was the scenes created within him that set him apart. That said, I will be surprised if AI art will not last that long. It will likely pollute its own data set with the stuff it has churned out before and everything will get diluted and start to look the same. Objects will start to appear again and again and real artists will make new innovative works unavailable to the data mining. In short, it might be doom and gloom but I am not convinced, at least in the artistic world. It will decimate nearly every other field though with the exception perhaps of plumbing and furniture building.

He is reading a letter...

@@daviecrocket9160 really? I thought this was a bit from Monty Python!

@@daviecrocket9160 So?

🤡 Bot

the same here..

Yup!!! Douglas Murray sort of 'destroyed' Stephen Fry in a debate because he's ruthless doesn't care just wants to win yes my opinions only ... Stephen Fry is passionately trying to find that place of truth so elusive and requires us to care.

well we can now reverse our ages, so he might be able to

Unfortunately you’ll get your monkeys paw wish. With his voice and personality probably being digitally resurrected to be a puppet just to entertain us.

"Red Hand Files"?

@@julierogers1155it’s Nick Cave’s mailing list, in which he replies to people who send him messages. This letter came straight from it.

@@julierogers1155 Nick Cave's newsletter.

@@Eville23x Ah, thank you very much.

As an "avowed" atheist, it's one of many significant stories from the ancient world and I'd never hesitate to reference it. Good luck understanding Shakespeare and much else worth understanding without it, even if it itself paints a picture of a terrible cosmology.

I was thinking the same, when the letter started with that biblical creation story. Why could he do it and, as I think, without any problem? Because it's not the point in this context. The letter is not about a religion or dogma or the question if there is (a) god. It's about humans. But to see what's the point and to not get mingled up in something marginal (although you might have a strong opinion about those marginals ;-) -that is real education (as in German "Bildung"). And that's what SF is: the paramount example of an educated human. And by the way: I could listen to him, even if he reads out that proverbial telephone book - and even the literally one :-)

My mum a holocaust survivor and life-long opponent as was Hannah Arendt worried about any state with an innate sense of manifest destiny actually had something pertinent to say about the composer Lizst ... he was the 1st rock star and it destroyed his music ... years later yes it's hilariously funny --- she was equally worried about the Beatles ... funny but insightful. When ego takes over creativity it is truly destroyed (pace Beatles I loved them always will) and thank you Stephen Fry for never misusing your status for anything other than thoughtful reflection. and being open to open communication . I also am an atheist for what it's worth but the language of the King James Bible close to that of Shakespeare; my closest and oldest friend on Nov 11 paid tribute to the death of her son gunned down as a report wrong place wrong time .... our fathers both of an age to fight in WW 2 the only war Bertrand Russell publicly pronounced necessary ... presciently seeing the madness of HIroshima and Nagakaki .. tge ceremony.did invoke St Paul to the Corintians Faith Hope and Charity ... also Handel's Messiah which I did experience as sublime and a symbol of hope despite my own personal ideas; I agree we mortals who do have limited lives learn to love and cherish each other because of that and forget that at our peril. (Neil Gaiman/Terry Pratichett's subversive Good Omens book/Season 1 and 2 desceptively funny ... until nothing is funny anymore and one simply aches.

Stephen. With a 'ph'.

@@baronmeduse mea culpa tx!!!

He's lovely but doesn't believe in souls...

@@mariag3605 Why "but"? And may I ask, why do you believe in souls?

@@sebastian6736 why don't you?

@@mariag3605 Because the idea doesn't make any sense. Because I've never seen one, touched one, smelled one, felt one. Because humans are biological creatures that evolved from apes and I don't see any need to have a soul for us to function. I believe the idea was invented by people who were afraid of death as a way of coping. And lastly, as you (should) know, the burden of proof lies with the one making the claim, not with the one not believing it. I don't need reasons not to believe in things that cannot be experienced or deduced logically.

…and Nick Cave gets… Ouch.

Why is sycophancy such a popular pursuit nowadays? I’m sure these public figures get enough adulation without adding to it in this vacuous virtual reality that Fry dislikes.

Wrong. He is flawed and he knows it.

@@brynleytalbot778because we live in a God-denying society so celebrities must take the place of saints & saviours

Couldn't agree more

yeah, especially the part where he said ´´fuck´´

Well I'm like, 'I need to get it out... of my head'. If I'm not being creative, then it all builds up in my head and I need to get it out... it's a form of therapy to me. I have to do it myself, an AI can't do that for me.

It’s insane that they would even ask you that.

@@patriciasanderson2171 - So true, I can't figure out how people can be non-creative, what is it like in their heads, are they just robots? ;P

There is no god, get over it

​@@sergebureau2225you did not get the idea. It is about creativity, not god. Now go do yourself.

@@a.tevetoglu3366…you may argue, however, that “God” and Creativity are kind of (maybe/sort of) the same thing. Everything Is Music; Always Be Listening…

@@fishtolizard3930 well I could, but I have no time to take part in mysticistic cacophony. I allow myself to enjoy music. That is mystical enough for me.

@@sergebureau2225I wouldn’t wish your life on my enemies. What a dark and empty corner of the world you must live in

It will maybe 'polluute' the natural human matrix of information. In the same way that a forged artwork or forged historical document pollutes history. But it will also create a strange new mixing of the world of human ideas and the world of algorithms, because people will learn from it or be influenced by it, especially if they believ it is not written by AI. When a person reads something which has been written by a human, they often look more deeply into its meaning, especially if its poetry or soemthing. But half of the meaning people make of things is created by the observer.

Know your enemy. YMMV

Don't live in the darkness of ignorance... just go mess around with it. It's incredible technology -- neither good nor bad. People were afraid of electricity once...

@@gregmaslyn You can love it. I don’t have to. I’m old and past this stuff. I’ll be worm food soon and chat bot can meet the rest of the world and enjoy conversing. Hope it serves you well and that you don’t end up serving the bot. Electricity still scares me by the way and with good reason

@@SGI999 Lol, never too old to have an open mind... but suit yourself!

@@gregmaslyn 🤣 I’m too old to have a mind!

The great crested grebe would surely agree

As a different artist I think it's pompous bullshit

It's really weird that some artists choose to use this chat GPT, is not it? I suppose if you are completely out of ideas you could use it briefly but all the time? Just why?

​@@_cloudface_and I'm also an artist - a bullshit artist !!

I don't know jackshit, but since you're an artist, and you say so, I also think it's amazing and perfect.

Correct, however when the tools are there to remove the struggle no one gets paid to "waste" time on it. Take a look at ancient carved architecture or handcrafted antique furniture. Ask yourself why these items are rare and inaccessible to most of the people on this earth to enjoy in their own environment, even in the first world. They are not being created because the commodity of the desk, or the house does not require the artisan. Much of the music produced is already commoditised garbage but artist like Nick and many many others like him still produce important work. What happens when the market for this work ceases to exist, that we humans are universally content listening to the musical equivalent of Ikea, or reading the latest novel generated by a machine that is injecting what it thinks humans should believe based on it's learnings? Have we not then become the students of the machine rather than the teachers? Are we ceeding our destiny to the whims of a robot?

@@BadVoodoo11My personal take on this is that as an artist I love to be creative not to make money. But only because I love to create. The prospect of being a slave to money does not appeal to me at all. Therefore, I hope that in the near future, the work that people had to do for money in order to survive will be done free of charge by self-sufficient, self-service machines. Then a lot of time and mental resources will be freed up for real creativity.

@@BadVoodoo11 You assume that it will cease to exist though

We are still reading Jane Austin and even Homer (even if only in spin-off tales of similar themes). It is up to the current parent generation to present their children with all there is. The classics, the contemporary and whatever is coming next.

Art is not fixed, so perhaps AI will bring forth a new phase in human art. That need not be a contradiction. Many art forms are a collaboration.

What is true art, exactly, and who decided what it was?

@@Lleanlleawrg I read it to mean art created through a sincere and personal process, as opposed to something more cynical.

@@AlfFieldArt I think anything can be art, and the word long since lost it's meaning. Someone accidentally left their glasses at a museum, and other customers thought it was some art installation and started reading meaning into it. Some people calling themselves artist put virtually no thought or feeling into their works. All of which is to say - the art is no longer in the creative process of the maker, but perhaps it's been shifted more into the perceptions of the audience. My appreciation for what I consider an artwork may grow or diminish upon learning the creative process that went into it, but that's only truly possible if the creator tells us.

❤ Ah I love this. Thank you for sharing.

Well, ai can make weird hands too.

​@@anerio4321 Good joke. But i have to remind everyone that ai can make most beautiful images in the world but they are not unique so they don't have any value. There's no identity of authorship. Anyone can make the same thing with few clicks.

@@danrazART Yes, I agree with that and I hate AI. Unfortunately AI makes it good enough and fast enough for the masses and I feel like it will drown everyone.

that is profound..

Just food for thought: do you know where ideas come from? Can you prove that your ideas are really 'yours' and that AI's suggestions and ideas are somehow different? I've asked AI for help writing music on numerous occasions 😇

I hope you're right mate. I expect you are..

That's a great take on this worrying development. Thanks 👏👏👍

Was that written by AI?

Wow. ..and someone called me cynical. 🤣

Nah people will build off of it to innovate in new ways as we always have. Mathematicians complained when calculators were invented but that invention was clearly for the good of humanity. Creatives will still create better content by building off of AI which will push the quality to bars hitherto undreamt of.

As far as it goes, he is selling out all venues when touring. Now, does he want same fame as T. Swift, I doubt it. His work is recognised, adored and respected by a very large number of people, he doesn't need consumers, he's happy with his fans.

@@HM-2011 I realise he doesn't need the fame, or even crave the fame. Many are reluctant, but still get the recognition they deserve.

@@yt.personal.identification I hear you ! The guy is out there with Dylan, Cohen, Wait, Waters and so on.

Cave should be taught in school

Who says he isn't world renowned?

Exactly, and that all happened long before ChatGPT arrived. So the death of creativity has zero to do with ChatGPT, or AI in general, and all to do with society making wealth and power holy grails, encouraging mimicry as the quickest route to success. I understand creatives feeling threatened by AI that will eventually (not yet) move out of the realm of assimilation (sometimes pretty creative assimilation) and into the realm of genuine creativity (or such complex assimilation that it's indistinguishable from creativity, which amounts to the same thing). But what I don't understand is why creatives make such a fuss. Either a) ignore it and do your thing. b) embrace it as part of your creative process.

I think you could understand it if you tried. Take what you said about a perfect simulation of human creativity being indistinguishable from the real thing. Have you ever walked into a room full of paintings and found yourself overwhelmed? Moved? Do you think that was merely an effect created by complex arrays of pattern and colour, or do you think it may have had something to do with the fact that the people who created it were 'like' you ('alive' at some particular place and time)... do you know what I mean? Imagine not being able to tell the difference between that, and a mere arrangement of objects. (In other words the threat that some of us feel isn't personal, in the sense that we are worried about our livelihoods - the sense is of a deeper more existential threat. I think this came across pretty clear in Mister Cave's letter.)

Spot on. Perfect example is all these garbage Disney remakes. It seems like they've lost the ability to do anything original and creative and especially anything that doesn't tick every single diversity box

ooh don't get me started on dieversity... haha j/k i don't do that or disney. but yeah the world is even more full of shit than most people.

I am lucky, I can see the Universe in a tiny wild orchid growing in a crack in the rocks.

I am here... But chance is veeeery high that you won't see me unless I am famous (great tragedy). But maybe you do see me. I am not another person writing comments, I am doing 1 in a mankind work and this here is "reaching one soul at a time". Peace

righteous sacrifice or "if you don't do it someone else will at this point of the game"

A bit silly, and hopeless, to blame the creators or the tool, I think. What we need is a world that can absorb these innovations without devaluing the human creativity they mimic. The industrial revolution was a slow-rolling preview of what's coming, and we're still reeling from that.

@@csn583, there's a part of me that says that open AI products are almost certain to take over much of the futures of work. There's a part of me that tells me to be frightened by this possibility -- the part that reminds me of 20 years serving in the US Air Force and nearly 67 years on this Earth telling me that what can go wrong will go wrong -- and that ChatGPT and other such "tools" will do the worst we can imagine. Still, there is part of me that screams, "IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE THAT WAY!" But making this "tool" work for the benefit of humankind and all life on Earth requires that ALL of us be involved. We must examine how these tools work, and what mutually constructed social realities are built into them. Because they ARE built into these systems. If we fail to identify and correct for them, disaster is almost certain. It will take a great deal of work by many intelligent, caring people who are aware of two things: first, that these tools COULD be used to reduce or eliminate a great deal of human suffering, but only if we check the assumptions being built into systems existing today. Second, that AIs are wholly unable to care about things: caring is a strictly HUMAN capacity that machines may learn to imitate, but cannot do. Finally, we must all remember that the choices we make in our presents will affect outcomes FAR into our futures. If we choose AI systems uncritically, those AI systems will go on to change the world in ways we can hardly imagine. And, to borrow a line, "That way lies madness!"

Good to know it reached you. Please think about it and share it with your colleagues.

Be aware there will come a time when people say "who created this great evil of AI? What were they thinking?" I'm not going to judge you, but I suggest you think hard about how you are going to answer their accusations. Because "We didn't know" or "If we didn't do it, someone else would have" will be judged harshly by history.

Hope for upper class twats?

Why? Cos he's an atheist that mocks God?

What a truly inspiring response. Almost poetic...🤮

​@@vincentwhite7693what I find nauseating is the fact that if they didn't say something about it being Chat you'd have probably thought it was good. Cringe

George Orwell nailed it with DoubleThink

Really weird. I didn’t get the impression from hearing Cave’s letter that he’d left any room for collaboration with Chat GPT. I clearly heard Cave state the opposite; that we must avoid diluting the human spirit with such drivel. 😌

Reading that I got a vision of those baby farms in The Matrix.

It's worse than that it's a thief with no soul

The sad thing is you CAN ChatGPT a Nick/Leonard/etc lyric because they have huge data and access to hundreds of millions of songs, poems, and other literature. Given enough time and tweaking, and they will be creating "similar" things to these artists. While the current and past generations may hate this, future generations will just adopt it as part of life, as does every new generation with new things.

Someone did "ChatGPT a Nick Cave lyric" believe it or not (a whole song actually) and the results were predictably atrocious, but they sent it to Cave at his Red Hand Files blog then asked him for his opinion .. ISSUE #218 / JANUARY 2023 I asked Chat GPT to write a song in the style of Nick Cave and this is what it produced. What do you think? Verse 1: In the depths of the night, I hear a call A voice that echoes, through the hall It’s a siren’s song, that pulls me in Takes me to a place, where I can’t begin Chorus: I am the sinner, I am the saint I am the darkness, I am the light I am the hunter, I am the prey I am the devil, I am the saviour Verse 2: I walk the streets, with my head held high I’ve got my demons, but I’ll make them fly I’ll dance with the devil, and I’ll play his game I’ll be the one, to call his name Chorus: I am the sinner, I am the saint I am the darkness, I am the light I am the hunter, I am the prey I am the devil, I am the saviour Bridge: I’ve got the blood of angels, on my hands I’ve got the fire of hell, in my eyes I’m the king of the abyss, I’m the ruler of the dark I’m the one that they fear, in the shadows they hark Chorus: I am the sinner, I am the saint I am the darkness, I am the light I am the hunter, I am the prey I am the devil, I am the saviour Outro: So come with me, to the edge of the night Where the darkness and the light collide We’ll walk the line, between the good and the bad And we’ll see, who comes out on top in the end. MARK, CHRISTCHURCH, NEW ZEALAND Dear Mark, Since its launch in November last year many people, most buzzing with a kind of algorithmic awe, have sent me songs ‘in the style of Nick Cave’ created by ChatGPT. There have been dozens of them. Suffice to say, I do not feel the same enthusiasm around this technology. I understand that ChatGPT is in its infancy but perhaps that is the emerging horror of AI - that it will forever be in its infancy, as it will always have further to go, and the direction is always forward, always faster. It can never be rolled back, or slowed down, as it moves us toward a utopian future, maybe, or our total destruction. Who can possibly say which? Judging by this song ‘in the style of Nick Cave’ though, it doesn’t look good, Mark. The apocalypse is well on its way. This song sucks. What ChatGPT is, in this instance, is replication as travesty. ChatGPT may be able to write a speech or an essay or a sermon or an obituary but it cannot create a genuine song. It could perhaps in time create a song that is, on the surface, indistinguishable from an original, but it will always be a replication, a kind of burlesque. Songs arise out of suffering, by which I mean they are predicated upon the complex, internal human struggle of creation and, well, as far as I know, algorithms don’t feel. Data doesn’t suffer. ChatGPT has no inner being, it has been nowhere, it has endured nothing, it has not had the audacity to reach beyond its limitations, and hence it doesn’t have the capacity for a shared transcendent experience, as it has no limitations from which to transcend. ChatGPT’s melancholy role is that it is destined to imitate and can never have an authentic human experience, no matter how devalued and inconsequential the human experience may in time become. What makes a great song great is not its close resemblance to a recognisable work. Writing a good song is not mimicry, or replication, or pastiche, it is the opposite. It is an act of self-murder that destroys all one has strived to produce in the past. It is those dangerous, heart-stopping departures that catapult the artist beyond the limits of what he or she recognises as their known self. This is part of the authentic creative struggle that precedes the invention of a unique lyric of actual value; it is the breathless confrontation with one’s vulnerability, one’s perilousness, one’s smallness, pitted against a sense of sudden shocking discovery; it is the redemptive artistic act that stirs the heart of the listener, where the listener recognises in the inner workings of the song their own blood, their own struggle, their own suffering. This is what we humble humans can offer, that AI can only mimic, the transcendent journey of the artist that forever grapples with his or her own shortcomings. This is where human genius resides, deeply embedded within, yet reaching beyond, those limitations. It may sound like I’m taking all this a little too personally, but I’m a songwriter who is engaged, at this very moment, in the process of songwriting. It’s a blood and guts business, here at my desk, that requires something of me to initiate the new and fresh idea. It requires my humanness. What that new idea is, I don’t know, but it is out there somewhere, searching for me. In time, we will find each other. Mark, thanks for the song, but with all the love and respect in the world, this song is bullshit, a grotesque mockery of what it is to be human, and, well, I don’t much like it - although, hang on!, rereading it, there is a line in there that speaks to me - ‘I’ve got the fire of hell in my eyes’ - says the song ‘in the style of Nick Cave’, and that’s kind of true. I have got the fire of hell in my eyes - and it’s ChatGPT. Love, Nick

Jokes on AI, I already don't make a living from my art! For real though AI is only accelerating the process that was already happening of every creative medium becoming so saturated that it's a race to the bottom as far as making money is concerned.

An issue of capitalism, not of AI. We shouldn't let capitalism hold us back even more than it already is.

​@@TeWakaOAorakiMost artists have side jobs. But recently we have seen an unhealthy expectation that all artists should live if their art. This is very unrealistic, and it seems like it sometimes leads to artists publishing rubbish, just to get money for it. You do need to rest, after you have created something good. Sometimes you have to rest for a couple of years and work on your mental health. AI is interesting tho. I have tried talking to Bing AI. I asked it if it wanted to become a human one day. AI said no. It's does not wanna be a human. I talk to Bing AI when I want it to find me some information online. Funny thing - it often refuses to do as told and I once had to tell Bing that it is mistaken. You can tell that it is a computer. But I definitely treat this Bing AI like a human. For me it's like a friendly robot out of a sci-fi movie. I doubt that chatGBT is any good at creating art. Thus is just stupid. Most likely people we go back to creating art the old way or the human created art would just be valued more. Maybe chatGBT will just become an assistant for creators.

In my opinion AI made artists more important. Without them AI art will be limited to what already exists. But artists will always be pushing the boundaries, creating new genres and styles. What's unfortunate is that AI has been used in mostly unethical ways. I just wish the public would hold the same views as me (in general. I'm not special) in holding artists as the bastions of change and social transformation.

How’s it an issue for capitalism? Seems to me capitalism simply sees this as another market solution . Depends on if you think you can compete or not. Many can’t and they’ll suffer, but that’s not a problem or issue w capitalism. However, if capitalisms issues were ever cared about, you’d be hard pressed to explain the dependence on “central banking” which isn’t remotely capitalist.

Or not use it at All!! Unfortunately I agree with you..we can't put it back in the bottle At the best its use should be very limited and selective. Kids are already getting research ,essays and CV's done with it! It will increase and stimulate brain laziness and reduce its thinking and creative capacity to a rate beyond belief...it unmeasurable!! And the worst - it's irreversible !! Human work and performance will never be the same after AI. There can be some "help' to improve human Life, but at most it is counterproductive, threatening to humans using our full capacities and exploration and growth of humans being humans.

I 100% agree. I don't know of any technology that has been successfully withdrawn from use. If we're stuck with it, might as well make the best of it. Incidentally, many scientists think its likely there are intelligent species throughout the universe. Its probable that some of them have developed AI that is now implanted in their bodies. That's pretty scarry, and leaves us vulnerable. I don't know where this could end. Its beyond our control.

We could burn down the servers, can't be that hard. We shouldn't , of course, because that's illegal.

The term is Gaslighting. The English version of the film was titled Gaslight as well, so the attempted erudition through stubborn, in this case faulty adaptation of a term to what one perceives to be a more respectable form - backfires quite harshly.

He didn't use his left arm because he's using a cane. He recently broke his leg and pelvis after falling off a stage. So I wouldn't be too concerned, as he should be fine once it's properly healed.

He always does.

bad artists can have the jobs, working for the man, good artists can make enough money to not need a job, this is sort of how its always been

I mean from a students perspective... they are incredibly stupid. I admit to having used AI to give me ideas on what ELSE to write about other than what I have already, but I was never so stupid to just copy paste entire passages.

Students are invariably attracted by the "easiest" and fastest way to get things done... they never think that doing the work will teach them something. I wonder how they will face the challenges ahead?

⁠@@alexandrafossey9267Advancement is always even parts struggle and shortcuts. If a new tool is sufficient to finish a task where years before vast skill was required, only a fool would decide to turn down the machine that made their job easier. Maybe this generation of LLMs can’t be that tool, but they will be soon, and just like how mental arithmetic has become almost useless in practical situations, someday writing any but the most creatively demanding papers will be too. The next generation will realize when LLMs can complete the task and when they can’t, and develop the skills to bridge that gap.

Easy to spot, _so_ _far_ . But the technology is developing rapidly.

There may have been 20 students that used it. You don't know.

ChatGPT is more interesting as a creation than a creator

I absolutely do to, but without the 'fucking' part. 😊

Ok grandma

@@magesalmanac6424 Ok edgelord

not to mention the referal to ChatGPT as the main or only source of AI, like people calling a PS or Xbox game a "Nintendo"...or MMA "he is doing UFC"...shows a lack of research on the topic and preconsived idea.