Post AV0SGerM5p5Ivgi7eK by tante@tldr.nettime.org
 (DIR) More posts by tante@tldr.nettime.org
 (DIR) Post #AV0SGerM5p5Ivgi7eK by tante@tldr.nettime.org
       2023-04-25T09:34:21Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       What many proponents of text/image imitators ("AI") misunderstand is why we read text or look at images. It's not about the signs, the letters, numbers and pixels. It's about entering the thoughts and mind of another human being to understand their views, to share a bit of their experience, to connect. Reading, looking at art are deeply social activities even when you are alone in your room.
       
 (DIR) Post #AV0U8omlVKiPJ1x9No by climbertobby@chaos.social
       2023-04-25T09:55:29Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @tante But I'd argue that many texts we produce are not to connect with others but because people get paid to write something that sells or shows up in search algorithms.And I think that's also the texts we see most often. That's why many overestimate the capabilities of "AI".That's kinda pessimistic, I admit
       
 (DIR) Post #AV0UKUCHsRiyvYSF2e by tante@tldr.nettime.org
       2023-04-25T09:57:35Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @climbertobby True, there's a sphere of "functional texts" for example. Legal documents, manuals, SEO optimization fluff etc. But a lot of that (think SEO fluff) is just SPAM, build to optimize financial output based on opaque systems. It's exactly the shit we need less of.
       
 (DIR) Post #AV0UZjCeMsW7oKtNJ2 by apublicimage@berlin.social
       2023-04-25T10:00:00Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @tanteI disagree. Though the social aspect is important, #language is not just a tool to share thoughts. It is informative on its own. Think e.g. of logic or poetry. These are partly exploratory practices, where we try to find out what can be said, and thus thought. It is for this reason that #AI actually works. So we should not fall into the trap of assuming that there is some kind of mind 'behind' the machines, but we should accept that language also creates meaning, not only minds do.
       
 (DIR) Post #AV0VdsISbEuJ7w9QDw by postweber@mstdn.social
       2023-04-25T10:12:19Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @tante not every human will attempt to draw well enough to convey their view, so I'm less against image generation.
       
 (DIR) Post #AV0WJQHT9WjEOpV0Jk by aoe@berlin.social
       2023-04-25T10:19:49Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @tante Pictures and images as a way of "entering the thoughts and mind of another human being".I like this. And that may also be the reason why looking at AI-generated images often makes me nauseous - literally. There is an unconcious feeling that something is "off".
       
 (DIR) Post #AV0XqiauBUhohy1wqe by jens@coma.social
       2023-04-25T10:37:03Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @tante While I think there's a plethora of things to be criticised when discussing "AI", especially from an ethical and economic standpoint, I don't follow this contradiction for creative processes in principal. There's no art without meaning, and that's what "AI" won't generate for you. It can be a means for ones intimate expression or playfulness, with all the thoughts and experiences that are rooted within. You still can create insignificance, but it takes a human to make that choice.
       
 (DIR) Post #AV0YX32yX2IIItLPu4 by simulo@hci.social
       2023-04-25T10:44:35Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @tante related "From The Transmission Of Representations To The Education Of Attention", Tim Ingold:  https://lchc.ucsd.edu/mca/Paper/ingold/ingold1.htm