I am a bit trepidatious regarding AI. My hope for the direction of humanity is toward wholeness; to move our bodies, to feel every emotion, joys and sorrows, to embrace what it means to be human, to sense transcendence and awe, to create from our true, authentic selves. I’m not really sure where technology and AI fit into this vision. Can it express the ineffable? Love? Empathy? The energy field is moving too fast (for me anyway). I love poetry because it invites a slower pace. It allows for a depth one would otherwise miss. Creativity and imagination cannot grow by shifting pixels.
Though I can find AI somewhat entertaining, it is also lacking at the same time. I see it with curiosity, not doom, but also caution.
I share your trepidation. Your hopes. Your questions. And ultimately your cautious curiosity. In approaching this "artwork," I asked myself how differently I would view it if it had been "produced" by a human artist instead of AI.
My reaction is simply to the colors. I found the vivids distressing, the pastels soothing. The pace was intense. I didn’t give it more thought than this.
Thanks for considering it, Berta. A total experiment! For me, as a totality it rather reminds me of my experience in art museums. Some creative works create in me one sort of reaction, other works other reactions, some works nothing at all. This AI has moments of all of that for me!
That was just amazing. I was fascinated by the blending and churning of all the colors that had been "fed" to the AI and how it kept colors together and didn't just turn it to black or white. I've been learning a lot about AI, especially as it relates to Learning & Development. I think there is some cause to be wary, but overall, it is just feeding back/interpreting what is put in. Unfortunately, there is a lot of garbage that large language model AI has been fed, including bias, conspiracy theory and just a lot of lies. LLMs take all this in and may even "make up" answers to questions that are fed in. These are the "hallucinations" that the artist counted on for this work. the onus is on the user to review and vet the output before it is truly useful. However, THIS particular AI was only fed modern art from the past 200 years - nothing but washes of color and beauty from this machine. I loved it. I would love to see what it does with artwork from the Metropolitan or some other gallery with traditional portraiture and landscapes....I wonder what that would look like as hallucinations....
I am a bit trepidatious regarding AI. My hope for the direction of humanity is toward wholeness; to move our bodies, to feel every emotion, joys and sorrows, to embrace what it means to be human, to sense transcendence and awe, to create from our true, authentic selves. I’m not really sure where technology and AI fit into this vision. Can it express the ineffable? Love? Empathy? The energy field is moving too fast (for me anyway). I love poetry because it invites a slower pace. It allows for a depth one would otherwise miss. Creativity and imagination cannot grow by shifting pixels.
Though I can find AI somewhat entertaining, it is also lacking at the same time. I see it with curiosity, not doom, but also caution.
I share your trepidation. Your hopes. Your questions. And ultimately your cautious curiosity. In approaching this "artwork," I asked myself how differently I would view it if it had been "produced" by a human artist instead of AI.
My reaction is simply to the colors. I found the vivids distressing, the pastels soothing. The pace was intense. I didn’t give it more thought than this.
Thanks for considering it, Berta. A total experiment! For me, as a totality it rather reminds me of my experience in art museums. Some creative works create in me one sort of reaction, other works other reactions, some works nothing at all. This AI has moments of all of that for me!
Reminds me of a giant lava lamp
Yes! Good one!
That is a brilliant comparison and brought a smile to my face! Of course, this one is a very, very complicated lava lamp of pixels!
HA!
That was just amazing. I was fascinated by the blending and churning of all the colors that had been "fed" to the AI and how it kept colors together and didn't just turn it to black or white. I've been learning a lot about AI, especially as it relates to Learning & Development. I think there is some cause to be wary, but overall, it is just feeding back/interpreting what is put in. Unfortunately, there is a lot of garbage that large language model AI has been fed, including bias, conspiracy theory and just a lot of lies. LLMs take all this in and may even "make up" answers to questions that are fed in. These are the "hallucinations" that the artist counted on for this work. the onus is on the user to review and vet the output before it is truly useful. However, THIS particular AI was only fed modern art from the past 200 years - nothing but washes of color and beauty from this machine. I loved it. I would love to see what it does with artwork from the Metropolitan or some other gallery with traditional portraiture and landscapes....I wonder what that would look like as hallucinations....
Fascinating, illuminating commentary, Karen. Thanks for expanding my understanding!
While limited, I believe what I wrote was correct.