|
| ▲ | bigfishrunning a day ago | parent | next [-] |
| Ok i was nerd sniped by the phrase "trillions of sunsets" how do you count sunsets? is it from one vantage point? in that case, the earth is about 1.7 trillion days old, so there have been roughly that many sunsets. but is someone standing in the opposite hemisphere at the same longitude line seeing the same sunset? maybe, maybe not. also, someone two time zones behind me will see a different sunset; maybe there have been an infinite number of sunsets? maybe just one continuous one that's moving? This is more fun to think about then the things I'm supposed to be thinking about, and more fun then worrying about AI. Sorry for the rant hackernews, needed to get this impulsive line of thought out. |
| |
| ▲ | Lerc a day ago | parent [-] | | Depends on your perspective, with a good spacesuit on mercury you could walk at 3.6kph and have one permanent sunset, Judge it just right and you could actually have a decent temperature. |
|
|
| ▲ | BoxOfRain a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I listen to music because someone went to the trouble of making music to express themselves, and I'm interested in knowing something of them. You have to put something of yourself into any artistic work for it to have much merit, so what use is the 'art' of something which has no self to me? The statistical average of what hundreds of millions of artists did cannot be art, because there's no intentionality behind it. There's no statistically average person after all, everyone is a unique collection of memory and temperament which is apparent in the art they create. There is a part of what it means to be human in even the meanest artistic act which I think the output of statistical models necessarily lacks. |
| |
| ▲ | Lerc a day ago | parent [-] | | >I listen to music because someone went to the trouble of making music to express themselves, and I'm interested in knowing something of them. You have to put something of yourself into any artistic work for it to have much merit, so what use is the 'art' of something which has no self to me? I'm totally fine with your reasons for listening to music. Do you have a problem with other people's reasons to listen to music? | | |
| ▲ | BoxOfRain 21 hours ago | parent [-] | | I'm not saying people are somehow morally defective if they prefer generative AI output to music someone sat down and wrote, I'm just completely baffled by it. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | Jtarii a day ago | parent | prev [-] |
| A sunset isn't art. I am so confused by this analogy. |
| |
| ▲ | Lerc 19 hours ago | parent [-] | | The question was not, "why do you think this is art?" The debate of what is and isn't art is older than art and almost as old as art critics. I like to think of art as "An invitation to consider" and not as a binary value. On this scale a banana taped to a wall is elevated above some paintings, A human drawn tree as a background of a video game that ends up always obscured by a house would be lower on this scale than an AI generated image crafted to make people think about an idea. The worth, financial, aesthetic, or moral, of the axis is purely a projection of human ideology. That's a side issue to why someone might like it. Something doesn't have to be art to be liked, or enjoyed. |
|
