During this forced hiatus from making art I’m getting some distance from the daily interaction and it feels like it’s easier to see things from a wider perspective.
This great piece from @Rabbunnitt prompted a personal reflection of mine, for the umpteenth time: why do I make AI art that doesn’t look like AI art, and why do I appreciate pieces like this so much.
It’s a super-wide topic of course, which we could sum up with the “truthfulness” to the medium.
Long story short, I was so surprised that both the audience and the middlemen favored quite a strict adherence to the AI aesthetic. I get it: when something is new, you want art that looks like new. But this argument is necessarily bound to a short time frame.
I sincerely questioned myself for two years, for wanting something that didn’t actually (or necessarily) look like AI. There was this lingering doubt that I was making a poor, superficial choice.
This doubt faded away. The matter is very complex, but suffices to say that we’ve been in a post-medium era for 3-4 decades already, and if you ask me to choose between an oil painting that looks like an oil painting, and another one that doesn’t, my choice is the latter 100 times out 100. I’m Gerhard Richter team.
AI is a marvellous tool which allows for an inherent aestethic, OR any aesthetic you like. That’s its power. Mixing media is its thing, way more than deformities or repetition of known models IMHO. This is my personal view.
So back to the argument, any take is legit. Of course. But I was surprised (that’s the right word) that 80-90% of this space appreciated “truthful” AI art and mostly overlooked the rest. I understand why, but anybody can draw their conclusions.
Maybe it’s early. Probably not the right time in history and that’s fair; but no, cross-media capabilities must be explored now.
That’s why I unconsciously made this choice while liking, supporting, curating for my zine etc. Every single time. This piece by @Rabbunnitt is great because it plays so well on this ambiguity (while looking as AI as well). Some will see interesting shapes and colors etc. But its value is all in the tremendous ambiguity about space, medium, and interpretation. Something that most AI works absolutely lack.
We're back with the 24th edition of Paragraph Picks, highlighting a few hand-selected pieces from the past week or so.
@hagaetc writes about the exodus of Norwegian entrepreneurs, driven by an untenable wealth tax on unrealized gains, highlighting the urgent need for Norway to abandon punitive taxation policies and foster innovation to ensure a sustainable post-oil economy. "In the past two years alone, a staggering 100 of Norway’s top 400 taxpayers, representing about 50% of that group’s wealth, have fled the country to protect their businesses." https://paragraph.xyz/@hagaetc/norway-shrugged
@mdean shares how AI art’s true potential lies in its ability to transcend its inherent aesthetic, enabling cross-media experimentation and ambiguity, even as the majority of the space still gravitates toward “truthful” AI art that conforms to its recognizable style. "AI is a marvellous tool which allows for an inherent aesthetic, OR any aesthetic you like. That’s its power." https://paragraph.xyz/@mdean/marcozine-n19
@yb writes about the rise of onchain AI and how it's being driven by open-source experimentation and collaboration between crypto and AI pioneers. "The key point I want all of you to takeaway here is that if you want to understand how this agent meta will play out, your best bet is to follow these AI hackers closely and understand what’s top of mind for them." https://terminallyonchain.xyz/simulator
@n1ftey writes about the urgent need to address exploitative corporate practices in AI development, advocating for ethical frameworks that prioritize transparency, fair compensation, and collaboration to empower creators rather than exploit them. "The problem lies not with the tools but with the corporations that wield them." https://paragraph.xyz/@jldart/the-unseen-cost-of-ai
Thanks for the shoutout Reid