The difference ultimately is in the knowledge of ‘who’ wrote the poem, human or AI. The latter is worthless except insofar it is proof that we as a species are capable of subverting ourselves. What should happen, if we are not too stupid and too far gone, is that the individual human creator will not be replaced but be accorded greater value as a rare commodity to be preserved.
I'm just not sure how much it is a subversion. For art, I don't think you can stop the human drive to create. I suppose we'll have artists who use AI as a stepping stone . . . not sure if that's to be booed down or not. Then there are others who dislike writing, who find it difficult (definitely NOT us, right?). To them, I suppose AI is a great relief!
Not conscious subversion, to be sure, but sort of like the way the A-bomb is not subversion! And use of AI as an element in art may be fine, like (Moog) synthesizers in music. As for those who dislike writing, again, I suppose that is fine as long as what they produce comes from external necessity, like a college textbook or something, not from what should only come from internal necessity, like a poem, a novel, an essay, a diary. Still, what are the consequences for a culture that is throwing away the gift of literacy, or at least limiting it to only the ability to read, not read AND write? We've already lost the art of letter-writing, now the practice of writing could be lost altogether.
The difference ultimately is in the knowledge of ‘who’ wrote the poem, human or AI. The latter is worthless except insofar it is proof that we as a species are capable of subverting ourselves. What should happen, if we are not too stupid and too far gone, is that the individual human creator will not be replaced but be accorded greater value as a rare commodity to be preserved.
I'm just not sure how much it is a subversion. For art, I don't think you can stop the human drive to create. I suppose we'll have artists who use AI as a stepping stone . . . not sure if that's to be booed down or not. Then there are others who dislike writing, who find it difficult (definitely NOT us, right?). To them, I suppose AI is a great relief!
Not conscious subversion, to be sure, but sort of like the way the A-bomb is not subversion! And use of AI as an element in art may be fine, like (Moog) synthesizers in music. As for those who dislike writing, again, I suppose that is fine as long as what they produce comes from external necessity, like a college textbook or something, not from what should only come from internal necessity, like a poem, a novel, an essay, a diary. Still, what are the consequences for a culture that is throwing away the gift of literacy, or at least limiting it to only the ability to read, not read AND write? We've already lost the art of letter-writing, now the practice of writing could be lost altogether.
Sadly, I'd say this culture has been "throwing away the gift of literacy" pretty well WITHOUT the help of AI.
True that.