Type B: First ChatGPT, Then Me
ChatGPT’s take
Prompt: Howdy ChatGPT, can you write a 250-word blog post about Kirby Ferguson’s YouTube video “Everything is a Remix?” Can you especially focus on the issues surrounding AI art?
In his captivating YouTube series, “Everything is a Remix,” Kirby Ferguson takes us on a journey through the intricate web of creativity, highlighting how innovation is often an interplay of inspiration, imitation, and transformation. This exploration of the creative process has far-reaching implications, especially in the realm of AI art.
Ferguson’s series underscores a fundamental concept: creativity is a continuous cycle of building upon existing ideas. He argues that every masterpiece, invention, or artistic creation is, in some way, a remix of what came before. This notion challenges traditional views of originality and pushes us to consider the transformative potential of imitation and adaptation.
In the context of AI art, this concept gains new relevance. AI algorithms, trained on vast datasets of human-created art, are capable of producing remarkable pieces that draw from various artistic influences. AI doesn’t create art in isolation but remixes, reimagines, and reinterprets styles and techniques from diverse sources. This challenges the notion of what it means to be the “creator” of a piece of art, raising questions about authorship, copyright, and the role of the human artist.
AI art represents a fusion of human ingenuity and machine capabilities, showcasing the potential for new artistic forms that blur the lines between the original and the remixed. As AI continues to redefine the creative landscape, we must embrace this transformation while also considering the ethical, legal, and philosophical questions it raises.
“Everything is a Remix” serves as a reminder that innovation thrives on the interplay between past and present, human and machine. It encourages us to embrace this evolution in the world of art and creativity, where AI art stands as a testament to the limitless possibilities of remixing and reimagining the artistic experience.
My Revision:
In his captivating YouTube video, “Everything is a Remix,” Kirby Ferguson takes us on a journey through the intricate web of creativity, highlighting how innovation is often an interplay of inspiration, imitation, and transformation. This exploration of the creative process has far-reaching implications, especially in the realm of AI art.
Ferguson’s video underscores a fundamental concept: the creation of art is a continuous cycle of building upon existing ideas. He argues that every masterpiece, invention, or artistic creation is, in some way, a remix of what came before. This notion challenges traditional views of originality and pushes us to consider the transformative potential of imitation and adaptation.
In the context of AI art, this concept gains new relevance. AI algorithms, trained on vast datasets of human-created art, are capable of producing remarkable pieces that draw from various artistic influences. AI doesn’t create art in isolation but remixes, reimagines, and reinterprets styles and techniques from diverse sources.
AI art represents a fusion of human ingenuity and machine capabilities, showcasing the potential for new artistic forms. As AI continues to redefine the creative landscape, we must embrace this transformation while also considering the ethical, legal, and philosophical questions it raises—how does the process of an AI taking inspiration from existing pictures differ from a human artist drawing inspiratino from art that they see?
As someone who likes words, I think it’s interesting that we use the word “generated” and not “created” when refering to an AI’s work: it’s always AI-generated text, never AI-created text. The word “generated” carries a conotation that the work isn’t original—that you’ve taken old work and reworked (or remixed) it into something new.
Image from DALL-E with the prompt: A photograph of an AI art generator stealing art from an artist in an alley.
Responses to “Remix, Reimagination, or Just Plain Stealing”
It’s interesting that ChatGPT described what AI art does as remixing, reimagining, and reinterpreting. Remixing is fair, but it’s uncomfortable for me to use the words ‘imagine’ and ‘interpret’ when the AI isn’t really doing either of those things. It’s using a data set to generate something new, but it doesn’t actually know what it’s doing. Just like with AI text generation, where the AI can spout responses without actually understanding what it’s saying, AI ‘artists’ aren’t capable of interpreting what any of it means, the art they take in or the art they put out.
A good observation about the prevalence of the term “generated,” Elijah. But given Ferguson’s argument about the origins of creativity, should we be thinking about how humans “generate” art rather than “create” it?
I like your distinction between the use of “generated” and “created”. I’ve always thought of creation and creativity as things unique to humans (though there are probably exceptions), but I can definitely see how AI is starting to blur the line between what it means to create something new and to “generate” something that already is.
It’s interesting how AI calls what it does creation, while also defining inspiration as a component of innovation. Is it really inspired if you just train an art AI to include certain components in its creations? Is a remix even worth that much if there’s no meaning behind it?