Thousands of artists are urging the auction house Christie’s to cancel a sale of art created with artificial intelligence, claiming the technology behind the works is committing “mass theft”.
The Augmented Intelligence auction has been described by Christie’s as the first AI-dedicated sale by a major auctioneer and features 20 lots with prices ranging from $10,000 to $250,000 for works by artists including Refik Anadol and the late AI art pioneer Harold Cohen.
All right, I don’t want to dismiss how you feel or anything but so many people said this that they did experiments to see and it turns out that nah, overall, people thought mostly that the robot art was more human, and the effect comes from the knowledge of the painter. All things equal, emotional connections happen just as much (if not more) with generative art. That doesn’t surprise me honestly, it’s mimicking humans. And the rating of how likely it is to do so has guided it to the end product, so somehow, the humanity is embedded. It’s not something that feels great as I am an artist myself, but I accept science on this one.
I’m not sure I understand your overall point here. It sounds like you’re saying that the perceived emotional connections in art are simply the result of the viewer projecting emotions onto the piece, is that correct?
This makes sense, but I always feel “tricked” if I don’t notice I’m reading or looking at generated stuff until after a tic.
Definitely. It’s maybe also the taint of the megacorps that train them to then put sadistic system prompts into them before training it on the public