←back to thread

647 points bradgessler | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.288s | source
Show context
curl-up ◴[] No.44009301[source]
> The fun has been sucked out of the process of creation because nothing I make organically can compete with what AI already produces—or soon will.

So the fun, all along, was not in the process of creation itself, but in the fact that the creator could somehow feel superior to others not being able to create? I find this to be a very unhealthy relationship to creativity.

My mixer can mix dough better than I can, but I still enjoy kneading it by hand. The incredibly good artisanal bakery down the street did not reduce my enjoyment of baking, even though I cannot compete with them in quality by any measure. Modern slip casting can make superior pottery by many different quality measures, but potters enjoy throwing it on a wheel and producing unique pieces.

But if your idea of fun is tied to the "no one else can do this but me", then you've been doing it wrong before AI existed.

replies(14): >>44009329 #>>44009344 #>>44009382 #>>44009383 #>>44009447 #>>44009580 #>>44009601 #>>44009759 #>>44009774 #>>44009818 #>>44009920 #>>44009945 #>>44009977 #>>44010301 #
ebiester ◴[] No.44009382[source]
Let's frame it more generously: The reward is based on being able to contribute something novel to the world - not because nobody else can but because it's another contribution to the world's knowledge.
replies(7): >>44009431 #>>44009453 #>>44009697 #>>44009959 #>>44010069 #>>44011386 #>>44011508 #
1. mionhe ◴[] No.44010069[source]
It sounds as if the reward is primarily monetary in this case.

As some others have commented, you can find rewards that aren't monetary to motivate you, and you can find ways to make your work so unique that people are willing to pay for it.

Technology forces us to use the creative process to more creatively monetize our work.