←back to thread

I Am An AI Hater

(anthonymoser.github.io)
443 points BallsInIt | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.202s | source
Show context
jkingsman ◴[] No.45044262[source]
I appreciate seeing this point of view represented. It's not one I personally hold, but it is one a LOT of my friends hold, and I think it's important that it be given a voice, even if -- perhaps especially if -- a lot of people disagree with it.

One of my friends sent me a delightful bastardization of the famous IBM quote:

A COMPUTER CAN NEVER FEEL SPITEFUL OR [PASSIONATE†]. THEREFORE A COMPUTER MUST NEVER CREATE ART.

Hate is an emotional word, and I suspect many people (myself included) may leap to take logical issue with an emotional position. But emotions are real, and human, and people absolutely have them about AI, and I think that's important to talk about and respect that fact.

† replaced with a slightly less salacious word than the original in consideration for politeness.

replies(11): >>45044367 #>>45044380 #>>45044473 #>>45044533 #>>45044608 #>>45044647 #>>45044670 #>>45045227 #>>45048762 #>>45051119 #>>45062362 #
randcraw ◴[] No.45044367[source]
Picasso's Guernica was born of hate, his hate of war, of dehumanization for petty political ends. No computer will ever empathize with the senseless inhumanity of war to produce such a work. It must forever parrot.
replies(8): >>45044540 #>>45044662 #>>45044689 #>>45044820 #>>45044916 #>>45045032 #>>45045144 #>>45045204 #
1. andybak ◴[] No.45045144[source]
The same Picasso that was notorious for churning them out towards the end of his career?

I'm being slightly flippant but I do think this is a motte and bailey argument.

Not even painting is a Guernica nor does it need to be.

And not every aesthetically pleasing object is art. (And finally - art doesn't even have to be aesthetically pleasing. And actually finally "art" has a multitude of contradictory meanings)