When I was a kid, I entered a county fair poetry competition. When I got to the fair, I excitedly ran to see what poem won — it was a total plagiarized ripoff of a poem from Calvin & Hobbes. I recognized it immediately. Clearly, the adults in charge hadn’t.
The problem isn’t AI.
Like all tools, AI art programs can be misused, and while they’re very new, we’re still figuring out the expectations and social rules for them.
That doesn’t mean they’re inherently bad. If you get hit in the face by a hammer, you don’t ban all hammers.
If you’ve watched Star Trek, you’ve probably seen people walk onto the holodeck and just start describing things… which the computer then pops into existence, and the person can tweak them by clarifying what they wanted.
That’s AI art.
AI art tools facilitate making it possible for human creativity to be more quickly and readily expressed, even for those who don’t have the time, facility, or inclination to develop complex, powerful drawing skills.
More people making more art is good.
Yes, it’s already cliche to compare AI art programs to photography, but there’s a reason for that. It’s a good comparison.
And they’re both very valuable, beautiful tools. And yes, both will shake things up and change the world.
And personally I love it.
Side note: there was a whole episode of Clarissa Explains It All (back in the 90s) about her winning a poetry contest with a poem she had her computer generate.
This problem isn’t new. Not even the AI side of it.
(Ironically, Clarissa Explains It All also had a penchant for ripping off Bill Waterson. I recall quite a few jokes pulled straight from Calvin & Hobbes in that show. Though, nothing on the order of a full plagiarized poem.)