I would think that if you liked a book as a fan, you'd want to know who the author/writer is. You'd want to hear from them in an interview or something. The same goes for a music artist/band, you'd want to see an interview, a music video or possibly go to a live show. AI can't do those things. That's where humans come in for the win.
But…it’s even worse than that. You can’t thread this needle. It’s stealing from the best as it trains a new audience. Who’s to say it’s not as good? It can ape Shakespeare jn seconds. Grammy winners ignored the subject as they used their mic time for other causes… but this is the cause. This is about transcendent human creative genius vs machine plagiarism.
Let human artists be inspired by human artists. It has no place in the arts. Show your prompts, put a label on it and let the audience decide if the bots move them.
It just grabbed the first image in the piece for the thumbnail. Unintentional. Though within the piece I differentiate between massive amounts of human output from AI-generated output. I don’t refer to her writing as slop.
I started getting ads at least a year ago about how I could make money selling books without writing them... and it was exactly this. Just prompt AI to slop some stuff out, put them up on Amazon and if you have enough "books" then you might actually make some money because it's all print on-demand or ebooks anyway. It's really sordid.
"The Slop Problem: AI, Filler, and Barbecue"-Bill Johns
Out Now!
I would think that if you liked a book as a fan, you'd want to know who the author/writer is. You'd want to hear from them in an interview or something. The same goes for a music artist/band, you'd want to see an interview, a music video or possibly go to a live show. AI can't do those things. That's where humans come in for the win.
But…it’s even worse than that. You can’t thread this needle. It’s stealing from the best as it trains a new audience. Who’s to say it’s not as good? It can ape Shakespeare jn seconds. Grammy winners ignored the subject as they used their mic time for other causes… but this is the cause. This is about transcendent human creative genius vs machine plagiarism.
Let human artists be inspired by human artists. It has no place in the arts. Show your prompts, put a label on it and let the audience decide if the bots move them.
Using a pic of Danielle Steel's novels is rather unfortunate/misleading on an article about AI slop.
It just grabbed the first image in the piece for the thumbnail. Unintentional. Though within the piece I differentiate between massive amounts of human output from AI-generated output. I don’t refer to her writing as slop.
Maybe all the slop will lead more and more people to buy physical media and stop using streaming services that peddle in slop.
I started getting ads at least a year ago about how I could make money selling books without writing them... and it was exactly this. Just prompt AI to slop some stuff out, put them up on Amazon and if you have enough "books" then you might actually make some money because it's all print on-demand or ebooks anyway. It's really sordid.
An AI-produced slop comment on an article about AI slop is pretty amazing and… you know… depressing.