Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

It doesn't matter whether diffusion programs or even more rarefied approaches to solution spaces can capture the essence of human-produced art.

Markets are fundamentally about perceived value instead of actual value. Algorithmically generated creative works do not have to compete in the field of actual value; they has to compete in the field of perceived value. Let's be real, almost all customers of art - whether they pay before or after the production - are pretty bad at estimating actual value.

More philosophically, it's not possible to empower humans above human superorganisms. You make a successful walled garden or you fail to reproduce your ideals into the future.



That is a bunch of minced words to explain a very simple concept:

People judge results, not effort.

You don't buy a product because the producer put in <X> effort, you buy it because it's good (FSVO good).


> People judge results, not effort.

That may be true for graphic art for movies, video games, websites, etc, but not for fine art. In fine art, the resulting artwork is judged much less by the result than what went into it. The artworld already is deluged by art, so the narrative around the art and the artist is the most important differentiating element.


Food Safety and Veterinary Office? Fire Service Vehicle Operator?


> Hey GPT, what does FSVO mean in the above

> "FSVO" stands for "For Some Value Of". In the given statement, "FSVO good" means that the product is considered good to some extent, though the degree of goodness may vary depending on personal opinions and preferences.


What is "actual value"?


In fine art? Social signalling. AI generated art is like artificial diamonds.


In the case of diamond it seems better to choose the artificial one. Especially the real one's price is controlled.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: