But people were bad at assessing whether images were made by artificial intelligence or an artist.

  • voracitude@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    I’m just giving you information so you are better informed and don’t sound like a douche nozzle in public anymore.

    You think I’m the one that sounds like a douche nozzle, spewing this pompous self-righteous up-your-own-arse armchair bullshit?

    Let me ask you this: if art has to be injected with meaning by its creator then why do people like you so often find meaning in art contrary to the intended message as stated by the artist? Could it be that people can find their own meaning in art, without any intention by the artist? How do you explain “found art”? Now, I admit I think “found art” is a load of bollocks but then I think Pollock is a hack too, neither of which changes the fact that there are large numbers of people who do consider both “found art” and Pollock’s work to be actual real art. Additionally, neither of those opinions of mine invalidate those of anyone else, nor am I so narcissistic as to think they do.

    You’re one of those people who tells a researcher they’re wrong and they really should read their own fucking work on the subject, and now you’re getting blocked because fuck you, you suck.

    • FraidyBear@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      Well I have a fine arts degree with minors in Art History and Art Theory so idk how much more qualified you’d like someone to be to weigh in on this. But I see you’re clearly very emotionally invested in this so you have a good day, try to see some sun today ✌🏽