site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of September 12, 2022

This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.

Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.

We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:

  • Shaming.

  • Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.

  • Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.

  • Recruiting for a cause.

  • Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.

In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:

  • Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.

  • Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.

  • Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.

  • Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.

On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

40
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

A few followups to last week's post on the shifting political alignment of artists:

HN: Online art communities begin banning AI-generated images

The AI Unbundling

Vox: What AI Art means for human artists

FurAffinity was, predictably, not the only site to ban AI content. Digital artists online are in crisis mode, and you can hardly blame them -- their primary income source is about to disappear. A few names for anyone here still paying for commissions: PornPen, Waifu Diffusion, Unstable Diffusion.

But what I really want to focus on is the Vox video. I watched it (and it's accompanying layman explanation of diffusion models) with the expectation it'd be some polemic against the dangers of amoral tech nerds bringing grevious harm to marginalised communities. Instead, what I got was this:

There's hundreds of millions of years of evolution that go into making the human body move through three-dimensional space gracefully and respond to rapidly changing situations. Language -- not hundreds of millions of years of evolution behind that, actually. It's pretty recent. And the same thing is true for creating images. So our idea that like, creative symbolic work will be really hard to automate and that physical labor will be really easy to automate, is based on social distinctions that we draw between different kinds of people. Not based on a really good understanding of actually what's hard.

So, although artists are organising a reactionary/protectionist front against AI art, the media seems to be siding with the techbros for the moment. And I kind of hate this. I'm mostly an AI maximalist, and I'm fully expecting whoever sides with Team AI to gain power in the coming years. To that end, I was hoping the media would make a mistake...

Reminds me of that bodybuilding/math article someone was looking for in the Sunday thread. The premise is that there are two types of 'hard', bodybuilding hard (where we know how to do something, but you have to put in the effort), and math hard (where it's hard to figure out, but once you do, it's easy).

AI is basically just plowing through the 'math hard' stuff. And for the most part, creative arts are mostly 'math hard'.

But how much will society really suffer if art, on average, becomes higher quality (because low-quality art basically vanishes when an AI can do it well for free). It reminds me a bit of projectionists in movie theaters. For many years you heard projectionists sounding the alarm about what would happen if they were replaced, how the theater experience would drop. But the honest truth is that most projectionists were teenagers who had no idea what they were doing, and the average experience for theater goers was that the film would be poorly lighted, framed incorrectly, that reels wouldn't be changed properly, that sound and video would be out of sync.

Sure, in a few large cities there were great projectionist made a film dramatically better. But for the whole of society, the death of the projectionist was a net benefit.

Anyways, the average artist (and the crappy artists) probably benefit the most from AI art, because they can increase their output and potentially their quality. For those who get stuck (like writers block) AI is a great way to blow through that. And maybe society as a whole benefits if people who have great vision, but not the skill to put their vision on paper, have the tools to be able to do so.

Most 'great' artists will survive fine, since most 'great' artists are actually just 'good' artists who built a brand. At some point AI will figure out how to build a brand, an audience, a following, and that'll be a major changing point for humanity.

Who knows, maybe the rise of AI in digital media will lead to an increase in demand for in-person, local arts, like theater. If everyone can simply type an idea into a prompt and get a theatrical quality film, then the real treat is going to be seeing performances live (just like with concerts).