Rob Greenlee argues AI content deserves evaluation on its own merits, not just dismissed for being non-human. He says comparing AI work directly to human-created material is unfair because they're distinct forms. His counterpart disagrees that AI output qualifies as art yet.
What the conflict is here is the fact that there is a certain amount of acceptance of this content that's already in place. Now, if we contrast that with human-created content, it's, it's really not a fair comparison because they are two different forms of art, right? Or two different forms of content.
Please don't call AI-created stuff art at this point.
Well, so creating, saying that AI-created content is somehow bad because it's not human is kind of begging the question.
Future-proofing with Delphi AI/Human clones: your podcast as a personal LLM | New Media Show
How sports reveal what AI spectacle gets wrong #Technology #Sports #Commentary
