Expressing themselves by generating boilerplate content?
Creativity is a conversation with yourself and God. Stripping away the struggle that comes with creativity defeats the entire purpose. Making it easier to make content is good for capital, but no one will ever get fulfillment out of prompting an AI and settling with the result.
Check out all the creatives on /r/screenwriting, half the time they are trying to figure out how to "make connections" just to get a story considered. It's a fucking nightmare out there. Whatever god is providing us with AI is the greatest gift I could imagine to a creative.
AI could be useful if used like any other tool, but not as an all in box where everything is done for you minus the prompt. Im actually worried people will become lazy
People will always become lazy with new tools. But not all people.
It'll lower the barrier of entry (and therefore the quality floor before people feel comfortable sharing something "they made" if they can deflect with an easy "the AI made this" versus "I put XY0 hours into this"), but it'll also empower people who wouldn't otherwise even try to create new things and, presumably, follow their passion to learn and do more.
Creativity is an expression. It comes from the heart. Hard work isn't always the greatest vehicle for creativity. We just think it is. I've seen plenty of things that clearly took a lot of execution but fundamentally lack creativity, often becoming an exhibition in technical virtuosity.
Here's something you can try to prove it to yourself. Sit down and write a novel. It'll be like squeezing blood out of a rock unless your heart is ready to do it freely. You'll see that if you force yourself through hard work to do it, you'll just end up with something that people will laud as creative due to the execution but it'll lack everything about free-flowing creativity. Good programmers are lazy, so are good creatives, but now I'm just repeating myself.
It's a lot easier squeezing blood out of a heart, especially for the lazy.
exactly, creatives and everyone else can always do something fulfilling for themselves just like before AI. They can struggle all they want and continue doing it for no capital. because that process is fulfilling to them.
> Yes but how many will sign up for that? Im sure few will continue to do so but crea
It’s not important to me that they do.
> Im sure few will continue to do so but creativity will certainly take a big hit.
I’ve seen the workflows for AI generated films like https://youtu.be/x6aERZWaarM?si=J2VHYAHLL3og32Ix and I find it to be very creative. Its more interesting to me that this person would never have raised capital and tried to direct this, but this is much closer to what they wanted to create. I’m also entertained by it, whether I was judging it for generative AI issues or not.
the level of discipline needed in a trade has gone down in almost every trade, including all mediums of art, for centuries
its not really anyone's problem, and generally limited to the people that made way too much of their identity to be based on a single field, that they feel they have to gatekeep it
its great that people can express themselves closer to their vision now
When it comes to tech startup capital, its not America its Silicon Valley and nobody else. Sure there are deals closing in other regions but the structure isnt the same.
Silicon Beach/Alley/Gulf/Islands within America cannot replicate it either
Without a culture of paying it forward as a reckless angel investor sometimes dressed up as a fund, already within the people that made it, none of these ecosystems get off the ground
Notably, Silicon Valley’s earliest winners were from a government funded initiative
Software engineering has trimodal compensation curves
Going between the curves isn’t tied to experience at all, but within the curves it moderately is. You should learn the field you are in if you want different results.
“falling into” was never part of the equation
reply