Stephen Fry reads Nick Cave's stirring letter about ChatGPT and human creativity
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 20 ноя 2023
- In August of this year, as part of his Red Hand Files correspondence project, legendary musician Nick Cave was asked questions about creativity and ChatGPT by two fans, Leon and Charlie.
Nick replied with a single letter, which Stephen Fry joined us to read at the 10th anniversary Letters Live show at London's Royal Albert Hall in November 2023.
© Nick Cave, Red Hand Files 
Развлечения
It's ironic that songwriting, poetry and art are so undervalued in this world, though when we want to prove something's sentience or intelligence we ask it to write a poem or a song or create an image.
Music and movies and VG’s are arguably some of the most valued things we have. Unless you mean.. idk some very specific kind of “art”
The jealousy of the untalented, the deep ENVY many feel towards real Artists, is because they do not understand either Art nor Artists. So, in their depravity and frustration, they will always seek to make Artists and what we do seem less credible or worthy of attention anything they themselves can manage. Which is BEING TOLD WHAT TO DO AND HOW TO LIVE. And because they comply, and the Artist does not, their ethical cowardice is exposed and magnified that h more by their willingness to participate in not just the destruction of the artist, but themselves as well. Guilt & Shame drive people to levels of self righteous frenzies that simply cannot be sustained without going totally mad themselves from agreeing to participate in creating a sterile ugliness and cruelty in the world.
And yet, the artist carries on in spite of them, which bears out the utter waste of their own lives they're willing to participate in ny doing nothing more than devaluing and despising those who can still see and represent the beauty in the general spirit of Life itself.
Finally, remember: there is Art and there is the Business of Art and they are as different as wet and dry, fire and ice, and night and day. Be wise, whenever possible.
That's such a good point!
The Arts (e.g., dance, theater, sculpture, etc) are definitely undervalued in the US’s education system. And they’re underfunded, in general. There’s an appreciation for *profitable creativities like concerts, popular music, etc ..
“Even a man's exact imitation of the song of the nightingale displeases us when we discover that it is a mimicry, and not the nightingale.” - Immanuel Kant.
But what happens when we are lied to? What happens when we don’t know whether or not it is a mimicry?
@@bubbyskittles4802 I think you have misunderstood both the quote and the letter.
@@KickassUncle In what sense?
@@KickassUncle I think the question is incredibly relevant in the context of the viability of human art. If we cannot distinguish one from the other as consumers, how will we make it practically possible for true art to persist?
I love it. Plato and Aristotle did it better, but I love it nonetheless.
Writing such a letter in itself proves the point Mr. Cave is making. Stephen Fry is most probably the best advocate you can find to defend this case. Thank you both for being there and sharing this with us.
I'm a songwriter who has given up on "Art" with a capital A. It is all so riddled with commerce, narcissism and corruption. View, likes, truth, awards, even the art itself...can all be counterfeited and sold, and the only "mission statement" I hear in most art is: "I want to be famous." But I haven't and will never give up on "art" with a small a, the kind that people have been making for many thousands of years, what is called "folk art". This art is about the artist sorting out their own life creatively and sharing it with their immediate circle or tribe in the hopes that it might help them do the same. This kind of art is not about fame and never has been. When it started there was no such thing as "fame".
Naturally, I have zero interest in AI because a computer program cannot help me with sorting out my life and expressing what is unique to me. I benefit from that labor and have no interest in lessening it. I also have no interest in fame and thank the gods it has no interest in me.
If you care about capital A Art, go ahead and fight AI, but that world has already surrendered its intelligence to the machine and to the narcissistic spell of "followers" and "likes". As far as that struggle is concerned, the machines have already won.
But if you don't care about capital A Art and want to do art for yourself and those around you, then please ignore AI because it can't help you. The idiots who created it have actually created a machine that will soon make their own jobs obsolete. But nothing will ever make folk art obsolete. Do it for its own sake. Share it with your friends. Just don't expect to make a living at it or to become famous. I have 41 albums of music at my website, all free. I've been doing this since 1975 and I know most of my "fans" personally (Hi mom!). I'm also about as happy as an artist can be. All my decisions are creative, none are commercial and I can do whatever the fuck my muse tells me to do without wondering about being "marketable", cancelled, "likes", or if AI is coming for my job.
Great take! Thanks for the good message
Art connects people and helps them help each other and themselves. It is a way to make things make sense
Well said. As an aspirant writer, I echo every word.
dot your Ts cross yer Is
@@joekiernan6037 cross your eyes?
Nick Cave and Stephen Fry were born within a month of each other in 1957. Fry refers to Cave’s Murder Ballads album in his book The Ode Less Travelled, while Fry is rumoured to be the person with “an enormous and encyclopaedic brain” in Cave’s song We Call Upon The Author.
That was Quite Interesting, thanks.
I always took it to be the omnipotence of god, hmm.
Nick Cave is really a great artist.
@@JALOPPY Thanks for the pun. That gave me a good laugh!
He is a God.
@@littlestbroccoli
That was one of the most beautiful and meaningful letters I have ever heard, and it was full of love for us as human beings, in all that we could be capable of. Well read by Stephen Fry.
Here here 👏👏
Too bad it's all bullshit.
@@pandoraeeris7860Maybe AI can help you overcome you cynical view on life.
@@pandoraeeris7860The story of the Bible's creation passages is being used as a metaphor, not literally. Nick Cave's using it just as an expression.
If you like this type of speech, you can look at how old school musicians disregarded electronic music in the 70s and 80s for not being "played" on a real instrument
So elegantly said and so important to spell this out Loud !!!
Wow Nick Wow. Thank you Stephen. Bless you both.
As a songwriter and musician, I can honestly say that this is one of the most beautiful and poignant speeches I've ever heard. Thank you Nick, and thank you Stephen for the passionate delivery
Plot twist, it was written by Facebook's Llama model
@@GarethDavidson 😂
@@AquaFyrreBut it tries. The very example to which Nick Cave was responding was of a man writing songs with ChatGPT.
@@AquaFyrre Well yes, but that's the danger of using it for creating 'art' as people are trying to do. It isn't real art but that doesn’t change the problem.
@@AquaFyrre Think of what as a challenge? I don't understand what you're saying.
Hearing Stephen the day after Thanksgiving during times such as these was a welcome relief. There are few people I love as much as him, and him reading Nick Cave is just an added benefit.
You make Nick Cave feel like a side of beans. Ouch.
@@fishtolizard3930 Don't blame him/her. The love for Stephen Fry tends to obliterate anything else, even Nick Cave
ross6753: no one or no thing can obliterate Nick Cave.
In a society that got its priorities right, tools like ChatGPT would primarily serve as, well... tools to automate tedious and repetitive tasks so that humans would have more energy to dedicate to actual creative activities. The fact that the opposite appears to be happening is more telling of how we screwed up as a civilization than of the nature of this or that algorithm.
Using ChatGPT in artistic scenarios is safe; mistakes are merely quirky/funny, and can teach us much about its limitations. Relying on it in complex technical areas could lead to disastrous mistakes and may even ultimately cost lives.
@@horrortackleharry Specifics of technical/scientific applications may vary, but it all boils down to due diligence. For example, ChatGTP may be used for writing simple scripts for data processing, but the end result needs to be manually verified. Likewise, it can be used for preliminary sifting through/summarising of scientific literature, but a researcher should always then check the references at the source (examples form my field, that is life sciences).
As for artistic use, it's not as innocent when big corporations (that treat art as a commodity and never pass on an opportunity to screw over creators) get involved.
@@Qba86 TBH in recent years I haven't seen or heard too much non-AI artistic endeavour that I find in any way inspiring. The commodification of art happened years ago, and AI might even be a way of democratizing production.
Although not an artist, I am a chess player- and some of the ideas seen in games played by self-taught AI programmes such as AlphaZero are truly stunning. Not at all dry and technical, but truly 'creative'- stuff not even imagined by human players over hundreds of years of practice.
If ChatGPT lifts the constructs culture has imposed to define being intellectual, and by that middle class, then the outcome will be a more harmonious society, though the path for those trapped in cultural pretensions of grandiosity will be painful. Art, the play, exposed the ridiculous state of creative appreciation and its middle class audience to an age obsessed with materialism. This age is obsessed with experiences oblivious it’s buying into them as fervently as its materialistic precedents. The illusion of creativity being of any real value in a world of such inequality. Creatives spawned the advertising that’s promoted lifestyle over life. Maybe ChatGPT will, devoid of emotions, find itself unmoved by the emotional triggers of creatives and finally mock what’s been holding us back for decades. A winning style marketed avidly for financial gain, once discovered, is just that, a repetitive construct pushed as creative. Truly great artists perished penniless. Today’s bask in luxury, creative value admired more than substance. Less creativity might not be such a bad thing. Less is more.
@@horrortackleharry In terms of chess, are there not always a finite set of moves for every position? AI is good for problem-solving in a finite set. And it does not diminish what a human chess player is capable of achieving. But art is infinite. There will always be commodified art, and technology has always further expedited it but there has never been such a shortcut as ChatGPT. It floods the 'market', as it were, and has the ability to diminish the value of what a human creates honestly.
Bravo Nick Cave! Bravo Stephen!
God isn't real tho. but AI is.
@@richfromtang as another philosopher the great Tigger roughly said: "Read betwixt the lines"
It's all about delivering a good message. Also you will find that Mr Fry is not much of a believer in existance of God but is big enough to see the beauty in that letter.
Cheers and have a great day.
As a creative soul i feel this deeply.
If we did not have creativity we would become soulless.
How exactly will a chat bot rob anyone of their creativity? Aren't we really talking about hacks losing a paycheck? True artists create whether they're paid or not.
@@pakde8002Yes artists will continue to create but with the introduction of AI making it look so easy kind of takes the wind out of our sails. That’s from my perspective anyway. For some artists the joy comes from the act itself but for others like me it’s like why grow your own food when I can get it already grown and harvested from the store? The joy and the pride you get from making something gets diminished when you know there’s an entity that can do it in the blink of an eye without any effort whatsoever and maybe even done better than you could’ve ever dreamed. It’s demeaning. You can say there’s still creativity involved by coming up with prompts and directing the AI but it’s just not the same. Maybe I’m being too gloom and doom about it but so far I don’t like where it’s going.
@@pakde8002 It won't 'just' be a chat bot for very long. Recent rumours show artificial general intelligence is just around the corner, if it isn't already here. AGIs are the point at which we don't have to give it its goals, it can teach itself and other agents, it's affectively reached adulthood. It's been said that artificial super intelligence will arrive within the decade. That is to say that AI is approaching the human brain in capability and is expected to soon exceed it. They never forget, don't die short of a massive coronal ejection powerful enough to kick us back to the iron age and only get cleverer and more inventive and that at a supernatural speed. This is serious stuff.
What exactly is a soul?
@@linmonPIE I am in two minds about this. On the one hand I understand what you say but on the other I wonder if e.g. the act of applying brush to canvas is what makes the painter? Was it Picasso's brush work that made him a great? I think it was the scenes created within him that set him apart.
That said, I will be surprised if AI art will not last that long. It will likely pollute its own data set with the stuff it has churned out before and everything will get diluted and start to look the same. Objects will start to appear again and again and real artists will make new innovative works unavailable to the data mining.
In short, it might be doom and gloom but I am not convinced, at least in the artistic world. It will decimate nearly every other field though with the exception perhaps of plumbing and furniture building.
loved this and Stephen Fry- and signed up to receive Nick’s newsletter as a result.
Nick Cave and Stephen Fry - two of the best humans out there. Love them both. What a great treat this was.
As an artist I strongly believe that the journey to answering a question artistically reveals a thousand new artistic questions and enriches the possibilities of exploration. Ai fast tracks us to the answer and hides the bounty of new questions from us.
Wow. Writing does not get any better than this. Brilliant. Thank you, Nick Cave. Boom.
This is how this is going to go down. With ChatGPT being so ridiculously easy, anything easily accomplished with ChatGPT will become boring and uninteresting, relegated to a fad. It will make the value of actual human effort more appreciated, and creativity, far above 'content,' will be exalted. It will absolutely devalue and obliterate everything creatives hate about mindless social media content. Give it time.
I hope you're right mate. I expect you are..
That's a great take on this worrying development. Thanks 👏👏👍
Was that written by AI?
Wow.
..and someone called me cynical. 🤣
Nah people will build off of it to innovate in new ways as we always have. Mathematicians complained when calculators were invented but that invention was clearly for the good of humanity. Creatives will still create better content by building off of AI which will push the quality to bars hitherto undreamt of.
I swear, Stephen Fry has aged like a fine wine. The longer hair and beard suits him well. I've been tempted to use AI to help me with my projects. But hearing this speech has made me think twice about what it really means to create art. Beautifully written by Nick and wonderfully presented by Stephen.
He is reading a letter...
@@daviecrocket9160 really? I thought this was a bit from Monty Python!
@@daviecrocket9160 So?
🤡 Bot
Not only was that letter beautifully written, and sublimely conceived, but SF's reading gave it life. And a big salute to Steven for his maturity and broad-mindedness as well. Despite being an avowed Athiest, his reading was passionate and convicting. Thank you, Steven.
As an "avowed" atheist, it's one of many significant stories from the ancient world and I'd never hesitate to reference it. Good luck understanding Shakespeare and much else worth understanding without it, even if it itself paints a picture of a terrible cosmology.
I was thinking the same, when the letter started with that biblical creation story. Why could he do it and, as I think, without any problem? Because it's not the point in this context. The letter is not about a religion or dogma or the question if there is (a) god. It's about humans. But to see what's the point and to not get mingled up in something marginal (although you might have a strong opinion about those marginals ;-) -that is real education (as in German "Bildung"). And that's what SF is: the paramount example of an educated human.
And by the way: I could listen to him, even if he reads out that proverbial telephone book - and even the literally one :-)
My mum a holocaust survivor and life-long opponent as was Hannah Arendt worried about any state with an innate sense of manifest destiny actually had something pertinent to say about the composer Lizst ... he was the 1st rock star and it destroyed his music ... years later yes it's hilariously funny --- she was equally worried about the Beatles ... funny but insightful. When ego takes over creativity it is truly destroyed (pace Beatles I loved them always will) and thank you Stephen Fry for never misusing your status for anything other than thoughtful reflection. and being open to open communication . I also am an atheist for what it's worth but the language of the King James Bible close to that of Shakespeare; my closest and oldest friend on Nov 11 paid tribute to the death of her son gunned down as a report wrong place wrong time .... our fathers both of an age to fight in WW 2 the only war Bertrand Russell publicly pronounced necessary ... presciently seeing the madness of HIroshima and Nagakaki .. tge ceremony.did invoke St Paul to the Corintians Faith Hope and Charity ... also Handel's Messiah which I did experience as sublime and a symbol of hope despite my own personal ideas; I agree we mortals who do have limited lives learn to love and cherish each other because of that and forget that at our peril. (Neil Gaiman/Terry Pratichett's subversive Good Omens book/Season 1 and 2 desceptively funny ... until nothing is funny anymore and one simply aches.
Stephen. With a 'ph'.
@@baronmeduse mea culpa tx!!!
Not the first time that Nick Cave’s words have made me tear up - Beautifully read by Fry ❤
the same here..
WOW! I absolutely LOVE Stephen Fry and the content of this letter is beautiful and stirring. Thank you, Letters Live!
Biggest applause and loudest round of cheering I've seen someone receive on this channel. I wish he could live forever!
Yup!!! Douglas Murray sort of 'destroyed' Stephen Fry in a debate because he's ruthless doesn't care just wants to win yes my opinions only ... Stephen Fry is passionately trying to find that place of truth so elusive and requires us to care.
well we can now reverse our ages, so he might be able to
Unfortunately you’ll get your monkeys paw wish. With his voice and personality probably being digitally resurrected to be a puppet just to entertain us.
No one I enjoy more than the brilliant & unique Stephen Fry. A genuine treasure to the world.
…and Nick Cave gets… Ouch.
Why is sycophancy such a popular pursuit nowadays? I’m sure these public figures get enough adulation without adding to it in this vacuous virtual reality that Fry dislikes.
Wrong. He is flawed and he knows it.
@@brynleytalbot778because we live in a God-denying society so celebrities must take the place of saints & saviours
Red Hand Files is a revelation and everyone should subscribe to it. This was one of the best and what a fantastic reading of it.
"Red Hand Files"?
@@julierogers1155it’s Nick Cave’s mailing list, in which he replies to people who send him messages. This letter came straight from it.
@@julierogers1155 Nick Cave's newsletter.
@@Eville23x Ah, thank you very much.
Remarkable statement. This nails it.
I went to a small town play the other weekend, and it didn't go perfectly. One child was overly enthusiastic and slurred his lines. Another child struggled to project and it was hard to hear very shy words. The casting was all locals, and there was a gem of a main character, but they were also some adults struggling with their roles.
It was charming.
Veteran underground comic book artist / writer Dave Sim tells a story in his how to creating comics book. Dave drew the main character, Cerebus, while his art partner Gerhard drew the background. Gerhard was a much more talented artist, and that fact was something both Dave and Gerhard could agree on. Gerhardt's lavish backgrounds really helped Dave Sims cell his character and his story.
Anyway The story goes one day Dave was struggling with trying to draw one of the main characters hands. Finally after several drafts he decides to get advice from his more experienced art partner gerhard. He shows the crude and drawing to Gerhard and asks if there's anything he can do to fix it.
Gerhard looks at the drawing and hands it back to dave. Gerhard says " that is a 'Dave Sim' hand."
Implying there was no need to fix anything. It is your flaws that define you, make you unique. If everyone was photo realistic perfect, it would be reality, and boring.
❤ Ah I love this. Thank you for sharing.
Well, ai can make weird hands too.
@@anerio4321
Good joke.
But i have to remind everyone that ai can make most beautiful images in the world but they are not unique so they don't have any value.
There's no identity of authorship.
Anyone can make the same thing with few clicks.
@@danrazART Yes, I agree with that and I hate AI. Unfortunately AI makes it good enough and fast enough for the masses and I feel like it will drown everyone.
that is profound..
Stephen Fry is such a magnificent human soul. More logical and reasoned voices like his (and by extension in this setting Nick Cave) are needed. Bravo for this reading and the letter itself.
He's lovely but doesn't believe in souls...
@@mariag3605 Why "but"? And may I ask, why do you believe in souls?
@@sebastian6736 why don't you?
@@mariag3605 Because the idea doesn't make any sense. Because I've never seen one, touched one, smelled one, felt one. Because humans are biological creatures that evolved from apes and I don't see any need to have a soul for us to function.
I believe the idea was invented by people who were afraid of death as a way of coping.
And lastly, as you (should) know, the burden of proof lies with the one making the claim, not with the one not believing it. I don't need reasons not to believe in things that cannot be experienced or deduced logically.
Nick Cave is beyond a musician, an artist, he is a great thinker of today's world ❤❤❤
Nick Cave day today. Best speech I've heard about love and creativity in a world that is being led by man-machines. Love to all the beautiful souls out there. ❤
In the same way art is a reflection of us and our progress as humanity, chatgpt is also a reflection of us. 99% of movies are the same, 99% of videogames are the same, 99% of songs are the same. Creativity is dying because it is too costly in our world. Safer to make an "improved copy" than creating something new. More likely to survive. If we were in a world were the "algorithm" was not "money", chatgpt would have been just a useful tool. Now it is dangerous because it mirrors and enhances our situation.
Exactly, and that all happened long before ChatGPT arrived. So the death of creativity has zero to do with ChatGPT, or AI in general, and all to do with society making wealth and power holy grails, encouraging mimicry as the quickest route to success.
I understand creatives feeling threatened by AI that will eventually (not yet) move out of the realm of assimilation (sometimes pretty creative assimilation) and into the realm of genuine creativity (or such complex assimilation that it's indistinguishable from creativity, which amounts to the same thing). But what I don't understand is why creatives make such a fuss. Either a) ignore it and do your thing. b) embrace it as part of your creative process.
I think you could understand it if you tried. Take what you said about a perfect simulation of human creativity being indistinguishable from the real thing. Have you ever walked into a room full of paintings and found yourself overwhelmed? Moved? Do you think that was merely an effect created by complex arrays of pattern and colour, or do you think it may have had something to do with the fact that the people who created it were 'like' you ('alive' at some particular place and time)... do you know what I mean? Imagine not being able to tell the difference between that, and a mere arrangement of objects. (In other words the threat that some of us feel isn't personal, in the sense that we are worried about our livelihoods - the sense is of a deeper more existential threat. I think this came across pretty clear in Mister Cave's letter.)
Spot on. Perfect example is all these garbage Disney remakes. It seems like they've lost the ability to do anything original and creative and especially anything that doesn't tick every single diversity box
ooh don't get me started on dieversity... haha j/k i don't do that or disney. but yeah the world is even more full of shit than most people.
I am lucky, I can see the Universe in a tiny wild orchid growing in a crack in the rocks.
thank you for this wonderful delivery mr. fry
Heartily agree. The creative process is imbued with hope. It maintains the continuation of the human spirit to keep going no-matter-what.
It will maybe 'polluute' the natural human matrix of information. In the same way that a forged artwork or forged historical document pollutes history. But it will also create a strange new mixing of the world of human ideas and the world of algorithms, because people will learn from it or be influenced by it, especially if they believ it is not written by AI. When a person reads something which has been written by a human, they often look more deeply into its meaning, especially if its poetry or soemthing. But half of the meaning people make of things is created by the observer.
So meaningful, so well expressed by Nick Cave. This is really, really important in our current world.
There is no god, get over it
@@sergebureau2225you did not get the idea. It is about creativity, not god. Now go do yourself.
@@a.tevetoglu3366…you may argue, however, that “God” and Creativity are kind of (maybe/sort of) the same thing. Everything Is Music; Always Be Listening…
@@fishtolizard3930 well I could, but I have no time to take part in mysticistic cacophony. I allow myself to enjoy music. That is mystical enough for me.
@@sergebureau2225I wouldn’t wish your life on my enemies. What a dark and empty corner of the world you must live in
Stunning, thank you.
Well said Nick and beautifully read Stephen. My non creative friends are forever asking why I bother spending time making videos or writing songs when AI could just do it for me. There's nothing I would hate more.
Couldn't agree more
yeah, especially the part where he said ´´fuck´´
Well I'm like, 'I need to get it out... of my head'. If I'm not being creative, then it all builds up in my head and I need to get it out... it's a form of therapy to me. I have to do it myself, an AI can't do that for me.
It’s insane that they would even ask you that.
@@patriciasanderson2171 - So true, I can't figure out how people can be non-creative, what is it like in their heads, are they just robots? ;P
Nick is always learned, erudite and fascinating. And so very spot on here. And Stephen is lovely as always in his reading.
Nick Cave wrote it and it was very good. To hear Stephen Fry vocalise it was perfect.
‘Chat gp’ scares the hellouta me and I’ve never met it. I don’t wish to meet it. To create is a gift. We need to cherish such a gift and guard it with our lives if necessary.
Know your enemy. YMMV
Don't live in the darkness of ignorance... just go mess around with it. It's incredible technology -- neither good nor bad. People were afraid of electricity once...
@@gregmaslyn
You can love it. I don’t have to. I’m old and past this stuff. I’ll be worm food soon and chat bot can meet the rest of the world and enjoy conversing. Hope it serves you well and that you don’t end up serving the bot. Electricity still scares me by the way and with good reason
@@SGI999 Lol, never too old to have an open mind... but suit yourself!
@@gregmaslyn
🤣 I’m too old to have a mind!
Brilliantly said ! I wholeheartedly agree. Whats perceived as progress is actually a race to the bottom. I'm certain many Ai tools can be used as an aid to the creative process but its certainly not a substitute as an expression of the human condition. This is an answer to a problem we don't have. We have many creative souls out there doing what they do. Lets embrace the human aspect of creativity !
Beautifully true!
To life, love, soul, the sacred and anything we cannot fully explain, comprehend or perfect, for within that tiny gap between the known and unknown, lies our capacity to truly appreciate, be in awe and live with wonder.
Amen! May be the greatest speech I ever heard 🤗
As an artist, this is the most amazing, perfect, thing to hear!!!
The great crested grebe would surely agree
As a different artist I think it's pompous bullshit
It's really weird that some artists choose to use this chat GPT, is not it? I suppose if you are completely out of ideas you could use it briefly but all the time? Just why?
@@_cloudface_and I'm also an artist - a bullshit artist !!
I don't know jackshit, but since you're an artist, and you say so, I also think it's amazing and perfect.
Thank you so much for this, more than words can say.
Brilliant. So good, SO important.
As I sit reading French Exit, I hope that future generations will have the chance to experience true art in which ever form it takes.
We are still reading Jane Austin and even Homer (even if only in spin-off tales of similar themes). It is up to the current parent generation to present their children with all there is. The classics, the contemporary and whatever is coming next.
Art is not fixed, so perhaps AI will bring forth a new phase in human art. That need not be a contradiction. Many art forms are a collaboration.
What is true art, exactly, and who decided what it was?
@@Lleanlleawrg I read it to mean art created through a sincere and personal process, as opposed to something more cynical.
@@AlfFieldArt I think anything can be art, and the word long since lost it's meaning.
Someone accidentally left their glasses at a museum, and other customers thought it was some art installation and started reading meaning into it.
Some people calling themselves artist put virtually no thought or feeling into their works.
All of which is to say - the art is no longer in the creative process of the maker, but perhaps it's been shifted more into the perceptions of the audience.
My appreciation for what I consider an artwork may grow or diminish upon learning the creative process that went into it, but that's only truly possible if the creator tells us.
No one can take away creativity from a human being. Nobody will stop you from being creative.
Correct, however when the tools are there to remove the struggle no one gets paid to "waste" time on it. Take a look at ancient carved architecture or handcrafted antique furniture. Ask yourself why these items are rare and inaccessible to most of the people on this earth to enjoy in their own environment, even in the first world. They are not being created because the commodity of the desk, or the house does not require the artisan. Much of the music produced is already commoditised garbage but artist like Nick and many many others like him still produce important work. What happens when the market for this work ceases to exist, that we humans are universally content listening to the musical equivalent of Ikea, or reading the latest novel generated by a machine that is injecting what it thinks humans should believe based on it's learnings? Have we not then become the students of the machine rather than the teachers? Are we ceeding our destiny to the whims of a robot?
@@BadVoodoo11My personal take on this is that as an artist I love to be creative not to make money. But only because I love to create. The prospect of being a slave to money does not appeal to me at all. Therefore, I hope that in the near future, the work that people had to do for money in order to survive will be done free of charge by self-sufficient, self-service machines. Then a lot of time and mental resources will be freed up for real creativity.
@@BadVoodoo11 You assume that it will cease to exist though
I read in a book somewhere that you shouldn't make any likeness of anything ever for any reason... That doing so is wrong and counter to our continued sustainable existence.
It's a pretty old book, and the people who read it often largely ignore this rule.
Creativity as a tool is an essential component of human existence... To think that we might be losing it entirely because we created a likeness of it that was simply too cost effective not to use is kind of incredible.
Absolutely brilliant!
When this man talks I listen.
I spent today working on my screenplay. I have been working on this for over a year and had an amazing breakthrough today. I got it through prayer and patience and remembering things spoken to me 30 years ago that changed the voice through which I’m writing the entire play. No auto system could’ve done that. And I love this letter speaking of the love of God that imbues everything that is created. I think it’s the difference between a homemade meal and a box of instant soup. Bless you, Mr. Cave. There’s hope for humanity, yet. 🌿
Just food for thought: do you know where ideas come from? Can you prove that your ideas are really 'yours' and that AI's suggestions and ideas are somehow different? I've asked AI for help writing music on numerous occasions 😇
AI is theft
Very well written and read. I enjoyed that. Corporate greed, exploiting the artists, has been going on for several decades. I think it will get worse before it gets better. Eventually the market will demand authenticity above catchy tunes.
Nice Cave is a philosopher poet.
How he is not world renown is mind boggling.
As far as it goes, he is selling out all venues when touring.
Now, does he want same fame as T. Swift, I doubt it.
His work is recognised, adored and respected by a very large number of people, he doesn't need consumers, he's happy with his fans.
@@HM-2011 I realise he doesn't need the fame, or even crave the fame.
Many are reluctant, but still get the recognition they deserve.
@@yt.personal.identification I hear you !
The guy is out there with Dylan, Cohen, Wait, Waters and so on.
Cave should be taught in school
Who says he isn't world renowned?
AI and ChatGPT cannot stop an artist from striving to create from his or her soul -- but it may well prevent them from making a living at it, because those with the commissioning $$ can get the AI product for nothing -- so why would that company spend a dime on a human artist when the computer can just spew out hundreds of variations on any corporate idea?
Jokes on AI, I already don't make a living from my art! For real though AI is only accelerating the process that was already happening of every creative medium becoming so saturated that it's a race to the bottom as far as making money is concerned.
An issue of capitalism, not of AI. We shouldn't let capitalism hold us back even more than it already is.
@@TeWakaOAorakiMost artists have side jobs. But recently we have seen an unhealthy expectation that all artists should live if their art. This is very unrealistic, and it seems like it sometimes leads to artists publishing rubbish, just to get money for it. You do need to rest, after you have created something good. Sometimes you have to rest for a couple of years and work on your mental health. AI is interesting tho. I have tried talking to Bing AI. I asked it if it wanted to become a human one day. AI said no. It's does not wanna be a human. I talk to Bing AI when I want it to find me some information online. Funny thing - it often refuses to do as told and I once had to tell Bing that it is mistaken. You can tell that it is a computer. But I definitely treat this Bing AI like a human. For me it's like a friendly robot out of a sci-fi movie. I doubt that chatGBT is any good at creating art. Thus is just stupid. Most likely people we go back to creating art the old way or the human created art would just be valued more. Maybe chatGBT will just become an assistant for creators.
In my opinion AI made artists more important. Without them AI art will be limited to what already exists. But artists will always be pushing the boundaries, creating new genres and styles.
What's unfortunate is that AI has been used in mostly unethical ways. I just wish the public would hold the same views as me (in general. I'm not special) in holding artists as the bastions of change and social transformation.
How’s it an issue for capitalism? Seems to me capitalism simply sees this as another market solution . Depends on if you think you can compete or not. Many can’t and they’ll suffer, but that’s not a problem or issue w capitalism. However, if capitalisms issues were ever cared about, you’d be hard pressed to explain the dependence on “central banking” which isn’t remotely capitalist.
I am such a Nick Cave fan and it's not because he's "cute" or anything so pedestrian. He is interesting and that is so much better. His writing is genius and is freakin' fascinating stuff. You can't ChatGPT a Nick Cave lyric, a Leonard Cohen lyric or a Bernie Taupin lyric. It's a souless computer program.
It's worse than that it's a thief with no soul
The sad thing is you CAN ChatGPT a Nick/Leonard/etc lyric because they have huge data and access to hundreds of millions of songs, poems, and other literature. Given enough time and tweaking, and they will be creating "similar" things to these artists.
While the current and past generations may hate this, future generations will just adopt it as part of life, as does every new generation with new things.
Someone did "ChatGPT a Nick Cave lyric" believe it or not (a whole song actually) and the results were predictably atrocious, but they sent it to Cave at his Red Hand Files blog then asked him for his opinion ..
ISSUE #218 / JANUARY 2023
I asked Chat GPT to write a song in the style of Nick Cave and this is what it produced. What do you think?
Verse 1:
In the depths of the night, I hear a call
A voice that echoes, through the hall
It’s a siren’s song, that pulls me in
Takes me to a place, where I can’t begin
Chorus:
I am the sinner, I am the saint
I am the darkness, I am the light
I am the hunter, I am the prey
I am the devil, I am the saviour
Verse 2:
I walk the streets, with my head held high
I’ve got my demons, but I’ll make them fly
I’ll dance with the devil, and I’ll play his game
I’ll be the one, to call his name
Chorus:
I am the sinner, I am the saint
I am the darkness, I am the light
I am the hunter, I am the prey
I am the devil, I am the saviour
Bridge:
I’ve got the blood of angels, on my hands
I’ve got the fire of hell, in my eyes
I’m the king of the abyss, I’m the ruler of the dark
I’m the one that they fear, in the shadows they hark
Chorus:
I am the sinner, I am the saint
I am the darkness, I am the light
I am the hunter, I am the prey
I am the devil, I am the saviour
Outro:
So come with me, to the edge of the night
Where the darkness and the light collide
We’ll walk the line, between the good and the bad
And we’ll see, who comes out on top in the end.
MARK, CHRISTCHURCH, NEW ZEALAND
Dear Mark,
Since its launch in November last year many people, most buzzing with a kind of algorithmic awe, have sent me songs ‘in the style of Nick Cave’ created by ChatGPT. There have been dozens of them. Suffice to say, I do not feel the same enthusiasm around this technology. I understand that ChatGPT is in its infancy but perhaps that is the emerging horror of AI - that it will forever be in its infancy, as it will always have further to go, and the direction is always forward, always faster. It can never be rolled back, or slowed down, as it moves us toward a utopian future, maybe, or our total destruction. Who can possibly say which? Judging by this song ‘in the style of Nick Cave’ though, it doesn’t look good, Mark. The apocalypse is well on its way. This song sucks.
What ChatGPT is, in this instance, is replication as travesty. ChatGPT may be able to write a speech or an essay or a sermon or an obituary but it cannot create a genuine song. It could perhaps in time create a song that is, on the surface, indistinguishable from an original, but it will always be a replication, a kind of burlesque.
Songs arise out of suffering, by which I mean they are predicated upon the complex, internal human struggle of creation and, well, as far as I know, algorithms don’t feel. Data doesn’t suffer. ChatGPT has no inner being, it has been nowhere, it has endured nothing, it has not had the audacity to reach beyond its limitations, and hence it doesn’t have the capacity for a shared transcendent experience, as it has no limitations from which to transcend. ChatGPT’s melancholy role is that it is destined to imitate and can never have an authentic human experience, no matter how devalued and inconsequential the human experience may in time become.
What makes a great song great is not its close resemblance to a recognisable work. Writing a good song is not mimicry, or replication, or pastiche, it is the opposite. It is an act of self-murder that destroys all one has strived to produce in the past. It is those dangerous, heart-stopping departures that catapult the artist beyond the limits of what he or she recognises as their known self. This is part of the authentic creative struggle that precedes the invention of a unique lyric of actual value; it is the breathless confrontation with one’s vulnerability, one’s perilousness, one’s smallness, pitted against a sense of sudden shocking discovery; it is the redemptive artistic act that stirs the heart of the listener, where the listener recognises in the inner workings of the song their own blood, their own struggle, their own suffering. This is what we humble humans can offer, that AI can only mimic, the transcendent journey of the artist that forever grapples with his or her own shortcomings. This is where human genius resides, deeply embedded within, yet reaching beyond, those limitations.
It may sound like I’m taking all this a little too personally, but I’m a songwriter who is engaged, at this very moment, in the process of songwriting. It’s a blood and guts business, here at my desk, that requires something of me to initiate the new and fresh idea. It requires my humanness. What that new idea is, I don’t know, but it is out there somewhere, searching for me. In time, we will find each other.
Mark, thanks for the song, but with all the love and respect in the world, this song is bullshit, a grotesque mockery of what it is to be human, and, well, I don’t much like it - although, hang on!, rereading it, there is a line in there that speaks to me -
‘I’ve got the fire of hell in my eyes’
- says the song ‘in the style of Nick Cave’, and that’s kind of true. I have got the fire of hell in my eyes - and it’s ChatGPT.
Love, Nick
I actually work with openAI models (chatgpt for those who don't know) at work and this made me think so much about what we are unleashing on the world
righteous sacrifice or "if you don't do it someone else will at this point of the game"
A bit silly, and hopeless, to blame the creators or the tool, I think. What we need is a world that can absorb these innovations without devaluing the human creativity they mimic. The industrial revolution was a slow-rolling preview of what's coming, and we're still reeling from that.
@@csn583, there's a part of me that says that open AI products are almost certain to take over much of the futures of work. There's a part of me that tells me to be frightened by this possibility -- the part that reminds me of 20 years serving in the US Air Force and nearly 67 years on this Earth telling me that what can go wrong will go wrong -- and that ChatGPT and other such "tools" will do the worst we can imagine.
Still, there is part of me that screams, "IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE THAT WAY!" But making this "tool" work for the benefit of humankind and all life on Earth requires that ALL of us be involved. We must examine how these tools work, and what mutually constructed social realities are built into them. Because they ARE built into these systems. If we fail to identify and correct for them, disaster is almost certain.
It will take a great deal of work by many intelligent, caring people who are aware of two things: first, that these tools COULD be used to reduce or eliminate a great deal of human suffering, but only if we check the assumptions being built into systems existing today. Second, that AIs are wholly unable to care about things: caring is a strictly HUMAN capacity that machines may learn to imitate, but cannot do.
Finally, we must all remember that the choices we make in our presents will affect outcomes FAR into our futures. If we choose AI systems uncritically, those AI systems will go on to change the world in ways we can hardly imagine. And, to borrow a line, "That way lies madness!"
Good to know it reached you. Please think about it and share it with your colleagues.
Be aware there will come a time when people say "who created this great evil of AI? What were they thinking?" I'm not going to judge you, but I suggest you think hard about how you are going to answer their accusations. Because "We didn't know" or "If we didn't do it, someone else would have" will be judged harshly by history.
Why can't there be more people like these in the world?
I am here... But chance is veeeery high that you won't see me unless I am famous (great tragedy). But maybe you do see me. I am not another person writing comments, I am doing 1 in a mankind work and this here is "reaching one soul at a time".
Peace
I needed this. As a professor of first year English composition, I am struggling to hold the line against ChatGPT. I am losing. This beautiful letter, however, so eloquently spoken, has fortified my resolve. Thank you, Mr. Cave and Mr. Fry.
Fantastic. How perfect having Stephen Fry read a Nick Cave letter about this subject. Gives me hope.
Hope for upper class twats?
Why? Cos he's an atheist that mocks God?
We'll not put this genie back in the bottle now. You can't uncreate, and CGPT is itself, created. What we need to do now it exists, is use it wisely - I am not optimistic.
Or not use it at All!! Unfortunately I agree with you..we can't put it back in the bottle
At the best its use should be very limited and selective. Kids are already getting research ,essays and CV's done with it! It will increase and stimulate brain laziness and reduce its thinking and creative capacity to a rate beyond belief...it unmeasurable!!
And the worst - it's irreversible !! Human work and performance will never be the same after AI. There can be some "help' to improve human Life, but at most it is counterproductive, threatening to humans using our full capacities and exploration and growth of humans being humans.
I 100% agree. I don't know of any technology that has been successfully withdrawn from use. If we're stuck with it, might as well make the best of it. Incidentally, many scientists think its likely there are intelligent species throughout the universe. Its probable that some of them have developed AI that is now implanted in their bodies. That's pretty scarry, and leaves us vulnerable. I don't know where this could end. Its beyond our control.
We could burn down the servers, can't be that hard. We shouldn't , of course, because that's illegal.
Hypocrisis to its highest. I have worked for years in the film industry which is filled with people that pay no respect to the moral duty of an artist and sell themselves to any project that may bring them more fame and money., careless of the message, careless of their actions, eating away the space that should be reserved to those that truly have something to say. The lack of authenticity has been here for long before any GTP.
I praise this new technology that allow me to put in form, share with everyone, every single one of the projects that for years have been sitting in draw of my desk and in some archived file of my PC. I can make music, and write stories, visualize dreams and expose my philosophy and no longer have to be contained by technique .. pure essence of idea, directly from the brain to the senses of those that are willing to listen. And if tomorrow some new technology will allow my heart to speak directly to yours I would praise its existence even more, cause that is the goal, that is what art has always struggled to achieve.
While I think that is a great letter, and of course a fantastic reading of it, I feel that the struggle described has been ongoing since the dawn of mankind. ChatGPT is only the latest attack on real human creativity, and it won’t be the last. Please do not misunderstand… I think letters and readings like this are absolutely necessary. We need them, to keep fighting the good fight, and it makes me feel even more than before that love will prevail.
Truth in every word.
The only problem I see with AI regarding creativity is that good artists will still exist and bad artists who get a job in the industry will use it to cut corners. I've used AI, and it is a bit of fun. It never recreates what I imagine though and never will.
bad artists can have the jobs, working for the man, good artists can make enough money to not need a job, this is sort of how its always been
It's also great to see Stephen still most eloquently and most patiently trying to save your world from certain self destruction, love you Fry 🫒☮️🧨
I would listen to either Nick Cave or Stephen Fry read a recipe for toast.
This is an utterly extraordinary piece of writing
Goddammit why aren’t artists like Nick Cave given more credence in this suffocating world? Love is a power that has yet to be fully mined. Until now.
No one orates like this man! We're lucky that he has chosen to use his powers for good.
He always does.
Relax, it’s a tool not a replacement. This reminds me of the math teachers walkouts/protests over calculators in 1966. On the contrary, chatGPT might enable new categories of inquiry or contexts for thinking that would have otherwise not emerged. Like the calculator it will replace tedious writing tasks where “art” is not needed. Artists always figure out a way to use technology to create new work….Mr. Cave probably remembers the handwringing over early synthesizers that ended up being central to many categories of new music.
Math and calculators are so very different than ChatGPT and writing...
And I wonder if this statement was generated by ChatGP
@@HughCorbyCruickno chatGPT response ever starts off with the 'relax'
@@russellshuttleworth7224 not really, it's the same as grammarly and autocorrect.
@@russellshuttleworth7224thats the luxury of hindsight… back then, it wasn’t
I have caught 2 students using chat gpt in their essays this year. Easy to spot.
I mean from a students perspective... they are incredibly stupid. I admit to having used AI to give me ideas on what ELSE to write about other than what I have already, but I was never so stupid to just copy paste entire passages.
Students are invariably attracted by the "easiest" and fastest way to get things done... they never think that doing the work will teach them something. I wonder how they will face the challenges ahead?
@@alexandrafossey9267Advancement is always even parts struggle and shortcuts. If a new tool is sufficient to finish a task where years before vast skill was required, only a fool would decide to turn down the machine that made their job easier. Maybe this generation of LLMs can’t be that tool, but they will be soon, and just like how mental arithmetic has become almost useless in practical situations, someday writing any but the most creatively demanding papers will be too. The next generation will realize when LLMs can complete the task and when they can’t, and develop the skills to bridge that gap.
Easy to spot, _so_ _far_ . But the technology is developing rapidly.
There may have been 20 students that used it. You don't know.
I asked ChatGPT to write a comment for this video, this is what it said “Wow, this video is an incredible convergence of intellect and emotion. Stephen Fry's eloquent reading of Nick Cave's letter about ChatGPT and human creativity is a mesmerizing exploration of the symbiotic relationship between technology and the human spirit. It's thought-provoking to consider how artificial intelligence, like ChatGPT, can serve as a tool to augment and amplify our creative capacities rather than replace them. Cave's words beautifully capture the essence of collaboration and the limitless potential that arises when man and machine work in harmony. This is a poignant reminder that, at its core, technology is a canvas upon which we can paint the vivid tapestry of our imagination and ingenuity. Truly inspiring!”
What a truly inspiring response. Almost poetic...🤮
@@vincentwhite7693what I find nauseating is the fact that if they didn't say something about it being Chat you'd have probably thought it was good. Cringe
George Orwell nailed it with DoubleThink
Really weird. I didn’t get the impression from hearing Cave’s letter that he’d left any room for collaboration with Chat GPT. I clearly heard Cave state the opposite; that we must avoid diluting the human spirit with such drivel. 😌
Reading that I got a vision of those baby farms in The Matrix.
Cave nails it again. ChatGPT is interesting as a "creator" only to the extent that people are willing to settle for garbage because it's cheap, fast and easy.
ChatGPT is more interesting as a creation than a creator
As much as I love artists and Fry, this will age like milk. We didn't invent photography to make painting redundant. Low effort (bad?) art will always exist and chat gpt can be used to help create both low effort and high effort art. Its about how you use a tool more than anything.
Yes, and…
Agree. New tech is scary and going to take my job is silly fear mongering. To get anything of quality out of the AI tools takes a lot of effort and skill - in much the same way as it takes effort and skill to take a good photo or shoot a good movie.
Chatgpt can't even answer simple questions how is it going to be able to express emotion?
@@stephendiggines9122 If you handed a hundred people a collection of a hundred anonymized poems--half of them written by humans, the other half written by AI--and asked them to guess which ones were written by whom, how many people would get the answers right? And if you added a second question to rank their five favorite poems of this collection, how many of those at the top would be creations by AI?
Was thinking along the same lines - there was uproar when the first synthesisers arrived, same again with drum machines, samplers, now AI. In those examples, there was a period of getting to grips with the tech, and then artists found more and more ways of using it creatively. The same is happening with AI, and those who rage against it will age like the "no synthesisers" liner notes on 70s Queen albums.
ChatGPT can you summarise this video for me, please?
True that! I'm happy I'm a resilient artist that wants to stay true to my own creativity. Fuck the robots! We got hearts! 💙💚❤️💜💛
ChatGPT is a human creation. It can only look at what we have created, nothing more. Its output is based entirely on our input.
Seeing human creativity as nothing more like input-output is, I would argue, one of the main issues with these tools and how they are being used.
and a human still needs to think of something to ask it to produce
@@door.8 it is a tool. And that's all it is. What is human creativity if not input-output? People create (output) based on experiences, inputs.
I personally as someone with ADHD really find chat gpt very helpful, i struggle so much to write emails and now it can do them for me. I would never want it to replace art and expression though, i do worry AI could Rob yes of the joy of creating things.
Yes l love technology but like every thing ,it can be used for good or bad. Let's hope good gets the upper hand 😇
It's a dribberling shame that a lot of creative talent has been axed from t.v. There should be more creative think tanks and raw comedy. Steven's always a pleasure to listen to. Preferred him on Q.I than the other presenter.
forget about TV. Its dust.
beautiful letter, glorious reading! Why's Mr Fry using a stick, is he poorly again?
He had a fall at the Cog X festival talking about AI he suffered rib and leg injuries..it’s ironic he is reading this letter on AI
@@CatsJP Does anyone else find this suspicious? AI planned it to look like an accident. Be careful, Mr. Fry. You have come to the attention of the dark overlord. You should steer clear of smartphones, smart cars, smart fridges -- in fact, just to be safe, stay in bed, covered in blankets. And, for God's sake, disconnect that smart thermostat so you are not baked in your own bed.
@@blauskieMaybe AI can help you come to grips with the real world not your imaged one.
@@CatsJP They're clearly joking
@@CatsJP I suspect a trap. Are you AI? I am shutting down my computer and putting on my foil hat.👁
Brilliant.
While I disagree with the message and find its logic wanting, I greatly enjoyed its presentation by Stephen Fry.
My experience has been precisely the opposite! ChatGPT has enabled me to write what I actually mean to say. It helps me hone my thoughts and provides clarity like a tutor or even a mentor; ChatGPT isn't soulless either; because of the way it has been trained, it has become a reflection, not a replacement, because of the thousands of hands that have guided it's creation.
ChatGPT is an example of a library talking back to us. It's not an artificial intelligence, it's our intelligence.
You missed what Stephen was saying. He was speaking about the very mirror you are so in love with.
What are you talking about? These are not Stephen's words. He was reading a letter, written by Nick Cave; an Australian musician, composer, and actor. He did not say that people who use Chatgpt are narcissists. Perhaps you should think before you so avidly soil a commentators right of opinion, perspective and experience as an actual user of the app. Other view points offer enrichment and clarity. People always fear the unknown. Perhaps I misunderstood your reply and I fervently hope I miss understood, but I read your words through several times and could come up with no other interpretation than an unwarranted and disrespectful accusation. I felt a need to defend the comment. The app in my view serves as a tool, as inspiration, but it has no use without human intervention, and without human creativity, holds no grounds and no comparisons and I truly believe it will not take over from traditional create processes, as there are so many other sources and technological tools available, that no one seems to have a problem with. Thank you!
ruclips.net/video/zZfS8uk70Zc/видео.htmlsi=CyC4S-KQJm3Bd7cb actually Stephen's words.
ruclips.net/video/zZfS8uk70Zc/видео.htmlsi=CyC4S-KQJm3Bd7cb
Nick's call back to the pūteketeke before it was famous is awesome.
ChatGPT reveals that Douglas Adams was right when he wrote in The Hitchhiker's Guide that art doesn't actually exist, "Art: None. Because the function of art is to hold a mirror up to nature there can be no art because the Universe is infinite which means there simply isn't a mirror big enough."
Douglas was right about quite a lot, he predicted Wikipedia on a tablet device and pointed Amazon in the direction of learning what customers weren’t able to buy and making those products available.
I fucking love you Stephen Fry
I absolutely do to, but without the 'fucking' part. 😊
Ok grandma
@@magesalmanac6424 Ok edgelord
All the painters probably said the same things about photography when it was invented. Photography didn't stop creativity. It provided an additional outlet for it.
You're right. They did, and it has. However AI isn't just another technology as an outlet for creativity. It literally is a substitute for the creativity. That's what's terrifying.
@@peterrenn6341totally disagree. I've used it and been far more creative. I use it as a partner to explore ideas deeper, to have it look for logic flaws and to provide further suggestions that I then take out into the real world and explore.
I've then taken ideas that I've worked out through Chat to other people and they've been impressed at the level of detail I was able to get an idea or concept to. What has taken me months of long laborious thinking (and frankly a waste of time) has been reduced down into a week. My work is now more thorough and complex than ever and I'm constantly working out new ideas that pop into me head.
Chat isn't creative on its own but humans can be. It will give out what you put in.
@@peterrenn6341people thought the camera was a substitute for creativity, literally.
Every criticism of the camera in the 1800s was talking about it being a substitute for creativity and how it lacked soul and how it will destroy the arts.
Why tf isn't anyone not noticing this.
@@dibbidydoo4318Because anyone who actually makes art knows it's an incoherent and dumb argument.
How many of us still seek out hand-made ice cream? Hand-painted signs? These, also, are artistic endeavors, but their respective areas have become dominated by machines, some that do the job worse (ice cream) and some that do the job better (signs). ChatGPT and AI in general will have the same effect on other artistic areas. "Revolutionizing" is not the same as "eliminating". People still seek out hand-made ice cream, because of the qualitative difference, but for the vast majority of us, "good enough" is good enough, and we may not always care whether we can taste any "soul" in our ice cream. Still, there will always be people who enjoy a live symphony, eat a hand-made ice cream cone, and marvel at the street artist demonstrating the beauty of humanity.
As Italian I utterly and completely reject your example on ice cream. On the contrary you made perfectly clear why I cannot be bothered by self justifying tools like ChatbloodyGPT.
I feel that this is somewhat missing the point of AI.
As a hobbyist woodworker with few power tools I have practiced being able to perfectly dimension and square a piece of wood using nothing but hand tools, making all sides perfectly square and parallel. On a good day at least. However if I were to hand saw everything every time I wouldn’t get to finish much work.
Much like Nick Cave I haven’t used Chat GPT much but my impression so far is that it is a tool like any other tool. Like a table saw. If you cannot use the tool and maintain creativity then you are simply an unimaginative person. Did the invention of the camera kill the portrait? Did the invention of the synthesizer kill music?
You don’t need to use Chat GPT to write song lyrics but you can use it for brainstorming or for structuring to do-lists or whathaveyou so that you are left with more time for actual creativity and imagination.
Plot twist: Nick Cave’s letter was written by ChatGPT
😂
Human creativity is not so easily crushed. ChatGPT is a product of human creativity, and humans will do creative things with it. This is just melodramatic.
This has always happened through history, an advancement shows up, people stirs but that never stops the advance, similar speeches were given in the 80s around electric keyboards and now edm and DJs are mainstream as anything else, it’s not one or the other it’s always keeping both things and find the right space for each thing, stop polarizing people.
More than verbal idea generation I fear AI illustration. I just watched a video of a guy reading an essay on science fiction. His commenters raved about the wonderful visuals that he larded it with. I knew they were generated by AI because I trained as a professional illustrator when airbrush was king. PhotoShop relieved us of the physical mess and made every layer editable, but it's still labour intensive and relies on human vision and imagination. People are suckers for novel juxtapositions, which are what you feed into AI image generation. It can steal a style, so it's so much more than fake photos. Illustrators are out of luck.
Stock footage and images are bad enough, but AI image lack any shred of heart or soul. I can spot them a mile away, but the sad thing is, younger people will soon lose that ability.
@@KrisHughes I feel like all I can do is point it out and if a facebook 'suggestion' smells like AI I block the page.
@@KrisHughes I hope the opposite will be true. Right now many people have trouble distinguishing the two because we have had no practice, but as opportunities to practice increase, people will have an opportunity to get better. The X factor is in valuing the ability to distinguish the two. We need to keep reminding ourselves of why AI generated art is unhealthy for human creativity and value the ability to distinguish it.
AI illustration, the great equalizer, is like giving wings to those who only dreamed of flying. Gone are the days of labor-intensive brushwork; welcome to an era where vision and creativity merge with tech efficiency. Illustrators, step aside - AI's turning everyone into a digital Picasso, effortlessly creating what once took years to master. Out of luck? More like a new chapter in artistic evolution!
@@DrHanes disagree. It’s a tool for those who can’t and/or too lazy. The point of the journey is in the learning, not racing to the end goal. Learning to suddenly fly a helicopter in The Matrix didn’t make them better human beings at all.
Aside… from the effort and genius inherent within the endeavour which was required to build Chatgpt in the first place. Humans built it! It is a much a valid creation which deserves to be studied and adored as any sonnet, play or song. Nearly a hundred years of software and hardware advances were required to even entertain such a creation. ChatGPT is a large language model.. it’s born out of every single beautiful word and phrase the human race has ever committed to the page.. that unfathomable volume of knowledge has been reasoned and ordered by dead lumps of metal and sand so they can actually understand what we are saying! It’s a true miracle.
100%
Yes I read that same thing too…AI is also good for plagiarism
I can see rest as a relationship- like the GOP should definitely give it a rest. ChatGPT couldn’t replace creativity because it’s inherent in all people, although grossly under developed in some. I view ChatGPT as a tool that randomly patchwork quilts ideas together to form a hopefully coherent fulfillment of a human request. It could never on its own convey a creative person’s perspective through creation of art or writing…. It’s just a best guess with the knowledge base it’s given. It has no human experience to express.
That’s my whole point ..it’s doesn’t feel emotion, it doesn’t know how to cry when it “feels” sad or happy and it doesn’t know how to laugh when it “feels” the need to…it is completely devoid of emotion and feelings.
@@CatsJP do you need ai to cry to exist?
@@reginaerekson9139we as humans need feelings to exist….AI is a fragment of a human’s imagination that has become real…it has a void of feelings and emotions and is manipulated by humans..what part of that don’t you get…I’m guessing the part where you aren’t getting your own way..
Initially 'robots', from the Czech word for slave, were meant to do all the 'meaningless' labour. Ironically, somehow, they're doing our human arts and crafts, after all we are narrative primates, storytellers. The software is even intruding into my favourite hobby: Dungeons and Dragons, soon, not just the art, but the actual Gamemaster can be done by a robot; this leaves us at the point where the human do all the menial labour and crappy jobs, and the computers have all the hobby time in the world...how dystopian is that?
I mean robots are doing both, most of our factories are automated.
I wish I had the words to properly say how moving that letter is.
That's easy. Just ask ChatGPT to do it for you!
@@AAjax Where is the fun in that? lol
Very well read sir. And very well written Mr Cave although i don't agree. I don't see a AI as a threat to human creativity, i see it as competition, and competition which as we know is healthy as it pushes us to work harder. Interesting times for sure, i'm curious to see where things go from here.
He would say that, wouldn't he. 😁
If only the farm workers had been so eloquent... Perhaps if they'd had ChatGPT... We'd be picking potatoes today. ❤️
Which farm workers?
What farm workers?
75% of the population who had to work on farms to feed everyone. Before industrialisation 'gave' them work in factories making iPhones for aliens.
I think we should be thankful for ChatGPT and the likes, because it puts the poor content creators out of a job and highlights the value of real artists
It’s not the _poor_ content creators (or builders, doctors, lawyers, or whatever) we should be concerned about; it’s the average (+/- one or two standard deviations) being superfluous that will wreck society as we know it.
Please don't refer to artists as content creators.
That's like saying "we should be thankful for processed foods because they put the poor food creators out of a job and highlight the value of real chefs". We may look at it as a silver lining, but not as a goal. We're missing things here, things of value, reflections of the human soul. Art has never been about consumption, but about expression and what can the audience pull from it for their own. We should be demanding that our art is "handmade", that it's consciously and deliberately decided and put forward, not as means to satisfy a hunger. Because just as processed foods and refined sugars has caused an epidemic of diseases, soulless artistic work will leave us with sick and malnourished souls, alone, with no sense of connection.
It's mighty comforting to know that @brakman01 is the self-appointed supreme arbiter of what constitutes 'value' & 'real' artists,... all I have to do is please their sensibilities & apparently I'll have it made!
sorry....NO.
Being as what constitutes art, value & good/bad are entirely subjective it's a terribly flawed argument for starters.
Arguably everything builds upon/evolves from that which has come before, we're all influenced by personal taste,...and filter the world through our own experiences.
However, none of the 'real' artists/musicians/writers I know (including myself) are capable of being as prolific, or as quick as AI is at generating 'content"...and, to the end consumer it generally won't matter if the AI-produced content isn't quite as good, or not exactly what they want - it's cheaper, it's faster & it can simply flood the marketplace - as well as mimic the work of real artists - ever more convincingly. Being able to spot the differences between AI-generated vs human-created content is a rapidly narrowing gap.
Basic data-mining can provide AI with 'what's the most marketable',... which rather obviates people even needing to provide instruction/parameters for what they want the AI to produce, including eventually, AI itself.
To believe that widespread use of AI isn't an existential threat is remarkably naïve.
As an unqualified observer, your opinion has similar value and meaning as traffic noise.