Now that “A.I.” seems to be a part of reality,* it is the source of much controversy. As an independent author who has commissioned artists for book covers, and some burgeoning graphic novel projects, I’m privy and intrigued by one facet of it: A.I. generated art.

Here are some of the arguments I’ve been observing go back and forth in my own social network, such as it is:

Stop, Thief!

Artist: Using A.I. to generate your art is abetting  the theft of intellectual property.

Writer: It’s no more theft than an artist drawing or painting something after looking at other art, photos, or the live subject in the real world. Unless A.I. simply reproduced your art, line-for-line, stroke-for-stroke, your argument doesn’t hold water.

Have You No Decency?

Artist: Shame on you! You’re putting human artists out of work by using A.I. generated art. It is morally reprehensible to make money off work that includes elements not created by a human being.

Writer #1: That’s like saying it’s immoral for you to build a website, make a flier, or advertise your art in any other way unless you or another artist (who you pay) hand-create all the text, rather than using an available font from some computer.

Writer #2: Considering your price-gouging, and your undependability, you deserve to go out of business. If you weren’t so unreasonable and flaky, I might consider paying more for your human touch.

How would YOU like it?

Artist: What if A.I. writes a cheap knock-off of your novel and somebody else cut into your profits by selling it?

Writer: That’s already happening even without A.I. From the hacks selling their junk on the Amazon Slush Pile, to downright piracy on the warrez sites. It’s something we have to live with. Welcome to our world.

Artist: You won’t be so cavalier when people start buying A.I. generated books instead of yours. Then you’ll see.

Writer: We won’t like it, but that’s already happening, too. The lion’s share of the indie market is dominated by cheap, quick, formulaic, uninspired pap generated by mediocre writers who might as well be bots. Welcome to our world.

 

My Thoughts:

I’ve seen some really impressive A.I. generated art, but in my limited experience so far, it takes just as much time and effort to make A.I. give me what I want as it would to just draw or paint it myself. No doubt it will improve, but it might always have that “Uncanny Valley” effect.

I suspect A.I. generated prose will have an even stronger Uncanny Valley factor. Granted, most Amazon shoppers will ravenously consume it anyway. But if my creativity depended on profit margins, return-on-investment, or any financial metric, I would have given up on creative pursuits long ago in lieu of something much more consistently profitable like politics, real estate, or telemarketing.

What are your thoughts on the role of artificial intelligence in creativity? Let us know in the comments.

 

*I’ve heard some tech-savvy folks say what we’re witnessing is not true artificial intelligence, but merely complex computer programming. I tend to agree, based on its performance. I don’t think it will ever truly be intelligent without imagination and probably self-awareness.