Rage against the night > Likes and Comments
10 likes · Like
True words!
I don't know. I've read novels generated by AI and I recognized them by a few weirdnesses that seem to be common to AI productions.
I don't see the purpose of AI writing. What does AI have to say about human experience? About life and love?
Even in the "good ol' days" of pulp fiction, the stories had character and originality that I don't think AI can produce.
I will admit that I've been using AI to generate images for my book covers. But they're fake photographs. And I design the cover myself. I only use AI "photos" as part of the design.
In "The Story of Nikki," I used a program called DAZ-3d to render, not generate, the images. IOW, I used a sort of GUI to create and manipulate my images of Nikki. While I don't claim that's "art," there are a number of artists who work in DAZ. See the early covers of the Badger Therese books, for example.
AI generated "photos" will definitely hurt commercial photographers, and maybe graphic designers. There are already AI "models" used by ad agencies instead of live people.
Note the graphic novels by the collaboration of Badger Therese and Kerel von Mierlo. "The Production Contract," for example, uses an AI image generator called Stable Diffusion, as well as the more familiar GIMP and Blender. Is the result "art?" IDK
We haven't come to terms with AI. I guess we'll see.
I totally agree with the concept of looking at where the creativity and the bulk of the creative work is coming from.
When the work is writing, it needs to be a human writer otherwise I'm not on board. There is no good way to just "edit" AI-generated text to represent the true creative thought and output of a human mind and imagination. Not now, and not for a very, very long time. AI is not sentient, will never be (don't buy the bullshit AGI hype these hucksters are selling) and will never create true written works that have real human meaning behind it. And I mean that: Never. Never, no matter how much they train these things, no matter how much energy they consume, they will never have artificial general intelligence. They have no intelligence at all, it's just a fancy statistical correlation machine. Don't buy the hype.
Visual art is harder to talk about, because most of the time it's not just some random AI-generated thing we're looking at. What is the difference between a human artist being trained on several prominent artistic styles, and a neural net trained on those styles? An apprentice to a master who copies and does what he/she is told and produces a work of art that is impressive in its details, but not truly original to that apprentice? Or the master?
Taking the example of Badger Therese and Kerel von Mierlo, I have those books, and the amount of work it took to get there from anything that a generative AI can produce these days is pretty huge. I know, I've played with these things a lot. There's enough human input and creativity there that I regard it as human-generated. Much like using a very fancy paintbrush or effect in an image editor results in every pixel being manipulated by an algorithm, but it's still human creativity.
I use various tools, including generative AI for the covers of my ebooks, and wind up spending hours and hours on something that I don't regard as central to my work. It's just marketing material. If I could tell a human how to produce what I wanted and it happened, I would use a human. I have in the past, and never got anywhere close to what I actually wanted, which led to me replacing those covers with ones I generated myself. I consider them my own human creative output to the extent that I wrestled creatively with them for hours and days before they fit my vision. I still report the cover images to Amazon as being AI. Because they are and I want to be honest about it.
But the text is pure me. No AI in there, because that's the meat of what I'm producing and what's the point of being a writer if I'm not the one writing? I should just go back to being a software hack, vibe-coding my way through the day and hating it.
Sign me up with a publisher who'll take care of the covers, and I'm a happy little clam.
Dallas wrote: "I don't know. I've read novels generated by AI and I recognized them by a few weirdnesses that seem to be common to AI productions.
I don't see the purpose of AI writing. What does AI have to say a..."
I'm not discouraging the use of AI, I'm just saying it is a different format and medium, one that is separate from writing and art. Writing and drawing take time, precious time some of us don't have. That's what makes it special. Time.
Your covers are fine!
If someone is using AI, they should say so. I'm getting inundated with fake videos pretending to be real and I don't know why. Just say it's AI. There's no shame in it!
No matter how you slice it,,, AI is programmed art.
i became a professional musician at 16. i worked with a group in their 40's. i had to join the musicians union because they booked nightclubs. the 'minor' had to have a chaperone to assure everybody he would not touch the booze
i watched the first synthesizers in the late 60's.
digital music is wonderful... except when they try to convert into computer composition.
a good musician can hear it.
yeah,, and they say 'all music is just mathematics'
Bach is a prime example of that, put to paper.
I can tell you for a fact,,,, they're not there, yet.
some of the best music every written was done during the 60's to 90's
I still can't believe they traded Motown for Rap.
if you can't 'whistle it',,, it's not a song.
it's obscene poetry set to a drum beat.
oh, well, that's my two cents.
and DX, you state your case beautifully.
dont ever lose that soapbox.
Frank wrote: "No matter how you slice it,,, AI is programmed art.
i became a professional musician at 16. i worked with a group in their 40's. i had to join the musicians union because they booked nightclubs. t..."
I think in this new world, musicians will become the new saints. They will hear what we cannot. I hope you still play.
no. i quit at around 35. too many oposing factors, A wife (who married a musician) resented me being gone on gigs on the weekends, then i got a steady job on midnights.
the cnoice was alternating days and nights for two weeks at a pop. nights 1559-2359 or straight midnights... midnights was much better.
The wife and the job, were too much to overcome.
i haven't touched it since the mid 80's
I didn't play rock, i played jazz,,, it kept me out of Viet Nam
i played in the band for four years in the Navy.
Frank wrote: "no. i quit at around 35. too many oposing factors, A wife (who married a musician) resented me being gone on gigs on the weekends, then i got a steady job on midnights.
the cnoice was alternating ..."
I hope you take it up again.
Erik wrote: "I totally agree with the concept of looking at where the creativity and the bulk of the creative work is coming from.
When the work is writing, it needs to be a human writer otherwise I'm not on b..."
Well stated, Erik!
Ｄ.Ｘ.. wrote: "Frank wrote: "no. i quit at around 35. too many oposing factors, A wife (who married a musician) resented me being gone on gigs on the weekends, then i got a steady job on midnights.
the cnoice wa..."
That's a nice thought.. but at 79, it would take several years to regain my 'chops'. That won't happen at my age. Muscle memory takes time to develop. at least two years.
I appreciate the well wishes, though. 😎
Frank wrote: "Ｄ.Ｘ.. wrote: "Frank wrote: "no. i quit at around 35. too many oposing factors, A wife (who married a musician) resented me being gone on gigs on the weekends, then i got a steady job on midnights. ..."
:)
Ｄ.Ｘ.. wrote: "Frank wrote: "Ｄ.Ｘ.. wrote: "Frank wrote: "no. i quit at around 35. too many oposing factors, A wife (who married a musician) resented me being gone on gigs on the weekends, then i got a steady job ..."
Thank you, the job on midnights i had for 17 years,,,
Second shift was much worse.
when you work the afternoon shift you don't get to see your kids from weekend to weekend
but midnights, you get the best of both
no bosses in your hair 😁
Good parking
no traffice going , but coming home you're going the other way..
plus
it was a very lucrative job,
it more than compensated for the loss of the money playing gigs,
back to top
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Dexter
(new)
Sep 06, 2026 04:25PM
True words!
reply
|
flag
I don't know. I've read novels generated by AI and I recognized them by a few weirdnesses that seem to be common to AI productions.I don't see the purpose of AI writing. What does AI have to say about human experience? About life and love?
Even in the "good ol' days" of pulp fiction, the stories had character and originality that I don't think AI can produce.
I will admit that I've been using AI to generate images for my book covers. But they're fake photographs. And I design the cover myself. I only use AI "photos" as part of the design.
In "The Story of Nikki," I used a program called DAZ-3d to render, not generate, the images. IOW, I used a sort of GUI to create and manipulate my images of Nikki. While I don't claim that's "art," there are a number of artists who work in DAZ. See the early covers of the Badger Therese books, for example.
AI generated "photos" will definitely hurt commercial photographers, and maybe graphic designers. There are already AI "models" used by ad agencies instead of live people.
Note the graphic novels by the collaboration of Badger Therese and Kerel von Mierlo. "The Production Contract," for example, uses an AI image generator called Stable Diffusion, as well as the more familiar GIMP and Blender. Is the result "art?" IDK
We haven't come to terms with AI. I guess we'll see.
I totally agree with the concept of looking at where the creativity and the bulk of the creative work is coming from.When the work is writing, it needs to be a human writer otherwise I'm not on board. There is no good way to just "edit" AI-generated text to represent the true creative thought and output of a human mind and imagination. Not now, and not for a very, very long time. AI is not sentient, will never be (don't buy the bullshit AGI hype these hucksters are selling) and will never create true written works that have real human meaning behind it. And I mean that: Never. Never, no matter how much they train these things, no matter how much energy they consume, they will never have artificial general intelligence. They have no intelligence at all, it's just a fancy statistical correlation machine. Don't buy the hype.
Visual art is harder to talk about, because most of the time it's not just some random AI-generated thing we're looking at. What is the difference between a human artist being trained on several prominent artistic styles, and a neural net trained on those styles? An apprentice to a master who copies and does what he/she is told and produces a work of art that is impressive in its details, but not truly original to that apprentice? Or the master?
Taking the example of Badger Therese and Kerel von Mierlo, I have those books, and the amount of work it took to get there from anything that a generative AI can produce these days is pretty huge. I know, I've played with these things a lot. There's enough human input and creativity there that I regard it as human-generated. Much like using a very fancy paintbrush or effect in an image editor results in every pixel being manipulated by an algorithm, but it's still human creativity.
I use various tools, including generative AI for the covers of my ebooks, and wind up spending hours and hours on something that I don't regard as central to my work. It's just marketing material. If I could tell a human how to produce what I wanted and it happened, I would use a human. I have in the past, and never got anywhere close to what I actually wanted, which led to me replacing those covers with ones I generated myself. I consider them my own human creative output to the extent that I wrestled creatively with them for hours and days before they fit my vision. I still report the cover images to Amazon as being AI. Because they are and I want to be honest about it.
But the text is pure me. No AI in there, because that's the meat of what I'm producing and what's the point of being a writer if I'm not the one writing? I should just go back to being a software hack, vibe-coding my way through the day and hating it.
Sign me up with a publisher who'll take care of the covers, and I'm a happy little clam.
Dallas wrote: "I don't know. I've read novels generated by AI and I recognized them by a few weirdnesses that seem to be common to AI productions.I don't see the purpose of AI writing. What does AI have to say a..."
I'm not discouraging the use of AI, I'm just saying it is a different format and medium, one that is separate from writing and art. Writing and drawing take time, precious time some of us don't have. That's what makes it special. Time.
Your covers are fine!
If someone is using AI, they should say so. I'm getting inundated with fake videos pretending to be real and I don't know why. Just say it's AI. There's no shame in it!
No matter how you slice it,,, AI is programmed art.i became a professional musician at 16. i worked with a group in their 40's. i had to join the musicians union because they booked nightclubs. the 'minor' had to have a chaperone to assure everybody he would not touch the booze
i watched the first synthesizers in the late 60's.
digital music is wonderful... except when they try to convert into computer composition.
a good musician can hear it.
yeah,, and they say 'all music is just mathematics'
Bach is a prime example of that, put to paper.
I can tell you for a fact,,,, they're not there, yet.
some of the best music every written was done during the 60's to 90's
I still can't believe they traded Motown for Rap.
if you can't 'whistle it',,, it's not a song.
it's obscene poetry set to a drum beat.
oh, well, that's my two cents.
and DX, you state your case beautifully.
dont ever lose that soapbox.
Frank wrote: "No matter how you slice it,,, AI is programmed art.i became a professional musician at 16. i worked with a group in their 40's. i had to join the musicians union because they booked nightclubs. t..."
I think in this new world, musicians will become the new saints. They will hear what we cannot. I hope you still play.
no. i quit at around 35. too many oposing factors, A wife (who married a musician) resented me being gone on gigs on the weekends, then i got a steady job on midnights. the cnoice was alternating days and nights for two weeks at a pop. nights 1559-2359 or straight midnights... midnights was much better.
The wife and the job, were too much to overcome.
i haven't touched it since the mid 80's
I didn't play rock, i played jazz,,, it kept me out of Viet Nami played in the band for four years in the Navy.
Frank wrote: "no. i quit at around 35. too many oposing factors, A wife (who married a musician) resented me being gone on gigs on the weekends, then i got a steady job on midnights. the cnoice was alternating ..."
I hope you take it up again.
Erik wrote: "I totally agree with the concept of looking at where the creativity and the bulk of the creative work is coming from.When the work is writing, it needs to be a human writer otherwise I'm not on b..."
Well stated, Erik!
Ｄ.Ｘ.. wrote: "Frank wrote: "no. i quit at around 35. too many oposing factors, A wife (who married a musician) resented me being gone on gigs on the weekends, then i got a steady job on midnights. the cnoice wa..."
That's a nice thought.. but at 79, it would take several years to regain my 'chops'. That won't happen at my age. Muscle memory takes time to develop. at least two years.
I appreciate the well wishes, though. 😎
Frank wrote: "Ｄ.Ｘ.. wrote: "Frank wrote: "no. i quit at around 35. too many oposing factors, A wife (who married a musician) resented me being gone on gigs on the weekends, then i got a steady job on midnights. ...":)
Ｄ.Ｘ.. wrote: "Frank wrote: "Ｄ.Ｘ.. wrote: "Frank wrote: "no. i quit at around 35. too many oposing factors, A wife (who married a musician) resented me being gone on gigs on the weekends, then i got a steady job ..."Thank you, the job on midnights i had for 17 years,,,
Second shift was much worse.
when you work the afternoon shift you don't get to see your kids from weekend to weekend
but midnights, you get the best of both
no bosses in your hair 😁
Good parking
no traffice going , but coming home you're going the other way..
plus
it was a very lucrative job,
it more than compensated for the loss of the money playing gigs,