AI is actually, by definition, not artificial intelligence.
So why are we conceding the definitions of the words we use to the tech giants ruling the word, including NVIDIA and Microsoft and Apple and Meta?
It's not artificial intelligence. It's just not, because it literally has no intelligence. The ability to deepen and extrapolate massive patterns is not the same as the ability to know things.
It's an automater.
ChatGPT is an automater. What does it automate? Answers; text production.
Do you really trust the things that matter most to you to an automated answering machine?
Character.ai is an automater. What does it automate? Improv writing; improv acting; conversation; text production.
Do you really want to spend hours of your day talking to an automated text generator?
Midjourney is an automater. What does it automate? Pixel generation; image analysis and remixing; the creation of visual art.
There are, actually, situations where it has been really interesting to look at art that was created by automated art machines. And there are a lot of reasons a person might want to automate the creation of visual art, which is deeply moving and inspiring to many people - and also, something that is much, much, much more accessible to some people than others (a lot of technical skill that takes time and often access to acquire.
Automating certain techniques is one thing. That is a genuinely interesting and vital area for examination.
But do you really want to create all of your art through an automated pixel generator?
