Introductory Note: On Automation and Creativity
Discourse around AI tools has been either a blind faith in artificially generated content or skeptical criticism. We stand with the skeptics.
Since 2022, when the use of text and image generation with so called “artificial intelligence” became widespread use, the discourse around these tools has been either a blind faith in artificially generated content or skeptical criticism towards the amount of resources needed to create at best mediocre outputs– not to mention the ethical concerns around the perpetuation of racist bias and potential safety risks associated with developing an artificial general intelligence (AGI). To clearly state our point of view, we stand with the skeptics.
For the purpose of this text, we will move forward with the assumption that you are aware of the ethical concerns just mentioned raised by experts on the field. The purpose of this magazine is to counter-balance techno-determinist narratives around art and culture–a response to the belief that hoarding the work of artists, creatives and individuals within a database that a few pretend to exploit for profit is a way to “democratize” art. It would seem that AI companies do not to like adhering to copyright laws that protect artists and creators. Just recently, court documents showed that Anthropic had spent millions of dollars to physically scan–and destroy during the process– print books to build Claude, an AI assistant similar to chat GPT.

.jpg)


