[Discuss] The Domesticated AI

[richard.pieri at gmail.com (Rich Pieri)]

On Wed, 06 May 2026 21:57:09 -0400
"Dale R. Worley" <Dale.Worley at comcast.net> wrote:

> The difficulty is that the actual market for "creativity" is fairly
> small; most "creative types" are employed as "illustrators", that is,
> the customer wants some sort of IP that has certain properties,
> doesn't care about how unique it is, and is price-sensitive.  The
> result is you get e.g. 

I don't know about that. I do know plenty of actors, musicians,
artists, writers, etc., who are in demand for their work. I also see
that when companies try to use machine-generated "art" instead of
employing human artists, it is met with backlash and ridicule from the
audiences. I also know several novelists who have written into their
contracts that no machine-generated content is permitted: covers must
be illustrated by humans, translations must be performed by humans, etc.

My impression is that "art" by Nano Banana 2 might be good enough for
some CEO who only cares about shareholder value. Not so much for the
rest of us.

-- 
\m/ (--) \m/