AI: The New Aesthetics of Fascism
AI: The New Aesthetics of Fascism
It's embarrassing, destructive, and looks like shit: AI-generated art is the perfect aesthetic form for the far right.
No comments on the article but a "tweet this" button new socialist? Really?
E: One comment, small thing I keep seeing pop up and it is starting to annoy me. The article refers to 'the cruelty is the point' thing a lot. Which yes, that is a point, but I don't think that is the driving force of the right and actually looking at it wrong. I think that for rightwingers the hierarchy is the point, and just that inside this hierarchy you are allowed to do cruelty (as long as it reinforces their hierarchy). I have not worked out how to explain this clearly in a short way (I just deleted several paragraphs here), but I think this explains a lot of problems with the US politics. See also how the mostly rightwing democrats keep upsetting their leftwing base when they pick the 'enforce the hierarchy' option every time somebody lesser speaks out (doesn't mean the dems vs repubs have the same hierarchy, dems like the US system, the (current) repubs the white nationalist patriarchal system. This also explains why the dems keep trying to absorb the repubs who fall out of line (or how the dems deal badly with dems who fall out of line, and why this enrages the 'do less cruelty, fuck the system' left)).
Anyway, im close to getting a 2x2 grid (as astute observers will have noted im leaving out the important 'we must do more cruelty' people) and talking about object vs meta level issues here ;). (For the context deprived, those are r/ssc terms, part of the group of people sneerclub dislikes (and for good reason, while object vs meta could be useful here, it is more about which values are important to people, and object/meta is the wrong frame (my joke does expose that object/meta thinking have an implicit valuation of the meta over the object level in it, so joke not joke! (take your meds people)))).
My interpretation is that, in current circumstances, cruelty is the principal way to enforce hierarchy. But, I might have to give up on trying to understand US politics because the differences between the two parties are shrinking.
The article mainly appeals to me because of I've seen some people claiming that hate towards AI art is "reactionary," when the exact opposite seems to be true when you think about the overall context of the technology. A pretty reasonable argument in favor of this is that human artists sometimes have their work called AI slop, simply because their works were scraped and people recognize some similarities in style. The obvious rebuttal is that this is victim blaming. AI models plagiarize, and misinforms people with the unfortunate side effect of sowing division between us.
Huge agree on the object/meta discourse. It's way more important to talk about specific values than use that binary way of thinking.
My interpretation is that, in current circumstances, cruelty is the principal way to enforce hierarchy. But, I might have to give up on trying to understand US politics because the differences between the two parties are shrinking.
Yes it certainly is the way to enforce the hierarchy (and some just like to do the cruelty and would join a side that allows them to be cruel), and the difference between the parties seems to be more about what the hierarchy is, and a big risk of having one 'the important part of the hierarchy is following the system/rules' that after the system/rules gets corrupted, they will join in. (This explains also why so many organizations are agreeing in advance with Trump/Musks bs). Anyway, I meant this whole post in 'understand your enemies' way, as a lot of things on the right do not make sense if you only look at the cruelty angle (like the popularity of the 'cuck' insult thing which in the past decade really has taken off (the r-slur now coming back is a really worrying development in all this also btw, as people are now 'allowed to be cruel' again)), which is not to dismiss cruelty btw (I'd take special notice of the people who are now using the system to do performative cruelty on people). It just feels incomplete to me. Also there certainly are factions who just want to be cruel, but they would lash out more to all sides (like how 4channers try to trick other 4channers a lot, trolls be trolls). But I'm just thinking out loud here, I have not put this all together in a well reasoned argument, it is more an intuition that they are not totally sadistic nihilists. And hey, 'the cruelty is the point' is good messaging for the leftwing people/people who are open to being convinced to become leftwingers (all these political opinions not being static in people and all), also contrast this message with the 'they are weird' message.
Jumpscare warning:
LW gets mentioned at about 80% into the article.
edit: it appears that there are people who do not know what “LW” means. I made a context-based joke that it was “Lemmy World”. What it really stands for is “Lurk More”
Something about aesthetics without a single image in the post?
aesthetics is not the domain of purely visual or simply physical
There are links to images. The author correctly assumes that there's no reason to insert examples since they are so easily found.
I stand corrected
Let's please try to be more specific
"AI" in general is just overpowered statistics, which can be used in many very useful ways, including saving life and reducing the work needed to fulfill the needs of a population. AI can help plan maintenance to infrastructure, saving resources.
The issue is the use of Generative AI that does no good public deeds, that is just a waste of resources, trained without consent on the data, to make investors happy.
Which is more complex than just saying "AI", the same way "Monopolistic social networks that exploit their user's data for toxic advertisement" is more complex than just saying "computers" or "the internet"
I have to say, this is the first time I've seen "machine learning is psychohistory" expressed this frankly. This has been useful, thank you for your contribution.
“Hello, peasants, I come to deliver you from ignorance. I can tell just by looking at your filthy clothes and vacant gazes that you all misuse the term AI. It is my obligation and privilege to educate you and inform you of the bright future AI is soon to bring, you swine.”
That’s you
Look, I understand it can come off as pretentious. Perhaps it is
But let's frame this a second.
AI, as I'm sure you are all aware, is a very old concept with useful applications dating back in the 80s. Not "the future is bright", but "this is a useful tool that is already helping in many fields".
Then one day, in the last 5 years, monopolists start doing generative AI to offer a flashy useless and wasteful service.
We then start calling this specific abuse of the technology, and of tens of years of passionate research, like the technology itself, overshadowing the rest.
If you think there's nothing wrong with that, I understand why my comment is unwanted. I think that it's wrong, a generalisation we wouldn't accept in other fields. I will refrain from making examples as I don't want to sound even more pretentious.
I guess I made my stand, I'll refrain coming back to this post at this point.
which can be used in many very useful ways, including saving life and reducing the work needed to fulfill the needs of a population
Uh huh. “Can” needs an asterisk and some disclaimers there. And probably “useful”, too.
While all true, you're missing the point of the article, which is why specifically the political right has embraced the aesthetic of "AI" generated slop. It's a good deep read, well worth your time!