In 1-2 years AI Art will be dead and here's why

In the video titled 'In 1-2 years AI Art will be dead and here's why', Sean argues that AI art will fade within the next few years due to its user base's lack of loyalty and genuine interest in art. He criticizes AI art users for pursuing art for clout or sales rather than passion, suggesting that they will abandon AI art once its novelty wears off. Sean contends that AI art's gimmicks and superficial enhancements cannot sustain long-term engagement, predicting a mass exodus from AI art platforms as the hype dissipates and legal and ethical challenges rise, ultimately leading to a resurgence of traditional artists.

Takeaways

• 🎨 **Lack of Loyalty**: The users of AI art are not loyal and are attracted to it for the wrong reasons, such as attention or sales, rather than a sincere interest in art.
• 🚀 **Short-lived Interest**: AI art provides a quick dopamine hit but lacks the sustained fulfillment that comes with traditional art creation, leading to a loss of interest over time.
• 🔄 **Gimmicks and Advances**: AI art relies on constant gimmicks and technological advances to keep users engaged, but these are insufficient to maintain long-term interest.
• 📉 **Job Market Concerns**: The promise of job opportunities in AI art is misleading; real job prospects are limited to business and software engineering roles.
• 🚫 **Legal and Ethical Issues**: There are significant legal grey areas surrounding AI art, including copyright infringement and the potential for jail time for those involved.
• 🧩 **Cannibalistic Behavior**: AI art users often fight amongst themselves over prompts and copyrights, which can lead to a breakdown in community and user base.
• 📈 **Market Saturation**: The commodification and saturation of AI art styles have led to a growing distaste among consumers, negatively impacting the market for AI art.
• 🚧 **Technological Limitations**: AI art has inherent limitations compared to human art and has already reached its peak performance, with little room for significant improvement.
• ⛓ **Black Box Concerns**: The 'black box' nature of AI training data sets poses serious legal and ethical risks, with potential consequences including imprisonment.
• 🌐 **Democratization Critique**: Claims of democratizing art through AI are seen as misleading rhetoric, with real power and opportunities likely to consolidate among traditional artists.
• ⏳ **Short Lifespan**: The average lifespan of an AI user or freelance artist is short, with many expected to quit within the first couple of years due to the challenges they face.

Q & A

What is the main reason the speaker believes AI art will decline?

The speaker believes AI art will decline because the users, referred to as customers, are not genuinely interested in art for its own sake. They are attracted to AI art for potential clout or financial gains, and as such, they lack loyalty and genuine engagement, which will lead to a decline when the novelty wears off.

How does the speaker describe the impact of AI art on traditional artists?

The speaker argues that traditional artists will continue creating art regardless of the state of AI art, implying that their commitment stems from a sincere engagement with art unlike AI art users, who may abandon art creation if AI technologies fail or become less popular.

What does the speaker predict about the future of AI art technologies and gimmicks?

The speaker predicts that future technologies and gimmicks in AI art will only serve as temporary fixes or enhancements that won’t sustain user interest long-term. These gimmicks are likened to downloadable content in video games, which can momentarily engage but fail to maintain long-lasting interest.

What concerns does the speaker raise about job opportunities for AI art users?

The speaker is skeptical about sustainable job opportunities arising from AI art, arguing that no one would pay for skills that can be easily replicated by machines, such as prompting AI to generate art. This suggests that AI art skills are not unique or valuable enough to warrant professional opportunities.

How does the speaker view the legal challenges facing AI art?

The speaker anticipates significant legal challenges for AI art, including potential lawsuits against AI developers for copyright and data privacy issues. These legal battles are expected to limit what AI can do and restrict its impact on various fields.

What effect does the speaker believe AI art has on the art market and traditional art jobs?

The speaker believes that AI art attracts clients with lower budgets and less respect for traditional art, essentially filtering out undesirable clients for traditional artists. However, AI art's presence in the market is also viewed as a competitive threat that could push out traditional artists unless AI fails or is legally restricted.

What is Glaze, and why does the speaker mention it?

Glaze is mentioned as an anti-AI software designed to protect traditional artists' works from being scraped and used by AI systems without permission. The speaker highlights it as a significant tool for artists to defend their creative rights against the encroachment of AI technologies.

What does the speaker predict about the future of AI art's popularity?

The speaker predicts a decline in AI art's popularity, attributing this to the superficial engagement of its users and the inevitable saturation and commodification of AI-generated styles, which will lead to public and artistic disinterest.

Why does the speaker believe AI art cannot replace human creativity?

The speaker argues that AI art, being dependent on predefined algorithms and data, lacks the inherent creativity and emotional depth that human artists bring to their work. Human artists can adapt, evolve, and inject personal insight into their art, capabilities that AI currently cannot match.

How does the speaker address the AI art community's behavior?

The speaker criticizes the AI art community for infighting and protective behaviors over prompts, which they see as hypocritical and self-destructive. This behavior is predicted to lead to a degradation of the community and further weaken the foundation of AI art.

Outlines

00:00

📉 The Decline of AI Art: Predictions and Reasons

Sean from 'The Art Mentor' predicts the imminent decline of AI art within two to five years due to a lack of genuine interest and loyalty among its users. He argues that AI art users, referred to as customers rather than true enthusiasts, are attracted by the prospect of easy gains and not by a sincere appreciation for art. This superficial engagement, he claims, leads to quick disenchantment when the novelty wears off. AI art, providing only a temporary 'dopamine hit', fails to offer the long-term fulfillment that traditional art does, thus it cannot sustain its user base. Sean emphasizes that genuine artists will continue creating, unlike AI art users who will abandon the field once the initial excitement fades.

05:01

🚨 Crisis in AI Art: Infighting and Market Saturation

The video script continues to critique the AI art community, highlighting the intense competition and infighting among users over prompts, leading to attempts to copyright common language. This 'cannibalism' is seen as detrimental to the AI art community’s foundation. Sean discusses the growing distaste for the homogenous style of AI art and its negative reception among clients and the general public. He predicts a mass exodus of AI users as they face the same challenges that traditional artists do, compounded by an increasingly savvy and critical audience that rejects AI-generated images. This phenomenon is further stressing the AI art market, leading to its inevitable decline.

10:02

⚖️ Legal and Ethical Challenges Facing AI Art

Sean forecasts significant legal and ethical challenges for AI art, predicting the development of anti-AI software to protect artists’ works from being used without permission in AI databases. He criticizes AI platforms for claiming to 'democratize' art, viewing this as a disguise for their actual intention of dominating and commodifying artistic expression. The expected legal actions and potential criminal consequences for AI developers are discussed as inevitable, with the 'black box' of AI's training data seen as a ticking time bomb of copyright issues and ethical violations. This legal scrutiny is expected to severely limit AI's application in the art world.

15:03

🛡️ Reclaiming Art: Human Creativity vs. AI Limitations

In the concluding paragraph, Sean asserts that the true power in the art world will always remain with human artists who understand and can apply artistic skills, knowledge, and history effectively. He dismisses the notion of AI democratizing art as misleading, claiming it merely serves to hook customers with grand promises while delivering little value. Sean encourages traditional artists to stay passionate and proactive, assuring them that AI will not replace them and urging them to reclaim their rightful place in the art industry.

Keywords

💡AI Art

AI Art refers to artwork created with the assistance of artificial intelligence technologies. In the context of the video, AI Art is discussed critically, with predictions that its popularity and usage will decline due to its superficial appeal and lack of deep engagement with the artistic process. The speaker argues that AI Art offers a quick dopamine hit but lacks the sustained fulfillment that traditional art provides, leading to a temporary user base that will eventually dissipate.

💡Loyalty

Loyalty in the video is discussed in terms of the commitment and dedication users have towards AI Art. The speaker suggests that the users (referred to as 'customers') are not loyal because their interest in AI Art is not driven by genuine passion for art but rather by potential gains such as attention or sales. This lack of deep, intrinsic motivation is seen as a reason why users will eventually abandon AI Art.

💡Dopamine hit

The term 'dopamine hit' refers to the brief surge of pleasure and satisfaction that users experience when engaging with AI Art. The video argues that while AI Art provides these quick hits of gratification, it fails to offer long-term satisfaction, which is crucial for sustained engagement and loyalty. This transient nature of satisfaction is predicted to lead to the decline of AI Art as users seek more fulfilling artistic experiences.

💡Gimmick

A gimmick, as discussed in the video, refers to superficial features or enhancements introduced by AI Art platforms to maintain user interest. The speaker criticizes these features as temporary fixes that fail to address fundamental flaws in AI-generated art, suggesting that they are merely short-term solutions to keep the novelty of AI Art alive without providing substantial artistic value.

💡Sustainability

Sustainability in the context of the video refers to the ability of AI Art to maintain its relevance and utility over time. The speaker argues that AI Art lacks sustainability because it does not foster a deep, lasting interest in art creation. This lack of sustainability is anticipated to lead to a decline in the user base as people move away from what they perceive as a fleeting trend.

💡Copyright

Copyright issues are highlighted as a major concern in the realm of AI Art. The video discusses how AI users attempt to copyright prompts and protect their generated content, yet face hypocrisy because the fundamental nature of AI Art involves using pre-existing data sets. This legal ambiguity and the ongoing debates over intellectual property rights are seen as factors that will complicate the future of AI Art.

💡Democratization

Democratization in the video is used to describe the goal stated by AI developers to make art creation more accessible to everyone. However, the speaker criticizes this notion as misleading and potentially harmful, arguing that it oversimplifies the art process and undervalues human creativity. The perceived misuse of the term by AI proponents is presented as a deceptive tactic that could mislead users about the true nature and impact of AI in the arts.

💡Cannibalism

Cannibalism in this context refers to the self-destructive behavior among AI Art users who fiercely compete over prompts and copyright claims, leading to internal conflicts within the community. This behavior is depicted as undermining the cohesiveness and integrity of the AI Art user base, contributing to its predicted decline.

💡Job market impact

The video discusses the impact of AI Art on the job market, particularly emphasizing the lack of real job opportunities for AI Art users. The speaker argues that skills in prompting AI do not translate to employable skills in the art world, which values deep knowledge and creative ability over the ability to operate AI tools. This mismatch is seen as a barrier to the professional advancement of AI Art enthusiasts.

💡Legal challenges

Legal challenges are mentioned as a significant impending hurdle for AI Art. The video predicts that lawsuits and legal battles over copyright and data usage will set precedents that could restrict AI applications in art. These challenges are expected to bring about tighter regulations and potentially stifle the growth and innovation in AI Art.

Highlights

AI art is predicted to become obsolete in the next two to five years due to a lack of customer loyalty and a focus on quick gratification rather than a sincere interest in art.

AI art users are described as being attracted to the medium for the potential of attention, clout, or sales rather than a love for art itself.

The speaker argues that AI art provides a cheap dopamine hit and lacks the long-term fulfillment that traditional art creation offers to artists.

Advances in AI art are referred to as gimmicks, suggesting they are attempts to fix inherent flaws in AI-generated art.

The necessity for continuous gimmicks is emphasized to maintain user interest, with the prediction that users will leave once these tricks can no longer improve the art.

AI art is seen as a threat to sustainable careers in art, with the question raised about the value of paying someone to do what a machine can do.

The artist argues that AI can only create a specific 'AI art style', which is easily identifiable and becoming commodified.

A growing distaste for AI art from clients and the public is highlighted, suggesting a future favoring of human artists.

The legal sphere is mentioned as a gray area for AI, with the prediction of future lawsuits and limitations on AI's capabilities.

AI developers' claim of democratizing art is criticized as misleading rhetoric, with the belief that real power will reconsolidate with human artists.

The speaker predicts a mass exodus of AI users within the next two years as the initial hype fades and the reality of the art market sets in.

AI users are described as facing the same competition and market challenges as traditional artists, leading to many quitting the field.

The phenomenon of AI users trying to protect and sell their prompts is highlighted, pointing out the inherent hypocrisy in attempting to copyright prompts.

The introduction of anti-AI software is discussed as a potential game-changer that could protect artists' work from being used by AI databases.

The potential legal consequences of opening the 'black box' of AI's training data sets are mentioned, with the possibility of jail time for those involved.

The infinite potential of human artists is contrasted with the limited potential of AI, emphasizing the superior flexibility and creativity of human beings.

The video concludes by reassuring passionate artists that AI is not a long-term threat and provides guidance on how to reclaim jobs in the art field.