World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
That the exact same piece of art will have a wildly different value depending on who's seen to have made it, is true. And that goes for different humans, as well as for human vs. AI. Usually artists find that part undesirable, though. It's supposed to be a skill they personally have and not just about connections and clout.
You're probably right that people aren't going to stop wanting Banksy, even if AI can do an equally good Banksy.
BTW, photography did kill painting, as it was. Painting portraits was like a steady trades job before - people wanted to be remembered and seen by future generations, and with no cameras that was the only way. Afterwards, it just becomes a form of fine art. A lot of the anger now is because something similar is happening to, like, graphic designers.
who's seen to have made it does matter but is not the important part, the important point is the causal chain by which the art is manifested into the final product matters. people assign much lower value to artwork that has been traced vs original pieces for instance.
photography did not kill the aesthetic value of paintings. people have and still appreciate good paintings even with the rise of photography. of course photography has changed painting stylistically, but has not killed its aesthetic value. the question of how much people value art aesthetically is related but separate from economic considerations. don't get the concepts mixed up. as i argued in the article, it follows from the statement that art is not a state function to the case that it is merely that our tools to make art evolve, but good art is always hard to make and intrinsically valuable regardless of what tools are available, even if those tools are a camera or a neural net.
To be a bit glib, it's always about money. And ego, in the case of the skill involved. People here aren't angry and insulting me because I'm technically wrong about the philosophy of aesthetics.
I'm just someone on the internet, and you should talk to other artists. If I'm guessing correctly, the response won't be "you're right, as long as the causal chain is intact it's fine".
pretty much no artists, or consumers of artistic works, would say their art is aesthetically more valuable simply because it costs more due to whatever the current economic situation is. of course there may be some correlation though, but think about whether it is causative, or perhaps the other way around (maybe art that has more aesthetic value entails they on average fetch higher prices based on however much people value their spare dollars in the current economy...).
also, artists actually aren't the best people to ask about the philosophy of aesthetics, philosophers are. mostly because artists spend their time making art whereas philosophers spend their time actually thinking deeply about these things. (though asking an artist might be better than the average consumer, because we artists are more attuned to the relationship between the creation process and our works)