The AI art and music are incredible. Create fun images in seconds. As you like, below is a photorealistic image I created with Adam Smith and David Hume’s Chatgupt.
Or, cartoon image of my summer bowling league team, Space Colonel:
Both of these had zero financial costs. I gtp what I wanted, it generated them and now I can share them.
Among artists (i.e. Bose, who creates art for art, and those who produce art professionally, like graphic designers), AI is fiercely debate. Professional artists understand that AI is afraid of doing their job. Use “economic thinking” to analyze those fears and see what’s most likely.
Start from the beginning with the basic, unadulterated elements of economic thinking. That demand curve is tilted downwards. In other words, as prices rise, certain amounts of demand decrease (and vice versa).
AI means that relativley is cheaper for users (as low as $0), which means people now demand original art for use of lower sales. The reason why the demand curve is downward is the law that reduces marginal utility. As you consume better consumption, the less satisfaction you get from each unit consumed. When acting as a consumer, people first move to try to satisfy the highest use of the limit and lower the use of the edge. This is why high subject prices tend to be used for high marginal value tasks, as opposed to Loww’s marginal value tasks.
Therefore, as the prices of art drop due to AI, more art is being consumed due to low frontier use. Use like: Create cartoon images of a bowling team or imagine David Hume as a bad friend in skating cheesy skating. You are using that you are not excluded from work. I don’t pay the artist to the committee to draw an image of a joke in my post.
But what about the use of Heiger Margin’s art? At a low price, can AI replace ART, which previously supplied the use of Thue, generating more consumer surplus (at the expense of producer surplus)? It certainly happens to a degree. Certainly, if the market is perfectly competitive (i.e., AI art is the perfect alternative to professional art), we should expect a perfect alternative to AI art for human-produced art.
However, for high-rise art, the goals are different. Rather than making cartoon images as a joke among friends, submit a production commercial product, customized portraits, or something else that others value. AI can replicate the sum of these tasks, but not all. AI is not intelligent because of all its wonders. It’s a computer program. When dealing with AI, there is no “heart-to-heart encounter” with artists. AI is not particularly good at interpreting human communication. What’s surprisingly difficult is how AI art will make you do what you want and how your interpreter will prompt you (AI!). Using human artists makes communication very easy.
Consenkory, I hope the market will diverge. One branch is low frontier art. It thrives, but it does not cost a job. The Oher branch is a high-rise art where humans are likely to still be in the domain. Where that fork occurs is where work is lost. Prime Minister type[1] Artists will probably lose their jobs to AI. They cannot say how they represent them. However, I do not expect the existence of a crisis where AI will consider it for the creation of art and the arts industry.
– –
[1] Reminder: I use “limits” here in the economic sense. These are artists operating just above the fork and just above the edge. “Limits” do not mean that they are low talent. Rather, for Whaterver reasons, the work they produce is different from what AI can produce from the buyer’s point of view.
