Artificial Intelligence has already caused changes in the way we conduct our lives. Will it change the way we make and perceive art? It has been predicted, for example, that AI will replace many jobs in the film industry. AI has been used in many types of writing and "artwork" already: legal and business documents, advertising, students' assignments … What is your definition of art? Can something created by AI be called art? How would AI affect the creation and appreciation of the arts, especially visual and verbal arts? Would anyone want to explore this topic, philosophically and prophetically?
Can't wait to write about this. I have thoughts. – Sunni Ago7 months ago
The thing about AI art, from my perspective, is that a lot of it is very boilerplate. An AI program can write a story or draw a picture if given a prompt, but there will always be something about it that marks it as computer-generated. I know that, in my experience, if I'm reading an essay that was written partly using AI, I can immediately tell where the AI sections begin and end. This is why I'm skeptical of AI's ability to ever truly replace human creativity. The more rote and repetitive stuff, on the other hand, I can see AI taking over (which I know from experience has many of my programmer friends worried). – Debs5 months ago
As soon as technology introduced the idea, movies have been wrestling with what to do with artificial intelligence. Once they are thinking on their own, do they have rights as a sentient being? This is seen very clearly with Data in the Star Trek: The Next Generation Series. It is also seen in animated films such as Astro Boy when the audience comes to see the robot more as a real child. The list goes on: AI, even Terminator 2 as the audience mourns the first Terminator's demise, iRobot, Dark Matter (a Netflix series) etc. Since this is a very real part of our future, the varying views on this would be interesting to consider.
I think this topic could dip into real life exams such as with AI and even the creation of Sophia -- a real life AI who was even granted Saudian Arabian citizenship – Pamela Maria6 years ago
Wow--I didn't even know about that! I find that most responses, at least in the film industry, have been fearful about this topic. There's so much to discuss here! – tclaytor6 years ago
An additional suggestion. Look in to Ray Kurzweil and his Frankenstein like 'Transhumanist' agenda. It may not be a case of 'Once they are thinking on their own', but once we have been forcibly fused with AI (as Kurzweil wants), will we still be sentient humans in our own right? Now, where's my sabot? – Amyus6 years ago
The films Blade Runner and Blade Runner 2049, are focused on the concept of what it means to alive or "human". It is the one of core theme of both films. – Sean Gadus6 years ago
What do our representations of AI say about gender and sexuality? Recent films, like Her and Ex Machina, portray specifically female AI. Her presents Samantha as a questing mind with emotional needs similar to those of humans. Samantha has true consciousness in her ability to love Theo. Yet, because she is non-corporeal, she is not quite human. She is "post-lingual" as she says and not limited by space and time as humans are. She is a non-human person. Ex Machina's Ava seems to pass the Turing Test when she proves herself capable of manipulation, deceit, and long-term planning. Unlike Theo, who desires a meaningful relationship with Samantha, Nathan uses Ava's predecessors as sex-objects. Why do these films focus on female AI interacting with men?
Interesting to compare these two films together since they present such distinctly different takes on the 'fem-bot' trope, with 'Her' being an exploration of how genuine feelings can be derived from such a seemingly 'mechanical' relationship to the A.I., whereas 'Ex Machina' focuses conversely on how such feelings can be 'manufactured' into this. – CalvinLaw9 years ago
I think it's a great idea to compare the treatment of AI in these two films. Both are fantastic, in different ways. For research on the topic, I would say it would be wise to keep a few things in mind. As to why are they female?, where both written and directed by men? Probably, because most are in the industry. Perhaps its easier for a male writer to come from that perspective. Maybe there is a correlation between the way women are viewed in media that makes them easier to be seen as a robot? I think there are a few different ways you can take this, and it's going to require a lot of research. Good luck! – kaliveach9 years ago
I think, especially when exploring what it means to be sentient or have agency, discussing how robots that are coded female (assigning genders to robots is intriguing in itself) are treated would be fascinating. To go off what kaliveach said, could making the main female presence robotic dehumanize women, especially if the robot's programming is dependent on a male character's plans and instructions? There are a lot of approaches to this topic in terms of gender and sexuality. – emilydeibler9 years ago
To answer kaliveach's question, yes, both films were written/directed by men (Spike Jonze in the case of Her and Alex Garland in the case of Ex Machina). Ex Machina explicitly focuses on the problems of male geniuses creating "female" robots, whereas Her focuses more on the (in)compatibility between human and AI. – JLaurenceCohen9 years ago
Blade Runner should definitely get a mention, at least. Deckard has a similar sexual attraction to the replicant Rachael in the film as well as that love/rape scene in between the two. The replicants do seem to have some sort of sense of morality in the film and they are capable of emotion (anger, fear, love(?)).
Also, there's the Voight-Kampf test which is fairly similar to the Turing test but deals with provoking emotion. – Jamie White9 years ago
A topic of great potential: the vastly differing portrayals of AI in both films present a wealth of possible approaches. Looking forward to reading this! – Matchbox9 years ago
