Space Opera Theatre.

When the economist Herbert Simon, the Nobel Prize winner in 1960, expressed his fears about technical development and the tyranny of robots, and their impact on human lives, he did not expect, know, or roam in his imagination that this tyranny might one day reach thought, creativity, and art, and that there would come a day when an application would compete with it. The smartest international artists, and it did not stop at that, but rather reached a prize in a competition in which other artists participate.

The story begins with a story published in the New York Times about a painting drawn by a smart application winning the first prize in a drawing competition organized by the Colorado Museum. . But it seems that those in charge of the award never expected the boom reached by computer-designed works, and they also did not expect that it would come to a work that won the first prize, and the most surprising thing is that some of those in charge of the award did not know that a theater painting The space opera Théâtre D “opéra Spatial, the winning painting of the first prize by computer design, although it is participating in the digital art department, but the American Jason Allen, the owner of the painting, printed it on the canvas by a digital printer, appended with his signature, which made it look like a painted painting, Jason Allen is also the inventor of the digital app Midjourney, an app that can read what’s going on in a person’s mind and turn it into images, as Allen himself described.

And after that award caused a sensation, the Colorado Museum announced that the MedJourney application was not the only application that participated in the competition, but that there are a large number of similar smart applications. What I think is that this type of application puts people in unfair competition, just as if whoever participates in this competition is competing with all the artists of the world such as Leonardo da Vinci, Rembrandt, Vermeer, Van Gogh, Munch, Pablo Picasso, Henry Matisse and others. Store the works, ideas, and creations of all these artists within the memory of the application, even if Jason Allen denied that, and when the application begins to read what is going on in the human imagination, the application summons ideas from the imaginations of the artists of the world that are already in his memory, to create from them a new composition that is compatible with those fantasies, In the end, he came up with a new painting, technically and practically made by Jason Allen, but actually and implicitly it is a painting bearing the signature of the world’s artists after the application succeeded in quoting their fantasies and ideas, just as if the application succeeded in impersonating the brains of these artists, which is a systematic robbery of the works of these Artists we do not know who they are, and on the other hand, it is deceiving the audience of this virtual artist, and unfair to all artists participating in the competition.

The amazing thing about this case is that the New York Times decided to delve into this issue, after a wave of angry reactions from the participants in the Colorado Museum competition, and met with Jason Allen, who confirmed that the application surprised him with that result, stressing that the application had succeeded in developing itself. ! He texted: “I sensed there was something devilish about it!” Several years ago, I was reading studies and research on future jobs, which were limited to jobs that relied heavily on thought, creativity, and innovation, given that robots would only dominate other jobs that might depend on manufacturing, transportation, and the like, and there were trends promoting For the idea that creativity is a qualitative advantage that humans monopolize, and no matter how much science reaches, it will not be able to compete with humans in that area, so how can a robot write an article? Or draw a picture?! And other works that depend on thought and creativity.

But it seems that the French poet Charles Baudelaire was more forward-looking when, in the mid-1820s, he predicted the killing of art when he described the invention of photography as “the deadly enemy of art”. Two centuries ago, who repeats his saying, an expression of what is happening to art now. One of the protesters commented on Allen winning the award in a tweet, saying, “A scene of the end of art is happening before our eyes.” But it seems that these protesters are not following what is happening in the world around them. This is not the first incident that supports the assassination of real art in favor of artificial intelligence. In 2018, a portrait of a man wearing a black shirt and white collar was sold, with the name Edmond de Bellamy or the Bellamy family, which means the family of a good friend in French.

The painting, designed by artificial intelligence, was sold at Christie’s auction in New York for $432,000. If we are talking about intellectual property rights, then artificial intelligence assassinates those rights when it is employed in creative fields, simply because it will depend in its outputs on the creations and innovations of others, which will be stored in the memory of those applications with their different specializations and fields, and their use. According to the target of the outputs, this is clear assassination and theft of intellectual property, but it is not declared, and we cannot say, for example, that this painting is derived from the works of Picasso, Da Vinci, Gogh, and others, because it is actually a mixture of their ideas, inspirations, and creations all, as if they made a new human brain It houses all of their brains.

A final word said by Fernando Pessoa, the Portuguese poet and writer: Why is art so beautiful? Because there is no purpose behind it, and why is life so ugly? Because it is full of goals, purposes and objectives.

[email protected]