55
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2026
55 points (100.0% liked)
movies
4071 readers
365 users here now
A community about movies and cinema.
Related communities:
- !television@piefed.social
- !homevideo@feddit.uk
- !mediareviews@lemmy.world
- !casualconversation@piefed.social
Rules
- Be civil
- No discrimination or prejudice of any kind
- Do not spam
- Stay on topic
- These rules will evolve as this community grows
No posts or comments will be removed without an explanation from mods.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Copy machine output doesn't count as original works.
Movies that retell stories openly are adaptations that give credit to the original source. AI slop does not give attriution to what it is copying.
Movies that are inspired by prior works, which is basically everything, but intentionally do a new take are art because they have intent and meaning even if done poorly. AI slop is just regurgitating stuff.
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, I agree that a copy machine is not sentient. You can’t just decide that an inanimate object is "art" and then work backwards to say that the non-sentient tools that were used to create the work are the real artist.
You can't take a thing, call it art, and then work backwards to calling the thing that made it an artist.
I mean, religion does, but I don't believe them either. Eg; a rainbow.