 |
I rarely if ever use the illustrations in the thumbnail for the article. But first of all, the use of generative ai for illustrating science discoveries and inventions has been a big game changer. Second of all this idea needs an image, and this image seems to be perfectly explaining what's going on. It's a neuromorphic substrate for a neuromorphic computer that grows all by itself, in other words, "Artist's rendering of a biocomputing device that combines biological neurons with advanced electronics into a network that can be programmed to recognize patterns" --Kate Zvorykina w Ella Maru Studio, Inc for Princeton, 2026
Source:
New 3D device harnesses living brain cells for computing
Apr 2026, phys.org
But here's the real reason for this post.
 |
| AI Art - Shitty image generated by the editorial team using AI for illustrative purposes - 2026 |
Watching this seismic shift in visualization is a crazy experience - these kinds of images, the thumbnail here, are exactly the kind of thing I pushed my art students to go past - it's always a person or a person's head, and cramming other more abstract objects etc into it or near it. It's the most basic form of symbolic imagery creation, and it's fucking boring guys. It doesn't matter if it's done with good technical accuracy, it's still boring. Will we all learn to grow past this tendency together or will there be a divide between people who can think more outside the box vs everyone else (sounds like the role the artist has had forever, no different just because ai is so "revolutionary").
Note that my google email inbox services ask me if I want to use their artificial intelligence email summary feature to summarize this email, but only this email, the one containing this article that I sent to myself, despite my having hundreds of similar ones in the same inbox. But I digress; because I don't care about the article, just the picture.
Source:
Can AI ascertain our personality traits from our ChatGPT history?
May 2026, phys.org
No comments:
Post a Comment