Im so sick and tired of greedy artists trying to halt AI Art

[Millennial_KiwiGamer]

AI Art is the ultimate equalizer in the sense that it allows anyone to put in a description of what they want and then they get that, or something near enough.

It's fantastic for users. It gets rid of needing to commission every little thing saving $$ for the average bob. Not everyone is made of money to be paying artists tons of money for a picture that might take days to make when you can just roll the generator a few times and get something of equal if not better quality than the artist themselves.

The "compromise" argument is also hilarious. Anyone who pays an artist OR uses a generator is compromising because they're relying on a third party to make their vision.

AI Art Good. Greedy Artist bad. :)

[crunchyfrog]

Messaggio originale di St✩rlight:

Messaggio originale di crunchyfrog:

It CANNOT improve with time - that's the problem.

Sure, the code might be refined but the data it trains on can ONLY get more diluted.

Okay. I don't think it is worth getting upset about.

I'm not upset - I'm advising you of demonstrable fact.

[crunchyfrog]

Messaggio originale di St✩rlight:

Messaggio originale di crunchyfrog:

I'm not upset - I'm advising you of demonstrable fact.

I never denied it was a fact, I denied the fact that it matters in any way.

But it does as that claim is contradictory.

You CANNOT claim it's a fact then claim it objectively doesn't matter when it demonstrably does.

As time goes on you get less human data to train on. You can see clear examples of this with the ChatGPT examples that people have made demonstrating this.

This is known as the feedback problem. It's recognised not just by many but by the people who CREATED AI.

[crunchyfrog]

Messaggio originale di St✩rlight:

Messaggio originale di crunchyfrog:

You CANNOT claim it's a fact then claim it objectively doesn't matter when it demonstrably does

I didn't claim it was a fact, you did. And yes, I can claim it doesn't matter. It is a fact that my car is painted white. It is also a fact that does not matter in any way.

Messaggio originale di crunchyfrog:

As time goes on you get less human data to train on. You can see clear examples of this with the ChatGPT examples that people have made demonstrating this.

This is known as the feedback problem. It's recognised not just by many but by the people who CREATED AI.

And I'm sure you feel very smart for lecturing me about that, but you still haven't explained why I should care or why it matters. Why are you so against letting things happen? Do you hate human discovery? Do you hate experimentation?

You're missing the point.

I don't care whether YOU care. I'm pointing out the OBJECTIVE problem - that it does matter to the world at large. Because it cannot continue as it will always dilute.

You're conflating subjective things with objective.

[crunchyfrog]

Messaggio originale di St✩rlight:

Messaggio originale di crunchyfrog:

You're missing the point.

I don't care whether YOU care. I'm pointing out the OBJECTIVE problem - that it does matter to the world at large. Because it cannot continue as it will always dilute.

You're conflating subjective things with objective.

Then why tf are you even talking to me? Go tell someone who is actually affected by this, if you can find anyone.

You realise this is a user's forum right?

I ALWAYS comment about factual things to offer the best advice to EVERYONE reading and tamp down on anything that's wonky, wrong or outright misinformation.

[miakisfan]

Messaggio originale di Millennial_KiwiGamer:

AI Art is the ultimate equalizer in the sense that it allows anyone to put in a description of what they want and then they get that, or something near enough.

It's fantastic for users. It gets rid of needing to commission every little thing saving $$ for the average bob. Not everyone is made of money to be paying artists tons of money for a picture that might take days to make when you can just roll the generator a few times and get something of equal if not better quality than the artist themselves.

The "compromise" argument is also hilarious. Anyone who pays an artist OR uses a generator is compromising because they're relying on a third party to make their vision.

AI Art Good. Greedy Artist bad. :)

I'm guessing you aren't one of those greedy artists or you'd be singing a different tune because it was hurting your bottom line.

Besides, I don't trust A.I. ... not because of the A.I. itself BUT who is programming it.

All I needed to see was what the Google A.I. was doing to know it is more important who you put in charge of doing it then the A.I. itself.

[smokerob79]

Messaggio originale di Millennial_KiwiGamer:

AI Art is the ultimate equalizer in the sense that it allows anyone to put in a description of what they want and then they get that, or something near enough.

It's fantastic for users. It gets rid of needing to commission every little thing saving $$ for the average bob. Not everyone is made of money to be paying artists tons of money for a picture that might take days to make when you can just roll the generator a few times and get something of equal if not better quality than the artist themselves.

The "compromise" argument is also hilarious. Anyone who pays an artist OR uses a generator is compromising because they're relying on a third party to make their vision.

AI Art Good. Greedy Artist bad. :)

I am sick and tired of the little people telling others they have to take out right theft in the behind like this is not bending the industry over and telling the people that crated it you have no value......

smooth brains dont understand AI will never make anything that is truly new......

[Pocahawtness]

Messaggio originale di Millennial_KiwiGamer:

AI Art is the ultimate equalizer in the sense that it allows anyone to put in a description of what they want and then they get that, or something near enough.

It's fantastic for users. It gets rid of needing to commission every little thing saving $$ for the average bob. Not everyone is made of money to be paying artists tons of money for a picture that might take days to make when you can just roll the generator a few times and get something of equal if not better quality than the artist themselves.

The "compromise" argument is also hilarious. Anyone who pays an artist OR uses a generator is compromising because they're relying on a third party to make their vision.

AI Art Good. Greedy Artist bad. :)

Agreed.

You wouldn't try to pan paint and brushes, so why with AI? It's a tool, not an end product.

[Good Night Owl]

Messaggio originale di smokerob79:

Messaggio originale di Millennial_KiwiGamer:

AI Art is the ultimate equalizer in the sense that it allows anyone to put in a description of what they want and then they get that, or something near enough.

It's fantastic for users. It gets rid of needing to commission every little thing saving $$ for the average bob. Not everyone is made of money to be paying artists tons of money for a picture that might take days to make when you can just roll the generator a few times and get something of equal if not better quality than the artist themselves.

The "compromise" argument is also hilarious. Anyone who pays an artist OR uses a generator is compromising because they're relying on a third party to make their vision.

AI Art Good. Greedy Artist bad. :)

smooth brains dont understand AI will never make anything that is truly new......

I think that's exactly what people are afraid of. A world where you can expect more of the same, and less creative ideas.

[Crystal Sharrd]

Messaggio originale di Millennial_KiwiGamer:

AI Art is the ultimate equalizer in the sense that it allows anyone to put in a description of what they want and then they get that, or something near enough.

It's fantastic for users. It gets rid of needing to commission every little thing saving $$ for the average bob. Not everyone is made of money to be paying artists tons of money for a picture that might take days to make when you can just roll the generator a few times and get something of equal if not better quality than the artist themselves.

The "compromise" argument is also hilarious. Anyone who pays an artist OR uses a generator is compromising because they're relying on a third party to make their vision.

AI Art Good. Greedy Artist bad. :)

The problem with AI art is that the AI companies are illegally pirating copyrighted material to train AI without permission.

[Kiddiec͕̤̱͋̿͑͠at 🃏]

Messaggio originale di soulcaliber345:

Sorry, but I put my foot down when it comes to AI art. Artists have to make a living somehow.

Messaggio originale di Kiddiec͕̤̱͋̿͑͠at 🃏:

You could try stocking shelves then going home to do art.

If you're not capable of stocking shelves, then you could try applying for disability income.

Messaggio originale di Michanicks:

Some people want to have personal life and/or secondary hobby as well, much easier when art is also your job rather than craving few hours a day to draw something or missing even this because you wanted to meet your friends, interracting with your family, playing videogames or go to the gym. Not even talking about it's really hard to draw when you already tired after work.

Your misconceptions are so wild i don't even understand why you talk about artists if you don't even understand them.

Some gamers want to have a social life and/or secondary hobby as well; it's much easier for them when gaming is also their job rather than craving a few hours a day to play some video game or missing even this much because they chose to meet up with friends (but then get stood up because they're a total nerd *lol*), or interact with their family, or play an instrument, or go to the gym (and get laughed at). We're not even talking about how it's really hard to do gaming when you are already tired after work.

Your misconceptions are so wild that I don't even understand why you talk about life responsibilities and time management if you don't even understand them and how they affect others about roughly the same.

Messaggio originale di Spooky Net Fiend:

Art is meant to be appreciated. Is that possible when it comes from AI?

The lack of traditional elements thought to be intrinsic to art and artists has not stopped people from looking in awe and appreciating rock formations, or the elegance of some computer code, or even the scars on their body from injuries, or the pain and suffering itself that they went through (most people don't appreciate that last one but... y'know... there's some people who do - some even pay to receive pain ...just for fun! )

Appreciation comes from the observer's own preferences and qualities, not the actions or creations of others.

When moms clean the house, I think they'd prefer it if if their boys would appreciate that more and check their boots before dragging mud all over the house or instantly making their room a mess again and not cleaning it up after all of her hard work. ...but it doesn't matter how much love, care, and work she puts in -- or that anyone puts into anything.

Appreciation is not a consequence of hard work, it's merely a consequence of getting results with someone who is capable of appreciating those results.

[Michanicks]

Messaggio originale di Kiddiec͕̤̱͋̿͑͠at 🃏:

Some gamers want to have a social life and/or secondary hobby as well; it's much easier for them when gaming is also their job rather than craving a few hours a day to play some video game or missing even this much because they chose to meet up with friends (but then get stood up because they're a total nerd *lol*), or interact with their family, or play an instrument, or go to the gym (and get laughed at). We're not even talking about how it's really hard to do gaming when you are already tired after work.

Your misconceptions are so wild that I don't even understand why you talk about life responsibilities and time management if you don't even understand them and how they affect others about roughly the same.

Playing videogames is.. entertainment, surprisingly, like reading books or watching tv. The main purpose of the art is not entertaining yourself, is to express your emotions and share your expierences. That sound pompous but it's includes even simpler form of artworks, like when teenager makes fanart for his favorite videogame or creates an ninja OC because he was impressed with ninja movie he watched yesterday. Also, art is pretty tiring, you have to make breaks to not burn out, while you could watch movies/play games all day long if you would have time for this.

Considering how badly you misrepresent artists... i am not surprised you advocating for AI art. That's checks out that the only people advocating for AI art is people who know nothing artists. For you making art is equal to playing videogames, and AI is maybe just a wizard machine that spits pretty pictures out.

[Morkonan]

Edit - Sorry, I didn't notice this was a necro'd thread. :(

Messaggio originale di Millennial_KiwiGamer:

AI Art is the ultimate equalizer in the sense that it allows anyone to put in a description of what they want and then they get that, or something near enough.
...
AI Art Good. Greedy Artist bad. :)

Nobody is trying to put a halt to "A.I. Art."


Artists are trying to not be displaced by technology that takes no skill to use, not talent to create, and that uses their previously produced product of their skills and talent to produce what could be termed directly derivative works.

Non-Commercial use of AI Art is fine. Commercial use of AI Art should not be fine.

[Kiddiec͕̤̱͋̿͑͠at 🃏]

It's not a threat.
It's not even a robot A.I. challenging you
(because generative neural networks are neither robots, nor even true A.I.
and also it's not challenging you.)

It's not a phantom.
But it's in your face, and it's here to see it through.

Messaggio originale di crunchyfrog:

... Why shouldn't I?

Because of the obvious point that AI creations kill real art....

I'm pretty sure that the burning down of libraries and labeling of art as "degenerate art" has done that far better than anyone else ever could.
Hurricanes and floods that reach unprotected studios and art storage facilities (see: the artist's basement) do it even better than war and fascist armies can.

And yet, even with generative neural networks in existence and so common that even barbers are talking about them, we're still appreciating van Gogh's Starry Night, and presumably it's still in the museum. I haven't heard of any major stories of A.I. confiscating or destroying any notable or remarkable artworks.

And also, it is in existence and produces results, which further results in people saying - writing, rather - stuff like you did. It's not just an idea.
Ain't it a shame, that it's not a figment of ...your imagination.
It's just as real as, just as disruptive, as you so know you'll find.

Right before your eyes, artwork multiplies.
Not eligible for copyright.
It's here.

You might as well go try'n stop time.

Messaggio originale di crunchyfrog:

...
Ever heard of the "feedback" problem with AI? YOu should perhaps look into it. All AI is trained on existing human work. What happens when say 10% of art out there in a few months time is AI? Now that AI is training on 90% human and 10% AI.
...

That's not how the technology works, though.
(Particularly the part where you imply that the feedback loop is guaranteed to happen because generative neural networks will supposedly be continuously trained on a scraped internet, rather than through more refined methods that are less indiscriminate.)

In the future new models will have to use curated sets of training data which are manually selected or curated,
because data scraping to produce models will indeed become ineffective but it's not some autonomous giant that is perpetually scraping the internet of data, therefore, outside of preliminary tests that have proven that the generative A.I. feedback loop is a problem, it just won't happen
because the people who train these systems and are also capable of doing data-scraping on the entire internet, will know by then that data-scraping loses effectiveness over time in a post-emergence of publicly available generative A.I. world.

Can't hold on or life won't change.

[Kiddiec͕̤̱͋̿͑͠at 🃏]

Messaggio originale di Michanicks:

... Also, art is pretty tiring, you have to make breaks to not burn out, ...

Again : as is the case with anything that people do in life, whether they want to do it or not.
But furthermore, your entire position rests on the premise that artists are CHOOSING to make this their career, and then complaining about what making a career out of it actually entails.

Messaggio originale di Michanicks:

Messaggio originale di Kiddiec͕̤̱͋̿͑͠at 🃏:

...

Playing videogames is.. entertainment, surprisingly, like reading books or watching tv. The main purpose of the art is not entertaining yourself, ...

Twitch streamers and people who call YouTube their carreer and who focus on video game critiques, playthrough, speedrunning, "Let's Plays", etc. and who also talk about how they're losing their livelihood if their channel gets shut down -- would disagree with your implication that it's "JUST" entertainment.

Messaggio originale di Michanicks:

... is to express your emotions and share your expierences. ...

Weird how ineffective it is at that then, given that an art piece inspires 20 different emotions in 18 different people.

Also, advertisement are what is known as "Commercial Artwork" -- that's literally the name of the class in school where they teach you how to make better advertisements. I sincerely doubt that the intent of most commercials is to convey emotions, especially since they're so good at being annoying.

(I took that class by the way. I am an artist.)

Messaggio originale di Michanicks:

... Considering how badly you misrepresent artists... ... That's checks out that the only people advocating for AI art is people who know nothing artists. ...

Thank you for reminding me that you don't actually read what is written.

Messaggio originale di Michanicks:

... For you making art is equal to playing videogames, and AI is maybe just a wizard machine that spits pretty pictures out.

That's quite a lot of prejudicial assumptions that you're making there.
The readers might notice that I haven't made personal claims about you, like you have of me, other than to point out that your assumptions of me are prejudicial and untrue, and also that you either didn't read what I wrote OR are intentionally misrepresenting my statements about the reality of struggles that people go through to manage their time and do the things that they want in life. Reminder : I am an artist - you think I haven't had to go through all of those struggles too? You're wrong.

Messaggio originale di Michanicks:

... and AI is maybe just a wizard machine that spits pretty pictures out.

It's not. Here's just a small fraction of the educational videos that I've compiled in my notes as to how this technology works :
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLZHQObOWTQDNU6R1_67000Dx_ZCJB-3pi
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjZofJX0v4M
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9OHn5ZF4Uo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVcsDDABEkM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xm7BwEsdVbQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMRi6pNAoag
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5nElEbbnfU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qv6UVOQ0F44
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KRb_qV9P4g
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRSg6gjOOWA

[🍋 Lemonfed 🍋]

I remember seeing a video of noodle where he was with someone else and was criticizing A.I but I can't remember what was the video name or who was the other person. (I'm not talking about the frame interpolation video , it's something enterely different with a collab)