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. :)

[kingjames488]

Michanicks の投稿を引用：

kingjames488 の投稿を引用：

now that you mention it you're right, your comment had nothing to do with art.

Yes. Because you mentioned AI that has to be good to copy something... and i don't really see the point there otherwise.

where did I say that?

[apathy]

Watching them run to bsky all because they don't like Musk is never not funny and infantile.

[Michanicks]

kingjames488 の投稿を引用：

if an AI can't be asked to generate a thing in a known style it wouldn't be a very good AI would it now?

like you ask an AI "generate a poem in shakespearean style" and it spits out sesame street it's not really going to be useful is it?

[kingjames488]

Michanicks の投稿を引用：

kingjames488 の投稿を引用：

if an AI can't be asked to generate a thing in a known style it wouldn't be a very good AI would it now?

like you ask an AI "generate a poem in shakespearean style" and it spits out sesame street it's not really going to be useful is it?

generating something in a known style isn't the same as copying an artists work...

which brings us back to the corporatization of "art" and how one can lay claim to a "style"?

if history worked like that no one would be allowed to use pigments on a medium as that's "caveman style".

[Michanicks]

kingjames488 の投稿を引用：

Michanicks の投稿を引用：

generating something in a known style isn't the same as copying an artists work...

which brings us back to the corporatization of "art" and how one can lay claim to a "style"?

if history worked like that no one would be allowed to use pigments on a medium as that's "caveman style".

Because we all know how exactly did AI "learned" this style. That's the problem. Artists often go for someone else style and their combination for thousands years, it's not like there is any truly serious problem with it. Humans don't learn styles by just looking at million pictures and learning the statistic between their patterns and applied keywords.

[Not Big Surprise]

kingjames488 の投稿を引用：

Not Big Surprise の投稿を引用：

if a company uses generative ai for animation or marketing, then they're gaining revenue from the work of others, without giving credit or putting any effort into transforming it

if they didn't transform it enough it wouldn't be considered an original work... regardless of the tools used.

same could be said for re-using clipart... was some hot water about that semi-recently with war thunder where they apparently re-used some image of a space shuttle exploding in their promotions for missiles :P

see, that's the thing
it isn't

all ai "artists" do is write a sentence or two and let the computer do everything, off of algorithms trained on the art of other people, used without their permission
essentially, reaping the benefits of someone else's work without putting effort into it

[kingjames488]

Michanicks の投稿を引用：

kingjames488 の投稿を引用：

generating something in a known style isn't the same as copying an artists work...

which brings us back to the corporatization of "art" and how one can lay claim to a "style"?

if history worked like that no one would be allowed to use pigments on a medium as that's "caveman style".

Because we all know how exactly did AI "learned" this style. That's the problem. Artists often go for someone else style and their combination for thousands years, it's not like there is any truly serious problem with it. Humans don't learn styles by just looking at million pictures and learning the statistic between their patterns and applied keywords.

ya, no... most humans "learn art" by specifically imitating someone else's style... at least historically...

how else would you have made money as an artist in the 1600s other than training a bunch of other people to paint in your style so they can replicate your art to sell?

[kingjames488]

Not Big Surprise の投稿を引用：

kingjames488 の投稿を引用：

if they didn't transform it enough it wouldn't be considered an original work... regardless of the tools used.

same could be said for re-using clipart... was some hot water about that semi-recently with war thunder where they apparently re-used some image of a space shuttle exploding in their promotions for missiles :P

see, that's the thing
it isn't

all ai "artists" do is write a sentence or two and let the computer do everything, off of algorithms trained on the art of other people, used without their permission
essentially, reaping the benefits of someone else's work without putting effort into it

they gave their "permission" when their art was shared publicly.

again, the AI is not scraping artists PCs for their personal artwork(except maybe in the casde of photoshop where it was agreed to)... it's all publicly available online.

[Michanicks]

kingjames488 の投稿を引用：

Michanicks の投稿を引用：

Because we all know how exactly did AI "learned" this style. That's the problem. Artists often go for someone else style and their combination for thousands years, it's not like there is any truly serious problem with it. Humans don't learn styles by just looking at million pictures and learning the statistic between their patterns and applied keywords.

ya, no... most humans "learn art" by specifically imitating someone else's style... at least historically...

how else would you have made money as an artist in the 1600s other than training a bunch of other people to paint in your style so they can replicate your art to sell?

You are really paying a lot of attention to the style for some reason. It's far from the most important things in drawing. And in "artists vs AI" discussion. And i even suspect you may confuse learning basic fundamentals, doing replicas and doing master studies with "copying someone else style" as well.

[Michanicks]

kingjames488 の投稿を引用：

Not Big Surprise の投稿を引用：

see, that's the thing
it isn't

all ai "artists" do is write a sentence or two and let the computer do everything, off of algorithms trained on the art of other people, used without their permission
essentially, reaping the benefits of someone else's work without putting effort into it

they gave their "permission" when their art was shared publicly.

again, the AI is not scraping artists PCs for their personal artwork(except maybe in the casde of photoshop where it was agreed to)... it's all publicly available online.

You can justify piracy with these words.

[kingjames488]

Michanicks の投稿を引用：

kingjames488 の投稿を引用：

they gave their "permission" when their art was shared publicly.

again, the AI is not scraping artists PCs for their personal artwork(except maybe in the casde of photoshop where it was agreed to)... it's all publicly available online.

You can justify piracy with these words.

well if they can call recording a publicly broadcasted work "piracy", I guess you can.

tho I'd say there's a difference between recording something made available to you and distributing said recording...

which brings another question... do you differentiate people using AI to generate content for their own use v.s. companies using it for profit?

because if that's your point maybe? but it's the same issue as anything with companies... people have to choose not to buy the product... and if it's a better value people are probably going to go for that.

[Michanicks]

kingjames488 の投稿を引用：

Michanicks の投稿を引用：

You can justify piracy with these words.

well if they can call recording a publicly broadcasted work "piracy", I guess you can.

tho I'd say there's a difference between recording something made available to you and distributing said recording...

which brings another question... do you differentiate people using AI to generate content for their own use v.s. companies using it for profit?

because if that's your point maybe? but it's the same issue as anything with companies... people have to choose not to buy the product... and if it's a better value people are probably going to go for that.

I don't really care about this, companies never fail at being bad by default, i already listed the main problems that AI causes to me earlier. AI in general, not specific things like comparing what is ethically right, what is legally right etc.

[ZOMBIECRUNCH]

I have the ability to draw the human form. I personally don't want to commission someone's work. Because I do not feel they can bring to life what I am envisioning.

[kingjames488]

ZOMBIECRUNCH の投稿を引用：

I have the ability to draw the human form. I personally don't want to commission someone's work. Because I do not feel they can bring to life what I am envisioning.

lies. draw me hands! >:D

[Not Big Surprise]

kingjames488 の投稿を引用：

Not Big Surprise の投稿を引用：

see, that's the thing
it isn't

all ai "artists" do is write a sentence or two and let the computer do everything, off of algorithms trained on the art of other people, used without their permission
essentially, reaping the benefits of someone else's work without putting effort into it

they gave their "permission" when their art was shared publicly.

again, the AI is not scraping artists PCs for their personal artwork(except maybe in the casde of photoshop where it was agreed to)... it's all publicly available online.

no they didn't lmao