|
I do not particularly care about AI generated art from a perspective of the ineffable quality of the human soul or whatever, I think normalizing the encroachment of something built on the backs of scraped, uncompensated labor to be repackaged and value-extracted (remind me again, does or does not Midjourney charge subscriptions?) in a forum full of people who make art, games, etc, in particular in a thread full of assholes with repeated examples of them being assholes (which really makes this attempted narrative of "pro AI people just want to have a calm rational debate while anti-AI people are all dumb and crazy" incredibly disingenuous) is something that makes the forum a worse, shittier place. I don't think the thread the currently exists deserves anything but to be locked. If someone wants to start a 100% open source/creative commons derived AI thread then I'm fine with that, as I have stated elsewhere when this subject has come up. If people want to demonstrate that AI art generation can be used ethically then there you go.
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 00:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 15:38 |
|
|
PurpleXVI posted:My bad, I misread your intentions. What about somebody who used the image as inspiration? I don't use AI art or commission art for character creation. When I make a character I always use dice to roll at least some of them and then build off that, I can't start from a blank slate. Alot of people's creativity needs an inspiration to bounce off of and an AI image can be that. A person posting that image would just be posting their inspiration. It's hard for me to place a line at what can foster inspiration and something that sparks inspiration has value. I was mainly just curious because I think the modding shouldn't focus on the quality of the art or writing(I agree its not as good). If it is generic and bad, but theres a group of people who like to post it then it should just be put in a thread for it. A lot of objection is on the ethics of data scrapping, and if it can be shown that people are using ethical generators, then that wouldn't be an issue.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 00:19
|
|
|
gurragadon posted:What about somebody who used the image as inspiration? I don't use AI art or commission art for character creation. When I make a character I always use dice to roll at least some of them and then build off that, I can't start from a blank slate. Alot of people's creativity needs an inspiration to bounce off of and an AI image can be that. A person posting that image would just be posting their inspiration. It's hard for me to place a line at what can foster inspiration and something that sparks inspiration has value. Once again I don't really see where the AI image or posting the AI image is a necessary part of it. The AI-generated thing will never be more than part of the way there, so I'd have a real hard time imagining you couldn't also find some other reference that was part of the way there. And even if it somehow ended up being necessary, then just post the finished result and don't tell us about the AI part. Pretend it never happened. You'll be happier for that and we'll be happier for that. Also the "if" of "ethical generators" is doing a lot of heavy lifting in that argument.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 00:23
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:I do not particularly care about AI generated art from a perspective of the ineffable quality of the human soul or whatever, I think normalizing the encroachment of something built on the backs of scraped, uncompensated labor to be repackaged and value-extracted (remind me again, does or does not Midjourney charge subscriptions?) in a forum full of people who make art, games, etc, in particular in a thread full of assholes with repeated examples of them being assholes (which really makes this attempted narrative of "pro AI people just want to have a calm rational debate while anti-AI people are all dumb and crazy" incredibly disingenuous) is something that makes the forum a worse, shittier place. I don't think the thread the currently exists deserves anything but to be locked. The bolded is an excellent point and in fact gives me a solution to the entire problem: given the recent-ish rules and moderation changes in D&D (the forum, not the game) with the specific goal of curating exactly this kind of posting, all the people who want to post about AI should go there instead.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 00:25
|
|
|
PurpleXVI posted:Once again I don't really see where the AI image or posting the AI image is a necessary part of it. The AI-generated thing will never be more than part of the way there, so I'd have a real hard time imagining you couldn't also find some other reference that was part of the way there. And even if it somehow ended up being necessary, then just post the finished result and don't tell us about the AI part. Pretend it never happened. You'll be happier for that and we'll be happier for that. I can't tell somebody what their inspiration is. They could see a picture on Tumblr, they could see it on a walk, or they could see it typing random stuff into Adobe Firefly. I guess if you just want to see finished products that's fair, but I think a lot of threads are enhanced when people show their work and process. Lets pretend the the "if" did all the lifting, do you no longer object to a thread about AI art and traditional gaming? I don't know if it could be verified or anything, I think this stuff is here to stay though and even banning it wont ban it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 00:29
|
|
|
Fajita Queen posted:The bolded is an excellent point and in fact gives me a solution to the entire problem: given the recent-ish rules and moderation changes in D&D (the forum, not the game) with the specific goal of curating exactly this kind of posting, all the people who want to post about AI should go there instead. Its not an excellent point because the thread is not, in fact, full of people being assholes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 00:32
|
|
|
reignonyourparade posted:Its not an excellent point because the thread is not, in fact, full of people being assholes. I more meant the pretending to be the calm argumenters while everyone else is mad at them bit, but several of the pro-AI people in this thread have absolutely been assholes about theft and labor issues.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 00:33
|
|
|
reignonyourparade posted:Its not an excellent point because the thread is not, in fact, full of people being assholes. Besides all the examples Nuns posted earlier, you can just take a look at the last page or two of the AI thread and find everything from "anti-AI people are all just hostile neckbeards having a moral panic" to "wanting to ban AI art is equivalent to persecuting minorities."
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 00:34
|
|
|
I think attempting to stop AI art discussion entirely is not going to happen, but as long as people continue to (correctly) yell at AI folks as thieves and such and keep them contained in their own threads, it's about as good as is going to get.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 00:36
|
|
|
Jack Van Burace posted:I think attempting to stop AI art discussion entirely is not going to happen, but as long as people continue to (correctly) yell at AI folks as thieves and such and keep them contained in their own threads, it's about as good as is going to get. Does that mean "and the AI folks who post in other places will get probes while the people yelling at them will not", or "those threads become unreadable garbage and the people yelling get probed", because the latter is, to my mind, what all this discussion is aiming to prevent.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 00:41
|
|
|
gurragadon posted:I can't tell somebody what their inspiration is. They could see a picture on Tumblr, they could see it on a walk, or they could see it typing random stuff into Adobe Firefly. I guess if you just want to see finished products that's fair, but I think a lot of threads are enhanced when people show their work and process. What if instead of pretending we're in a fantastical future we instead pretend we're in the current year of the real world and that if someone's "inspiration" is AI mulch, then I don't want to see it and will think less of them for posting it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 00:46
|
|
|
Kyrosiris posted:Honestly, I disagree. It's coming from a place of pushback against normalization, in the same broad strokes vibes as the WGA/SAG strikes. Yeah, though Firefly tags all its pics with metadata specific to Firefly, if you want it to. Midjourney should be straight up banned though. Holy poo poo is that company completely loving unethical and straight up Do Not Give A poo poo. https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/news/midjourney-founder-basically-admits-to-copyright-breaching-and-artists-are-angry Fuckhead McGee posted:"It’s [the dataset] just a big scrape of the Internet. We use the open data sets that are published and train across those. I’d say that’s something that 100% of people do. We weren’t picky". Shares holz in the interview with Forbes. In terms of the crypto discussion, Holz is a cryptobro. Fuzz fucked around with this message at 01:01 on Jun 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 00:57
|
|
|
PurpleXVI posted:What if instead of pretending we're in a fantastical future we instead pretend we're in the current year of the real world and that if someone's "inspiration" is AI mulch, then I don't want to see it and will think less of them for posting it. Because you want to ban AI art because it sucks which is bad reason to ban posting something and not just limiting it to its own thread. This whole website isn't just what you want to see. You not providing feedback or looking at an AI thread is perfectly ok. An adobe firefly thread could exist in the present, not the fantastical future. I just signed up for the beta while I was typing this post.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 00:58
|
|
|
Doctor Zero posted:I think the big disconnect here is a difference in understanding of the technology, which leads to disagreement over the terms like 'stealing', and 'ethical.' I feel like people on both sides of the argument have a solid understanding of the meaning of those words, but apply them differently. How the technology is trained is important to understand in any case because even if everyone in the forums understood it well, there are still a ton of inaccurate articles out in the world. I do appreciate you walking through how someone would settle the issue, or at least come to a different conclusion about it. I do want to highlight that personally, I don't think "stealing" in the literal sense is always deeply wrong or avoidable. Theft is a pretty difficult issue to talk about, I get that, and I know we're trying to step away from really broad ethical issues, but it comes up in a lot of other cases about when, if ever, stealing is wrong or justified or harmless. I'll just make a note that even if personally assign the way a lot of the commonly-used AIs are trained to be theft through appropriation, I don't think that makes people using it privately "thieving jackals" I'm better than or something because I'm not. Doctor Zero posted:And therein lies the rub, and it will probably not be settled in our lifetimes, if ever. Everyone draws the line in a different place. There is no objective truth in these questions, and I wish people on both sides of the argument would understand that. That's been where I'm sitting at, too, honestly. Some of the legal messes might be cleaned up with AI art in time, but I'm sure a few of the precedents set will favor whoever has the capital to pay for the ruling they benefit from 
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 01:03
|
|
and doesn't really have anything to do with how the tech works.
|
PurpleXVI posted:What if instead of pretending we're in a fantastical future we instead pretend we're in the current year of the real world and that if someone's "inspiration" is AI mulch, then I don't want to see it and will think less of them for posting it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 02:04
|
|
|
The threads I read in TG have had a few posts with excerpts from ChatGPT in them. I'm not really interested in what a chatbot thinks would make for an interesting encounter or character backstory or whatever, that's really not what I'm here for. So I just scroll down and move on with my life. If it was taking over threads maybe it'd be a problem, but it isn't. It's like, a few posts, then the conversation moves on, unless it just has to be another round of the same argument for pages and pages. I'd personally prefer we not indulge yet another moral panic on this forum.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 03:00
|
|
|
I don't really see this as fundamentally different from people wanting to talk about D&D in the forum that's made for talking about tabletop games. Wizards of the Coast as a company has a history of some pretty questionable practices, that doesn't mean the solution is banning D&D from Trad Games. Repeatedly barging into the D&D specific thread to yell at people about D&D's business practices is probably also not something that's desirable. The solution is probably putting up a specific thread for people to talk about their legitimate issues with WotC in, and discouraging or banning making GBS threads up other threads on the forum with ethics arguments about a company that isn't going anywhere and has a massive impact on the hobby as a whole. Whatever your opinions on it, AI is here to stay. The world is changed. It's never going back in the box. And I don't think Trad Games as a forum would benefit from ostriching over it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 03:02
|
|
|
So insofar as I understand it we're not supposed to discuss the underlying ethics; my suggestion to reiterate from earlier is to avoid any policy that makes a segment of the user base feel attacked for their hobby. People who just want to enjoy their hobby in peace shouldn't feel like they're under siege with policies that will likely be weaponized to attack them. I feel that a policy around identifying the source of your art should only apply to commercial projects; there's no risk of anyone accidentally spending money or being involved with someone's pet personal project. And anyone joining a private campaign can always leave if they discover there's any use of AI to supplement the campaign. People feel strongly on both sides of the issue, its fair to recognize and acknowledge some of the underlying ethical issues, but the best way to do so to my mind seems to be a closer look at enforcing rules against low content or low effort posts which seems to me to be the most egregious and visible problem. People should be allowed to post what they want without stress or worry as long as they're posting earnestly and are having fun. The worst thing that can happen on these forums to someone's user experience in this scenario is then someone going "Ah that looks cool oh WAIT" which seems to be something everyone can live with? This is the same forum where there's goatse in the Leper colony, you can live with seeing the occassional AI artwork. Suggestions that amount to baking into rules discouraging people from their hobby is just going to make people feel attacked and defencive about what they find cool and interesting; and further divide the community, as with any other hobby, like guns. "I like collecting guns  " normally in 99% of the forums goes unremarked even though the gun control debate can be quite contentious, but its usually restricted to specific debate threads without issue?People with commercial projects where they indicate AI should be encouraged to disclose, and that's where I think pushback should be directed at, since these are people who should have greater expectation of not denying paid work to artists. Of course this isn't to deny that there's ethical concerns with personal use, but I'm not really sure what anything productive can result from it rising above grumblings and passive disapproval outside of specific debate threads. We're all here to have fun and enjoy the hobby our own ways. Not worry about witch hunts. In summary: - Don't recreate the war on drugs but for AI. - Related to the above, discourage aggro posting towards people with an interest in AI. If there's to be any fair framework for restricting discussion and use of AI in the subforum its only fair that the burden be shared equally. - Discourage low effort or spammy posting, particularly for anything AI related. - Encourage disclosure from people with a declared business interest as personal use isn't really anyone's business as long as any forum posting regarding it meetings the sufficient effort standard indicated above. - If people can keep civil than mentioning the issues around AI, or talking about meta aspects can be fine, but the expectation is that there should be a clamp down quickly if things get heated. People shouldn't think they can bait someone into flaming out if they act like a dick towards someone whose just doing their thing. Like outside of the specific "AI for TTRPG" thread, like people probably shouldn't be posting in detail about their SD prompts or whatever; but posting the result, in a context which indicates some kind of creative curation and effort, shouldn't be discouraged.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 03:21
|
|
|
Quarantine ai to the ai thread, be incredibly nasty to the people who break containment explicitly to make them feel unwelcome Edit: I'm only half joking, but I think the art thread needs a strict source your stuff clause Ominous Jazz fucked around with this message at 03:29 on Jun 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 03:24
|
|
|
Colonel Cool posted:Whatever your opinions on it, AI is here to stay. The world is changed. It's never going back in the box. I don't understand why several people seem to think this when there's nothing indicating it's true. Just ban and/or mock and ridicule the poo poo wherever it pops up and it will eventually fade into irrelevance much like every other dumb techbro fad.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 03:46
|
|
|
Just to clarify as maybe I didn't see it as I was on my phone earlier today but is the "source your art" clause only suggested for some specific TTRPG art thread? The only issue I see with that is maybe they do porn and maybe the poster in question might not want to directly associate themselves with that artist on these forums and potentially get doxxed. Because usually artists will tweet when they finish a private commission and who it was for. Fajita Queen posted:I don't understand why several people seem to think this when there's nothing indicating it's true. Just ban and/or mock and ridicule the poo poo wherever it pops up and it will eventually fade into irrelevance much like every other dumb techbro fad. Didn't Jeff buy the forums with bitcoin money? I feel like you're many years too late with this; and of course many people strenuously object to this suggestion. There doesn't seem to be any productive result from subjecting a significant portion of the community to abuse and harassment because of a difference in opinions. Raenir Salazar fucked around with this message at 03:50 on Jun 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 03:47
|
|
|
If you commission art the artist isn't going to doxx you, it is very easy to ask to be anonymous. I'd support a credit requirement forum wide.Raenir Salazar posted:Didn't Jeff buy the forums with bitcoin money? I feel like you're many years too late with this; and of course many people strenuously object to this suggestion. There doesn't seem to be any productive result from subjecting a significant portion of the community to abuse and harassment because of a difference in opinions. Also SA continuously mocking and harassing crypto guys has made for a much better community.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 03:53
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Just to clarify as maybe I didn't see it as I was on my phone earlier today but is the "source your art" clause only suggested for some specific TTRPG art thread? this is an incredibly stupid problem you've invented. edit: making people source images in that thread serves two important purposes it gives credit to artists, and it makes posting ai generated images without being ridiculed harder to do, which again i'm actively encouraging edit x2: Terrible Opinions posted:Also SA continuously mocking and harassing crypto guys has made for a much better community. if you think there's a difference between ai generated nonsense and crypto, i'm sorry but you're too far gone Ominous Jazz fucked around with this message at 03:59 on Jun 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 03:54
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Just to clarify as maybe I didn't see it as I was on my phone earlier today but is the "source your art" clause only suggested for some specific TTRPG art thread? The Jeff bitcoin thing is a bit, and even if it is actually true he is one of a miniscule minority of people who profited significantly off of it compared to the absurdly large majority who had it all go up in ashes. Either way, bitcoin is rightfully ridiculed in every corner of these forums and AI poo poo deserves the same fate. If that "significant portion of the community" (lol) does not want to be subject to that ridicule then they simply need to stop shilling garbage and being scabs or at the very least do it somewhere other than the Something Awful forums. Ominous Jazz posted:if you think there's a difference between ai generated nonsense and crypto, i'm sorry but you're too far gone I think that poster agrees with you
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 04:02
|
|
|
Terrible Opinions posted:If you commission art the artist isn't going to doxx you, it is very easy to ask to be anonymous. I'd support a credit requirement forum wide. It isn't the artist specifically going out of their way to doxx you; its people being able to do basic 2+2=4 in identifying whose social media account relates to the character that was commissioned, and then stalking them. Ominous Jazz posted:this is an incredibly stupid problem you've invented. So it seems like the point of the suggestion is to enable harassment? I'm not sure this should be a rule outside of a specific thread, that's kinda messed up. Clearly it seems like the legitimate justification, to encourage crediting artists only needs to be specific to a specific thread; if privacy regarding commissions could be reasonably maintained (doesn't seem to me like this is a tenable suggestion though), I'd hope that the moderation staff agrees with me that there's no room for harassment. Fajita Queen posted:The Jeff bitcoin thing is a bit, and even if it is actually true he is one of a miniscule minority of people who profited significantly off of it compared to the absurdly large majority who had it all go up in ashes. Either way, bitcoin is rightfully ridiculed in every corner of these forums and AI poo poo deserves the same fate. So, presumably its a joke, but I'm not sure that any earnest engagement with crypto is actually mocked as thoroughly or universally as you say. For one thing ideologically I'm sure there's anarchists on these forums who have Anti-Imperialist reasons for using crypto that is likely to be accepted at face value in some parts of the forums; and regular uses engaging with Coinbase stuff or whatever, I don't really buy the idea that crypto overall is as mocked/ridiculed to the extent being suggested towards AI hobbyists. Raenir Salazar fucked around with this message at 04:06 on Jun 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 04:03
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:It isn't the artist specifically going out of their way to doxx you; its people being able to do basic 2+2=4 in identifying whose social media account relates to the character that was commissioned, and then stalking them. ridiculing lovely posts is not harassment and is in fact a cornerstone of this forums' community.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 04:04
|
|
|
Fajita Queen posted:ridiculing lovely posts is not harassment and is in fact a cornerstone of this forums' community.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 04:05
|
|
|
Fajita Queen posted:I don't understand why several people seem to think this when there's nothing indicating it's true. Just ban and/or mock and ridicule the poo poo wherever it pops up and it will eventually fade into irrelevance much like every other dumb techbro fad. It's also a dumb argument because whether or not something is "here to stay" or prevalent or whatever, the entire point of curating a social space is deciding what behavior does and doesn't fly. Lots of places also allow low-effort posting and I'm sure people argue "well that's just the way the world works" or whatever but even if you believe that a thing is now some genie out of the bottle, there's no reason that a forum or discord server or whatever can't have a "don't post AI art gen poo poo here" rule any more than they could have a "don't post about later editions of D&D, this place is for old-school only" rule or whatever. Ominous Jazz posted:this is an incredibly stupid problem you've invented. And I have to agree that people seem to be way overthinking the difficulties of "cite your art sources." If you want to post rehosted, unsourced art in a thread as inspiration or something, then do your best to find the source and post a name along with it. It's not even just an additional courtesy, it's actively helpful if someone wants to know "wow where did that cool piece of art come from, I wonder if that artist has done anything else?"
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 04:07
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:It isn't the artist specifically going out of their way to doxx you; its people being able to do basic 2+2=4 in identifying whose social media account relates to the character that was commissioned, and then stalking them. Raenir Salazar posted:So, presumably its a joke, but I'm not sure that any earnest engagement with crypto is actually mocked as thoroughly or universally as you say. For one thing ideologically I'm sure there's anarchists on these forums who have Anti-Imperialist reasons for using crypto that is likely to be accepted at face value in some parts of the forums; and regular uses engaging with Coinbase stuff or whatever, I don't really buy the idea that crypto overall is as mocked/ridiculed to the extent being suggested towards AI hobbyists.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 04:13
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:It's also a dumb argument because whether or not something is "here to stay" or prevalent or whatever, the entire point of curating a social space is deciding what behavior does and doesn't fly. Lots of places also allow low-effort posting and I'm sure people argue "well that's just the way the world works" or whatever but even if you believe that a thing is now some genie out of the bottle, there's no reason that a forum or discord server or whatever can't have a "don't post AI art gen poo poo here" rule any more than they could have a "don't post about later editions of D&D, this place is for old-school only" rule or whatever. I think its one thing if the goal is just to encourage a greater awareness and appreciate for hard working artists potentially being afflicted; but openly advocating for it to identify targets seems like that should result in the moderators abandoning the idea entirely because it seems like there's no universe where it won't be weaponized and hopefully they understand that it would be terrible for that to occur. I don't really get the sense that either moderator engaging with the thread intends to see AI hobbyists be burdened with any additional hostility so I hope my read is correct that this is a terrible suggestion/intention to act on and implement. No one should feel alienated. But hopefully Leperflesh can chime in to inform us on what the temperature is regarding AI hobbyists as a subcommunity in their and the other mod's views to help guide us away from suggestions that are entirely without likelyhood to be implemented and what sentiments are entirely not going to be acted upon. Terrible Opinions posted:What is the danger here? For an anonymous commission to be linked to you from a SA account your SA account would already have to be doxxed. I feel like you're being obtuse. Demanding people identify the artist in the case they commissioned the piece would mean potentially figuring out their private social media account; and then stalking that social media account for dirt on them. quote:Are you actually stupid enough to believe there is an anti-Imperialist argument for crypto? Like genuinely believing this requires one to either be a crypto evangelist or have no knowledge of how any existing crypto currency works. I'm not an anarchist and don't buy the argument myself; the question isn't whether its a legitimate and valid belief, but whether can you really say with authority that you're familiar enough with the posting culture of every subforum on SA to the extent you can claim with total confidence that there's no single poster who gets mocked for participating in some kind of crypto? Raenir Salazar fucked around with this message at 04:24 on Jun 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 04:22
|
|
|
Fajita Queen posted:ridiculing lovely posts is not harassment and is in fact a cornerstone of this forums' community.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 04:27
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I think its one thing if the goal is just to encourage a greater awareness and appreciate for hard working artists potentially being afflicted; but openly advocating for it to identify targets seems like that should result in the moderators abandoning the idea entirely because it seems like there's no universe where it won't be weaponized and hopefully they understand that it would be terrible for that to occur. I don't really get the sense that either moderator engaging with the thread intends to see AI hobbyists be burdened with any additional hostility so I hope my read is correct that this is a terrible suggestion/intention to act on and implement. No one should feel alienated. I'm not a part of this "we should do it so we can bully AI artists" tangent or whatever, I'm addressing two points: 1). That the "AI art is here to stay so we have to let there be space for it on the forums" argument isn't some sort of absolute, it is completely within the power of a forum to decide what stuff is and isn't allowed there. The topic's prevalence or inability to be put "back in the bottle" has nothing to do with it, and deciding you don't want to give space to something isn't a fuckin witch hunt, it's not "ostriching," it's just saying you don't want it here. 2). That a "cite the rehosted art you post" guideline is not a herculean task that needs extensively codified legalese or a contingencies for hypothetical worst case scenarios to put into practice, you just say "hey source your art" and if people post unsourced art you say "hey we don't do that here, could you post a source with it, thanks." e; and then if they keep doing it you can probate them I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 04:29
|
|
|
lmao at the insane hyperbole in this thread both for and against AI
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 04:29
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I feel like you're being obtuse. Demanding people identify the artist in the case they commissioned the piece would mean potentially figuring out their private social media account; and then stalking that social media account for dirt on them. Raenir Salazar posted:I'm not an anarchist and don't buy the argument myself; the question isn't whether its a legitimate and valid belief, but whether can you really say with authority that you're familiar enough with the posting culture of every subforum on SA to the extent you can claim with total confidence that there's no single poster who gets mocked for participating in some kind of crypto?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 04:30
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Just to clarify as maybe I didn't see it as I was on my phone earlier today but is the "source your art" clause only suggested for some specific TTRPG art thread? You always have the option of not posting art if giving the artist credit will somehow harm them or you. I think it’s a good general rule for all posts.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 04:30
|
|
|
Ominous Jazz posted:if you think there's a difference between ai generated nonsense and crypto, i'm sorry but you're too far gone Of course there’s a difference. Crypto has absolutely no practical use other than as a very dumb investment vehicle. Every time someone tries to use crypto for the actual stated purpose, they find out it’s nearly impossible. It’s got awful user experience. Generative AI is easy to use and generates results that make a segment of the population happy with minimal effort on their part. There are plenty of serious experienced software engineers who are using LLMs as code assistants and finding them to be timesavers. Some of those engineers are also critical of LLMs and vocal about security flaws, issues with training and cheap labor, and so on. It is possible for a tool to be both useful and unethical. Lots of them are. If a given techbro always latches onto the technology that’s getting the most buzz, they’ll usually be wrong, but sometimes they’ll accidentally be correct.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 04:41
|
|
|
Thanlis posted:You always have the option of not posting art if giving the artist credit will somehow harm them or you. I think it’s a good general rule for all posts. Seems like this is completely counter productive to the goal of fostering a fun community; which is for people to have fun without worry; and having everyone undergo scrutiny for participation seems like an unacceptable overreach. Terrible Opinions posted:No really just ask to be anonymous in the commission. The only identifying information would be your SA account. So in order to participate here, they need to completely change their behaviour elsewhere? That's ridiculous. People can have lives outside the forums; and shouldn't be forced to not post art they want to share if they want to keep their private lives private. quote:It's a very stupid argument that requires taking obviously false claims by crypto enthusiasts at their word and would be mocked on the overwhelming majority of spaces on the forums. The only exception I can really think of is D&D where obvious idiots and bigots are protected from ridicule. The takeaway here is that you don't know for sure, there isn't really any proof so I don't think it makes sense to suggest it as a sort of precedent. Kai Tave posted:I'm not a part of this "we should do it so we can bully AI artists" tangent or whatever, I'm addressing two points: Any forum can have any policy it wants, but that isn't particularly novel as revelations go, or means that we should. There's obviously very contentious and vehement disagreement regarding some of these suggestions so obviously insofar as we're ostensibly caring about reaching a consensus compromise some suggestions obviously aren't very congruent to that. I don't think for real, that this is a discussion where any possibility is equally likely; seems like there's a sort of range of options being considered and saying "Well a total ban is on the table" doesn't really add to the conversation and doesn't seem constructive to me; its obviously pretty unacceptable to some no matter how hard its suggested. Regarding (2) like what's the point of this policy? If its to identify and expose people as targets for a campaign of directed hostility that's unacceptable I have to imagine. If the goal is just hey, friendly reminder to Support your artists! Then there doesn't need to be any suggestion of telling people to *not* do something; because the goal isn't to add scrutiny to AI hobbyists in particular right?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 04:55
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Any forum can have any policy it wants, but that isn't particularly novel as revelations go It sure seems like it needs to be pointed out since some people seem to think "well AI art exists and it's never going away" is an argument that should result in inevitable acceptance and anyone who says otherwise is just trying to bury their head in the sand. quote:Regarding (2) like what's the point of this policy? The point of the policy is to credit and source artists, and I have no idea why you're struggling so hard to grasp this. It's a courteous move, it helps people find artists whose work they might enjoy, it's a minimal-effort thoughtful habit to cultivate in a social space to say "please don't post unsourced art."
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 05:10
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Seems like this is completely counter productive to the goal of fostering a fun community; which is for people to have fun without worry; and having everyone undergo scrutiny for participation seems like an unacceptable overreach. “People should be able to have fun without worry” sounds good but in practice if that’s the rule you quickly find out that not all fun is compatible. You’re always going to have to balance pure freedom of speech against the values of the community you want. In this case, the cost is that some indeterminate number of people might not feel comfortable posting commissioned art. It’d have to be people who think the artist’s style isn’t recognizable even with some effort, so they’d be willing to post it without credit but not with credit. I think this would be a small population of people! I also think the benefit of encouraging people to credit artists is a good one. It’s true that there’s always been stolen character art, but as I think Nuns said, it’s okay for us to become more aware as a result of a semi-related discussion. I don’t particularly see the scrutiny aspect. Any post we make is subject to scrutiny. That’s why there’s a reporting system, right?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 05:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 15:38 |
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:So in order to participate here, they need to completely change their behaviour elsewhere? That's ridiculous. People can have lives outside the forums; and shouldn't be forced to not post art they want to share if they want to keep their private lives private. Raenir Salazar posted:The takeaway here is that you don't know for sure, there isn't really any proof so I don't think it makes sense to suggest it as a sort of precedent.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 05:23
|
|