|
I liked Disco Elysium
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 15:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 10:32 |
|
|
Davedave24 posted:Had this guy on Facebook trying to tell me that being against AI art is ableist. Yeah dude, disabled artists totally have not existed before now, and letting corporations steal their works and eliminate any future opportunities for them to get gigs as an artist will not negatively affect them at all! these people all use the exact same talking points, I’m convinced they workshop them on discord or something
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 15:03
|
|
|
The AI hasbara discord...
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 15:05
|
|
|
Killingyouguy! posted:I liked Disco Elysium Wow get a load of this moron, art isn't about *liking things*
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 15:16
|
|
|
Death... but for the universe? Oh we are going to contemplate the *poo poo* out of this.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 15:54
|
|
|
Akett posted:The algorithm isn't suffering, the artists who's art was stolen for the data set ARE, because their jobs and livelihoods are being deleted with machines.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 16:30
|
|
|
No it's companies using ai art. Same as if companies were using pirated copies of photoshop en masse.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 16:36
|
|
|
Rogue AI Goddess posted:Are we using the piracy lawsuit damages logic here? "Without AIs, each and every one of those Swole Harry images would have been commissioned from our client for their standard rates?" Even if an individual human was building these tools and training these models for personal use, this take wouldn't have legs: if you're scraping a specific style, just pay the person that style belongs to. But it's not a human doing it, it's a large tech company pillaging the hard work of thousands of artists as raw material for their statistical models. Without that source material, it's literally impossible to create the model.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 16:40
|
|
|
Rogue AI Goddess posted:Are we using the piracy lawsuit damages logic here? "Without AIs, each and every one of those Swole Harry images would have been commissioned from our client for their standard rates?" No, but I'd still see as it the context of a making a project (such as a small indie game) someone might opt to generate free assets rather then paying for someone to make what they need. Like, I think it's a fine line, because yeah, someone might no have the money to pay for voice actors to voice their silly little indie game or Skyrim mod, and otherwise would not make it without the AI, but, there's also tons of amateur talent for cheap, and there is very much people paying them to voice lines for skyrim mods and stupid twitter memes. Sure not every one of those images would have been commissioned had there been no AI, but you're naïve to think that people won't opt to use AI for their hyper specific fetish porn over paying an artist to make it. Oxyclean fucked around with this message at 17:03 on Nov 20, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 17:00
|
|
|
the artist works for years learning the techniques of the masters in order to adapt them in creating their own style, something original that could not have existed before was the artist earning while they were practicing and producing? no they were not. in a basic understanding of economics, a person whos work has value to you must be compensated for that work, or they will stop doing it. happy to explain other basic concepts such as maslows hierarchy of needs, the monetary cost of art supplies and empathy by the way so you pay your artists, we understand that in under a minute a thousand art pieces can be fed into the black box of machine learning which can then replicate and spit out common features of the patterns it has observed. but it only asks the 'what' of the stylistic choices, and not the 'why' of the composition: why do human beings get a pang when they see the smile of the mona lisa? why do breugel's works fill us with dread? why should you just put a happy little tree right there? that is what we mean by soul-less, you dipshit. a machine does not have emotions or existential questions to resolve. it just spits out an iteration of a pattern it observed; but so stupid is the replication and observance of patterns that you have to add negative prompts like "too many teeth" and "extra limbs" for the result to actually resemble anything meaningful the resulting work is the haphazard result of a random number generator that bashed it out in about a minute, hosted on server farms whos environmental impact is becoming more and more catastrophic the more the required network of computing power expands worse, every time ai art is used in place of human art you are taking money out of the hands of the actual artists whos work is stolen to produce this generic trash. every book cover, every celebrity feet pic, every piece of background music is another artist who will have to give up to get a second job, further stagnating the available pool of styles for the ai to draw from, so well done on having gone and hosed yourself in advance of us asking you to a human being producing art adds value to the world. an ai producing 'art' homogenises its genre and drains value from the world. and a human being who stans for ai is a loving idiot feeding the tiger who will eventually eat him, because he believes against all reason and logic that somehow he will end up on the side of the tigers even if you aren't on the artists side, even if you see prompt creation as a valuable side hustle, ask yourself this: how long before they automate prompt creation? it's even simpler than producing the eventual art, after all in summary, the difference you loving idiot is that we compensate artists for the time and labour undertaken because they are a human being with human needs. a computer is not how are you aware enough of the concept of disco elysium to find this thread and you don't even understand this basic concept also gently caress off with that noncery about 'art is only good if it upsets people,' a statement dreamed up and propogated by arseholes gluing dolls together to get in on russian money laundering scams
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 17:07
|
|
|
Oh my god just shut up everyone, AI art is stupid but nobody is going to give you a medal for writing several paragraphs and making GBS threads up the thread about a good video game because you just hate it soooooo much
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 17:10
|
|
|
wiegieman posted:Even if an individual human was building these tools and training these models for personal use, this take wouldn't have legs: if you're scraping a specific style, just pay the person that style belongs to. There is an argument for giving styles limited protection with some kind of mandatory open license, so that the style "owner" could get compensated without being able to block others from using the style altogether. While it has more legs, it remains mere theory for now. (Also, apocalypse cop scenarios aside, that leaves open the question of the morality of scraping work that is in public domain. If one trains a model to imitate Vincent van Gogh or Paul Cezanne, whom do they pay?) wiegieman posted:But it's not a human doing it, it's a large tech company pillaging the hard work of thousands of artists as raw material for their statistical models. Without that source material, it's literally impossible to create the model. If an oil company underpays its workers and damages the environment to produce a bucket of fuel, and later a cop steals that bucket to paint "gently caress THE POLICE" on a wall in fiery letters, is the cop to blame for the company's fracking? (Or, for that matter, the extinction of dinosaurs whose bones became the fuel in question?) Rogue AI Goddess fucked around with this message at 17:28 on Nov 20, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 17:15
|
|
|
It's pretty funny to make a computer that can gobble up the internet and vomit out whatever pictures you ask it to make, even if it's "Harry DuBois arguing communism with Goku" or whatever. But if your art goes into the machine and you don't get anything out of it, that's frustrating, because being an artist already means getting compensated for much less than the value you put out into the world and the AI process makes it transparent and systemic: your art is, beyond any doubt, some small part of the foundation of this massive new industry and you get nothing out of it. Artists should get paychecks from the public (the state) to do what they do, and in exchange, their works should be available for anyone who wants to make a machine that doodles "Evrart Claire dunking on Joyce Messier." And if they want to opt out of that, sure whatever.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 17:26
|
|
|
Escobarbarian posted:Oh my god just shut up everyone, AI art is stupid but nobody is going to give you a medal for writing several paragraphs and making GBS threads up the thread about a good video game because you just hate it soooooo much  is already open, I just put it all in one post so we don't have to go through multiple pages of that guy rebutting point-by-point. I don't want a medal, I want him to shut the gently caress up as well.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 17:31
|
|
|
Rogue AI Goddess posted:Legally, art styles don't "belong" to anyone, and a single glance at the hellscape of patent law shows why this is an extremely good thing. If styles were copyrightable, it would be trivial for Disney and other media conglomerates to show that any given image or video is stylistically similar to at least something that they own, thus completely locking down all creative expression forever. And they would not need a single AI for that, either! Pay artists for their work. I'm not sure how I feel about work that is in the public domain, but you aren't stealing from artists if you scrape it. "Belongs" was bad word choice. I could agonize over word choice but I won't. Pay people for their work, it's that simple. I will never hate a worker for taking the work they need to in order to pay their mortgage and put food on the table. What the hell does the rest have to do with anything?
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 17:41
|
|
|
wiegieman posted:Pay artists for their work. I'm not sure how I feel about work that is in the public domain, but you aren't stealing from artists if you scrape it. I think the obvious solution here is that all art should be purchased into the public domain - and going forward artists should work for the public: creating art independently, releasing art to the public, and getting the money they need to lead lives of meaning and dignity. Treating art like anything other than a public non-excludable good is going to produce dumb bullshit (inconsistent restrictions on how the art can be reproduced or remixed, artists making pittances for work that has a big impact) because it's alien to how people (and now some of our machines) actually engage with art: it influences us directly and indirectly, in unstoppable and indetectable ways. Civilized Fishbot fucked around with this message at 17:48 on Nov 20, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 17:46
|
|
|
why are you arguing with the person who compared critics of AI art to white supremacists and transphobes they will never have anything of value to add
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 18:05
|
|
|
Civilized Fishbot posted:I think the obvious solution here is that all art should be purchased into the public domain - and going forward artists should work for the public: creating art independently, releasing art to the public, and getting the money they need to lead lives of meaning and dignity. In the meantime, we have to look at AI in the context of the hellish capatalist nightmare we live in, and in that context it is impossible to reconcile AI stealing from artists; both in terms of scraping the results of their labour without compensating them, and also robbing them of opportunities for work.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 18:20
|
|
|
Party Boat posted:why are you arguing with the person who compared critics of AI art to white supremacists and transphobes This does not invalidate the criticism of AI art or detract from the crux of the argument in any way. It is just personally frustrating. Bobby Deluxe posted:In the meantime, we have to look at AI in the context of the hellish capatalist nightmare we live in, and in that context it is impossible to reconcile AI stealing from artists; both in terms of scraping the results of their labour without compensating them, and also robbing them of opportunities for work. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) Rogue AI Goddess fucked around with this message at 18:47 on Nov 20, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 18:35
|
|
|
Part of the value of an artist's work is their identity, and their body of work and skills. I don't think it's right for anyone but them to put a price tag on that. Worse, models that have been trained on their work without their knowledge or consent actively degrade the value of these things.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 18:39
|
|
|
Rogue AI Goddess posted:No, critics of AI art are well-meaning progressives who, likely unconsciously, sometimes happen to use the same turns of phrases that white supremacists and transphobes employ. allow me to resolve the issue for you algorithms are not people
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 19:04
|
|
|
That's where his conversations with himself take place.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 19:07
|
|
|
also the concept of "I know it when I see it" vis-a-vis "real art" and the usefulness (or lack thereof) of that test already has a long history in literally specifically the area of evaluating the inherent social value of a work and judging what makes something merely soulless masturbation versus actual art. the nearest antecedent of the concept as deployed by critics of AI art is not transvestigation lol
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 19:08
|
|
|
Party Boat posted:allow me to resolve the issue for you Valentin posted:also the concept of "I know it when I see it" vis-a-vis "real art" and the usefulness (or lack thereof) of that test already has a long history in literally specifically the area of evaluating the inherent social value of a work and judging what makes something merely soulless masturbation versus actual art. the nearest antecedent of the concept as deployed by critics of AI art is not transvestigation lol Rogue AI Goddess fucked around with this message at 19:15 on Nov 20, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 19:12
|
|
|
Desdinova posted:An art student walks around the gallery, taking in the old masters work: The intricate brush-strokes, the countless hours of preparation, the studying for weeks on end of the subject that was chosen to be painted. Eventually the art student starts making their own paintings, in his own way having learned from the results of the masters. The artists who made the work in the gallery were in fact paid for it. And the gallery workers are paid to work there. And the art student gets to get paid for her own work in turn, allowing her to make a living making art, rather than all the profit going directly into enormous tech corporations who attract investment by boasting that they have a lot of users. you unbelievable dunce. You imbecile. You cretin.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 19:22
|
|
|
Rogue AI Goddess posted:But that's the thing: the AI is not the problem here, the capitalist hellscape is! Without the hellscape, mainstream artists and AI-assisted ones can coexist and thrive It is incredibly expensive to make a modern "AI". In order to exist outside the hellscape, AIs would need to be created by a method other than theft (theft enabled by the power differential which allows these corporations to steal work knowing that artists, unlike musicians, do not have enough legal power to retaliate). Could AI in the modern large data set sense even come into existence without that power differential? Would there be enough training data? Genuine question, I do not know the answer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 19:31
|
|
|
Rogue AI Goddess posted:neither was hp lovecraft's cat okay, I will elaborate for centuries, workers have had their jobs automated away. it is a very real and well founded fear because it has played out time and time again and, as you've correctly identified, the incentive to do so is built into the worker / owner model "they will not replace us" is a white supremacist chant based on a conspiracy theory that The Jews are attempting to eradicate white people via demographic change. it simply is not true on any level and by comparing it in any way to real concerns you lend it an air of legitimacy that it in no way deserves and lol at trying to set a logical n-word trap like a poundland supermechagodzilla
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 19:32
|
|
|
Rogue AI Goddess posted:But that's the thing: the AI is not the problem here, the capitalist hellscape is! Without the hellscape, mainstream artists and AI-assisted ones can coexist and thrive. Without the AIs, the capitalists will continue to gently caress over all artists. ZA/UM's investors did not use any AIs to shut out Kurvitz et al, after all. If we are planning a perfect future without economic considerations, I will still probably be against AI, because I am at heart a creative person who resents the idea of a computer randomly generating something I would quite like a chance to do myself.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 19:46
|
|
|
Holy poo poo shut up about AI art
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 19:49
|
|
|
get at me when the chatbots are capable of penning a post a fraction as iconic as this oneInequalityGodzilla posted:After a great deal of coaxing I managed to get my sister-in-law, who I really like but who has never played any video game aside from Tetris, to play this game. I gave her some information before she starts as follows
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 20:15
|
|
|
Party Boat posted:okay, I will elaborate
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 20:28
|
|
|
Rogue AI Goddess posted:Are we using the piracy lawsuit damages logic here? "Without AIs, each and every one of those Swole Harry images would have been commissioned from our client for their standard rates?" We are lol intellectual property is extremely precious now and must be protected to the limits of the law, such times, but mainly whydirt posted:Holy poo poo shut up about AI art
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 20:34
|
|
|
Feels like there is an analogy to the pale here
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 20:43
|
|
|
Let's maybe get away from the subject of AI art for a bit please, thread
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 21:39
|
|
|
it's funny when egghead yells things
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 22:33
|
|
|
INCREMENTAL PROGRESS YEAH
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 22:52
|
|
|
Inexplicable Humblebrag posted:it's funny when egghead yells things 
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 23:15
|
|
|
AI Shart
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 23:17
|
|
|
Lil Swamp Booger Baby posted:AI Shart
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 23:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 10:32 |
|
|
Oxxidation posted:these people all use the exact same talking points, I’m convinced they workshop them on discord or something There's one goober by the name Shadiversity on youtube and social media that absolutely signal boosts these talking points and champions AI art as his own work and skills improving as AI software gets updated and he puts more work into text prompts/key word entry.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2023 23:40
|
|
