|
This discussion is more than contentious enough without importing another extremely well-trod and incredibly annoying argument, about crypto, to add to it. I understand why some people made that analogy but it's an imperfect one and seems to be mostly just generating another derail. We also are not going to intentionally create a honeypot thread for people to out themselves specifically for sanctioned harassment all over the forum. I guess it has to be spelled out but if we create (well, reboot) a thread for people to post AI stuff in, that is because we feel people ought to have a place to post AI stuff in where it's not going to create a derail or intrude on other people's enjoyment of other threads. Not because we think it'd be fun to help them self-identify so that forums vigilantes can stalk them for harassment purposes. There is a difference between directly addressing a lovely post by calling it lovely, and deciding that because someone posted in a thread (for example, a pro-Magic post in the Magic the Gathering thread) you have free reign to yell at them for supporting Pinkertons anywhere else you see them post. The latter is not OK. If we ask people to give credit to artists whose art they post, I'm confident we can find a way for folks to do that without self-doxxing. For that matter, it's trivial to reverse image search and find the source of a unique artwork if its only other presence online is on a social media account where you commissioned the work from an artist, so if that's a genuine concern my recommendation is to avoid doing that regardless of any new policy about crediting artists.
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 05:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 01:37 |
|
|
Leperflesh posted:We also are not going to intentionally create a honeypot thread for people to out themselves specifically for sanctioned harassment all over the forum. I guess it has to be spelled out but if we create (well, reboot) a thread for people to post AI stuff in, that is because we feel people ought to have a place to post AI stuff in where it's not going to create a derail or intrude on other people's enjoyment of other threads. Not because we think it'd be fun to help them self-identify so that forums vigilantes can stalk them for harassment purposes. There is a difference between directly addressing a lovely post by calling it lovely, and deciding that because someone posted in a thread (for example, a pro-Magic post in the Magic the Gathering thread) you have free reign to yell at them for supporting Pinkertons anywhere else you see them post. The latter is not OK. Nobody has suggested this so I'm not sure why you brought it up as though it's an issue.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 05:47
|
|
|
I'll take it that you meant by this post that if people post AI stuff outside of an AI threadFajita 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. but my reading of these posts is that people want to harass anyone who posts in a honeypot AI thread Ominous Jazz posted:Quarantine ai to the ai thread, be incredibly nasty to the people who break containment explicitly to make them feel unwelcome 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. Maybe by "containment" these folks don't mean if those posters dare to post elsewhere, but only if those posters post AI generated stuff elsewhere. If the latter is what they mean, then... that still seems extremely over the top angry and a bit absurd to me, because if we make these rules then the right approach is to use the report button instead of creating derails, but at least it's not e-stalking. If the goal is to stop derails, then let's make a rule to discourage posting of AI stuff all over the forum and use mods to help enforce it. If the goal is to punish your forums enemies with ridicule so that AI will just "go away forever," that's not something I feel has been established as an unequivocal community standard for mods to help make happen.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 05:53
|
|
|
PurpleXVI posted:And... people keep bringing up this theoretical situation where someone posts something "AI"-generated alongside an interesting analysis or statement, and I just can't imagine this scenario ever happening, unless it's about the technology that generated it. Actual "AI" output is void of meaning, intent or emotion, the things that make actual art more interesting than just dumping a bunch of random colours on a canvas. It can never say anything, you can never be impressed by anyone's skill and the only emotion it inspires is a mild "heh" when the "AI" has coughed up a combination that seems particularly nonsensical. But sure, if it should ever happen, in the extremely unlikely case that I'm wrong, then I guess that merits a policy of: fine, okay, but try harder next time. I'm not sure what makes it unlikely, especially intent. I think I have some control over that with my deforum projects. The process generally goes, I train a bunch of models for the subjects and style. I usually end up with a ridiculous number of different models, like 40+, though many of them are the same but with a different number of training steps, like, there are some times you want a model to be overwhelmingly your subject vs just slightly your subject, etc. This can take quite a bit of time for the style ones to get something right, especially if I want a merger of a couple thing. The merging can happen in two ways depending on what I want from that model but this part does often involve manually editing pictures in the training data. I do use creative commons/permissive license stuff for this (or stuff that originated from me) but it's not to make some ethical point, it's because I have strong opinions about open source everything and it's easy to get enough of that for a style. Working within deforum itself, it's hundreds and hundreds of lines of instructions (I could give you the script files themselves, but for mine every project is actually divided into several dozen script files because I do 10 second sections so I can have more granular control. My control isn't 10 seconds, I can stop it midway and change things and continue from a point actually do this most of the time to make the big changes, and it's easier to stop and tweak a 10 second script than something that's been running for 4 minutes.) The instructions are a bunch of values that are kinda hard to explain but like, you have your prompts but you use different formulas to control the strength of an individual part of the prompt or the movement of the image or the amount of change (denoising) the whole images goes through. You can make it just increase or decrease or whatever, formulas for waves, etc. What you get in the end is something in a style that couldn't, realistically, be replicated by any traditional medium and that the person both put a lot of work into and had a lot of control over. I don't think it's the amount of effort that makes it meaningful, but that also is a common criticism, that it's just typing a few words and pressing a button. With that amount of control though I don't see why someone can't create something with meaning. The person using the AI has an idea in their head and through a lot of work was able to get that idea out onto a computer. It's not a short process, the average I've always given is 60 to 100 hours, but that's just an average. I've made little fun ones with less and some big complicated serious ones with more. I got one I've been working on for so long I lost track of how long it's taken. That one involves some real video I've been recording put into the AI too so it's gotten more complicated. It probably still wouldn't be your thing, but it is for some people. There are a lot of other techniques for creating projects (of a bunch of different types) with AI that take the same amount of effort and have the same amount of control, but most AI stuff you see really is generic, garbage and low effort. I think that's because it's a new, popular technology. The people using it are mostly amateurs excited about something. But you wouldn't judge all of digital art off of low talent low effort anime-furry art teenagers make either, I guess. I also think there is some meaning to my language model training experiments, but I'm still figuring out where I'm gonna go from there. What I figured out about them though is, basically, you can train a language model on two different things but you lie to the AI and tell them they're the same thing. The AI will merge the two, but it wont just be randomly mashing together words from each it will pick up on "rules" from both, like if you give it two different philosophies it will mix the language but also create new concepts that satisfy the rules of each philosophy, etc. And the techbro thing. Techbros are gonna attach to anything tech, that's why they're techbros. In the AI spaces I'm in, at least, there aren't really many techbros, there's nerds. Because techbros are almost entirely superficial in their understanding of tech (almost, or they're the rich guys paying the people to have an understanding of the tech) and, to train models and really use things at the edge of AI you have to actually know what you're doing. There's a much bigger crossover between Linux guys and AI guys than there is techbros and AI guys. The "hah you're all techbros" thing feels like when people are all "socialist exists, so they're a tankie"
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 05:56
|
|
|
The issue with AI stuff isn't some kind of artistic statement - it cannot create real art anyways, as all it is is the summed up parts of actual, human artists' work. As for my opinion on containment, I don't mean the people need to be contained there, but the subject. I do think it's worth yelling at people who post AI "art" in creative spaces! After all, there's zero creativity involved there, and for all the artists in those spaces know, their own stuff was used to train the AI.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 06:03
|
|
|
Jack Van Burace posted:As for my opinion on containment, I don't mean the people need to be contained there, but the subject. I do think it's worth yelling at people who post AI "art" in creative spaces! After all, there's zero creativity involved there, and for all the artists in those spaces know, their own stuff was used to train the AI. Thank you for clarifying, I misunderstood your intent.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 06:09
|
|
|
Jack Van Burace posted:The issue with AI stuff isn't some kind of artistic statement - it cannot create real art anyways, as all it is is the summed up parts of actual, human artists' work. I'm trying to stay on topic for state of forums, and ignoring the ethics for a second, but statements like this are annoying. Have you seen modern art? Have your heard of things like Tracy Emmins bed? Do you consider this real art? (my uncle How about damien hurst and his chainsaw? It's been proven time and time again art is whatever medium you need to make a statement. It may be painting on a canvas, working digtally in photoshop, modelling something in 3D, typing words into a prompt matrix, then spending time refining the image, or taking a chainsaw to a cow. If the end results are an image that convays somethings, ANYTHING, then it is art. it doesn't have to be good to be art. the scrawlings of a three year old are considered art. Art is the process of creating something visual, you can hate the style, question the morality (again, see chainsaw cow), but you can't deny it's art.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 06:23
|
|
|
Grey Hunter posted:I'm trying to stay on topic for state of forums, and ignoring the ethics for a second, but statements like this are annoying. Putting words into a box doesn't make you an artist dude, sorry.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 06:34
|
|
|
Something I'd be interested in is seeing examples of the sorts of posts people who support AI think would benefit from the AI inclusion in said posts. I have a fair bit of experience using AI art in playing TTRPGs by this point and they're undeniably valuable there. I like having a visual reference for every NPC I expect to be encountering more than once because it helps give people some shared understanding of what they look like, helps to cue the memory of who this person is (sort of like forum avatars!), and is generally evocative. Before AI I had to trawl the internet looking for imperfect matches, because I'm not going to spend a bunch of time, effort, and money commissioning the perfect piece of art for NPCs that might show up three times in a campaign. I haven't entirely stopped doing that, but now I have another tool in my box for generating unique artwork that's "good enough" to suit my purposes. It's also expanded the range of things I can use art for and I make more use of things like scenic backdrops that also help establish an evocative tone for the game. I've never felt an urge to post about AI stuff on the forum yet, because the sort of things I use it for don't have any overlap with my posting about RPGs. So I'm curious, what sort of AI content posts are people looking to make that they feel would contribute to the forums? I don't think the contribution has to clear a particularly high bar either, there's plenty of posts that don't add very much that aren't banned.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 06:36
|
|
|
Ibram Gaunt posted:Putting words into a box doesn't make you an artist dude, sorry. Apart from completely missing my point, you also seem to have massive overestimation of what an ai can do There is a lot of choosing the right image, which needs an idea of composition and style, then you need to fix up the inevitable errors, iterate on the design, upscale. The human has to have an idea what they want to make, there is thought and design. As others have said, calling it AI is wrong, it's an idiot box that can only put out what it's told to make, without an idea it's nothing. Also my 3D art as shown in my avatar, while crude as it's a hobby, makes me an artist. My miniature painting makes me an artist, my doodles in my sketch pad are terrible, but still art. My AI stuff is art. The ethics are debatable, but calling something a human had input in not art is wrong. But as I said this is a derail, so I'll shut up.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 07:01
|
|
|
Grey Hunter posted:I'm trying to stay on topic for state of forums, and ignoring the ethics for a second, but statements like this are annoying. Comparing abstract/performance etc art to AI generated images utilizing art that someone else made, without their permission is... certainly a take. (It's not a good one.) The former is used to make a statement. The latter is taking a bunch of art someone else made, throwing it in a blender that can arrange things based on prompts, and calling it "art" that "you made". Last I could tell, computers do not have intent or ability of expression. Nor are you an artist for asking the computer the right prompts so it picks the right art to scramble for you. Also, your definition of art is objectively incorrect, but that's neither here nor there.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 07:04
|
|
|
"What is art" is another question we absolutely will not answer to everyone's satisfaction in this thread. Fortunately, it's irrelevant - whether or not the output of AI tools may be posted in TG, in one thread or all of them or none of them, does not hinge on whether that content is or is not "art." Libraries of books, centuries of academic warfare, oceans of ink have been spilled in the dogged pursuit of that particular question. I picked up just the barest surface of it by proxy as my wife earned her masters degree in art, but it was enough to be convinced that trying to answer that question is utterly fruitless.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 07:08
|
|
|
Colonel Cool posted:I've never felt an urge to post about AI stuff on the forum yet, because the sort of things I use it for don't have any overlap with my posting about RPGs. So I'm curious, what sort of AI content posts are people looking to make that they feel would contribute to the forums? I don't think the contribution has to clear a particularly high bar either, there's plenty of posts that don't add very much that aren't banned. I love when I see things that help me to know the available tools and how to use them, and help me to improve my results. I got some great primot tips for a very black and white, gritty, High constrast, horror-like style in the AI tools thread, and I used it for the PC portaits of my VtM campaign. YggdrasilTM fucked around with this message at 07:31 on Jun 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 07:28
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:We also are not going to intentionally create a honeypot thread for people to out themselves specifically for sanctioned harassment all over the forum. What we want is the converse. We don't want a thread for AI-posting so we can all go there and see who's AI-posting. We want a thread for AI-posting so we can never go there and never have to deal with anyone AI-posting.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 10:15
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:"What is art" is another question we absolutely will not answer to everyone's satisfaction in this thread. Fortunately, it's irrelevant - whether or not the output of AI tools may be posted in TG, in one thread or all of them or none of them, does not hinge on whether that content is or is not "art." The generators pretty clearly produce art and the people using them are a new kind of artist, that's why everyone is so mad The people making the art the model is based on intended to make art, the person making the model intended to make art, the person who used the model intended to make art, and it outputs art. It's not some machine spontaneously generating art without human input ,every step is a human product. Seems pretty straight forward You can not like it and think it's poo poo, but who cares what you do or don't like regarding art. That's something you should post about but its not something to make forum rules around Communist Thoughts fucked around with this message at 11:09 on Jun 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 11:02
|
|
|
Communist Thoughts posted:The generators pretty clearly produce art and the people using them are a new kind of artist, that's why everyone is so mad I don't even loving know where to start, this isn't even something it's possible to reply to because it's so orthogonal to conventional reality and observed fact that it's nearly impossible to put into words. edit: gently caress it, by your objectively terrible definition, someone who commissions an artist are, themselves, artists, because they typed in a detailed prompt and then paid for it to be carried out. I have absolutely paid artists for their work before, but that in no way makes me an artist. Except in this case it's more like you pay someone to blend up a bunch of existing paintings and pour them out on a canvas. PurpleXVI fucked around with this message at 12:06 on Jun 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 11:44
|
|
|
Communist Thoughts posted:The generators pretty clearly produce art and the people using them are a new kind of artist, that's why everyone is so mad No, garbage stitched together by a machine is not art and cannot be art. Algorithms do not have creativity and are not people. You should not post on this website anymore. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 13:33
|
|
|
If it's about the copying, why does Andy Warhol get a pass for cutting out a Campbell soup can from an ad and running it through a color filter, when some nerd using a computer to do effectively the same thing doesn't?Fajita Queen posted:No, garbage stitched together by a machine is not art and cannot be art. Algorithms do not have creativity and are not people. You should not post on this website anymore. Cool, I'll make sure to tell my friend who's spent dozens of hours generating, tweaking, editing, and compositing generatively-produced images for tradgame-running purposes that they should throw it all in the trash and use random images off boorus instead Roadie fucked around with this message at 14:19 on Jun 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 14:03
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:but my reading of these posts is that people want to harass anyone who posts in a honeypot AI thread What I mean by breaking containment is posting ai generated content outside of that thread. Be nasty to posters for the content of their posts and not because they post in the ai thread.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 14:05
|
|
|
Roadie posted:
Please do.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 14:28
|
|
|
ravenkult posted:Please do.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 14:29
|
|
|
So if you're cool with uncredited use of images, why are you so mad about uncredited use of images?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 14:33
|
|
|
Just credit them you ding dong why are you over thinking this and trying so hard for a "gotcha!" moment
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 14:38
|
|
|
Roadie posted:If it's about the copying, why does Andy Warhol get a pass for cutting out a Campbell soup can from an ad and running it through a color filter, when some nerd using a computer to do effectively the same thing doesn't? Someone watched a lot of YouTube videos so they can do $30 DnD character commissions and they'll lose some of that because of AI art, but not to pop art. Thats pretty much the difference. That is, for the most part, the impact it will have on the art world.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 14:40
|
|
|
Ominous Jazz posted:Just credit them you ding dong why are you over thinking this and trying so hard for a "gotcha!" moment In what world do you think someone running a D&D game is ever going to hand out credit sheets to the players listing NPC token and interstitial art sources?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 14:43
|
|
|
BrainDance posted:Someone watched a lot of YouTube videos so they can do $30 DnD character commissions and they'll lose some of that because of AI art, but not to pop art. Thats pretty much the difference. Didn't I post a couple of pages ago of multiple lost projects to AI?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 14:46
|
|
|
My main issue with AI-generated content is that trying to discuss it is like trying to discuss Arnold Rimmer's die-roll by die-roll recap of his favorite game of Risk. Okay, you experienced a bunch of randomness and you were happy with how it all turned out. Great. What's my contribution here supposed to be? Just sympathizing with your enthusiasm? Nothing you're talking about could possibly be relevant to me at all, because even if I was in the same situation and did the same things, the outcome is still random and could wind up unrelatably different. The difference between "Hamlet" as produced by Shakespeare and "Hamlet" as produced by a thousand monkeys on typewriters is that when we talk about Shakespeare's "Hamlet" we can talk about more than just the actual text of "Hamlet" - we can talk about story arcs, speculate about motivations, consider themes, discuss how the whole thing is such a patent ripoff of an old Danish legend about Prince Amleth, oh my god, you just moved a letter, did you think no one would notice, Will, you fool, you absolute rube? Because Shakespeare was a human being trying to convey ideas to his fellow human beings, and as fellow human beings we can look at the work and try to find evidence of the particularities of his creative process. With "Hamlet" as a carefully curated roll of the dice, there's nothing like that to talk about, because there's no human intent behind it at all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 14:49
|
|
|
ravenkult posted:Didn't I post a couple of pages ago of multiple lost projects to AI? I mean, is your art at the level of $30 DnD character commissions?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 14:50
|
|
|
Glazius posted:My main issue with AI-generated content is that trying to discuss it is like trying to discuss Arnold Rimmer's die-roll by die-roll recap of his favorite game of Risk. If advanced AI were available to Shakespeare how would you even know “Hamlet” was created by him vs his personal AI assistant? You are elevating “human intent” to some kind of mythical status. Shakespeare is dead so any kind of discussion about his intent is going to be mainly hypothetical anyway. We could just as easily hypothesize about the “AI’s intent.” nelson fucked around with this message at 15:16 on Jun 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 15:02
|
|
|
nelson posted:If advanced AI were available to Shakespeare how would you even know “Hamlet” was created by him vs the AI? Because we’d still find it in De Vere’s handwriting.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 15:05
|
|
|
ravenkult posted:Didn't I post a couple of pages ago of multiple lost projects to AI? It sure is interesting how the people who say AI hasn’t been proven to cause harm refuse to take any proof given. Interesting.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 15:14
|
|
|
nelson posted:If advanced AI were available to Shakespeare how would you even know “Hamlet” was created by him vs the AI? If advanced AI were available to Shakespeare and he secretly used it to produce "Hamlet", then anybody who's ever discussed anything more than the raw text of Hamlet has been wasting their loving time sniffing their own farts, hallucinating human intent from an inhuman source.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 15:16
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:It sure is interesting how the people who say AI hasn’t been proven to cause harm refuse to take any proof given. I certainly didn't get any replies to my posts after they said "no artists have been harmed by AI."
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 15:18
|
|
|
Glazius posted:anybody who's ever discussed anything more than the raw text of Hamlet has been wasting their loving time sniffing their own farts
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 15:20
|
|
|
O huh and the same people putting the goalposts on cross country skis are also using the “genie’s out of the bottle, can’t stop it now, teehee” argument. Wow. So you only believe in harm that’s been exhaustively proven but if harms have happened you just gotta let it because of inevitability. That seems an awful lot like an iron clad argument to never, ever do anything. Cool.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 15:21
|
|
|
Roadie posted:If it's about the copying, why does Andy Warhol get a pass for cutting out a Campbell soup can from an ad and running it through a color filter, when some nerd using a computer to do effectively the same thing doesn't? i was going to suggest maybe you and your friends could instead use words to describe what your characters look like and use your imaginations to "imagine" what the characters looked like, but then i realized you probably just ask a robot "describe a sexy elf babe" and then take what the robot spits out and put it into your gelboor scraper. it must be nice having no brain
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 15:23
|
|
|
Just want to say that the argument made earlier that "well AI exists, so it's here to stay and you need to accept it" is exactly the same nonsense that NFT peddlers and cryptobros claimed and what do you know, enough backlash and refusal to adopt both of these things by the general public meant that they are less relevant than ever now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 15:27
|
|
|
Grey Hunter posted:I'm trying to stay on topic for state of forums, and ignoring the ethics for a second, but statements like this are annoying. I'm willing to believe that someone will do something very interesting and produce some amazing art with an AI bot, but I'm sorry the use cases people are applying here for TG content, and that most people are using these same bots for right now, are not equivocal to "Modern Art." And your comparison of the art installation of a guy's messy bed and statue displays of two bisected cows in formaldehyde are absolutely not similar because they clearly represent intentional and thoughtful effort by a human creator. That's the key divider. The human, who is not a chain of logical estimates, who is irrational and strange and produces works that maybe have a point or perhaps are just deliberately stupid in a way these bots are not capable of replicating, at least right now. I'm only bringing this up because you were lamenting how it sucks that people lash out at AI bots out of ignorance (with an implied "if they understood better they'd be on my side") and bad metaphors like this, the MSG food addition, stuff mentioned in the thread like 3D printed Warhammer minis, and traditional art that copies/references other traditional art, are all way off base as points of comparison. All they do is muddy the waters you want clearer, and it's sure to affront some people who know how those things are produced and have at least once read a baseline description of how ChatGPT or Stable Diffusion or whatever generates its products. I do think a broader discussion on whether or not AI is art is beyond the ability of this thread to answer, and beside the main point of this topic, but these bad analogies are just dragging the issue down some pointless rabbithole.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 15:43
|
|
|
nelson posted:If advanced AI were available to Shakespeare how would you even know “Hamlet” was created by him vs his personal AI assistant? You are elevating “human intent” to some kind of mythical status. Shakespeare is dead so any kind of discussion about his intent is going to be mainly hypothetical anyway. We could just as easily hypothesize about the “AI’s intent.” Nice ninja edit! Also, bad misunderstand of the entire purpose of human communication! The entire reason Alice Human communicates to Bob Human is because there's something Alice Human wants Bob Human to do. Alice Human considers her communication successful when Bob Human does want she wanted him to do! "Human intent" is not some mythical force, it's the fundamental assumption. "This is a human, trying to get me to do something. What do they want?"
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 15:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 01:37 |
|
|
It's called ''throwing poo poo at the wall to see what sticks."
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 15:52
|
|