|
Glazius posted:Nice ninja edit! okay but now we have Chad who wants to copy their communication and get a computer to make weird hallucinations of it to sell to everyone as if it's his own. That's not safe! What to do?
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 15:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 4, 2024 02:01 |
|
|
Glazius posted: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! … what? Human interactions aren’t always transactional. Sometimes we communicate because we want to share information (“this is what my character looks like.”) Sometimes we want to share emotional resonance; a lot of the AI posts I find annoying are people who get excited and want to share their excitement. They’re wrong to be excited, but I get the emotion behind it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 16:12
|
|
|
I don't really understand the need for intent for something to have meaning or beauty. A sunset doesn't have intent, it just is, but it can inspire. I piece of AI art doesn't have intent, it just is, but it can inspire. A piece of normal art may have intent, but it still inspires. They all provide inspiration or meaning to the viewer. I as a human can give things meaning even if they were created by something with no conscious. If a million monkeys wrote Hamlet, it would still be a good story, and if people were still putting on that play 500 years later than humans could derive meaning from it. The original intent of the creator isn't the only thing that gives something meaning, and in my opinion is one of the least important things in a piece of art. Taking out anger about corporations using new technology to marginalize workers on people who are posting in a 7-page thread about using ChatGPT and Midjourney for their home TTRPG's is misplaced anger. They are people who saw a new technology that came out like 6 months ago and wanted to try it out, just like basically everyone else who heard about it. They weren't going to commission a character portrait for $30, they just saw a way to get a unique picture for their character and thought it was cool. It should just be posted in an AI thread until either the copyright issues are resolved, or it becomes so ubiquitous it cannot be avoided because you might not know if an image was generated by AI or not.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 16:18
|
|
|
I think the biggest takeaway from this thread, overall, and really this entire industry and the entertainment sector in general is that MBAs are pieces of poo poo and giving them any form of control heralded the death of creativity and innovation.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 16:35
|
|
|
Developing a TG policy on AI-generated content can't be entirely decoupled from the ethical considerations (or legal ones: right now the law has not caught up to what some "AI" developers are doing). I'm also concerned that some of the arguments pro-AI generation seem to be walking along the edges of the (bad) argument for illegally downloading software: "I wasn't going to buy the game anyway." (None of this is actually AI, IMO, but I'll keep using the term anyway in this post as scare quoting it every time is worse.) What I think can be generally agreed is that there's well-defined sides for this argument, people feel strongly, and there doesn't seem to be very much progress made in the debate so much as two sets of people with diametrically opposed understanding of the basis for discussion yelling at one another. Preventing that from cropping up randomly across TG whenever anyone posts "hey, here's a PC generated entirely by AI" seems desirable, even if some people have made posts like that recently without triggering a debate. Frankly, such posts seem to hit both "low effort" and "starting an argument" (intentionally or not). A single AI thread would have the virtue of setting an expectation that, when someone posts AI-generated content in another thread, the correct response would be to say "hey, forum policy is to share AI generated stuff in this other thread" and not "why do you steal food from the mouths of starving artists." Not that that perspective might not be valuable to someone thoughtlessly using AI, but that the discussion shouldn't be happening constantly, predictably, and across the whole subforum. Communist Thoughts posted:i have already found many uses for image and text generation in my life and so have many people i know. we're literally talking about people using image generators in tabletop games, which i can assure it it works for. Here's the basis, or at least part of the basis, for a new AI thread, at least to me. How to use generative software in TT games. There's a second question I'll engage with in a moment concerning restricting the generators. Such a thread would discourage low effort posts of "hey, guys, I just spent five seconds giving ChatGPT a prompt and here's what it spat out! Here, let me post five hundred more examples!!" The focus would instead be on how to use the tools as part of something larger, that involves human effort or curation. Someone posting "this is an interesting Shadowrun image" doesn't really do any work; someone discussing how they touched up an AI-generated image does work, and what's more, it teaches how to take something generated by a tool and make it better. I suppose even a post discussing how to refine prompts to get what you want from *insert AI generator name here* would be valuable. If this is transformative technology--and it could be, though I don't think we can know yet, and that question is separate from the question of how it can be ethically used or abused--then surely a thread about it ought to focus on how the technology can be best used in tabletop gaming to transform the experience, and that conversation should be instructive and illustrative, not a bunch of people spitting out undigested ChatGPT content. As for the second question: there's already a range of text and image generators available, and they can be distinguished usefully from one another. I haven't visited the existing AI thread in TG, but I wonder how many of the posts there involve generation software that has been discussed in this thread as more ethical by those generally opposed to such software, like Adobe's? If that's fairly common, I see less harm in restricting discussion to software and tools specifically developed ethically; if nobody posting there is using such tools and everyone posting is using tools by developers who just took everything available on the Internet, then I'd actually be more concerned because it suggests the unethically-developed tools are "better" and thus more likely to catch on. In other words, from my perspective, if the tools aren't much different, no harm is done in pushing for the AI thread to focus on the more ethically developed tools; if they ARE different, then permitting free discussion helps boost the unethical ones because they are "better" and there's both more pressure not to restrict them and a greater reason to do so. If mods don't want to be in the business of defining ethical or unethical generators, I can certainly understand that. But I think mods would differentiate between a link to Archive.org and a link to Pirate Bay, so I think that issue should at least be considered. And I'd want to hear from the AI generator proponents/posters on what they think would be the effects or harms of such a restriction. I do think it matters, though. These particular technologies are still early in development and I think the pressure by their developers to hype and get them adopted by Microsoft/Google/Apple right now is both understandable from a business perspective and massively premature. My concern is that the "best actors" in this narrow sub-industry are likely not the ones most successful with the hype, and that companies more willing to cut ethical corners and market and sell an incomplete, imperfect, and sometimes harmful product are the ones whose products are getting lots of free press and early adoption. ChatGPT is already doing demonstrable harm, harm I'm not sure will even be mitigated as the "product" is "improved," and I'm not aware of anyone affiliated with that corporation working hand-in-hand with, say, the US Department of Education to help develop stronger cheating detection. That in itself doesn't prove it should be banned from discussion in TG, but that decision has real stakes (if very small ones) and people in this forum can and do shape their purchasing decisions around what they read here. I honestly don't know whether a dedicated "using generative tools" thread that allows free use of any and all generative software but also allows ongoing discussions about the ethics of using every piece of software is a good idea or a bad one. It isn't like the same thing doesn't come up with game companies, or Google, or Apple, or Microsoft. Maybe cover the software and have a sentence or two on what we know about each developer's ethical approach to creating it, in the OP, and then let the thread sort out the rest? This kind of question is why I'm glad I'm not a mod. Narsham fucked around with this message at 16:44 on Jun 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 16:40
|
|
|
If the AI bros had backbones they wouldn't write their own posts, they'd ask chatGPT to do it for them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 16:43
|
|
|
If anybody gave a poo poo about AI generated content, they'd be happy to have it all on the same thread so they can interact with each other and show off said content in a place where people will appreciate it. Unfortunately not even the most hardcore AI aficionado gives a poo poo about reading or viewing other people's AI generations.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 16:46
|
|
|
Considering the amount of time I've spent finding references, writing descriptions, giving feedback, editing and cropping images to zero in on what part of a design I want incorporated into the design I'm describing, arranging mood boards and the like, sketching silhouettes, I think that's definitely a form of art; and a key part of the artistic process. At least in my experience, rarely does anyone start commissioning knowing perfectly how to get what they envision from an artist, and rarely do they happen to stumble upon the right artist for them and their vision; it takes years of practice and experience and a lot of money spent. That kinda sounds like a sort of creative skill to me, one fairly essential to the creation of a specific product. Which is kinda a part of the problem, it kinda sucks tell people to just commission an artist when if its like their first time or inexperienced doing so they're highly likely to have a highly variable experience that might not even get them what they want, because now they also wasted their money. Or heck maybe all they know are bad experiences and constant failures to get what they want, telling them to keep putting their money into the gacha they'll definitely get their S-Rank pull this time is obviously going to be met with resistance. While on the other hand, few seconds or maybe hours of google gets someone something basically good enough for their private personal purposes. This kinda strikes me as less as a problem with the technology and more of a service problem, that yes has a lot of overlaps with the debate around piracy, and we aren't solving these problems by banning AI art in whatever form such rules take, you can't ultimately compel people to spend money.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 16:46
|
|
|
gurragadon posted:I don't really understand the need for intent for something to have meaning or beauty. A sunset doesn't have intent, it just is, but it can inspire. I piece of AI art doesn't have intent, it just is, but it can inspire. A piece of normal art may have intent, but it still inspires. They all provide inspiration or meaning to the viewer. I as a human can give things meaning even if they were created by something with no conscious. I think the monkey hypothetical is stupid because we don't have Hamlet written by monkeys and we never will. The same with the stupid loving "what if Shakespeare had an AI write Hamlet?" well he didn't so it's stupid to contemplate. It's all perfectly spherical cow navel-gazing masturbation that leads to crap like Roko's basilisk. Things don't need intent to be beautiful, but things also don't need to be "art" to be beautiful either. And art doesn't need to be beautiful. Or you can broaden your definition of "art" to include everything in the universe regardless on if it has a mind or not, but that's also going into masturbatory "but what is art, really?" discourse. I don't think people would say the forces of nature are comparable to an AI bot in any case. I'd say the state of a sunset is neither art nor beauty on its own. Those are meanings we apply to those situations, as irrational little animals. We've trained AIs to cater to what we expect and want. They produce sunsets because we tell them we find them beautiful. Or maybe we could train an AI to be "subversive" so you ask for something beautiful and it produces a realistic painterly turd. It's doing that because it's still dependent on the particular understandings certain humans have about what things mean and can't define stuff for itself. Fuzz posted:I think the biggest takeaway from this thread, overall, and really this entire industry and the entertainment sector in general is that MBAs are pieces of poo poo and giving them any form of control heralded the death of creativity and innovation. 
Nuns with Guns fucked around with this message at 17:02 on Jun 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 16:50
|
|
|
Leperflesh, why do you consider the wants of a small, toxic fraction of the community to be more important than the wants of the large, vocal majority of the community? The past 10 pages have made it abundantly clear that the preponderance of TG doesn't want to engage with AI and would like a quarantine and that the AI bros do not respect that unless enforced. You aren't a government official, nobody is being put in jail. Just do a reverse Lowtax and grow a spine and shove this poo poo back in quarantine and be done with it instead of composing another 1000-word screed full of whataboutism and mealymouth both-sides placating. If you can't read the last 10 pages and come to a moderation decision, tell us, and we'll get the admins to find someone who will.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 16:57
|
|
|
Also, reboot this loving thread so that the OP isn't Podima and his bros laughing at each other for the 5 minutes before he got perma'ed for fucks sake.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 16:59
|
|
|
Narsham posted:I'm also concerned that some of the arguments pro-AI generation seem to be walking along the edges of the (bad) argument for illegally downloading software: "I wasn't going to buy the game anyway." (None of this is actually AI, IMO, but I'll keep using the term anyway in this post as scare quoting it every time is worse.) Hey, the whole main MtG thread is already MASSIVELY pro-proxy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:00
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:Also, reboot this loving thread so that the OP isn't Podima and his bros laughing at each other for the 5 minutes before he got perma'ed for fucks sake.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:06
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:Leperflesh, why do you consider the wants of a small, toxic fraction of the community to be more important than the wants of the large, vocal majority of the community? Despite the best efforts of the toxic assholes on both sides of the discussion, I think there are a few people genuinely trying to hammer out something worthwhile. This isn’t a hospital; it’s fine for the mods to take a few days.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:13
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:Leperflesh, why do you consider the wants of a small, toxic fraction of the community to be more important than the wants of the large, vocal majority of the community? As Thanlis says, there's been toxicity on both sides? It also seems like a roughly approximately even number of people on both sides of the debate have posted in the thread regarding the issue; so I feel that it's good for the moderators to try to talk to everyone and get everyone's input and arrive at a hopefully careful compromise.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:16
|
|
|
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. ravenkult posted:Are you saying artists currently in the industry can't tell if they're being affected? If client X of mine has hired me for their last 3 books and on book 4 it's all AI art, does that satisfy the condition that I lost work and was harmed by AI image generation? If client Y goes on a rant on social media decrying the pushback on AI art and saying they won't be told what they can and can't do and they will be using AI images exclusively, isn't that a reasonable deduction? Would you say that, as a trend, have you received less work since the advent of AI art? What about other artists you know and work with? Other posters have brought up AIs like Firefly with ostensibly ethically sourcing of art - work from artists explicitly consenting to this automation process. If only these ethically sourced AIs were available to your client X, do you think they would have contracted you for their 4th book? In the same case, do you think client Y would have dissolved their relationship with you? There's at least 3 harms at play - harm from AI automation of art, harm from indiscriminate internet scraping of art for AI automation, and harm from the randomness of the reality (e.g., COVID downturn in the economy) - and I'm curious about how the second has affected you. Like you say, we don't know if the backing down of these companies was due to backlash, or to the companies realizing AI work to be unsaleable in general, or to any other reason. It's fine to me if much of the public doesn't want to watch or buy AI work, I just don't want it to be banned in TG or be ostracized for liking to use and make it. Thanks for sharing, and I agree that the National Eating Disorder Association made a big error here. However, the worker quoted in the article stated this to be about union-busting, and other quotes identify the major issue with the AI automation to be its lack of human empathy (a necessity for the job). If your point is that automation can be used by Capital as a tool against the Worker... then you have issues which are not going to be solved with removal of AI content from TG. This is not evidence of harm, and you freely admit the WGA strike is preemptive. It isn't clear that it's even possible to automate the writer's jobs - AI may never be able to produce usable writing for a (profitable) Hollywood production. Thanlis posted:Despite the best efforts of the toxic assholes on both sides of the discussion, I think there are a few people genuinely trying to hammer out something worthwhile. This isn’t a hospital; it’s fine for the mods to take a few days. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:23
|
|
|
Thanlis posted:Despite the best efforts of the toxic assholes on both sides of the discussion, I think there are a few people genuinely trying to hammer out something worthwhile. This isn’t a hospital; it’s fine for the mods to take a few days. Hard disagree. Many people said their piece in the first few pages and now are too tired of this poo poo and don't owe the thread anything, so they aren't continually posting "this poo poo sucks, quarantine it". If the plan was to just delay the decision until people were too fatigued to care, mission loving accomplished.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:33
|
|
|
HOMOEROTIC JESUS posted:
It's hard to say if it's less, it's all freelance so it comes and goes. It's on a downward trend however. In the small potatoes publishing industry (genre fiction like horror and sci-fi) AI covers are an epidemic for sure. You could argue they're cutting out designers that would charge $50-$200 for photo-based covers but I don't see it stopping there, personally. I think Firefly by virtue of not being fed on contemporary artist's work would not be able to replace artists for these uses. That's what I've seen from people that have replaced artists and have tried Firefly; the consensus is that Midjourney is great for making art, Firefly is currently useless for it. Might just be a taste thing or they got used to MJ's style. You could argue that they're not stealing from anyone 'till the cows come home but then when every prompt includes some variation of "in the style of" it becomes a bit transparent that's not the case. For ttrpg work I've been in a lot of public slapfights as there's the idea that games need art, art costs money, profits for ttrpgs are low, thus any way to cut costs in art is great. It's disappointing to see past clients and friends suddenly turn around and call artists "entitled" for wanting to get paid or for taking issue with AI art . Then celebrating the advent of AI that freed them from the yoke of the artist.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:37
|
|
|
I definitely have no problem agreeing that there's been societal harms, like that one Korean mobile game company replacing their art team with AI, which they've been widely criticized for afaik. I'm just not sure if these harms are relevant to the specific use cases being suggested to be accepted in some fashion here, because no one here is a corporation; and maybe the more relevant ones can be mitigated to some degree without affecting hobbyists interested in the technology for private use.Toshimo posted:Hard disagree. Many people said their piece in the first few pages and now are too tired of this poo poo and don't owe the thread anything, so they aren't continually posting "this poo poo sucks, quarantine it". If the plan was to just delay the decision until people were too fatigued to care, mission loving accomplished. IIRC some people on the AI side of things likewise aren't posting, or posted their say in other threads.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:39
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:Hard disagree. Many people said their piece in the first few pages and now are too tired of this poo poo and don't owe the thread anything, so they aren't continually posting "this poo poo sucks, quarantine it". If the plan was to just delay the decision until people were too fatigued to care, mission loving accomplished. If people are tired of the discussion, they can choose to not read it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:42
|
|
|
Can we all agree that the people quoted from the AI thread calling this authoritarian or comparing anti-ai to racism be brutally destroyed and banned. Don't think that should be tolerated.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:43
|
|
|
There is, clearly, no consensus on if AI belongs in Trad Games or not.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:43
|
|
|
Ibram Gaunt posted:Can we all agree that the people quoted from the AI thread calling this authoritarian or comparing anti-ai to racism be brutally destroyed and banned. Don't think that should be tolerated. Yeah we should put them in the oven and gas them. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:44
|
|
|
Fuzz posted:Yeah we should put them in the oven and gas them. ....?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:45
|
|
|
Thanlis posted:… what? Human interactions aren’t always transactional. Sometimes we communicate because we want to share information (“this is what my character looks like.”) Sometimes we want to share emotional resonance; a lot of the AI posts I find annoying are people who get excited and want to share their excitement. They’re wrong to be excited, but I get the emotion behind it. For purposes of this discussion, "experiencing Alice Human's feelings" can also be something that Alice Human wants Bob Human to do.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:46
|
|
|
Fuzz posted:Yeah we should put them in the oven and gas them. "I think comparing the entitled techbros who don't wanna learn how to draw to real racial inequality is bad." "Yeah I think we should MAKE ALL TECH BROS WEAR GOLDEN STARS." it's so cool when you people are even more insane then any strawman the most disingenuous person could create
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:48
|
|
|
Fuzz posted:Yeah we should put them in the oven and gas them. hey dude real quick; what the gently caress
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:48
|
|
|
Ibram Gaunt posted:Can we all agree that the people quoted from the AI thread calling this authoritarian or comparing anti-ai to racism be brutally destroyed and banned. Don't think that should be tolerated. I'm entirely fine with a forum-wide rule that comparing people not liking your dumb nerd hobby to being a persecuted racial/sexual/religious minority is at least a nice long probe. Fuzz posted:Yeah we should put them in the oven and gas them. Here's as good a place to start as any.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:49
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I definitely have no problem agreeing that there's been societal harms, like that one Korean mobile game company replacing their art team with AI, which they've been widely criticized for afaik. I'm just not sure if these harms are relevant to the specific use cases being suggested to be accepted in some fashion here, because no one here is a corporation; and maybe the more relevant ones can be mitigated to some degree without affecting hobbyists interested in the technology for private use. The harms cannot be separated from the technology. The harm is the point.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:49
|
|
|
edit: wrong button
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:51
|
|
|
Fuzz posted:Yeah we should put them in the oven and gas them. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:51
|
|
|
It does seem like consensus is moments away
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:55
|
|
|
You may be asking yourself, "What is the difference between being robbed of basic human freedoms due to an arbitrary expression of one gene and people who want to use a toy to steal art." Well, my dear viewer, there is no difference. Tech bros are the most persecuted people in the world, second only to straight white men and Christians in America.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:55
|
|
|
Ibram Gaunt posted:Can we all agree that the people quoted from the AI thread calling this authoritarian or comparing anti-ai to racism be brutally destroyed and banned. Don't think that should be tolerated. Probe seems fine. “Brutally destroyed” seems… a little over the top.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:56
|
|
|
Thanlis posted:Probe seems fine. “Brutally destroyed” seems… a little over the top. banned and encouraged to be normal
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:58
|
|
|
I am going to do the most dangerous move in wrestling on AI art. I don't know what that is because I don't watch wrestling, so I'm accepting submissions and feedback now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:58
|
|
|
I dont think anything is too over the top for people who generate pics of elfs for their pals or concept art for cool models
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 18:00
|
|
|
Ego Trip posted:The harms cannot be separated from the technology. The harm is the point. I think a lot of people disagree, and I don't think we're deciding this one way or another here, there's an AI thread in D&D we can move this discussion to if you'd like, it seems like a lot of intelligent people post interesting arguments there. Ibram Gaunt posted:Can we all agree that the people quoted from the AI thread calling this authoritarian or comparing anti-ai to racism be brutally destroyed and banned. Don't think that should be tolerated. I think it's more that some people feel kinda upset in that they feel like they're being unfairly targeted and thus prone to posting absurd things in anger; like many people have on the other side of the argument as well. But sure I agree that maybe a mod could've said, "Hey guys I know you're feeling angry but please tone it down you aren't helping your case." Asking for bans or "brutally destroying" people seems egregious though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 18:02
|
|
|
Ban all OC, AI or otherwise. Banish it all to the thread where people post about their dreams.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 18:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 4, 2024 02:01 |
|
|
Ominous Jazz posted:banned and encouraged to be normal Mmm, no, still over the top. Increasing sequence of probes is fine. I’m on board with a sixer (at least) for the gas chamber analogy, and if that poster has a history, jack it up.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 18:03
|
|