You must log in or register to comment.
Slop is insulting. If I take the time to read it, I want another human to have taken the time to write it.
The counter there is to have an AI summarize it. No time taken to write nor to read haha
So iPhone 16 notification?
Eh, that makes it too easy for AI to avoid eating its own excrement
interesting counterpoint. but i also imagine if ai content was correctly tagged, traffic to slop content would dramatically decrease, reducing incentive to post the content in the first place.
i don’t know which force is stronger but i think both certainly exist.
This. Don’t let AI or AI posters know that you caught on. Just report them and be on your way.
I am in complete agreement with this. While you can currently tell what’s AI it won’t be long before we’re scratching our heads wondering which way is up and which way is down. Hell, I saw an AI generated video of a cat cooking food. It looked real sortve.
A lot of people seem to think that all ai art is low effort garbage, which is just not true. There can be a lot of skill put into crafting the correct prompt to get the image you want from an image generator, not to mention the technical know-how of setting it up locally. The “ai art is not art” argument to me doesn’t sound any more substantiated than “electronic musicians aren’t musicians, go learn a real instrument” or “photographers aren’t really artists, all they do is push a button”. But regardless, I agree that we need good tagging, or as @ThatWeirdGuy1001 said, different communities. Even though the output looks similar, actually drawing things and wrangling prompts are two completely different skillsets, and the way we engage with the artistic product of those skills is completely different. You wouldn’t submit a photo you took to a watercolor painting contest. Same with ai art and non-ai art.
Anyway, just thought i’d share my opinion as an ai non-hater.
For art to be art you need space to express yourself through individual choices:
- play an original song on a real instrument, and you have the entire artistic spectrum to yourself
- if you make the music for it out of individual pieces, you narrow that range. The sounds are not yours, only their composition and words
- when you record a cover of a rap song over some elses beat, you further narrow it down to your performance only. Its still artistic expression, but to a much less degree than an original song
In a prompt generated image, the image itself is not your expression. The prompt is, but comparing the amount of choices you need to make with a painting over a prompt, its just so… less art?
If you can’t tell, does it matter?
Yes
Why?
Because edited pictures and CGI require actual effort?, the artist will credit themselves, but ai “artist” most of the time didn’t say it’s ai generated
Because generative AI should burn in hell.
It’s here to stay. You’re a luddite with no understanding of the subject matter and should fuck off. The hate bubble is deflating
You’re free to show your AI images to your AI friends who will give you AI congratulations. I’m not sure why I need to be a part of this masturbation.
Do you think computers are generating images for other computers to look at? I applaud your optimism about AI but we’re not there yet. There are always people involved
No, I think the bitcoin nft metaverse gooners of yesteryear have found a new thing to pretend is the future.
Not everyone will use it. Many right wing types spreading divisive or incorrect information, for example.
I’ve also seen boobies that were not flagged NSFW. I didn’t throw my hands up and just delete my NSFW filter though.
Text, sure. But I don’t get the hate towards AI generated images. If it’s a good image and it’s not meant to mislead, I am completely fine with AI content. It’s not slop if it’s good.
It’s still stolen content. Regardless of any other issues, it’s 100% stolen content.
So I assume you are morally opposed to piracy?
There’s a pretty clear difference in the two. If piracy ended in a new digital good that removes the market for the original good while eliminating the jobs of those that made the original good, then it’d be close. Even then pretty much everyone agrees not all piracy is the same; you wouldn’t pirate an indie game that hasn’t sold well unless you’re an absolute piece of subhuman shit.
I really enjoyed the “Hobbit: Extended Edition” project which condensed the three films of the Hobbit trilogy down into a single film, and as an unofficial fan-made project, is only available online for free.
Under that proposed gradient, I’m not sure where that would fall, given that it is a transformative work which uses the work of others to make them redundant (in this case, the original trilogy and the studios which would have otherwise profited from those sales).
I feel like there’s a better way to divide it, but it will be difficult to negotiate the exact line against the long-held contradictory ideas that art should both be divorced from its creator once released but also that the creator is entitled to full control and profit until the expiry of its copyright.
well uh, idk how to break it to you but it kinda does.
Piracy doesn’t equal a 1:1 sale, that argument is true, however that argument works with both AI and piracy plus it goes both ways.
The more people who do it via the free method, the less people who /may/ have bought it via the paid method. Meaning the less profit/earnings for the affected party.
However, since it goes both ways, obtaining the item via the free method does not mean that they would have purchased the paid good if the free good wasn’t available.
Both versions the original market is still available, regardless of method used.
I highly disagree that piracy and AI are any different at least in the scenario you provided.
if anything AI would be a morally higher ground imo, as it isn’t directly taking a product, it’s making something else using other products.
Being said I believe that CC’s should be paid for the training usage, but that’s a whole different argument.
It’s not solely about pay, but also what your work is used for. It makes sense you don’t understand this if you’ve never created anything, artwise or otherwise. If I draw a picture I control who displays that picture and for what purpose. If someone I don’t like uses that picture without permission it reflects poorly on me, and destroys my rights.
The easy example is an art piece by a Holocaust survivor being used by a neonazi without permission.
Now imagine you steal tens of millions of artists work. You know for a fact you don’t have the licenses needed to ensure their work is used to their liking.
I am torn on that. If it’s a company making money off of it, despicable. If it’s an open source model used for memes? I’m fine with that. We shouldn’t act like artists follow some magical calling from god. Anything anyone creates is built on their education and the media they were exposed to. I don’t think generative models are any different.
Normalizing is a thing, on top of that there are still indie markets that can be supplanted by gan image generation. On top of that artists still have rights to their work, if they didn’t explicitly license their works for the model, it’s theft that removes the value of the original.
deleted by creator
Yes, just because you disagree that your new toy is literally theft and is one of the most irresponsible inventions since leaded gasoline, that doesn’t change anything.
Sorry you’re the type of person that added lead shot to your gas tank after they banned leaded gasoline.
deleted by creator
It is available on R34, Hentai and Porn Website.
Truly we are just improving our tech to goon. LOL
Tech progress has always been driven by humanity’s desire to either kill or fuck someone. I, for one, prefer horny-based progress. Make love, not war, and all that.
we need more innovation in the intersection of killing and fucking, perhaps by designing more realistic fuck-dolls that can have explosives rigged to them to trap and kill soldiers.
