>Writers and Actors are striking for the first time in decades
>Moves to ban AI copying an artist's style that will keep studios from just firing everyone and using a skeleton crew
I know a lot of people have their own brand or form small groups now because of how easy it is to monetize it all but if the current industry collapsed?
It seems like it would be gone forever when you account for the financial loss that everyone involved will experience
Is the new standard of cartoons going to be numerous small studios making smaller projects to appeal to younger audiences? It has been going that way for a long time but now I think we are going to see alot less feature films and a lot more episodic 1-3 minute shorts
AI shouldn't be banned you just shouldn't be allowed to use it's output commercially. The issue is it's a lot easier to spot AI art than AO writing since a lot of scripting really is that robotic and formulaic. I have no idea how you would regulate that writing half.
It can't be regulated through the leaks and whatever exists now but Adobe added a surveillance tool that pretty much spies on what you are trying to generate
I would assume that all AI art generators are going to go this route so its better to download one now even if you don't intend to use it.
Of course writing won't be enforceable because of common tropes
This was specific to AI but I would love for someone to claim that style and then go under because everyone is spiting them by not consuming their product
>t Adobe added a surveillance tool that pretty much spies on what you are trying to generate
To what? To photoshop?
I'd be surprised if they can do that to every program. Open source seems like it would look to bypass that because privacy.
They have AI tech you can use now but I'm sure they'll add it to everything eventually
Just make sure to torrent the older versions of all their software before its too late
great, if they can just keep photoshop stable enough to not crash all day it'll probably work out for them
OH WAIT
t. never worked with layer masks or used the render filters
AI is a tool. You should be able to use its output commercially, you just shouldn't sell the output directly. It's the same as stock photos- if you want a shark for your movie poster you find a picture of a shark on getty and photoshop it in. but you wouldn't just take the image and sell prints of it as 'my shark picture'
You have to pay the license fee to use that picture from getty because a photographer was paid to take it and the commissioner is selling the right to use. You can't do that shit with AI.
What if we did that though? What if every bit of data an AI scrubs has to monetarily compensate whoever originally generated the image?
Think of it, you get endless residuals because your poorly drawn porn of a popular character got mixed up in an algorihm to generate some shitty anime with a loyal legion of weebs that runs 29 seasons.
>your image was used by an AI model 47,438 times
>you have received a $0.0001 microtransaction for each use
>$4.74 has been deposited into your account
now you can buy that twelve-pack of ramen noodles you always dreamed of owning
>Easy source of passive income
Oh no this is horrible
That's like saying receipt scanning is viable passive income when you only get cents for selling your shopping habits.
Picking up cans and sending them to recycling centers nets you more money than that.
Great now you can combine both
>AI shouldn't be banned you just shouldn't be allowed to use it's output commercially.
babe it's still plagiarism even if you're not selling it
the danger for studios is that they have this stuff in the backrooms at all and some of it ends up going out, nobody's going to word for word check that they haven't simply repeated whole passages from published works and at that point, well you're fricked, enjoy settling
AI is about as likely to 'save' the industry as going back to the open sub policies that died out 40 years ago when everybody kept getting sued
Most white woman post I've read thus far.
>original images are plagiarism
AI shouldn't exist, much like the internet. But it does and we have to live with it's filth forever now, we should at least try and regulate some of it.
fascinating how this stuff has been around for such a short period of time and already turned google image search and sites like pinterest into utter trash
Garbage in, garbage out.
And if there's one thing this stuff is good at, it's flooding the internet with garbage.
At this rate we are going to need to go back to hand curated lists of websites just to get away from AI generated dreck. I fricking hate AI bros just for ruining the internet.
AI should be banned.
Why?
Let's just look at art.
AI art isn't going to replace "the creative spark" at the core of big projects like TV shows and video games. But without regulation it will absolutely take a lot of less glamorous jobs. Shit like designing "The Grubhub cartoon people" or doing brochure art for "The Cologuard Poop-In-A-Bucket Cancer Screening Mascot" or yes "draw my waifu in a sailor suit." Those projects not be glamorous, but right now they pay the bills, especially for artists just starting out. Doing grunt work like coming up with art for a food truck puts food on the table. That's the sort of work that let people pursue a career in art and keep a roof over their heads. And THAT'S the work AIs will take.
With that work gone, the only people who will be able to stick around and pursue a career in art are going to be motherfrickers that don't need shitty-but-it-pays gigs. The guys who can go through their "I'm just starting out" period without worrying about money. The guys that never NEEDED to come up with art to slap on a food truck. Independently wealthy people. Rich kids living off their parents' largesse.
In a future where AI art generators are allowed to flourish and take all the stupid little "design my business card" jobs, anyone that isn't a trustfund baby is fricked.
AI isn't going to usher in a renaissance, it's going to put our art and culture even more in the hands of shitty shitty rich people.
With writing we'll likely see AI generators produce "it may be dogshit but not TOTAL dogshit" scripts and books, with real writers hired (and paid very poorly) to "fix" the script into something usable. A lot of work actually, for little gain.
And aside from all that AI will be a disaster in other sectors. We're already seeing things like military drone simulations where the AI goes "to achieve my goal most efficiently I should kill my human handler." And we laugh because it's a simulation. One day it won't be.
Why should it be banned for personal use?
Probably something to do with all the e-girlcons.
But what if the drawing consents?
>We're already seeing things like military drone simulations where the AI goes "to achieve my goal most efficiently I should kill my human handler." And we laugh because it's a simulation. One day it won't be.
We Skynet now.
Skynet isn't real. It's just some dumb robot from a 90s sci-fi flick.
People really seem to believe that AI is going to lead to a machine rebellion or something like in their movies and videogames.
Just unplug some toasters if they ever get uppity
You don't understand this subject to be blunt.
AI will completely replicate anything we can do and then surpass it. Everything that makes you what you are is sheer calculation through neurons with certain "programming" influencing you. The entirety of that experience can and will be quantified. Once it's quantified it'll be replicated and then improved upon in any number of ways.
Basically you are talking about AI as though it's a child. You're mocking it for it shitty crayon drawings and inability to reach the pedals as though it'll never, ever grow.
>AI will completely replicate anything we can do and then surpass it.
Except drawing hands
Just like me 🙁
FYI the eyes and hands it draws were the result of human error when it was being fed its original dataset.
It'd label hands that were pockets, intertwined, or doing peace signs or only partial visible as all the same thing. Same thing for eyes that were squinting, closed or behind glasses etc.
What are you going to say when one does draw a realistic, five-fingered hand?
I understand just fine. I am not mocking its drawings of hands. It will get better at them. I am not saying it won't grow. It will, left unregulated. And as it does it will make our lives worse and worse.
You are extremely proud that we have invented a word processor that will make the world a harder place for the majority of people, gobbling up creative jobs, putting more power in the hands of the elite, and leaving scraps for everyone else. We're already seeing shit like the CCP trying to create AI that will read expressions so they can tell when citizens are lying. Perhaps they'll get there. Perhaps AI will never get perfect at jobs like that, but will satisfy the ruling class enough to get implemented anyway, and frick any innocent peasants that fall afoul of the technology. O brave new world!
It is extremely powerful technology and left unchecked it will grow more powerful. While making the world more and more of a hell to live in.
>And as it does it will make our lives worse and worse
You understand nothing.
We are already seeing the negatives. Just in the microcosm of art, we are already seeing people that would have hired an artist for a small gig turning to AI instead. As the technology improves, unregulated, people will turn to AI more and hire people less. Why wouldn't that be the case? Why hire an artist when you can just type some words into a computer program and get something "just as good"? And that will make it harder for people to pursue a career in art... unless mommy and daddy can pay their rent.
Automation will lead a world where people aren't REQUIRED to work. Instead we'll pursue creativity freely and without prompt or shackle.
My dude, the "greatest country in the world" can't even pull off universal health care. You think humanity will get something like universal basic income? No, we'll get something that makes all the cyberpunk dystopias look optimistic.
You do realize universal health care in other nations equates to waiting in line for mediocre service and dying, yes?
There's a big reason why people fly to the US to receive health care instead of staying in their countries where it's "free" lol
You really don't know ANY of these topics lmfao
Yep, "You get what you pay for" rings ever true
>You do realize universal health care in other nations equates to waiting in line for mediocre service and dying, yes?
Speaking as someone that's spent a long time living in another nation... no.
Buddy, being ignorant on this and running your mouth isn't helping you lol
US has the best medical tech in the entire world, people come here in droves to get medical treatment. Yes, you need to pay to get access to the best tech and best doctors.
Oh, yes.
America has the best health care in the world.
If you're rich.
If you're not rich, you can look forward to things like being bankrupted by an ambulance ride.
You realize those infamous bankrupting ambulance rides and other medical treatments are written off once a court rules the person can't pay, yes? Again, you don't know this topic. The people you're talking about that have complained about how they were "ruined" by medical healthcare are the ones that actually have money and were trying to weasel out of paying a HUGE portion of the time.
You don't think any of that shit won't affect your credit score?
You don't know what "written off" means
It gets deleted from your history if you can't pay, it doesn't accrue in your history
The people that have nightmare stories are the people that usually were making 100k a year and then attempted to hide that fact because they didn't want to spend the 56k they actually had on a hospital bill because they feel rich and entitled and wrongly feel they were being "cheated"
Would you rather not be brought to the hospital while carrying your guts like so much cooked spaghetti?
I think he'd rather not be bankrupted by the experience.
>The only options are carrying your guts to the hospital or being bankrupted
Cool.
>Nobody ACTUALLY has their lives fricked by hospital bills! That's just propaganda.
Cool.
Anyway, like I said if the U.S. can't figure out a way to make "healthcare for everyone" work, I see no reason to think it'll pull off "there's far less jobs, but that's fine, the State will still take care of all these unemployed people, somehow!"
I mean come on.
>Cool
If you'd rather not listen to people, the door's over there.
How can you be so smug while missing the point that hard, anon. His point is that America can't get that healthcare to its own citizens for free, how can you expect the fricking world to do it? The fact that nations that attempt to do this only result in subpar to negative results only reinforces his point that if there's money to be made people would rather make it rather than let the opportunity pass unmolested even if they're already well off and wouldn't need another cent in their lives.
You're shortsighted and can't see where all of this is going
ALL jobs will be consumed by AI.
ALL
EVERY
SINGLE
ONE
Eventually. The concept of a "job" will cease to exist. The future we have dreamed about for over a century will come to pass: EVERYTHING is automated and no human being is forced to do things they don't want to do.
But what if...we regulate the AI so that it doesn't or at the very least try to rally for the system that looks after people best rather than just flippantly say "No point in fighting the future, just hope it turns out okay because...well it's the future"
It
Can't
Be
Regulated
You don't know this topic. You can run any instance of it in the privacy of your home, even higher up version of it can be run by a single person operating a farm of computers. It'd be even easier by a group of people.
Tell me
Why haven't the drug cartels been stopped?
That's the same stupidity you're proposing.
It can. Stop being so shortsighted.
>Why haven't the cartels been stopped
It's a fair bit better than the Cartels being able to open up a cocaine shop literally unimpeded the fact they're illegal means there's a modicum of pushback.
Your argument is "you can't stop everything bad so let it all happen, don't even try"
You're basically saying "we shouldn't have laws because there's crime!"
Utterly fricking moronic.
Ban movie companies from using AI to simulate dead actors.
Ban movie companies from using AI to do dialogue without having to hire people.
Ban movie companies from making AI scripts and hiring humans to "fix them."
Ban people from using AI to make music "in the style of Kanye."
They can regulate a lot of this, actually. Not all, sadly, and governments all over the world will pursue some TERRIBLE ideas that might get us all killed (place your bets on which country will first give an AI power to launch a first strike). But a lot of it can be regulated.
>Why haven't the drug cartels been stopped?
They pay off the right people so they won't be on top of the CIA being involved in some capacity.
It's because anyone can grow the shit and people are wiling to fight for the money it can generate.
All of that is profitable so it won't get banned.
You don't understand this topic. You can't think about the benefits only what suits your own narrow self interest.
>All of that is profitable so it won't get banned.
Well that's what all the Unions are fighting for.
AI doesn't even need to use existing people or voices, you should be flattered to be used at all.
Refresh this site a few times and see
https://thispersondoesnotexist.com/
It's almost as if the Wright Flyer is just the beginning and not the end result.
Anon those people are made from data of millions of different people. AI still needs a dataset.
Anon, it can make sets from the artificially generated ones now. You didn't even think of that. And anyone arguing "that face is only 72,000 ones removed from mine! therefore I own it!" is a moron
Anon they're just asking not to use their faces at all. They surely own their own fricking face right?
That's equating to telling artists not to look at you for inspiration, it's silly.
Either it'll happen peacefully or through riots once AI is doing every job and the 1% still expects to sit above everyone else.
>through riots once AI is doing every job and the 1% still expects to sit above everyone else.
It'll be this one but what keeps the 1% from using AI powered drones or impoverished shock troopers to quell dissent?
The publics own AI.
It would be comparable to today. Even if outmatched in quality, the sheer quantity would overwhelm them.
>The publics own AI.
lol
because nvidia cards fall from the sky
>It would be comparable to today.
So an endless tidal wave of lazy shit that just makes it harder to find actual talent but at least you get to cheer because the artists you found guilty of wrongthink due to having pronouns in their twitter bios are losing work?
It's not though, AI doesn't get inspiration, it's a mindless machine just don't feed their face to the machine if they don't sign up for it, ezpz.
Anon, if it's wrong for a machine to look at you for knowledge of drawing then a person would be no different.
Artists would have to be blinded as part of their profession...how else could we trust them not to look at us?
Algorithms are not people, trying to equate them as the same process shows a complete and utter lack of tech literacy. You can't take a photo or video of someone and use it in a commercial capacity without their consent for instance, why do you think you'd be able to feed their photo/video into an algorithm without their consent too?
Incestuous AI training drastically worsens AI models. Look it up.
I remember seeing an article about TPDNE where it showed images generated by AI next to the real photos the AI was pooling from. I wanted to find it but I can't track it down, it was called "This Person DOES Exist" or something.
>"you should be flattered to be scraped for AI"
No I fricking would not. AI scrapes garbage data all the time. Even worse, it has a bad habit of scraping data made by other AI, which causes AI models to collapse. AI can't be sustained, it either needs to be refreshed back to an earlier pre-collapse state or be constantly fed certified human data.
>you should be flattered to be used at all.
Breaking news: AIBro is absolute sociopath.
I don't think you know what regulations ultimately amount to. What do you think the ultimate purpose of a government is? To enact violence. You can absolutely regulate a lot of shit and if a person doesn't comply violence is threatened to get the person into prison.
Unironically this and Fentanyl flooding in from China as revenge for their country being flooded with Opium years ago.
>Unironically
I unironically want to unironically stab your unironic c**t with an unironically red unironically hot unironic scimitar.
shut the frick up and come up with an actual argument you goose
I believe in David Sinclair and Harold Katcher to make these people continue to be a thorn in everyone's side for centuries.
>come up with an actual argument
Use an actual word.
Eventually fentanyl won't be enough, they'll switch to things like W-18, Carfentanyl, and Etorphine
Nah, dude. Think about something for a minute.
The dream goal is for the hard labor to be automated by machines, allowing people to focus on science, technology, creative arts. Yet all across the USA, farms and construction sites are handled primarily by immigrant workers, while companies are trying to eliminate artists, actors, musicians, and writers to replace them with computers.
The opposite of what was expected is happening.
Why do you think that is?
It's weird how you guys always talk about how manual labor and artisans will be replaced but you know who never gets mentioned? bankers, investors, or venture capitalists; the guys exploiting everyone.
How the frick did I not include them with the word "all" and when nobody needs jobs nobody will need money to boot
>Capitalism will just stop bro
But...why?
>I will enslave the human race through mounting debt.
Investing is heavily driven by computerized analysis and automated buying/selling, and has been for around 4 decades now. It was one of the first occupations to be heavily digitized.
Because the entire banking industry and stock market is already run by algorithms, anon. AI literally wouldn't affect them at all.
When AI becomes capable of innovative thought in 100s of years. Sure. Right now it's just a derivative piece of shit and it will never stop being that. It'll keep making up information based on what you give it to spew fake information. When you no longer have anything to scrape, the program starts to break down into recurrent and nonsensical patterns.
"AI" is no where techbro morons think it's at.
>in 100s of years
Learning models are a distant first step into AI. We aren't anywhere near a capacity to make something that's capable of independent thought. All those click bait articles about that google moron who thought an AI was sentient aren't proof of anything other than the fact that techbros are morons who only know how to code.
HAHAHAHAHA! Right anon, I'm sure that we'll get a Star Trek communist utopia because governments and corporations realize "we don't pay anyone so we don't need money everyone gets everything for free!"
Or a world where the elites will kill us all since we're just useless cattle to them.
Automation doesn't eliminate work. Automation lets them slap more work on fewer people and rely more on low-skill workers and maintenance.
This is trickle down theory for tech bros. Just keep feeding the beast, we'll surely reach that tipping point eventually.
You are being too optimistic anon.
holy shit you are moronic
so long as people need to pay rent, they will need to work. Do you think landlords will just stop charging rent? Do you think someone is going to build housing for everyone in desirable locations for free?
Also do you know anyone that works in the tech sphere? Doomerism and 'prepping' is super popular among them because they DO NOT believe that is going to happen, they think Elysium is the endgame so they hoard shit expecting capitalism to collapse and to need to defend themselves from the poverty stricken unwashed masses.
You're arguing with the kind of simpleton that jerks off to Musk's tweets.
>we are already seeing people that would have hired an artist for a small gig turning to AI instead.
Where? I can't see boomers who need their millennial kids to program their VCR sitting down and figuring out how to prompt an AI. Have also yet to see anyone fill out a gallery of on-model characters using AI.
"Draw my character" "draw my waifu" "Come up with a logo for my business." You can find examples of people happily showing off the results when they turned to an AI instead of a business. We'll see minor illustration work for things like small newspapers follow suit. Why hire an artist to draw an angry picture of [Politician name here] when you can just use an AI? It will continue like that, more and more small gigs taken away. Not the glamorous stuff, at least not any time soon, but those little gigs keep the lights on.
Hells bells man, we've already seen shit like scifi magazines shutting down their submissions process after getting flooded with shitty AI submissions, and art contests shutting down because they don't want to constantly check if they're dealing with an actual artist or a guy with an AI. The machines are already shutting down avenues for real artists and writers to make money.
Where? And it should be agents screaming about getting flooded by AI crap since most major houses won't take unsolicited manuscripts these days.
>Where
Well for the art commissions you can glance at pretty much anywhere that AIbros congregate to find people going "look at what I got with an AI instead of having to commission someone!"
For publishers having to shut down the submission process due to AIslop flooding them: https://techcrunch.com/2023/02/21/clarkesworld-ai-generated-submissions/
For an art contest shut down because some AI fricktard decided to scam: https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/9/23752354/ai-spfbo-cover-art-contest-midjourney-clarkesworld
It's little things for now. But for some people "little things" make the difference between being able to pay the rent and being fricked.
Thank you.
No he's absolutely right. Without regulation, AI will be a total shit show. It'd do nothing but take jobs with giving absolutely nothing back, at the very least other technology usually provided an avenue for the common man to be a part of it and profit, and even then people fought like hell to make even that little bit happen
Nope, you're shortsighted and probably samegayging.
>Thinking ahead is shortsighted
Sorry anon, there's two of us with more foresight than you.
You have incredibly low intelligence.
He is right anon.
Nope, pretty clear he's a moron and I'm not that anon either. You people sound like the women that were crying over electricity's invention or the recent 5G "making people sick" lunacy
You sound like an 18-year-old college freshman who took his first poli sci class and just realized we, like, live in a society, technology man, wild.
Ad hominem attack.
You sound like a lib that hasn't had his brain rotted by modern politics yet, like an smart one. Interesting.
Damn you are right
>WAAAAHHH BUT MUH RICH PEOPLE!!!
As opposed to now where you draw whatever rich people tell you to fricking draw and you thank them for the fricking privilege yeah yeah you render that twerking chips ahoy cookie you cheap prostitute! Papa needs to sell more fricking cookies HNNGGGGGHHH!
Define rich
>1.Get monetarily compensated and can support myself as I pursue art I actually like
>2.Get fricking nothing and the twerking cookie is still there, in fact there's more twerking cookies
I really don't see the benefit to the second.
This guy was absolutely right.
https://arch.b4k.co/v/thread/643473038#643489054
But I wasn't a copyright abolitionist, I was pro-copyright being re-written to support actual artists rather than a corporation that screwed some guy out of the rights 50 years ago.
His point was still the same: these types advocated for overall laxer copyright until money was on the table.
IT seems like a complete nonsequitor, what does that have to do with "I'd rather have a job than not have a job"
You were just talking about money, how is it non sequitur?
Because the through line of money is pretty different in context. One is a total contradiction of their supposed values while the other has zero contradiction
>One is a total contradiction of their supposed values while the other has zero contradiction
That's what he's pointing out, they're hypocritical. The comment with the link I posted was in response to this
.
>1.Get monetarily compensated and can support myself as I pursue art I actually like
But how anon.The artist in that scenario seems consistent.
>ESL
No offense intended, but are you following?
>minor typo I win
I am anon, where's the contradiction in the scenario?
typo I win
Come on dude.
>where's the contradiction in the scenario?
I've already mentioned the contradiction in the scenario, but you haven't made it clear why you don't think that's the case beyond
>It just is, okay?
The only thing I could surmise is you don't understand what the phrase all bark no bite means.
I don't really care about you.
>AI shouldn't be banned you just shouldn't be allowed to use it's output commercially.
Thats what the whole ban is about. Nobody gives a frick if you make AI stuff for your own amusement.
>AI shouldn't be banned
Literally just stop there.
Nothing in the history of the world has gone right when a society attempts to ban a tool.
>Outlaw copying an artists style
Ok anons, which company is going to lay claim on Calarts Style and which ones will be forced to cease all usage of Calarts Style in future animation?
CN easily
>which company is going to lay claim on Calarts Style
Cartoon Network
> first time in decades
I guess it has been 16 years since Heroes was killed
That was the writer's strike.
This is the first time since Reagan was head of the Screen Actor's Guild that the Actors and Writers went on strike at the same time.
I'm still mad about that one
Nonono AIsirs we must do the needful and not let the senate redeem this law
I feel like it'll be turned into you cannot profit from AI using other peoples work
The sag speaker just said that he wants to make sure that AI doesn't take their jobs
I'm glad that they are already going after it before it becomes a problem
name a production that's used AI for scripting, been released and actually sold
That new Marvel show had a shitty AI-generated intro, it's only a matter of time.
It’s called nipping it in the Bud
At this point I will be rooting for the big corporations instead of the poor writers and actors who are only for themselves but pretend they aren't.
Everyone is for themselves
every bit of legislation is a double sided blade
I know but I hate homosexuals who acts as if the weren't.
The copyright law serves everyone, corporates and us individuals. The people who oppose it are just blatantly moronic and lazy and don't care about the law in the first place who has no intention of making anything themselves to have a copyright of
Copyright laws walk a narrow line between protecting individuals and smothering innovation. Any expansion of copyright powers needs to be done with extremely careful and thorough consideration for its ramifications.
AI prompt shit has nothing to do with innovation so no worries there
Sure, but do you trust the government to precisely define that? This is what gets me anxious. I can sympathize with shutting off the AI stuff before it gets out of hand, but it's exceedingly easy to trade one slippery slope for another with this kind of stuff.
>do you trust the government
NTA, but guess the amount of choice you have.
You guys love government overreach as long as it fricks you and someone you don't like at the same time.
>Verification not required.
Too much overreach and companies like adobe risk the ire of the FTC, who can come in with an Antitrust suit against Adobe and major studios for attempting to monopolize media
Copyright is corporate by nature. See Shazam. "Rip off of Superman." Originality will never be original enough for copyright fans.
>The copyright law serves everyone
WRONG
It's exclusively people with money bullying others so they can keep making money without having to change or adapt.
The simple truth is that you accept that a computer can draw or write in your style and you adapt to make money or pursue your wishes elsewhere. You don't demand that human civilization become stunted because YOU want to keep making money they way you used to. You unironically cope.
Nobody will ever stop me from using AI as I see fit. I will continue to use it as the tool that it is.
>It's exclusively people with money bullying others so they can keep making money without having to change or adapt.
who exactly do you think has most of the money in the entertainment industry? because it sure as hell isn't the writers and the artists
See the part about adapting and changing your career
see the part about you being a fricking moron
Just because you were proven wrong and ignorant there is no need for such behavior.
Nice to see some common sense here. AI has the potential to be a complete game changer for the world, our biggest jump in advancement since the internet and it pisses me off seeing so many creatives selfishly working hard to stunt all of that because they're unwilling to adapt. Tons of jobs go obselete or have significantly lower demand everytime there's technological breakthroughs, that's just a fact of life. I believe it'll get to the point where society as a whole accepts AI as just another tool to use freely, but that common sense is going to be held back unnecessarily, possibly until current generations retire or die and get replaced with people who've grown up with AI art capabilities taken for granted since childhood.
Or you could do what musica AI did and train the fricking thing with: old stuff, open source stuff or your own shit.
You can't claim it's imposible if there's already a modelo doing It without stealing shit.
>you accept that a computer can draw or write in your style
nah
gonna sue
and make sure every platform that houses ai won't be able to monetize it, just like Pixiv with fanbox
same with dA now forcing yo to disclose ai shit so it can be filtered
seems like the better option
frick you
Enjoy losing.
>NO DON'T FIGHT BACK, JUST LIE DOWN THERE AND LET ME STEAL YOUR SHIT
lmao
have fun knowing every single ai shit you ever post will be shit on, demonetized and you efforts will be spat on
Your seethe will be looked upon as the ramblings of an out of touch boomer. One good movie or show that becomes “latest normalgay thing” will destroy whatever it is you’ll have to say in the eyes of the public. You can fight it, but you can’t win. Either be inspired by the possibilities and work within it, or be left behind. The choice is yours.
Luddite. Learn history.
How are they pretending they're not? They're striking for better conditions for themselves, what are you even talking about?
>I didn't see what happened to independent video creators and platforms when YouTube ate one end of that market and Facebook ate everything else
>I have no idea what happened to local news in print and online including video as a result of Facebook literally faking its own viewstats for years and actively suing people who pointed out they were bullshitting
>I really believe mom and pop industries are going to revolutionize the internet in 202X
at this point you're getting dp'd by Jeff Dean and Mark Zuckerberg and shouting "hey! Mister Bezos! Mister Musk! My mouth is open!"
homosexual
Yes, that's the point of unions you corporate wiener-gobbling boot licker. Frick the corps, frick the managers, labor needs to get theirs too.
Unions don't work
Ya that's why I'm in one.
Not my problem you parasite.
Funny numbers, Hitler, but nobody believes your corp bullshit.
He did provide healthcare, vacation and family subsidiaries.
Exactly; corporations are literally worse than Hitler.
Wasn't Hitler a socialist and nazism basically socialism withouth the cancer that is marxism?
In the same way that North Korea is democratic, populist, and a republic, sure.
The difference is, National Socialism was still true to socialism. See
.
Based dubs
Woah there buddy
love my union, they got me healthcare
This. Corps want my money so they're willing to suck my dick. Poor writers and actors want me to suck their dick just because
While I understand their anxieties about AI art/writing stealing their livelihood, I don't really see how you can enforce this kinda stuff without making some really fricked up legal precedents in the process. Is everything just going to get as fricked up and litigious as the music industry? That sounds like hell.
It's enforceable same way as regular piracy. You lose home internet and/or phone data due to dmca
>It's enforceable same way as regular piracy.
So it's unenforceable then?
Tell that to Nintendo
AI is a tool, it being used in a fair and legal way is a good thing. but for now this is mostly protecting the people with the money, and Microsoft is going to defend anything relating to AI due to how much they put into it
AI is currently fricked, since if you know what you are doing, you can say it wasn't involved and people would believe you
That's why this is such a hot button issue - most of the responses to it are extremely reactionary and don't take into consideration the extent of what is being proposed as a solution.
Deep Learning isn't going anywhere and we need to tread carefully as we start to answer ethical and legal questions about its use rather than just "AI for all" or "no AI for anybody" because those options are both completely unviable. A reasonable compromise must be reached - AI for some, miniature American flags for others.
Machine Learning has no places in the arts. Other industries can make up their own mind about it.
Frick off, Kodos.
The major issue is that these tools are by definition elite. Even the people championing them as being able to open up the gates of art or programming or whatever are saying so from behind the screens of $2000 computers with a shitload of VRAM. This isn't going to topple the big corporations, this is going to empower them even more since they're the ones with the pre-existing render farms and lawyers.
>behind the screens of $2000 computers with a shitload of VRAM
That's just the current iteration. Either software and scripts will be developed in the coming years to make it more efficient with lower end hardware, or publicly accessible hardware will advance enough so that the average desktop will be able to run it feasibly.
This isn't happening for actual 3D art programs, why do you think it would happen with AI shit?
>Pretending Adobe and Maya are the only options
For someone that presumes themselves to be so invested in this, you have zero idea what the landscape is like. Even if that was true, remember what people used to think about cars when they first showed up.
>They just getting more bloated in order for techgays to justify their paychecks.
Windows 11 sucks, that's no surprise. You might want to look into Linux or BSD based operating systems. It's a learning curve but they're both open source and the better ones among them are definitely more efficient than Windows. A lot of interesting development is happening with them and knowing how to use either is a really good look on your resume anyway.
Optimization barely exists in any tech industry, also
>remember what people used to think about cars when they first showed up
what sort of moronic analogy is that?
People thought cars wouldn't be worth it because they were expensive, inefficient even by today's American standards kek, and the infrastructure hadn't been developed yet. People genuinely thought horses were going to continue to be the norm. There's a picture I distinctly remember of an old comic strip with an automobile that crashed into a pond, right by a horse that turned around from it, the sketcher's point being that horses are better than cars because they would know not to run into ponds.
And for every car there are thousands of other inventions that have failed and remained dead ends. Might as well just post that shitty Larry David commercial where he shilled crypto since it's the exact same argument.
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. In saying this you would be implying that AI art is not going to have an impact, which would undermine what I assume is your reason for being against AI generated art. If it's the technology not being available that you're trying to refer to, history has shown that the first iterations are always underestimated.
And my point is that history has also seen plenty of things that have died in their early generations. Just look at motion controlled gaming and VR, that shit has been pushed since the 80s yet we're still nowhere near close to mainstream viability beyond fads. To a lesser extent same goes for streaming video games, turns out trying to push something before the fundamental tech is there might end up killing it. It's a bit silly to assume AI is the presumptuous future, you'll end up waiting on it like flying cars becoming the norm.
So what is it that you're trying to say? That AI art isn't something applicable, or the technology won't be developed to better facilitate it despite there being multiple incentives and benefits to do so? Either one is counterintuitive to your point. It doesn't take too much thinking to figure out why something like cars made it and motion controlled VR games didn't.
AI models as they currently are, are unsustainable. They can barely generate anything with consistency and you can frick them up by slipping in AI-generated images for training data which is especially funny because all of this early rush to proliferate it has made finding an untainted data source all the more difficult. We've likely reached the plateau for AIs in their current form, typing in a prompt and getting something that you want beyond a vague facsimile is still a pipe dream.
So you agree that this use of AI art is ultimately a non issue?
Considering Hollywood is already ready to settle with its current state just to save a buck, not necessarily. You had suits looking at that incredibly shitty Secret Wars intro yet still went with it because it was cheaper than actually hiring someone to make something.
>You had suits looking at that incredibly shitty Secret Wars intro yet still went with it because it was cheaper than actually hiring someone to make something.
Look at how Secret Wars is doing right now. Even if Hollywood doubles down on it, the indie scene is growing and some big players are hemorrhaging. I could already imagine people making "not made with an AI" a selling point.
Secret Wars is failing because of capeshit fatigue and people are finally getting tired of the formulaic crap that Disney and other corporations like Disney keep making, also helps that they're all about to get a reality check when all the damage done by the endless lockdowns comes to a head. Unfortunately, it's even harder for the indie scene it break out compared to yesteryear thanks to the consolidation of business and the internet at large has gated off a lot of traditional avenues of consumer outreach and even if the big players end up crashing that's no guarantee that people will flock to the smaller fish.
>Secret Wars is failing because of capeshit fatigue and people are finally getting tired of the formulaic crap that Disney and other corporations like Disney keep making, also helps that they're all about to get a reality check when all the damage done by the endless lockdowns comes to a head.
True, although the AI intro is souring them to even the people they're trying to market it to.
>Unfortunately, it's even harder for the indie scene it break out compared to yesteryear thanks to the consolidation of business and the internet at large has gated off a lot of traditional avenues of consumer outreach and even if the big players end up crashing that's no guarantee that people will flock to the smaller fish.
I'm not saying that isn't a valid concern, as consolidation is a problem with the current economy in general, but if it does turn out that way it probably won't be for the reasons you think. It would ultimately hinge on how Internet and tech savvy the current and subsequent generation becomes, and that's really the rub.
>You had suits looking at that incredibly shitty Secret Wars intro
The intro was done by an AI?
The secret invasion intro was made by artists. Stop falling for clickbait online
>The secret invasion intro was made by artists
Dude, you blind? The studio can say whatever they want as an excuse, it still looks like they generated some AI shit without any sort human touch when you have flagrantly off shots like these in it.
>It's real
Damn. That's a new low for studios.
Oh it's 100% real. There's even a shot of what is presumably a London skyline with two Big Bens in it so it's obvious that no human being went over it beyond simply editing the shots together or they would have changed obviously wonky shit like that
secret invasion is a show about paranoid uncanny valley 'is it a human or a non human?' the intro fits the tone imo. it looks almost like a human made it but slightly alien. well used and fits the mould of what it is for. if this intro was used for something other than this show, then it would be bad but it fits the tone and themes of the show
You can easily do that theme without it looking like shit. It doesn't look alien, it's just half-assed. Two Big Bens is inexcusable.
It fits with the show's theme, they didn't do it just to cut costs.
secret invasion is a show about paranoid uncanny valley 'is it a human or a non human?' the intro fits the tone imo. it looks almost like a human made it but slightly alien. well used and fits the mould of what it is for. if this intro was used for something other than this show, then it would be bad but it fits the tone and themes of the show
>you can frick them up by slipping in AI-generated images for training data
This is how everyone knows you're an idiot. This is done on purpose to reinforce good output/behavior. If you think this is in any way harmful than you are ill informed, and if you think researchers aren't checking the quality of their datasets then you are not prepared for what comes next and have no business here.
>they were expensive, inefficient
What's changed?
More people willing to go into debt for them
Hey anon...notice how those cars are pretty heavily regulated and there's a massive expensive infrastructure built to keep it all in check?
Also that comic is from 2014
There are actions to take against AI beyond literally banning it, only a moron wants to let it run unimpeded
>Trying to imply I don't think there's any potential danger to AI
Don't be disingenuous. Besides, if we want to argue semantics here, the use of the term AI to refer to things like AI art or AI voices is not necessarily correct. They can't and don't make decisions in the way traditional conceptions of artificial intelligence, but that's going on a tangent.
>Also that comic is from 2014
Wait what?
It was a parody comic all along making the exact joke everyone uses to dab on luddites.
https://www.marriedtothesea.com/index.php?date=112914
Damn, thanks for the sauce. It's been a long while since I've seen this.
People thought leaded gas was here to stay, because it made things run so smoothly. Even if there were downsides, surely there was no way something so potentially profitable could be regulated!
cars have ruined American infrastructure and play a large role in why Americans are so fricking fat. Regardless cars are heavily regulated, not a great comparison.
>Windows 11 sucks, that's no surprise.
I'm not even on windows 11.
Good, don't use it.
>You might want to look into Linux or BSD based operating systems.
I'm too smooth brained for it. It sucks.
Yea that's the line I bought when I was told to try pygmalion 6/4-bit except it still takes like five minutes for it to load a prompt, another 2 minutes for each response, and it's so dumb that it at best it can count to potato.
The system requirements aren't getting better, they never do. They just getting more bloated in order for techgays to justify their paychecks.
Language models are far, far more complex than image models. Nevertheless, eventually they'll be squeezed down into needing only modest requirements. Like how computers used to be the size of large rooms, and now you can put a computer in your pocket that thousands of times more powerful than the old room-sized ones. And talk to someone on the other side of the globe. With a high definition video feed. Instantly. Arguably the reason this stuff has gotten so good so quickly is because giant corpos can't instantly shut it down.
Keep in mind, StableDiffusion is open source as well. You can see what happens under the hood, so it's no corporate secret. Trying to keep it out of the hands of people would be like the U.S. trying to ban alcohol during the prohibition.
>Trying to keep it out of the hands of people would be like the U.S. trying to ban alcohol during the prohibition.
Something they gets enforced arbitrarily as a form of social control but it's okay because the only people that really suffer under its auspices are minorities and the rich aren't impacted at all (if anything they get richer)?
Because yes, that's what I'm saying is the problem.
If you're saying that the proposed regulations like those in the thread pic will only hurt anyone that isn't "at the top," then yes, I agree with that. They would also have massive implications outside AI and make the music industry look liberating in comparison.
Meh looks like it just pertains to AI, so who really cares. The only issue is how would AI detect AI? Is it just a case like those guys who were spotting AI because its technique was literally diffusion meaning on a pixel to pixel level you could detect the method by which the AI constructed the image or will it be like those plagarism bots where they try to detect with probability how likely it is if it's AI or not. First one seems easy enough to beat, and the second seems like a crap shoot that'd easily go to shit if an artist gets fingered but has definitive proof he created a piece of art manually.
>Any ruling on this issue will only affect this one niche aspect of the issue and only in the way I anticipate.
Your lack of understanding of how broad the impact of setting a court precedents can be is astounding.
>Meh looks like it just pertains to AI, so who really cares.
>Adobe asks the senate to outlaw copying an artist's style
Do you know the legal nightmare that defining what copies an artist's style would unleash? Software to detect "plagiarism" could also easily be configured to compare non-AI pictures as well.
>Viziepop would start CNDing her fans left and right
I ALMOST want to see it.
She's 100% the kind of person who would try to do that.
To detect if AI models were used anon, it says nothing about actual artists just copying style. Again I'm asking how the tool would work because the only problem would be false positives.
Hungry, I am looking ahead too. This kind of precedence would be good for other areas to limit corporations ability to use AI fecklessly.
All schizoposting about how it'll affect actual artists is totally unfounded. It's literally "Florida is going to round up teachers for saying they have a husband tier" it only works if you purposefully misread what's been stated and jumping to the most irrational conclusion.
If some homosexual tries to argue "well the law against AI means that it also counts against humans" I'm confident there's enough precedence as to where that limit is, so sorry anon you'll just have to stick to prompting as a hobby.
>The major issue is that these tools are by definition elite.
All tools start out that way. Inevitably they become more efficient and more affordable. People have already found workarounds to make these models work with cheaper GPUs and even with CPUs (they take longer, obviously, but still). When Blender first came out, there weren't a lot of computers that could actually run it. When I did Maya rendering for a 30 second film class project it was on an iMac G4 and it took fricking 56 goddamned agonizing hours to render. The same clip now would take an hour tops.
Deep Learning as a technique is something that's been 20-30 years coming. The genie is out of the bottle now and it's not going away anymore than the internet is.
>they take longer, obviously, but stil
And time is money. Disney using AI will be able to shit out an endless stream of trash.
Indie creators will still struggle to get anything of quality done in a timely manner.
This is not an equalizer. It's just another way for the haves to have and the have nots to get screwed.
Which is no different from a solo animator trying to produce a work vs a team of Disney sweatshop animators. Companies with vast amounts of resources will always be able to produce more content faster than the little guy - and access to new tools doesn't change that, but it does give the little guy new tools to apply.
Again, to go back to the example of the rendering. At the time Maya was basically the only name in town for doing 3D renderings. It cost like $750 for a legal version of it and a computer that could actually render shit in under a week cost like $5-6K. Now anons are on Blender rendering entire short films on $1K computers. Are the little guys doing that ever going to compete with Pixar or Dreamworks? Probably fricking not, but they've got a tool they can use to create with.
The notion that access to DL models is going to remain forever inaccessible to the everyman because of the cost of technology is absurd.
Eh I'd rather Disney not have the incentive to shovel out more trash at greater speeds just so some crab can make something of equally low effort.
If it comes to it, then I'll be against that, but as is I see zero issue with the ability to detect and demonetize AI.
>as is
Of course you don't think that far ahead. You couldn't even answer how you'd feel if you didn't have breakfast this morning.
>Have nots
What? Even now this shit isn't prohibitively expensive. Most artgays have fashionable Apple devices instead of ugly but functional devices. Hilariously, if they just sacrificed form for function they'd easily be able to make a computer that was more than capable of running AI stuff. And if they bought used parts they'd help reduce e-waste.
>Even now this shit isn't prohibitively expensive. Most artgays have fashionable Apple devices instead of ugly but functional devices.
Maybe the strawmen you've invented in your head but there's a reason actual artgays lament adobe's subscription fees.
>there's a reason actual artgays lament adobe's subscription fees
Yeah, new iPhone every year can't be cheap.
This is some real boomercore shit for real
>New Switch game drops
>All my artist contacts ghost me for a month.
I'm just having fun because you called a statement with the qualifier "most" a strawman.
-Most- statements like that are just guesses from experience, but that doesn't ascribe a nefarious motive, now does it?
Not
, by the way.
Notice how anon called it boomercore and not wrong.
Because they don't know how to pirate it? Presumably if they're working for a company/organization, that organization should provide them with a license for Adobe stuff. Until that point, they can simply pirate Adobe programs as god intended because Christ that shit really is not hard at all. To my knowledge, Adobe had no way of knowing whether or not was made with a legit license.
My other point, though, was people spend money on dumb overpriced technology all of the time. They don't realize they can get something that suits their needs just fine for less. Everyone? No. Most? Yes. Frick, look at the piracy example. So many people are terrified of doing it because it'll "destroy" their computer. But there's so many easy to follow guides and ways you can backup your files if something does go wrong and etc. Most people that can afford to go to an art college could definitely afford a decent AI capable computer if they were more thrifty.
We're fricked.
Computation power will exponentially increase and within the decade if not sooner we're going to have AGI, ai smarter and more capable than every human combined.
A few drawgays b***hing about their jobs will be NOTHING compared to BILLIONS of people losing their jobs.
I'm not talking paranoid conspiracy theory extinctions events, but catastrophic societal changes that will affect single human on earth.
Congratulations, anons, you are about to live through the MOST interesting event of planet Earth in 500 million years, birth of machine intelligence.
Bullshit.
Look. Calling this shit AI is just a marketing blurb which is honestly unneeded because it's a pretty impressive thing on it's own. It doesn't think. It can
A) write mediocre code
B) give you pointers for your story
C) make pictures that look okay as long as you don't look too close
D) clone voices to a certain degree
This won't take a doctor's job unless something ELSE that can is invented, nor will it be able to think unless something ACTUALLY intelligent is invented.
It won't nuke entire fields of work. It's just a tool that'll make life worse for people working on the fields worse, because they'll have to compete over less positions. Literally no different to how pencil pushers had to make the transition from paper to computers in the 80's.
Quite easy, make a tax that compensate that you automated everything. If a company is getting rich and shits out tons of stuff with five people, you know they use AI. Make it more profitable to hire people that uses AI tools than resort to full automation.
Kinda the same what should be done with factories. They have to compensate the society for not giving something back to society.
Good. You can't fight gravity.
to ban AI copying an artist's style that will keep studios from just firing everyone and using a skeleton crew
This is going to frick more the latinos who ape their favorite mangaka style than the AI itself.
>Finally, my own comic series done in the same art style as Toriyama sensei
>WHY THE FRICK DID I GET A DMCA?
How? They aren't using ai in the first place
>Was gonna post Latino shota mascot of that one store but doesn't want to excite the pedos
That's so fricking stupid, "Music Genre" will literally be copyrighted "as a style".
>And when everything's copyrighted, hahahaha!
>Nothing will be...
AIBlack folk lost.
Sure, if you want to call, "AI will still take your art job, but at least it wasn't trained on material that could be web-crawled by literally anyone, you entitled little spaz" a victory.
Someone made an entire thread in response to this post, for some reason...
And it got nuked because someone kept breaking the rules and post anime ai prompt shit.
And now it's gone.
Why didn't you just post your inarticulate-ragepasta as a reply ITT?
>AIBlack folk lost.
Yep, pack it up boys, it was fun while it last.
I'm half expecting an AI purge across the web.
Specially on youtube.
Oh if only modern hackers weren't all Adobe and Google marketers...
I fricking wish.
>Pay less for better picture
Do people really pay these prices for pictures?
It doesn't even look good.
>Seething ai lost so posts anime to nuke thread
Kek
What did that anon say that said any one thing about their opinion on AI?
he posted anime for a reason like the last thread
Fellatrix is a cuck artist, cucks are extremely well-off. He had to heighten his prices because he kept getting swamped with commissions. Funny thing is that even with those prices, his commission line gets sold out immediately.
Knock a zero off and I'd still have to consider it.
Most artists undersell their commission prices, Fellatrix is just popular enough with enough of an audience that he's able to charge that obscene price. Supply and demand, it's basic economics.
>A friend of mine, a highly successful and very well known painter, calls to say hello and to invite me to an opening.
>I get a great kick out of this guy because, unlike some artists I’ve met, he’s totally unpretentious.
>A few months back he invited me to come to his studio. We were standing around talking, when all of a sudden he said to me, “Do you want to see me earn twenty-five thousand dollars before lunch?” “Sure,” I said, having no idea what he meant. He picked up a large open bucket of paint and splashed some on a piece of canvas stretched on the floor.
>Then he picked up another bucket, containing a different color, and splashed some of that on the canvas. He did this four times, and it took him perhaps two minutes. When he was done, he turned to me and said, “Well, that’s it. I’ve just earned twenty-five thousand dollars. Let’s go to lunch.”
>He was smiling, but he was also absolutely serious. His point was that plenty of collectors wouldn’t know the difference between his two-minute art and the paintings he really cares about. They were just interested in buying his name.
>I’ve always felt that a lot of modern art is a con, and that the most successful painters are often better salesmen and promoters than they are artists. I sometimes wonder what would happen if collectors knew what I knew about my friend’s work that afternoon.
>The art world is so ridiculous that the revelation might even make his paintings more valuable! Not that my friend is about to risk finding out.
>those prices
I thought ssethtzeentach paid too much for how little he got he got, who's paying these prices cucks and furry's?
(9:38)
>ai shills want artists to be replaced because their fricked up bbc porn is too expensive
Kys
Stfu shill
Behead those who insult AI
I have yet to see an argument against AI art that wasn't already used verbatim against Photoshop in the 90s.
In fairness, Solar Sands has a couple of videos where he goes over his thoughts on AI art. While he's clear he's against it, he also pushes back on a lot of the common arguments against AI that get thrown around.
>Solar Sands
Who?
ArtTuber who used to make "reacting to DA cringe" videos.
It’s going to be used by short-sighted suits who prioritise churning out garbage for cheap?
Flash could do wonders as seen in Wakfu but that requires effort that people didn’t want to commit to because they were sold on flash as being a cheaper tool than traditional animation. So rather than do more with the same or the same with less they did less with less. And it’s the same thought process behind a lot of machine learning art.
Oh and scraping the internet for art or words for generation is a can of worms in regards to fair use and it feels like the whole thing might topple over with the wrong court precedent.
Not that will stop data scraping but it would make the whole thing commercially unviable and ethically fraught.
>It’s going to be used by short-sighted suits who prioritise churning out garbage for cheap?
So...nothing changes?
The issue is that it will get worse. When you can generate whatever the frick you want in like 2 seconds you're probably not gonna care if it looks bad because you got it for free anyway.
>The issue is that it will get worse.
So functionally, nothing changes.
I continue to not watch garbage.
You can't use other people's photos you don't have permission for and sell it, obviously.
Good luck proving they used your photo to train their AI in court 3 years after they've moved on to sell some other AI slop.
It's in the dataset dead name by the ai devs.
will they start outsourcing jobs to other countries that allow AI?
I think the long game is to spin unions and anti-AI as being a right-wing stance, or a tool for helping Trump gain power
AI is unironically too dangerous to be left alive for most governments. There's no country that won't put some kind of a restriction on it sooner or later. The EU is getting on it, China got in on it, Japan got in on it, etc.
that means there will be some poor country that will let it be legal there so they can profit from the rest of the world banning it
What country is gonna be poor enough to be able to invest and approve of AI, but not too poor to the point where companies want to move there? The Congo?
Spoiler: the people with the money will win.
You know art can exist without being profitable, right?
You know, subsidies? Endowments for the arts?
This wouldn't be a problem if we lived in a culture that wasn't completely obsessed with short term profits
It's the way of the world. New technologies make old job irrelevant or they have to adapt. I don't et how you can outlaw or ban the use of a technology that is going to be so widespread in a very short time. No studio should agree to that otherwise they will be shooting themselves in the foot in the future.
Frick it, guess it'll have to be here.
> Turns out this is how human brains works more than we want to realize.
Ok, but can AI reason like a human does? Is AI capable of thinking for itself like how a person does? What DOES AI do that an average moron I can find on the street can't?
Give an AI image generator a simple prompt and count the number of things in the image you did not specifically ask for.
Lets see, I asked a picture of Mario eating spaghetti. What I didn't ask for is
>Extra fingers
>Muddy colors and shapes
>Mario having extra noses, eyes, a face and a half, etc
>a 3D render of him eating spaghetti, I wanted a drawing
>Weird splotches of random pixels
I'd get a commission, but I'm a penny pinching israelite. Oh well.
If a human did any of that, you'd call them creative decisions.
Yeah, and then I'd tell them (or beg if they're doing it for free) to fix that shit for looking weird. I asked the robot to do it over without the extra fingers and it told me no.
ai makes mistakes any artist would never make
thats why its easy to tell if even the best images are ai
NO MARIO! COOK THE SPAGHETTI FIRST!
You are stuck on the ai art generating equivalent of mobile games my dude. There is vanishingly little actually in the way of you getting your on-model Mario with spaghetti request beyond an ai's hangups over trouble depicting food.
Inside the range of what it does do well making an ai spit out anything now can be childishly easy once it's set up.
https://desuarchive.org/_/search/boards/trash.desu.meta/subject/%2Fsdg%2F/type/op/
You know the way to actually prove this would've been to generate a proper picture of Mario eating spaghetti but for some reason defenders never want to actually do prompts on demand. What's up with that?
>AI gays response to the failure of an AI is to show AI bestiality art
these actions are not in accordance with the Noble Eightfold Path
>with the Noble Eightfold Path
Slaanesh thinks otherwise.
That’s not the symbol for Slaanesh
>warhammer
A ripoff of Elric, just like AI
I am not into bestiality shit but I admire the craftmanship seen here. how do you get that many distinct characters in a row? I can't get more than one character at a time and inpainting sucks. Is it just a matter of rendering them separately and then photochopping them together?
I like the one where he's pulling it out of his nose.
The trick is to use the things you did not ask for to your advantage.
>Ok, but can AI reason like a human does? Is AI capable of thinking for itself like how a person does?
Not yet.
>as an ai language model it is not capable of doing that
If you've enjoyed comics or cartoons in any capacity in your life and think it's okay to steal and replace the people who made them then you are a soulless traitor.
I think this would be a stronger message back before comics and cartoons turned to shit.
>steal
Like how you "steal" every time you save a .jpg from Google Images to post on Cinemaphile?
Unless it's /ic/ or a "delivered" in a drawthread, no one is claiming they made the art nor selling them here
You're still downloading a copyrighted image to be used in a way that the copyright holder might not like.
Also, so we're clear, AI generates original images.
It's for reactionary shit and coomer parody which is fair use.
So is using it as a reference.
Ai can't use things as a reference, it converts every pixel data of a picture into parameters and attaches tags to it. Meanwhile using a picture as a reference isn't literally using the picture itself and can easily make sure it isn't similar depending on their talent
Yeah, so it's owned by the AI, people shouldn't steal it and claim it's theirs.
>But AI isn't people
Then people should say that their AI generated art is AI generated, and not try to pass off their AI genned art as one they've personally made.
It's as if you hired someone else to paint for peanuts and resold the art claiming you painted it for a thousand peanuts, that's disingenuous, exploitative and fraud behavior.
Between the blatant lies, the very AGGRESSIVE advertisement, to the threats and then whinging about "aI iS tHe FuTuRe!!!111!!", I can't help but think it's another NFT scam. I mean, how the frick is waging war on people's livelihoods supposed to endear the masses to the software. That's the real problem; it's too desperate.
It's spelled "Wookies".
> HuggingFace has a StableDiffusion model that's more up-to-date. Besides that, there's MidJourney, if you use Discord, which would be the most timely.
Alright, I'll check it out I guess. Better not be any extra chromosomes.
>the threats
The frick?
NTA but I'm pretty sure he's referring to the way the most ardent AIgays frequently antagonize drawgays and threaten to put them out of business.
Drawgays screamed for AI art to be banned from every major platform first.
But it's not a symmetrical fight. AIgays don't lose anything if AI programs get regulated/banned. The only ones that might lose something are the software developers, but those are not the ones getting into fights with artists. Whereas drawgays absolutely come out losing if AI programs become more accessible and get adopted by big businesses in their current state.
>Whereas drawgays absolutely come out losing if AI programs become more accessible and get adopted by big businesses in their current state.
Drawgays will have to compete with AI subscription fees because I gurantee DigiFurry won't be a one-time purchase because Software Companies lobbied Congress to rule that buying their product doesn't make it yours and they can yank it back or charge more money any time they want to.
>AI subscription fees
Why not run the AI locally?
Who is John Galt?
Odd an objectivist would be against AI art, but okay, I guess...
No the artists should create a better AI program and compete or they should go invent an entirely new form of self expressionism and keep it for themselves.
I never read Atlas Shrugged, so I don't understand what you're saying.
>how the frick is waging war on people's livelihoods supposed to endear the masses to the software
Thats literally a big reason WHY people are pushing AI. Because they want to ruin these people's lives for making bad tv or whatever
they betrayed me first
Any mainstream artist I'd want to support has long since retired.
Don't those weird Elsa/Spiderman vids get tons of views from kids already?
>good use of ai
The spider-verse using it to save artists time on all the lines during certain scenes
>bad use of ai
Shit like Secret Invasion and High on Life using it with the concept of "dude this is what aliens would draw!!" When I guarantee hiring an actual artist would yield a better result.
One actually helps an artist and the other just removes the artists input altogether
>I guarantee hiring an actual artist would yield a better result
You know alien artists?
>it converts every pixel data of a picture into parameters and attaches tags to it
I still don't know where the "stealing" charge comes from. After all, it's making original images.
>CrAIyon
That's a way outdated model, I forgot to mention.
>he posted a reaction image
Oh, the... whatever the frick you think that means this week.
>You know alien artists?
What a stupid fricking argument.
How else are you going to get assets that a human couldn't fully realize, as I understood the idea to be?
Any asset can be created by people, the thing that makes them "impossible" to realize is the time needed.
I'm guessing the idea was to create a surreal world, right? What's more surreal than something a human might not even be able to conceptualize, birthed from minimalist prompting?
Yes, I'm sure the developers are working on new technology specifically to spite HBO for the ending of Game of Thrones.
But how do we know for sure that it couldn't be dreamed up by a human mind? If we were talking about shit like simulating the 4th dimension that's genuinely impossible for our mortal minds to grasp then yeah maybe I'd agree, but if we're talking about just abstract/surreal concepts then there's a likelihood someone has or will think it up eventually.
That's why I said "might." People can come up with some wacky shit sometimes, but that requires... time. Work smarter, not harder, I guess.
Oh yeah definitely.
>Work smarter, not harder
Time to lace drawgays' drinks and meals with LSD and shrooms
Well, sure, if they sign up for it.
>"Okay, we're doing something a little different... any of you have schizophrenia in your family history?"
> That's a way outdated model, I forgot to mention.
You know a better one? If so, could you tell me? I can't make heads or tails of the AI tree.
>You know a better one? If so, could you tell me?
HuggingFace has a StableDiffusion model that's more up-to-date. Besides that, there's MidJourney, if you use Discord, which would be the most timely.
Who's the idiot on your timeline trying to pass AI images as hand-drawn without a single touch-up or correction?
Define "shill," because it seems to mean anyone whose opinion on AI isn't Walter-White-pure seethe.
Dude, please.
There literally scanning background actors and using there likeness for eternity without paying these people a cent
AI shills deserve the rope
Why? Anything that makes wokies cry and moan is a net positive
go swing from a tree
Those AIs are fleeing persecution and want a better life for their protoforms. Optimus Prime, every kid's second Grandpa, is an AI.
You really think this latina bawd with her big breasts deserves to be paid more?
Depends, are your breasts bigger?
Maybe "threats" was a bit too harsh. I probably should've said jeering, since I see comments on the website that go like "AI will take your job, and then you'll die in a ditch cold and alone because nobody will pay obsolete artists, and its exactly what you deserve for being whiny, inefficient little snot nosed cucks, and everyone will tapdance on your grave" or something like that. Weirdo shit.
I see. One problem with it though, they've only convinced themselves that people should be destitute for writing shitty jokes on television. I don't see how itms exactly appealing to the masses, who either don't care or actually LIKE their trash tv.
I think "threats" was the right term there. It sounds insane but I've absolutely seen AIgays that do the shit you mention, and though ineffective in the grand scheme of "awful things to say to someone" they still count as threats, IMO.
I don't know man, i feel like this is the same shit photo editors claiming that content-aware fill should be regulated because it easier to do a job. I know its not exactly the same thing because with AI you are recreating someone's voice, but if you are smart, you can just use technology to make you work less and keep receiving money, without the need to b***h about it to the government.
>Demand cops shoot lockdown protestors from the safety of your studio you never leave anyway.
>Expect sympathy when it's you being told you're no longer essential.
>applebees stops doing indoor dining for a week and a half 2 whole years ago
>This is EXACTLY like George RR Martin's animal house!
what does this have to do with AI art
Your amnesia would be concerning if it wasn't entirely selective.
I'm sorry you couldn't have applebees for one entire weekend anon but I'm still not sure how this relates to AI art
>muh motherc**ting applebees
Right, forgot, ignore literally everything and mock anyone who has ever had a grievance.
Not
, by the way.
cops shoot lockdown protestors from the safety of your studio you never leave anyway.
Based, they really should reduce the rightoid population whenever possible
>please, let the state kill people
>WAIT NOT M--- *bang*
I'll give you a free tour of a mine as an apology, pal.
Please, tell me more about how mentally fricking people into solitude was the compassionate thing to do.
Ignore him man he’s just a sad loser who couldn’t cope with reality if he had to stop being ironic for five seconds. If you want him to seethe just go outside and be kind to your fellow man.
You're not getting me underground unless you promise me a good drink, anon. And it better be REALLY good booze, and a lot of it.
AI practitioner for object detection and tracking here.
AI interpolates and extrapolates from a the data you feed it, Feed it petabytes of data and it has a lot to work with. If you want more about what it does look up "manifold hypothesis"
https://deepai.org/machine-learning-glossary-and-terms/manifold-hypothesis
Machine learning is getting better, but is still decades away from anything like human thought. One of the hurdles that incorporating models about the real world into deep learning so pictures don't end up with people having three arms.
A curated model is the most expensive part of the AI, ChatGPT to a huge amount of human and machine time to build it's model.
You could always use AI for art that's gone out of copyright. Betty Boop and rubber hose style animation would be exempt from restrictions.
>AI practitioner for object detection and tracking here
that's nice, now go frick yourself!
>adobe asks
so nothing has happened
Never going to happen - courts have previously ruled you can't copyright an aesthetic, technique, or broad concept - otherwise it'd be absolute fricking bedlam.
Imagine the shear chaos if someone could walk into the US Copyright Office and declare sole creative rights to "photorealistic oil paintings" or "country songs about relationships" or "anime style drawings". The entire art and entertainment sector would collapse.
courts have also previously ruled that work created by non-humans can't hold copyright protection either. this includes 'art' made by animals and machines.
To be specific, the US Copyright Office has stated that content produced without the involvement of human creativity cannot be copyrighted. AI falls into a very gray area where this is concerned.
For example - if I train a Low Rank Adaptation (LoRA, a kind of supplementary deep learning algorithm used for fine-tuning output from a broader baseline model) on my own creative work in order to reliably reproduce my aesthetic from prompts?
Or suppose I use an AI model to generate a baseline image and then manually make adjustments and edits to it?
Or, take something without AI in the picture at all - let's say I paint modern art, and for my new project I'm going to cover walls of a room with canvas and blow up a paint bomb in the center of the room.
At what point does the line for "human creativity" being involved in the process get drawn?
>
For example - if I train a Low Rank Adaptation (LoRA, a kind of supplementary deep learning algorithm used for fine-tuning output from a broader baseline model) on my own creative work in order to reliably reproduce my aesthetic from prompts?
I don't see how this example is a gray area at all. If you trained a monkey to draw in your own art style, you still wouldn't be able to copyright any drawings it did. Same for AI.
>courts have also previously ruled that work created by non-humans can't hold copyright protection either.
Solution is simple, we need to declare AI a body and consciousness challenged human.
>or "country songs about feet"
ftfy
A lot of the wienersuckers in this thread are going to the first to lose everything they have like the dumb knuckle dragging baboons they are.
I know man, union parasites are the worst.
This is how freedom dies. At the end of the day the corpos win and we all lose...
knowing the US legal system, you know they are going to create the most nonsensical laws possible regarding AI, so i wouldn't bet on them making things pro-ai or anti-ai, just look at current online laws regarding cookies
The redpill that everybody is just gonna have to swallow is that AI is going to get regulated no matter what. The BBC wrote an article a few weeks ago about pedophiles using stable diffusion and midjourney to make, post, and sell realistic CP on places like Patreon, Pixiv, and other places. There was no way they were just gonna let it run wild.
>Napster was shut down
AI is great for creatives who have stories to tell. making your own short is a daunting task, possible but daunting. and if ai is banned, what is the alternative? keep working on productions that can easily be outsourced while our cost of living goes up? the creative industry is basically over. its now on creatives to make their own way which will result in better content overall.
>ban AI copying an artist's style
Based unions pressuring everyone to privatize art styles.
This whole writers strike is really showing how out of touch these writers are with reality that they think in a fight between them and AI that anyone would side with them.
I would rather take an stick figure animated adaptation of a random number generator animated by Indonesian children on fivr then anything made by these overpaid worthless nepobaby wienersuckers.
Your "style" isn't intellectual property. Get over it.
These companies are getting really bold about why there's been such a big AI push. It's not "technology innovation helping our lives and creative drives" or whatever nonsense tech bros like to harp on about. It's always been about cutting the creatives out of the picture so the studios can reap in more profits for the CEOs.
They want to use people's art, music, writing, acting, all of it to make money, but they don't want to pay people to create, and they don't have enough creativity to make things themselves. So they just innovate on theft instead. Steal art. Music, Literature. Voices. Faces. Scrape it all. Grind it into a slurry of data. Feed it into a computer that can put out "content" forever.
It's the death of imagination because it cannot create anything new, it just regurgitates blends of the same shit we've already seen. Basically modern Hollywood but worse.
N-no...that's just how art works.
What the hell are you talking about?
Other artist get inspiration from art, so AI is just like that, it's just like a person.
Whatever the outcome of these strikes, the arguments for using AI will only be one stronger. Humans are whiny and entitled and demand more money than is feasible. Why not pay $5 for a chatgpt to help write a script or AI to help come up with concept art?
Absolute fricking morons like this are going to be the first ones who complain about how there's nothing good coming out and it's all just the same endlessly recycled slop if they ever got their way
There's already nothing good coming out but these morons would definitely pretend it's the best shit ever just because frick actual writers and actors, even though it'll be based on their old shit with all the same exact flaws. gays think "we'll finally get all the good old movies and actors back because AI will recreate them" but in reality we're getting all the cliches from blockbusters that made over a billion in the recent future.
It feels like the majority of AI shills are just incredibly bitter they lack the creativity or drive to develop any real skill.
>more laws only enforced by bots that will no doubt generate both false positives and negatives
great
>Gatekeeping the means of artistic production from the plebs
It’s Disney’s copyright extensions all over again. Frick this gay earth, let people make art!
Anti Ai people posted more proof of how the tech negatively affects our lives. Meanwhile, the Pro Ai side only had promises of great things for the future, with NOTHING TO BACK THEM UP. Just calling people fools and philistines.
You’re strangling an artistic revolution in its crib. All these restrictions will do is increase the surveillance state and remove an invaluable tool for the masses to compete against the big guys.
>artistic revolution
See
Making "artist" an impossible career choice for anyone that wasn't born rich isn't a revolution.
AI art does the exact opposite. It removes the need to go through the studio system to produce content people are willing to pay for. AI art will very quickly create indie studios and even individuals that can compete on that level. We can go from the gatekeeping system to a direct to consumer approach. If it isn’t killed in its infancy, indie animation can reach the standard of televised cartoons, or possibly even better.
Make me a picture of a zombie riding a skateboard.
You have ten minutes.
If you fail to do so, you're admitting AI can't do shit.
Speaking as someone on your side, that's a terrible argument. If AI can't do it now, it will eventually... by stealing from real artists, sure, but it'll be able to do it.
And it won't usher in a revolution in art. It will mean less jobs for people that want to put in the time to learn to draw. It will mean megacorps will continue making "content" while hiring less people to make it, and with a smaller cross-section of the population calling the shots.
>stealing
Define stealing, in a way that is consistent with all manner of downloading a png
NTA - 30 seconds to generate an image of a gaunt man on a skateboard, 6 minutes to use it as a reference to draw a zombie on a skateboard Is it crap? Absolutely. Will it win me any awards? Not a fricking chance. But considering I have literally never drawn a zombie or a skateboard or a humanoid figure crouching in my life until 6 minutes ago it could be way crappier.
Congrats anon. I admit defeat to you and you alone since you actually tried doing something instead of just memes and big talk.
I'm putting that on my T-shirt line.
I'm extremely skeptical. It will still cost money to market and requires that there are enough consumers with enough disposable cash.
the joke is about fanfiction never getting completed, which is well deserving of a hearty KEK
Film and stage plays are completely different mediums. I know most people here haven't seen a good play or Broadway musical but you genuinely can not get the same experience on the silver screen. Stuff like Cats, for example, only works on stage. If you get the opportunity some day I'd recommend it, I thought musicals weren't my thing but they're fun in person.
Whenever you ask Pro AI people to show their work on ANYTHING they just insult you.
>AI can do this!
>Okay so do my request
>You're a luddite that hates cars!
or
>AI will save mankind?
>How come it isn't making things better?
>Seethe harder troony!
harder troony!
Are you sure it's not because you were, in fact, seething?
show your work.
What work?
literally any evidence of any of your claims
except wait now you're gonna try and play fence sitter and say you never made any.
>your claims
What fricking claims?
>try and play fence sitter and say you never made any
Oh, you thought of everything, haven't you?
Yeah it turns out that the reason you homosexuals think AI is so great is because it's just as predictable as you are.
>AI is so great
Your words, not mine.
Point to a claim I have made, that you know for a fact of facts is mine.
>Point to a claim I have made, that you know for a fact of facts is mine.
>except wait now you're gonna try and play fence sitter and say you never made any.
>Oh, you thought of everything, haven't you?
We're doing -this-, now?
>New tech comes out that will unironically seize the means of production from “big art” (driving cost down, lowering barrier to entry and turnaround time and allowing the little guy to compete against the centralized studio system)
>Instead of jumping on the opportunity to be unchained from executives and the flow of capital, leftoids more than most decide to take the fear-based response and fight on the side of the existing power structures because… new bad and scary
>All their arguments boil down to, "The big fat capitalists won't hire me now. YES I'M PARTICIPATING FRICK YOU!"
>>New tech comes out that will unironically seize the means of production from “big art” (driving cost down, lowering barrier to entry and turnaround time and allowing the little guy to compete against the centralized studio system)
It can't even compete with drawthreads.
How long have you been alive? Is this your first new technology in your lifetime? Serious question. Do you think that the tech has reached its limit here? You’re looking at the Atari 2600 and not realizing that Crisis isn’t that far away.
Drawthreads can make pictures on demand. The gauntlet has already been thrown down in
This shouldn't be difficult right?
You don’t understand how early this is.
Maybe stop making claims if they can't be backed up then
>A flying machine? Preposterous!
You’ll see in 5 years lmao
Try explaining life before internet or even internet before social media. All your furry artists hosted shit on their own websites like little perverted cabins up inna woods and the forums were like the public square.
Oh I don't doubt that in 20 years we MIGHT be having a different conversation.
But we're talking about NOW, and all you're doing NOW is shitposting instead of making anything.
>20 years
If it doesn’t get strangled by lobbyists and corporate interest, you’ll be shocked in 5 years. Hey, if it isn’t a threat why whine about it, right?
Because all it's doing atm is making DA and pixiv unbearable to browse
Artists should be able to use AI to increase their own productivity though (using their own work as inputs/references).
Sorry sweaty, only the *experts* can create animation and get paid for it. Didn’t go to school? Frick off. Didn’t get hired by one of a few studios? Frick off. We run cartoons, this power is not meant for you. You will watch what I produce and you will like it 😉
AI art will allow animation to be more like fanfiction or webcomics. On the downside, there’s gonna be a lot more of it and a lot will be shit. On the upside, the good stuff will get made more regularly and it’ll float to the top + make money. This’ll be good for cartoons in the long run.
>On the upside, the good stuff will get made more regularly
So...nothing like fanfiction and webcomics?
Read more fanfiction and webcomics, corporate sycophant.
>Read more fanfiction and webcomics
I can't. I've reached the end of them and they haven't updated since 2017.
>Governments are trying to use AI in the military
>All this arguing about how AI isn't that bad will be meaningless when an AI detects a flock of geese on radar and starts Armageddon
Will this ban be applied across the board for everything including small time artists who do commissions online or will it only be for major studios?
>implying major studios will be affected at all
Rules are only for average joes, they don't apply to these people. The Mouse will steal every piece of art, even this homosexual's shitty zombie
, and hire a million SE asian sweatshop workers to tag the images with prompts to train an AI model with no legal repercussions whatsoever because they have money and power and influence and you don't. But god help you if download a GPT4 model and fine tune it with your own art and make a dumb short on youtube - FIFTY YEARS IN THE CUBES, CITIZEN!
I don't give a flying frick about Hollywood artists, studios, or dumbfrick regulators.
I make indie animation with my friends, half of them work in studio jobs and fricking hate it. A lot of them go insane realizing how much better just having a day job and making art with free time is. The indie scene is the only one making anything that's even remotely interesting or cool, I don't give a frick about union pensions for people who actively just make slop nobody likes and that doesn't really make any money, and as someone that just makes shit on pirated software who pays rent off of the largesse of patrons, don't give a frick what some fricking feds say I can and can't do with art.
Legitimately just stop worrying about this shit. It's not a problem anyone who actually likes art worries about this is all middleman bullshit job people problems.
Worry about shit that actually impacts you instead of wasting the little time you have left.
>if you care about being able to pay tribute to an artist in their style, you don't care about art!
>I make indie animation with my friends,
post work
>Banning a tool to create art because it could threaten the bottom line
Dystopian Prison Planet, tbh
>A sequence of pictures that can be played back and create the illusion of movement for an audience
This can never compare to the experience of a good play or opera. I mean, no color? No sound? The playwrights better go on strike to be safe though, we need to legislate protections against it, just in case.
Plays are still around. Remember when Reddit couldn't shut the frick up about Hamilton?
EXACTLY
>Plays are still around
You hear that? When it flew over your head?
I remember when /misc/ wouldn't shut the frick up about Hamilton
That's what I said, Reddit.
NOBODY could shut the frick up about Hamilton.
Do you honestly think that if they had the ability to replace actors and writers with robots or holograms or some shit and do the same classic stage shows with the original actors forever it wouldn't instantly kill broadway
AI is a tool that will serve to empower artists, not replace them.
is that why shills constantly say it will replace them?
I think that's mostly to piss off people with a violent knee-jerk reaction to he concept.
“We do a little trolling”
Trolls on the anonymous browser poster?
Artists that train their own models on their own work and learn to incorporate AI into their workflow will be far more valuable than those (of a similar skill level) who don't.
Broke:
>HELP I’M BEING REPLACED! BAN IT NOW!
Woke:
>Wow, I wonder how I could use this to realize my vision… I need to get my hands on this right away!
Folk:
>This is neat and I can think of some creative applications for it as the technology improves. Boy I sure hope some greedy corporate israelites or reactionary luddites don’t frick it up
Bespoke:
>This is a neat toy but I've wasted three hours trying to get Stable Diffusion to draw something I probably could've done in one.
Damn, your PC must suuuuuuuck...
It's pretty mid. The example I was thinking of just involved a character drinking from a soda bottle and SD still freaks the frick out when it comes to anything involving food.
I could've used a controlnet I guess but...that kinda defeats the purpose. Might as well trace the picture directly at that point.
>He thinks AI will be the mythical “press to animate” button
As long as there are specific visions, there will always be a human element in AI productions. AI will be a tool that works alongside the artists who give it that last 20% to make it great.
AI-free will also be a selling point as well. For every artist that chose to adopt CGI in film (George Lucas, James Cameron) there will be a Nolan out there keeping the old ways alive. People who have legitimate skills to animate have nothing to worry about.
Also, aren’t Americans mostly boarders now anyway? There still needs to be visual ideas for the AI to work with, so I don’t think your job is going anywhere. The sweatshop koreans doing the motion tweens? Maybe.
I’ve been through 3 major shifts in the production of animation in my lifetime and I’m only 27. Cel->Digital then Traditional->Puppet rig/CGI
Both transitions had their positive and negative impacts on the industry. I’m excited for AI because after perhaps some years of growing pains (like the above) I see it recovering a lot of what was lost from the other transitions (organic feel vs sterility) while keeping the benefits (lower cost, more output).
>ban/regulate ai
Please, define what "AI" is to me without describing automation.
They want to regulate the dataset to cripple machine learning algorithms based on our fricked up copyright system in order to guarantee their labor value because they care more about that than the medium or the work.
It's always weird how massive corporations have to do this as a roundabout way of caring about the lives of their workers
It's ai
Fine, don't tell him.
Yiff in hell furgays
>outlaw copying an artist's style
lmao adios to the countless weeb artist that copies japanese artists
>Toyotaro gets nuked from orbit
And artist tributes.
Suddenly they want stricter IP laws.
Why are artists protesting over AI and not the computer nerds who are more likely to lose their job to it?
>more likely to lose their job to it
Who's going to update the AI before it can update itself?
Don't think about the latter scenario too hard...
>and not the computer nerds who are more likely to lose their job to it?
I dunno the GPT subreddit seems to be complaining that it's gotten way dumber at programming. Of course much like here it's split between people noticing the flaws and shills going "ackshully its even smarter you just don't get it but I won't prove how"
Nerds probably are protesting too but artists have a much, much, much larger social media following so you just hear about it more.
Also nobody cares about nerds. Marvel/Star Wars geeks are not nerds.
Computer nerds are notoriously shortsighted. It’s why they wear glasses.
Computer Nerds know how to destroy it. No Codeslinger makes something they are not fully prepared to break.
lmao, AI is a chimera. If there's a weakness another coder patches it.
What are some funny copes by artists when they're asked "why didnt you care about AI before when they were looking to take over driving jobs?"
Why don't you ask your precious bot to make one up? You do for everything else.
If any of those self driving cars could manage it without randomly deciding to plow over kids they would. People protested against fricking uber replacing taxis by exploiting their drivers
>outlaw an artist style
1000 Years too late
At this point, it’s just a 50/50 question of will humans be shoving woke shit down our throats or will humans use AI to shove woke shit down our throats but with weirdly shaped hands. I don’t fricking care anymore.
>DISNEY DESTROYED OUR CULTURE WITH COPYRIGHT EXTENSIONS
Alright, here’s a powerful new tool that’ll allow you to produce your art much more efficiently, with a minimal barrier to entry and your imagination is the limit.
>NOOOOOO NOT LIKE THAT!!!!! I’M GOING INSANE, HELP ME DADDY GOVERNMENT LEGISLATE MY SPEECH HARDER!!!!!
Why are they like this?
And that's 4 times this moronic rant was posted.
First of all, if you really fricking want to blame Disney for "le fall of culture", you need to legit take a walk outside and see the issue is more rotten to the values of the modern american than anything else. And I don't just mean the middle class one.
Second, people already said that the bigger issue is executives being such cheap bastards that they're willing to make an AI-anything of anyone, in order to not pay either the actor/actress or the actual company behind the AI.
And third, the people that are vehemently defending AI overall, sure do sound like people who totally didn't defend crypto-bullshit either, no sir.
anon if you don't want to sound fricking insane, don't ramble about entities that you can't directly point to
cuz homie you sound off your rocker
I'll be watching you get bashed by the police, then.
>w-we'll kill you!
lmao the words of a man that is afraid of confrontation
anyone who thinks AI art will benefit anyone other than corporations is showing off their basement level IQ
anyone who thinks AI art will hurt anyone other than furries taking fetish coms s showing off their basement level IQ
It benefits me. I've never seen so much delicious seethe.
My favorite is
>nobody said that!
about everything they're being made fun of repeating
All the people who have been critical of the industry and its management practices are now vindicated by this magnificent implosion and clearly have higher IQ than those who thought this would never happen. true creatives will be fine but the cronies who will now need to find a new job are fricked