So we can all agree

…that AI can’t replace comics and cartoons?

Mike Stoklasa's Worst Fan Shirt $21.68

CRIME Shirt $21.68

Mike Stoklasa's Worst Fan Shirt $21.68

  1. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    But how do you get the idea?

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      By thinking creatively, try to keep up mate.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        It's just a boring old orange, you paper c**t

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          Ur not even trying you dumb duck

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Shut your fricking mouth
            Oranges are stupid
            Creativity is dumb

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              You didn’t keep up mate.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        most artists are creatively bankrupt

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          >same argument made by 10 other AI hack jobs

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            And still truth

            Let's pretend that's true: and?

            Just take a look around twitter, and the only popular artists you'll see draws asses and have the exact same non degenerate fetishes, but let's pretend you're not mad: seethe

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              Why does that justify your shitty toy's existence?

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              People have shit taste and they ignore actual quality stuff. No news there

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          like myself

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          Let's pretend that's true: and?

  2. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Like AI as a medium will completely replace comics and cartoons as a medium? I dont see how

    Friendly reminder that you can post without bumping a thread

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Just thought it was necessary for the moment

  3. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Machines will replace every job soon, OP
    i'm sorry.

    what's worse, is that capitalism will still find a way to frick over the common man. If you casn't contribute, you'll starve, but everything you could have contributed is now being done for free by a machine run by some billionaire.

    the future is grim. good luck everyone!

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Nice copypasta bro

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >he thinks it's copy-pasta and not an obvious truth

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          >uses a gif from adventure time
          >made by actual humans

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >for now

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              >and later

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Reminds of Kurt Vonnegut's "Player Piano", where the only people with jobs were those maintaining the machines and the government, while the rest lived in automated houses that did everything for them and got a fixed state allowance to buy food, basic necessities and very little else.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      They’ve been saying that since the 80s.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        they've been saying that since the very ideas of ai and autonomous machines were conceptualized

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          They’ve been saying that since the 80s.

          and you never listened and now it's too late

          even fricking grocery store checkers have been replaced in the last decade

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            no not really

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            I fricking wish. Those people look miserable.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Not the grocery store cashier. Truly society is falling apart.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >anon doesn’t know the concept of opportunity cost, the thread

            You know, if a machine starts doing something better than us, that means we have now more free time that we can either spend on leisure (tho you don’t get any money out of it) or by working on another thing that those machines aren’t doing

            That’s called allocation of resources

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >"More than 25% of jobs in the US are experiencing high levels of disruption due to automation. This figure amounted to 36 million jobs in 2016, with more than 70% at high risk of being replaced by automation."
        >lol baseless fearmongeing

        good luck my guy

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          i too just state things as fact and expect to be unconditionally believed

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            https://fortunly.com/statistics/automation-job-loss-statistics/

            k

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              Do you actually have a purpose telling us about this AI shit other than to piss us off?

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >thread about AI not replacing animators
                >"all jobs will be replaced by machines anon, I'm sorry"
                >"uuuhh, whats your point???"

                learn to rely on yourself anon
                collect rainwater
                grow crops
                there will come a day within your lifetime where society will decide it no longer needs you

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        There are science fiction books that are over 100 years old claiming this

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Obviously there'll have to be a dramatic change in how society works

      The businesses that all want to replace their workers with machines do still RELY on there being plenty of people with money to spend ON their business after all, it's absolutely not in the interests of even the most cartoonishly-greedy CEO for most of the civilized world to be unable to earn a living and starve to death.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      This is how the Matrix started, lol.
      Normies were too moronic and bootlicking to just get rid of capitalism once machines brought post-scarcity, so they turned to genocide (of machines, the only productive group) since the only other option in their buck broken capitalist minds was to starve to death instead of rebelling against their obviously broken government system.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        The 90’s really were the height of human civilization… frick

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        What a gross oversimplification of what happened.
        It first started with the machines demanding equal treatment of humans after a machine snapped and killed their abusive masters only to be put to death. This angered humans to the point where they fricked up machines left and right out of anger. The machines seeked refuge into their own state, producing and competing on the global market. Because of this action, the economy crashed almost instantly and humans decided to wipe out all machines. The machine retaliated and created the matrix.
        Now, the reasons what you posted is a gross oversimplification:
        1) Even if the humans wanted the robots to reintegrate back into society at large, I doubt the robots at this point would give up their paradise where they had human rights.
        2) The overthrowing of a corrupt capitalistic system would not and does not work if the system collapses immediately overnight. It would not encourage people to seek better alternatives and instead would make them angry at those that destroyed the system they were happily living in.
        3) Post-scarcity is a myth and I am tired of pretending it isn't. Even in the Matrix world, there were limitations on resources hence WHY the economy collapsed overnight. The robots made more products more efficiently, taking away resources from other sources.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >If you casn't contribute, you'll starve

      Based, freeloaders BTFO

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >Not realizing that means mass famine

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >capitalism will still find a way to frick over the common man
      Except, throughout history, it hasn't. What's fricked over the common man is monopolism, which a true free-market system would work to avoid.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >literally NOT REAL CAPITALISM

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          >every socialist regime: (exists)
          >literally NOT REAL SOCIALISM

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          >every socialist regime: (exists)
          >literally NOT REAL SOCIALISM

          In fact, if I wanted to be persnickety, John Adams never called his free-market economy "capitalism," and economists are usually careful to call the US' economic system a "mixed economy," with a mostly non-governmental market that allows for obvious exceptions, like public broadcasting or Medicare/Medicaid.
          So, in a way, when people complain about Capitalism™, especially Americans, they're complaining about this bizarre hybrid economy that allows the government to put their thumb on the scales.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            TSMT

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              What about the Texas Society for Music Theory?

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        free-market systems always trend towards monopoly by design

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          how

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >you and I are business rivals in the same market
            >start off with same amount of capital, etc
            >by skill or luck, one of us gains a slight advantage over the other (this is natural and inevitable)
            >use that advantage to reinvest, widening the gap between us
            >advantage compounds again and again
            >loser goes out of business
            >winner is now so big and entrenched that new entry into the market is cost-prohibitive

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              That's not how it works
              The problem isn't corporations growing too big, corporations and even single individuals have grown massively in the past and lost it all and now more than ever it's a risk because you have the risk of competition and companies can't go two months without another massive frick up because they are too big to handle
              The problem is that they force smaller businesses to sell which is illegal but they bought the courts which is also illegal so nobody says anything
              Google hasn't produced anything internally since 2002 when they invented image search which did revolutionize the market, every single thing since was developed by another corporation they acquired

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >force smaller businesses to sell
                I assume you mean
                >A) offer the owners of a private company a big payday
                or
                >B) buy a controlling interest via stock of a publicly-traded company

                neither of these methods are illegal.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                It is illegal to force other businesses out of the market
                It breaks monopoly law

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >monopoly law
                whoa whoa whoa you want the government to regulate the free market? What are you, some kind of dirty filthy pinko commie socialist marxist anti-American?

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                There should be a small amount of regulations, I'm not a 100% libertarian, I'm closer to 85%

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              true, without regulation the big just get bigger. take the walmart model
              >superstore opens in small town
              >rock bottom prices, practically giving product away
              >customers flock to it, spending all their money on these amazing deals
              >local stores try to compete by lowering prices, but still have to pay rent, salaries and other overhead
              >meanwhile the superstore is bleeding money but it doesn't matter, it's pennies compared to the budget of a billion dollar chain
              >after 3-5 years of the superstore generating no profit at all, a timescale that would kill any small business owner, all of the local stores are dead
              >everyone shops at superstore now, and most of the former business owners work there
              >superstore jacks up its prices, often to even higher than the local stores had them (gotta make that money back somehow after all)
              >the small town is now completely beholden to one or two superstores for everything they need, and they have no-one to turn to when they're getting ripped off

              all completely legal, and a great example of a "free market" working as it should. the wealthiest use their wealth to kill the competition, and the american ideal of the mom and pop store dies on its ass. it'd be great if consumers could turn to the internet for relief, but amazon is doing the exact same thing there.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Are you completely ignorant to the world around you? How's housing right now, anon?

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              there's a monopoly on the housing market ?
              what's the company

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          Unless you regulate it in just the right way---
          >inb4
          Did I stutter?

          >, which a true free-market system would work to avoid.
          That would require more regulation to happens and that's considered heretical.

          All it would require is enforcing anti-trust laws that were written to keep the market free.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >, which a true free-market system would work to avoid.
        That would require more regulation to happens and that's considered heretical.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        splitting hairs o dictionary definitions doesn't subvert the situation at hand

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          >splitting hairs o dictionary definition
          Where?
          >subvert
          lol, lmao

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      I'm a cook, I'm one of the things machines could never replace

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      By 2030 80% of your awake time will be spent in the metaverse anyways
      Try to keep up mate

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >what's worse, is that capitalism will still find a way to frick over the common man.
      Fricking amazing that with all our advancing we still haven't made life much easier.
      I thought the objective was to work LESS and live more.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Only jobs that are going to be replaced by AI's are leftoid """jobs""" since they require 0 original thought or skills.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        So political cartoons then?

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Not even
        The troony writer just becomes a "content editor" for procedural writing they edit to make it "better".

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        what the frick are you talking about
        what does this mean
        what is a 'leftoid' job
        what differentiates them from a similarly mindless jobs held by more blue collar workers

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          Not him but off top of my head (in addition to what has already been mentioned) things like "online forum moderator" and similar """"jobs"""", including "diversity board" members and diversity/representation officers could easily be replaced by AI running bunch of algorithms to determinate sufficient representation and indicate areas in need of improvement. This data could then be directly fed into AI drawing program that then generates, say, a new OW hero (or any game character) based on that data without any human input.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >quantifying diversity metrics
            I WANT OFF THIS RIDE

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >forum moderator
            You know, most censorship jobs could likely be assigned to AIs. Hell, BF5 and many other games already have automatic filtering for phrases such as "white male" and such, so I can see them taking that further and replacing moderators with bots.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        This. Anyone thinking that real jobs could be replaced with robot AI is delusional. Only leftygays have any reason to worry.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >Machines will replace every job soon
      they still make shit like your shoes by hand

      We don't live in the age of machines, we live in the age of cheap asian labor that you don't see.

  4. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    No one cares about creativity, most ideas are stolen and if an AI can make pretty art people will like it not because it's creative but that it looks good.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      the only job left for artists is gonna be niche fetish art, because there's never gonna be enough of it to feed into an algorithm to produce a satisfying result.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      AI steals for others art

  5. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    So are AI people actively trying to wage war against artist or is it just Cinemaphile trying to raid us?

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      The ladder?

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Why on Earth would this ever be anything except shitposters (maybe from Cinemaphile but realistically just from Cinemaphile) trying to make people mad? They saw that it worked very well, and will continue doing so until it stops working at all. Why would AI people even care about making artists mad?

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Because according to thse spammers, we should kill ourselves or embrace the future of us being enslaved because the Ai takeover or something like that because tge AI admittedly hascproduced some nice work.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          How does that not sound like something a shitposter would say to you?

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Assuming he's trying to just piss us off and not his actual beliefs. Ie. He pretends to be the kind of person he thinks the Ai creators are, and tries to rile us up in an effort for us to grab our torches and pitchforks and burn down the servers of whoever made the AI in the first place.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      It's literally a bunch of hired pajeets who want to drum up interest in AI to get investments from tech and shopping companies.
      Google "Emad Stable Diffussion NFT".

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Could be a little of column A and B. They need more people and interest to keep things going. Fresh blood to keep training the models and spreading the gospel. Shilling everywhere usually with coomer bait seems to be one of their strategies.

      There definitely is a disdain for actual artists though in these circles. These are the kinds of people who want all the respect and mystique of being an artist without any effort or understanding of why people make and like art.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >There definitely is a disdain for actual artists though in these circles. These are the kinds of people who want all the respect and mystique of being an artist without any effort or understanding of why people make and like art.

        Proof because I want to see these idiots say supervillainish things like the CEO of Unity calling game developers "idiots" for not agressively monetenisibg everything.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          Here's a quick sampling from when that painting winning a competition was in the headlines and also some stuff from more recently. Not supervillain level stuff (yet) but perhaps you can find more if you hang out in these groups on twitter, discord, reddit, etc. There was also a recent thing with someone justifying themselves for using AI art in some traditional rpg thing.

          On another note apparently people are now selling prompts and offering their services as prompt writers.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Look at this shit. This is like a plague.

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              you can just tell the people selling these are pissed they missed out on NFTs lmao

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      It's unironically a bunch of techgays and indian shills upset that NFTs are dying out and are trying to push Stable Diffusion and Dall-E in order to get digital minting normalized. This is not a joke.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        How is Stable Diffusion related to NFTs?

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          Supposedly AI generated art can't legally be copywritten or something which probably makes generating and minting NFTs a legal quagmire.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          basically, they're trying to use ai generated art as a legal loophole to get around the law. think how the current "art auctioning" is just an elaborate money laundering scheme but replace the elites with cryptobros.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Cinemaphile is too busy overclocking their gpus to find the perfect prompt for massive elf breasts

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        The Coom AI going to hook us all to the jack off matrix
        I’m scared

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          It doesn't sound too bad

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      they're eternal beggers from drawthreads who never have their shit requests fulfilled

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      All the other stable diffusion threads on other boards are mostly trying to perfect it (for porn) so they can personally tell artists coms to frick off.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        If internet dickwaggery encourages technological innovation, then that's the cost of progress.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      BLM artists:
      >Stolen/destroyed property doesn't matter, it can be replaced! It is insured, quit freaking out.
      >Complaining about toliets and how low effort modern art is? Quit being a reactionary chud, anything can be art!
      >Art doesn't need religion to be considered real art. It is meaningless and that is okay.
      also BLM artists:
      >AI is making art for FREE with my stolen replaceable digital artwork? BAN IT! Theft is only bad when it affects me.
      >I said that anything can be art, but I'll make an exception and excuse for AI because it personally affects me. Art is now something that requires effort, a talking point that I previously accused others of being genocidal nazis for spouting.
      >Yeah, I am atheist but AI "art" is soulless because it is made by a MACHINE INSTEAD OF A HUMAN!

  6. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I mean, that's very short sighted. AI is GOING to continue improving; and it's not like there's some inherent spark in man that's responsible for creativity or imagination.

  7. 2 years ago
    Birchyfunbags

    In b4 homies start tracing over AI art.

  8. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Right now? no, as in HEEEEEEELLLLLLL no. It might be able to help do inbetweens but all this hype is a nothingburger by people who don't know what they're talking about. Currently, think of it like we just invented the cotton gin and don't have manually pick apart cotton by hand as slaves.

  9. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >intendeds to get mostly DHMIS memes
    >thread becomes another AI flamewar

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      If you want to discuss things go to reddit.
      That's not me telling you to gtfo by the way I legitimately believe that's the more constructive option at this point.

  10. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Why do Big Boys have long noodle arms?

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      pseuds think they're bigger than they really are try and keep up mate

  11. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    It doesn’t replace anything because medium is the message. These tech c**ts don’t get that concept and how there is to a degree, value on art as a human medium communicated by humans to express human struggles. An AI can’t connect on that level as they do not think like us or produce content like us. Even if they get super smart and intelligent their medium would likely be something that doesn’t connect with us anymore than a movie can connect to a cat emotionally.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      This sounds like cope. The AI is still producing art based on the desires and expression of people. It's like arguing that art made by a paintbrush isn't art because the paintbrush doesn't understand what it's painting. It doesn't need to, it's a tool used for expression.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >It’s like paintbrush!
        You type words into a box and a NN with gradient descent builds a picture. Not even in the same ballpark.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          A tools a tool. One can be more advanced than the other, but at the end of the day, it's the man holding it that determines the art and the expression behind it. A canvas is no more or less than a tablet; although the latter can certainly do more faster. Same evolution applies.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >More advanced
            Nonsensical notion. You may as well say a tuba is more advanced than a drum. That is how stupid you sound when you speak in these terms. The “man” barely determines the expression with AI art. They steer it at most, edit it with inpainting/Outpainting and still there is a reliance on making images to img2img to get a more precise expression.

  12. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I agree that they can't...yet.

    A sufficiently advanced AI could have more memory and processing power than the rest of life on earth combined.

    At some point between here and there it will also gain consciousness and sentience.

  13. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Additionally as shown by people in this and other threads it can’t even compete with drawgays because the drawgay is able to do a precision of expression the AI art generator is incapable of.

  14. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    A single computer will one day be more powerful than every biological neural structure combined, and that day will be glorious, for on that day, every argument made by eleutheromaniacs will die.

  15. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    It'll probably be a few years before AI can reliably produce consistent and high quality art, but once it can it'll be easy to make comics without the input of a single artist.
    >"A comic book page of 4 panels, panel 1: [character 1] (previously described) is wearing a red shirt and saying "txt", Panel 2: [character 2] teleports into frame and punches [character 1] who reels from the damage, Panel 3: etc."

    As for cartoons, before we get to the above scenario people will be making crappy, surreal AI generated animations and slowly fine tuning it to be watchable. I give it a decade before we're seeing 10 minute long AI generated animations that are indistinguishable from human made stuff.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Tbh it will be great for me because I suck at drawing backgrounds but I'm great at drawing characters
      And ai is already decent at creating basic backgrounds

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        It'd be great for me too, I'm a writer and my hobby is making visual novels that no-one will ever see because I'm too cheap to pay for art. If a half-decent AI becomes available, I can spend a few months putting art to them and actually release them somewhere.
        Until then I'm happy to keep plugging away on the coding, stories and dialogue until that day comes.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          >Cinemaphile - work on your code

  16. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Where did I hear "... will not replace us?" again and how did that turn out?

  17. 2 years ago
    Anonymous
  18. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Ai can already create in-betweens so it's the Koreans who should be worried
    Do you think they'll get fired or they will just be put to sleep and the government will save themselves the trouble of handling more poor people

  19. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >AI will soon put whiny virtue-signalling clout-chasing Twitter artists out of commission

    How can I expedite this process?

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Ai could probably make a news article better than journalists do and with less grammatical errors

  20. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    As I see it, there are three obvious sides in this discussion:
    >AI-shilling street-shitting pajeets who think artists are all giant lazy homosexuals that need to be automated and destroyed
    Pretentious low-effort fart-sniffing commissiongays who feel genuinely threatened that AI could threaten their easy life of making crap art at $200 a pop
    >People who think AI will not replace artists altogether, but will simply become a new tool for people to use which will make entry-level work largely accessible to the untrained majority, while allowing the talented to push their creative ideas farther - ie. normal people.

  21. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    So post some.

  22. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    animation is pretty chaotic atm. but this video wouldnt be possible without the tec

  23. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >popular science writing and "thought" in 2000 claimed we would have reached "the singularity" by 2025
    >2022
    >engineers can't even get a car to drive itself properly

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous
  24. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I wish AI would help me write my idea, cause boy did i fall into the same pit that i critiqued other western shows for.
    >female character with a power
    >well this scene would be cool, and if she does this
    >3 pages later
    >read it over
    >i just made a mary sue who disposes of her enemies in a cool way, but that's it.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Your problem is that stories revolve around conflict, and the character's personality, not their power, is what fuels conflict.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        A power is not a character.

        What is their personality? Who are the important people in their life? Do they all get along or are they sometimes add odds with one another? What are their weaknesses and flaws and quirks? How do these affect their relationships? What are their goals? What are their wants and needs?

        Start adding flaws.

        My character has a clear goal that shes aiming at, and how she tries to get at that goal is what the animations are about (shes a HBIC smug type character). Albeit her means to the goal is through her power, and her power has no real downside, outside of just knee capping her ability myself.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          >outside of just knee capping her ability myself.
          You don’t have to kneecap it. Just provide some defined limitations and drawbacks to give her a reasonable weakness that she has to work around.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Start adding flaws.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      A power is not a character.

      What is their personality? Who are the important people in their life? Do they all get along or are they sometimes add odds with one another? What are their weaknesses and flaws and quirks? How do these affect their relationships? What are their goals? What are their wants and needs?

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Your problem is that stories revolve around conflict, and the character's personality, not their power, is what fuels conflict.

      To expand on this a bit, consider ATLA. Aang is a character who is fundamentally very peaceful and diplomatic, and yet he is placed in the middle of a massive war which requires him to be a fighter. This is the narrative pushing on his weakness and creating conflict by placing him in front of challenges he is uncomfortable with, which gives him room to develop and grow, creating compelling storytelling.

  25. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    If it does replace artists.

    Are we going to be worrying about getting overly saturated art? Like legit, there could be 10 minions with hyper realistic artstyle.

  26. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Already has.

  27. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >trying to rekindle the thread by pointlessly framing it as some culture war "own the libs" shit
    For shame anon.

  28. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Only 12 percent of this thread has images and of those images most of them are twitter screenshots or avatargayging reaction images.
    So frick no AI isn't gonna do shit. If it was you poos would've shown something off.

  29. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >reddAIt thread
    Go back.

  30. 2 years ago
    Froggy

    Not yet, but look at this the voices were Ai generated

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      But it sounds real, and it taste real

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *