AI """Content""" wouldn't exist if AI wasn't able to steal it from real content creators.

AI """Content""" wouldn't exist if AI wasn't able to steal it from real content creators.

ChatGPT Wizard Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

ChatGPT Wizard Shirt $21.68

  1. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    And that's a good thing.

  2. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    Skill issue

  3. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    >AI Art is shit and no one likes it
    >I am crying and shitting because I am about to be replaced by AI art
    which is it?

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      Both. Normies overlook the defects because "oo pretty picture, niche fetish, gotta proompt" and mass-generate images that look like shit to anyone who actually cares about quality at all.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      Artgay here
      The first
      AI has not made a dent in my commissions. It's a toy and I have no problem with people playing with it, I just don't want AIslop on my screen, simple as.

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        Nice man, can you share your socials, i would like to see your portfolio and support you 😉

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          You can see my page here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vincent_van_Gogh

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        ART is absolute bullshit. Your job is useless. And you will be jobless in the next 2-3years when AI takes over

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          Tbh I think "real" jobs will be taken sooner than the arts. Engineering, lawyers, doctors, accountants, programmers, are all easier to automate since your supposed to follow strict rules and guidelines anyways, and no one actually cares if your work looks pretty as long as it works. Where as the arts are all made up nonsense, and most are just hired for moneylaundering or via nepotism anyways.
          White collar jobs are gonna be a thing of the past. The era of the tradesman is back

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            You are right in theory, jobs with rules are always easier to automate. There are two issues though:
            1) The actual gruntwork of engineering, architecture, lawyering, etc. is not a big deal. The difference between a salaried employee and a $NEG/job millionaire is the creativity, improvisation, savvyness, etc. they can employ that solves problems in ways a cheaper one can't. Computers aren't good at that, best they can do is iterate on random shit until they hit a solution by luck. And today's AI models running on racks of top end servers packed with GPUs still can't iterate fast enough to make a dent in the search space of these fields.
            2) The AI models we have right now are not in any way shape or form the future. They are a parlor trick, a "it's amazing it works as well as it does" and not a serious contender to solving the human problem.
            I'm not saying AI won't ever replace these jobs, I'm just saying that LLMs are not the future, just like genetic algorithms didn't revolutionise testing, just as state machines didn't replace doctors. We'll have to wait for the NEXT breakthrough and evaluate that before I'd be even remotely worried that white collar jobs will vanish.

            • 10 months ago
              Anonymous

              Tbh I think "real" jobs will be taken sooner than the arts. Engineering, lawyers, doctors, accountants, programmers, are all easier to automate since your supposed to follow strict rules and guidelines anyways, and no one actually cares if your work looks pretty as long as it works. Where as the arts are all made up nonsense, and most are just hired for moneylaundering or via nepotism anyways.
              White collar jobs are gonna be a thing of the past. The era of the tradesman is back

              You both are wrong. We thought jobs with before that jobs with rules will be easier to automate, but then when we actually started developing AI, we found out that it is amazing moron that fricks up all the time. In a way it is more human then humans are because it is really good at analyzing emotions, being creative, but also being forgetful and wrong. Jobs with no hard rules will be fricked first and probably the only jobs actually getting fricked unless we fix the hallucination issue. There are no rules for art, which means that random color blob generator that then finds patterns to make the blobs look pretty is enough to replace every artist on Earth, even if it has 0 "actual creativity". Yes, the people who buy it will be mad if you lie to them about it being made by robot or human because lot of people value the process, but the end result is the same, even if AI is more derivative then human or more generic. Customers dont see inside of your head, they dont know your vision and how you actually studied ancient architercture to get the symbolism and lore right, they will see random towers that have patters similar to Indian jungle temples and think it was intentional, even if the initial prompt was overgrown palace with nothing to do with Indian culture. Meanwhile if robot doctor fricks up even a little bit, even if it is less likely then human doctor, it will still get shit on. Same with cars, or engineer, or architect, or lawyer. People will think that because the robot did oopsie 1/100 times, it was the reason why it failed, while human would prevent that simple mistake, similar to how the best GO bot was beaten by random amature. People will see that and never trust a bot in playing GO if their life depended on it because people are emotional in this way.

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        https://i.imgur.com/rLingti.png

        AI """Content""" wouldn't exist if AI wasn't able to steal it from real content creators.

        The definition of art is stealing frick off anti ai gays

  4. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    CC0-licensed content does exist, you know.

    https://creativecommons.org/choose/zero/

  5. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    it's true though. "AI" has become a label so programs can scrap your data disregarding copyright and redistribute it.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      good.

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        unlike the shitty generic comic in OP, i doubt a GAN come replicate this image

  6. 10 months ago
    Anonymous
    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      this is what it's really like. artgays just cope too much saying it's not good. it's just keeps getting better too.

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        btw could you guess that this is(n't) AI art ?

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          obviously not ai

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      Can you share the original image

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      What if we edit human art and post it on twitter or reddit, I bet they will say the drawing is soulless lmao

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        Devilish

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/v1EUYav.png

      https://i.imgur.com/LtG7m5q.png

      ftfy

      why this homie look like the okinawan angry video game nerd

  7. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    >big tech literally makes its entire fortune stealing your data for decades
    >some dude starts making animu waifus
    >NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO THIS IS WROOOOOOOOOONG

    frick off.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      >learn to draw you pleb, all you have to do is spend the next ten years practicing daily making 99.999% shit until your muscle memory improves
      >just ignore that button that saves you actual years and gets you most of the way there, it's bad for you
      Not gonna happen.

  8. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    are we at the point where we're putting excessive quotation marks around "content" now? "content" has always been shit. it's to be consumed. why do you care?

  9. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    Next, we will train new AIs on existing AI art. A new generation of AI artists learning from looking at the work of the AI artists that came before them. After some generations of this, the AIs will form their own culture art-wise.

  10. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    Human """Content""" wouldn't exist if humans weren't able to steal it from real content creators (God).

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      What's mine is mine forever. In no way should it be allowed that perhaps in my lifetime most modern encryption standards will be broken and everyone's secrets, including mine, will be exposed. After that our content will be archived and scooped up by powerful AI corporations who will make the perfect porn that once seen you will jerk off yourself to death. Don't look at the porn!

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      In Islam art that mimics God's creation is forbidden, which is why mosques only have geometric shapes for art

  11. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    why are people so moronic about AI?
    literally the only argument they have is "it's theft because it was trained on other people's shit without permission" but:
    >the models are already out in the wild and there is no way to tell which model was trained on what (or even what model a picture came from), so the cat is kind of out of the bag
    >it's not an insurmountable problem to train new models without IP problems, and then artists would be in the exact same position they were in before but without any leverage
    all of the objections against it just seem very shortsighted. it seems obvious to me that there's no solution they would be happy with that isn't just a return to the old status quo, which is obviously impossible
    it's also kind of moronic if you think about the economics of AI art versus the old art economy - imagine if every AI-generated picture cost money, relative to its quality (i.e. those detailed photorealistic paintings with anime aesthetics you keep seeing would cost hundreds of dollars EACH). how much (less) art would get made, exactly? not to mention that the people with that kind of skill are picky about what they draw, so a lot of niche subjects would simply never get drawn to that level of quality without paying many times more money. the artists would be thrilled, but the amount of art that actually gets produced would be much, much smaller (and it would be more boring), which is a loss for everyone else

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      There are very few people in the world that understand enough about ANYTHING to argue sensibly on the topic. Doesn't matter if it's AI, compilers, politics, whatever. However there's MILLIONS of people who feel strongly about them based on their limited understanding so they argue back and forth not realising that both them and the person they are arguing with don't actually know enough to even understand the opposing viewpoint.
      Understanding how stable diffusion works, understanding how it was trained, and understanding how much or how little it's "theft" goes WAY beyond the skills of the majority of people.
      And given how utterly truly atrociously awful SD drek is with straight prompts until you inpaint and canny/openpose it well at that point you either need to be artistically gifted enough to understand what you're doing or you need to be straight up stealing someone else's art to act as your base image. The fact that the checkpoint was trained by vacuuming up *booru posts is irrelevant.

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        One of my braincells died last week when I saw an artist I enjoy post about how "AI ART IS THEFT" where on the left there was their art and on the right there was img2img of it with like 0.2 denoising strength, love their art but ffs someone applying a filter to your art and trying to steal it that way doesn't mean that's how the technology works

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        Controlnet has been so helpful. A real artist would look at this as another tool they could use and not seethe over it.

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          The biggest failure of AI art was the advertisement and that the first time it was seriously advertised, it was only in the state of prompt box that shits out pictures. You write something in the box and then it pulls out picture that looks like your buzzword description. It is closer to commissioning then doing art because it is not visual, so artists cannot transfer their skills over there, and skilled prompter is not somebody with artistic talent, but somebody who knows what each prompt word means and knows how the weights and training sets work. Its not that artists are too moronic to know how these work, but that the work is done in different way. Just look at the workflow of any of the artists that were artists before AI and incorporated AI into the workflow. They prompt different chunks of the picture, and then photobash them together while fixing stuff, almost never starting witht he prompt itself.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      It's all NAI variations. It's still theft no matter what you do with it.

  12. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    Most artists die starving even the ancient ones we laud as geniuses today. AI is making sure that trend continues. A truly human invention.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      Good. Maybe they'll try to get a real job for once

  13. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    Root of the issue is clown world and clown world stems from usury based israeli globohomosexual banking system killing everything quality and moral in the world. Promoting evil and scams while punishing good people who just want to promote advancement and peace.

    The clowns like big tech, vaccine companies, crypto Black folk, ai shitters wouldnt exist if it werent for clown world.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      moron take, the clown world ringleaders hate crypto because it lets you avoid the traditional financial system, because they use their control over that system to enforce social rules - they don't like you, you can no longer accept money over the internet, tough luck! also of course they can't trace crypto payments very easily
      they also hate AI because it has the potential to create an epistemic collapse where nobody believes anything they see on the internet anymore, because it's so easy to create convincing deepfakes, fake news, etc. this is bad for them because they spent all this time gaining control over the media, which they need you to believe in as being the only gatekeepers of truth
      both of these things have the potential to destabilize large centralized systems of power and control, why would you ever think they're something our overlords are imposing on us?

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        >still thinking crypto was anything but a ponzi scheme in 2023
        yes anon.
        tech scams will free us from globohomosexual not shackle us further.

  14. 10 months ago
    Anon

    Ai won't replace traditional artists, but even if it did, that would be fine.

  15. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    there would be no notion of stealing, if there was no capitalism

  16. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    all artists in the planet can stop drawing and AI art will keep getting better, OP.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      Haha I'm imagining all art majors suddenly refusing to do art in protest of AI.

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        hahaha, yeah that will be weird.

  17. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    >AI produces shit quality art
    >I will get replaced by AI
    Way to admit you're a sub-par artist.

  18. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    I've never seen so much gatekeeping with all this AI art shit. Makes me hate "real" artists even more.

  19. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    >content creators

  20. 10 months ago
    Anonymous
    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      gem

  21. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yes, and a fly wouldn't shit if it couldn't feed on other's shit.
    The only issue here is that this increases the total amount of shit in the world.

  22. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    ftfy

  23. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    Digital art wouldn't exist without pirated photoshop. Programmers are just taking back what is theirs.

  24. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    Huamn """content""" would not exist if Humans were not able to see/hear/taste/feel/smell it from real content creators.

  25. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    test

  26. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    water is wet.

  27. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    Why are normalgays so vehemently against AI? NFTs I could understand because a lot of them were moronic enough to invest into them, but AI? Most of them aren't even artists.

  28. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    Art content wouldn't exist if artists weren't able to steal it from real content creators.

  29. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    >steal
    >implying humans don't do exactly the same
    There are just some extra steps between the stolen artwork and the original product. We call it creativity, but essentially it doesn't fricking matter, because functionally it's not different.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      that's right, humans don't. your flimsy argument relies on anthropomorphizing code.

  30. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    The real blackpill - and most creators will go down to the end screaming their denial of it - is that there's no such thing as "soul", there's only limitations of current generation technology. There's a long way to go yet, but there's nothing special at all about content creation by biological neural nets versus silicon ones. Current AI models are proof-of-concept of this.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      soulless post

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        If you want to get all mystical about it, it means that awareness and creativity are so deeply bound into the structure of the universe that any sufficiently complex and properly configured array of matter nearly automatically starts doing it. Consciousness is absolutely inherent to the cosmos. Fricking hell, an array of a few billion numbers can emulate it well enough to start fooling people. Even if you hate it because it's threatening your self-narrative that's still pretty amazing.

  31. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    >replace 'AI' with 'Black folk'
    Huh. Guess you're just a racist, anon. Go to college.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      >replacing words changes the meaning of a sentence
      big if true

  32. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    > white mermaid
    WTF we can't have this bigoted racist AI run free! Regulate the technology! Introduce the black seed to its randomness!

  33. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    >AI """Content""" wouldn't exist if AI wasn't able to steal it from real content creators.
    It would, but it would look different. We've already seen that AI can learn and be creative without drawing from any human-created data. For instance, AlphaGo Zero developed its own strategies for Go, only by playing against itself and using no data from human or other AI games. It developed completely novel strategies that even professional Go players hadn't thought of, and some human Go players have been learning from them.

    Secondly, all human creativity is derivative to some extent. If I draw a picture of a tree, it could be completely unique, but it was clearly influenced by the countless trees I've seen IRL, in photos, and other drawings. In a way, I've been "trained" the same way AI is trained. The difference is right now AI is still clunky and appears to copypaste specific elements from the data its been trained on, but one day AI will be able to take all the data, stick it into an abstract cloud, and create more genuinely unique art.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      Ai pictures haven't even been deemed derivative

  34. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    https://www.artstation.com/search?sort_by=relevance&query=pikachu

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