AI is inherently immoral.
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
AI is inherently immoral.
AI is inherently immoral.
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
>technology automates your job
lolol! serves you right chud! lern 2 code!
>technology automates my job
nooooo! this is illegal! deleet this!
they're making a huge strategic mistake by (as this comic artist does) putting all their chips on criticizing technical errors by the models, like deformed hands or incoherent geometry etc.
because those errors are going to be gone with 2-3 years and all those arguments will be useless
perhaps they imagine they'll be able to quickly pivot to new arguments at that point, but they shouldn't be so sure that'll work
because it takes a very long time for messaging to percolate into the mind of the normie (and convincing normies is ultimately what they'll need to do if they want the men with guns, i.e. the government, to enforce their will for them)
This but unironically
Also this
Hopelessly Black personbrained
>because those errors are going to be gone with 2-3 years and all those arguments will be useless
If they had the technical acumen or future time orientation to realize this, they'd spend less time b***hing about AI making their job easier and more time figuring out how to use AI to make their job easier.
They still fricking think AI just keeps a database of photos and selects one to give you in exchange for a prompt, these gays have no idea what they are hating like moronic serfs burning the woman who sneezed 2 weeks before a plague started.
You can't even argue with them because they refuse to listen, AI essentially works the same way as a brain and their art is based off the art they saw, you explain that to them and they still have a sperg out like they couldn't comprehend it and thus ignored it entirely.
Frick drawgays, they won't even admit the only reason they care isn't because their hobby is being diluted but because the furry homosexuals no longer need their commisions for beasto material
if they had the ability to understand the theory behind it, they wouldn't rely on their drawings for income
>AI essentially works the same way as a brain
AI is a machine. It doesn't have human constraints. Are you so fricking stupid and up your own ass that you can't see this basic shit? AI is better than an artist. It just is. It can pump out better stuff than an artist at random and with the proper prompts it can do amazing things that no one could ever think of.
You are also missing the "human effort" factor. And I know most people are so fricking edgy and laugh at this shit but think of all the things you have done in your life and being proud of. When you see a good drawing and you see the piece you can notice those things and feel a "second hand good feeling" about it (empathy). Don't fricking deny that because most people who prompt, prompt thinking of that one drawing they saw one day and how to mimic it. It's human nature.
>Frick drawgays, they won't even admit the only reason they care isn't because their hobby is being diluted but because the furry homosexuals no longer need their commisions for beasto material
I agree but wouldn't you too? no one expects their work to be obsolete from one day to the next. I am more concerned about stored data being used in the future.
>You are also missing the "human effort" factor. And I know most people are so fricking edgy and laugh at this shit but think of all the things you have done in your life and being proud of. When you see a good drawing and you see the piece you can notice those things and feel a "second hand good feeling" about it (empathy). Don't fricking deny that because most people who prompt, prompt thinking of that one drawing they saw one day and how to mimic it. It's human nature.
no one cares about the "human effort" factor lmao, do you care about how many much "human effort" was put into your fricking car? No one cares about the Chinese factory workers and no one cares about the artists either.
not him but i only feel it for things i made myself, such as the machines i drew in cad, because i actually know the difficulty in making it
the end result always looks so simple compared to the work designing it
a graphic artist probably sees pictures more like this i imagine, where they recognise the work put into something because it's what they do and they understand it
but they're fooling themselves if they think others feel like this, all they see is the end result, and it will be judged only by how it looks
Normies didn't even noticed SDXL rolled out. Suddenly all the text written is completely legible and no one batted an eye.
(the words it generates can still be gibberish but at least now all the letters are readable)
SDXL is still shit. Wonder if this is going to be an every-other-release-is-big phenomenon
deep floyd also solved the hands issue but sucked for other reasons
>because it takes a very long time for messaging to percolate into the mind of the normie
but the message normies keep is "ai bad" they forget everything they were wrong about pretty quick
normies aren't hearing that message though
the only thoughts my boomer mother has about AI are "haha neat"
people outside of twitter aren't mad or scared about AI at all (nor are they super interested in it)
i've already started saving some ai generated stuff just as normal pictures, not just some curiosity folder for ai pictures
Got almost obsessed with AI for a few months when I saw some pics with quality that was reaching booruslop.
You can still see some issues with the perspective here, her left (your right) wing isn't properly matching the angle of her back, the hair is blending into the wall on the right side, the right knee looks kinda fricked, the right eye's cornea is mishapen. Some of these things can be fixed, but because current models generate foreground -> background things like perspective issues will always exist. I don't see this changing without the AI somehow figuring out it needs to handle the background first.
>2 to 3 years
The issues normalgays could pick up on were solved months ago.
At this point you've just got to be an autist that notices things that are incorrectly assymetric like
's collar doesn't match from one side to the other.
>collar doesn't match from one side to the other.
looks fine to me, the left side is white because it's facing the bright light coming in from the window
See look at this, even with his attention specifically directed, he doesn't notice ruffles versus two lines. It was only obvious shit like 6 fingers that somebody like this was going to catch.
the "two lines" is debatable, but i guess i can see the lack of ruffles, though even so they would be mostly blown out by the light level anyway
i'm not going over these pictures with a fine-tooth comb, no, and i'm also not an artist, so i'm likely not going to notice nearly as much as one
yea, if i deliberately look for weirdness i can see some, like the fang isn't right, the top of the crystals are a bit funky, the shoe strap doesn't go all the way across, but it's good enough for my needs. not to mention human-drawn art is very rarely perfect, either, it's hard to argue that picture is poor even by human standards
>i'm not going over these pictures with a fine-tooth comb, no, and i'm also not an artist, so i'm likely not going to notice nearly as much as one
Right, that's pretty much what I'm saying, AI art is already past the point that even a slightly alert viewer will miss it. It's not some 2-3 year in the future thing.
Most of the nits left to pick are things that humans mess up too, but there's a few subtlely "inhuman" mistakes it makes, although those don't get a chance to show up in every picture.
You don't need to be an artist to scrutinize art and notice inconsistencies. Our brains are heavily geared toward pattern recognition and it doesn't take much for it to notice inconsistency in them. Even if someone isn't immediately conscious of an inconsistency it will still feel "off".
These minor detail problems will likely be fixed with the next iteration of SDXL. They're the same things that get fixed with text comprehension and reproduction. But I think AI will continue to struggle with perspective (although many human artists do too if you don't get autistic about it). But once there's an AI attention layer that criticizes and advises the generator for nonsensical generations it's ogre.
>These minor detail problems will likely be fixed with the next iteration of SDXL.
Probably not. SD doesn't understand what an object is or how its supposed to properly relate to objects around it, yet. That's pretty much a requirement in order for it to create proper separation between what we recognize as objects with consistency. So you'll always wind up with generations where two areas of similar color, which should be separate objects, end up blending into each other. Proper perspective would be easier with background to foreground generation, but it is definitely possible to make backgrounds appear perfectly consistent when doing foreground first with enough training.
As they add more parameters the accuracy is going to go up, that means the AI will be more likely to do a single stripe instead of two. Perspective won't get fixed until they take three dimensionality and coherence seriously which means the AI fundamentally understands blocking such as understanding the form is made up of 3D volumes.
>that means the AI will be more likely to do a single stripe instead of two.
You can't just shove more parameters in to fix fundamental issues with its pipeline.
>until they take three dimensionality and coherence seriously
Which would lead to the eventual resolution of both issues. I imagine there are many bocking issues for them regarding coherence.
The problem with hands is also the dataset and tagging. Most of the hand poses are not tagged in the datasets, that's why AI doesn't know what to do with the hands a lot of the time.
It doesn't fail as much with poses such as "waving" for example because it's an actual tagged hand pose
What's funny is that when you think about it, AI has gotten this far without any concept of depth, multiple perspectives or image segmentation in its training data. It's gotten this good just with 2D image data and a text description, which is something that i doubt can be said about any human artist.
version 1 of stable diffusion: no inherent concept of depth but one is inferred from the 2D images, and that's seen in the latents
(Yida Chen, Fernanda Viegas, Martin Wattenberg - Beyond Surface Statistics: Scene Representations in a Latent Diffusion Model)
version >1 stable diffusion: they train the model with explicit depth
that's cooler to me though, that it infers 3D even whilst only have an experience of 2D
that's good
>This is a dumb statement. Photography isn't a tool, it's a replacement. It's its own giant on their own.
photographs cant create fantasy in the same way a drawing or painting can, think before you post
now you're just moving the goal post
>muh food on the table
you are not /owed/ money for your skill, you get money as long as people are willing to pay you for it, that's all, you have no grounds to kill off something which threatens your income based on competition alone, human or not
using images they have no right to use for training i do agree with, however, at least for commercial uses. humans train on images they have no copyright to as well, which complicates things, artists may be shooting their own foot
The reason they make this argument is because their other arguments come off as extremely petty. What even is the reason why someone should support them when they themselves believe they are easily replaceable? Ironically though, artists aren’t even going to be fully replaced. Despite the existence of easy website builders, people still pay web developers to run a site for their business. As this technology advances, the main interface with AI will move away from prompting to using a large variety of photoshop like tools that manipulate images in real time. The use of these tools will become increasingly complex, not everyone will be able to learn them, thus “art” will continue for the forseeable future.
It was solved in like the first month with inpainting.
I mean let's face it, artists were never the smartest cookies in the jar anyway. All their campaigning against AI is based on criticizing technical shit that can easily be solved (deformed hands, etc.), or by putting up petitions and lawsuits that can very easily backfire in their faces (copyrighting artstyles).
>an infinite amount of sloppy random art with text as constraints
vs
>artists who draw exactly what they want
Just like with NFTs, nobody's arguing with you because it's a waste of time.
>those errors are going to be gone with 2-3 years
You're telling me in two-three years, words are going to better at describing pictures than just drawing it? perhaps you suck wieners
Luddite
This is fricking stupid because AI in like 2 or 3 years will make everything perfectly. Now it makes some flawed things and the more you look at the pics you'll find plenty of mistakes but in the future it will be perfect for everything.
This is a dumb statement. AI isn't a tool, it's a replacement. It's its own giant on their own. It shouldn't be competing with real artists in the first place just as a robot shouldn't be competing in boxing. I also find it hilarious how you cheer for megacorporations trampling your rights and privacy to steal all your info to make buck and are blind to their legal loopholes just because you can spend a week prompting a e-girl pic to jack off too. On principle, it's immoral how these megacorporations are training their models on pics artists make without their consent. Yes I know
>they are dumb because they post it in social media
then wtf are they supposed to do to get noticed and put food on the table? I am more angry that BOT is not capable to see the bigger picture just to dab on some obnoxious twitter gays, while coorporations are dabbing on you on a bigger scale.
> muh megacorps
Megacorps can afford to spend billions buying "ethical" datasets. Do you think open source model producers can? You want ethical, go to Adobe, they have an "ethical" image generation model based on only content they own. This whole "ethics" argument is only cope anyway, artists hope to be able to use it to deny training data and thus prevent image generation AI from existing.
Anon, the fricking models are already trained to look at different boorus that include paywalled images. There is no point of arguing about "ethical AI training" when models already took those images. And yes >Muh megacorps. Is a real argument. You fricking Black folk always fricking shit on megacorps for making shit products, trampling your rights and privacy and finding scummy loopholes for their shitty products but this time you are turning a blind eye.
I am not an artist but I don't understand where the frick is this lack of empathy coming from? Why do you not want privacy but support these datasets? It's only okay when they don't come for you.
>Why do you not want privacy but support these datasets?
Apart from the fact that the majority of BOT do want privacy, it's more of a fact that anons see the bigger picture.
It's been pinpointed plenty of times that the creation of the AI could be compared to the creation of photography: it didn't stop painters to still thrive.
Yet artists are still seething at this tool that if used correctly will help them with their workflow in the same way PCs, drawing software and tablets helped artists getting more work done in a time where everything was drawn by hand.
Megacorps will megacorp anyway, it's their nature. But you can't be angry at a technology by how is used.
I am not angry at the technology. It's fun and can lead to many advancements. But these models were trained with datasets that didn't ask for artists' consent (yes yes they posted it in social media I know). It's spilled milk already and there is no point of arguing that now but they keep doing it currently.
The people here are not seeing the full picture regarding data. Your every sentence can be collected as data to reproduce an AI that types the same way as you do, writes as you do, talks as you do, moves as you do and there is not a fricking thing you can do to hide about it. Yeah, artgays are gettiing buckbroken now who will be next? I swear people are so naive, there are actual moron who think CEOs and politicians will be replaced by ethical AIs. I heard this from a coworker and I almost burst off laughing at how naive people can be. Imagine getting a call from your mom saying she broke her leg and that she needs money for the treatment. You may figure out it's AI right now due to the context of the situation, but in the heat of the moment, can you notice the difference? You will miss indian scammers in the future.
Then what's even the point of discussion if we both agree? Don't try to play nice as if the future you imagine is also not our fault.
Nobody batted an eye when social media started hoarding our info, when Amazon introduced a fricking spyware in everyone house that people willingly paid for to use.
Nobody batted an eye when hardware DRMs became the norms fricking every consumer in the ass (HP printers refusing to print if they detect an off-brand cartridge, refurbished Macbooks not booting up if your non-authorised apple repairman don't do the job perfectly, John Deere tractors refusing to boot up if repaired by non-authorised mechanics hence helping rising the cost of food etc).
So why now is different?
People want slop and they will get slop, enjoy your bi-weekly AI-generated Marvel movie where the good guy saves America from the bad guy.
Unfortunately for us technology and media caters to the lowest common denominator (your colleague that thinks CEOs would ever be replaced by AI IMHO is a nice example of that) and until those people get some brain mass, things won't change.
Oh yeah also i'm not
Regarding your
that was not my point, the point was that despite the fact photography was invented, it did not prevent good artist to still make a living out of their work. So why AI would put EVERY artist out of commission?
>So why now is different?
It isn't. It was wrong then and it is wrong now.
>the point was that despite the fact photography was invented, it did not prevent good artist to still make a living out of their work.
because those people were already established in their art community circlejerk and because with painting you don't capture an instant of reality like with photography.
And photography did put portrait artists out of business. But you are comparing apples and oranges. Photography doesn't have to compete with drawing even though in some fields it does.
AI competes with EVERYTHING. Right now you are only seeing the competition regarding visual arts. But ai 3d modeling is also advancing. Coding as well. And there won't be a "AI coding inspector" job because AI will also do that based on coding experts reviewing the previous AI's coding data.
It's a huge step but what I am getting at is not just privacy. The world is a consumer vs producer jungle. If you can produce more that you can consume, you are winning. Now tell me if you can produce more than these massive corporations in your field. It's why UBI was being pushed hard years ago. Because these corporations know you need money to consume and at the same time they will get rid of the little competitors because no one will buy their products. They are turning yourself and everyone else into a consumer at a larger scale.
>So why AI would put EVERY artist out of commission?
The same way as the previous artists only surviving because they already established an style on their own and their own circlejerks. Basically, you will see less and less new names in art and everything in general.
I am not rambling. I am stablishing a point and you know it's a completely rational. I am saying it can be taken away easily, or the price can be increased.
>prompters will be replaced one day by algorithms?
So it wasn't useless
>algorithms using your data is nothing new
it was wrong then and it's wrong now
>I am saying it can be taken away easily, or the price can be increased.
what that's your point? I gave you to much credit
price increases are not unique to ai first of all. but also they don't logically apply here as the best thing about ai is that it decreases costs, time required and barriers to start producing, all of which lead to a higher supply.
now maybe you're not great in economics, but I trust you know what happens to prices when supply increases without demand changing..
as for taking it away, that's also blatantly false and tells me you don't have a clue what you're talking about. I can run all my models locally on a consumer grade graphics card and still produce more content then I can consume.
so much for your 'logical arguments', rambler
>price increases are not unique to ai first of all.
Price increase was my point for using it as a social engineering tool and I think I was very clear about it. But if I wasn't, sorry.
>now maybe you're not great in economics, but I trust you know what happens to prices when supply increases without demand changing..
Congrats for spouting basic microeconomic shit from 1st year of college that you inmediately unlearn 2nd year. That shit doesn't apply to real life but for theory. Why do you think economics is not a science? because it's not logical and is depending on millions of factors so an increase in demand doesn't necessarily mean a price increase. The overall point was that it can be a social engineering tool.
>as for taking it away, that's also blatantly false and tells me you don't have a clue what you're talking about. I can run all my models locally on a consumer grade graphics card
moron. Do you honestly think these corporations will make the good shit on consumer grade graphics cards? How much money are you making btw? because if you don't have a point if you aren't making a billion dollars right now.
>'ere I go rambling about shit I don't know anything about again
>economics isn't a science, doesn't matter that it's considered a science by everyone else, because I am the smartest
>what's open source? can you eat that? I only know megacorp
>you're not a billionaire, so your opinion is irrelevant, I should know I'm an expert on having irrelevant opinions
this person thinks of himsel as rational,
can't make this shit up
isn't a science, doesn't matter that it's considered a science by everyone else, because I am the smartest
Social sciences aren't science because they aren't based on logic. Social sciences make speculations. Logic tells you rationaly the derivatives of an action, to the point you can predict it. Social sciences are not logical. They are speculative. Which is why years ago many economists went broke for investing all their money on crypto. How fricking embarassing.
>what's open source? can you eat that? I only know megacorp
Open source will never be as good as the product that is being invested at. Open source is crumbles and will never be at the top of the food chain. Never was, never will be.
>>you're not a billionaire, so your opinion is irrelevant
I am pointing out that whatever you may be doing, companies are at least 1000 steps ahead than you because they have the resources necessary to succeed. Show me a model as good as GPT4 that is open source.
You are either underage, moronic, or you must have a pathetic sense of humour if you think any of this was a "gotcha!" moment. You only show your lack of sight.
>no one cares about the "human effort" factor lmao
And you feel that's a good thing? Are you so fricking depressed, hateful and spiteful you think that's a good thing? You are a perfect consumer. You are objectively speaking wrong because empathy exists. If you don't have it, see a psychiatrist but you are probably LARPing as an edgelord.
>do you care about how many much "human effort" was put into your fricking car?
I care that my car is of a quality and price that is good enough to not fricking explode. That is indeed important and that means there are people that were inspecting if those things were correct as of the current time because AI can't do it now. So, yes.
All those words I didn't read aren't going to stop me from refining my cute anime girl models anon......
>not a science because speculation
Careful your ignorance is showing, speculation is part of the scientific method. unified gravity and relativity are speculative theories. they are data driven speculation, just like economic theories
>many economists went broke for investing all their money on crypto
you make such a good point, because no chemist ever blew himself up, no microbiologist ever died of disease and no nuclear physicist ever died of radiation poisoning.
>Open source will never be as good as the product that is being invested at
tell me you don't know shit about current machine learning trends without using those words. lile even the top people of the branch admitted internally "there is no mote" to open source models. guess you don't read the news in addition to being an all-around rambling moron
>Do you honestly think these corporations will make the good shit on consumer grade graphics cards?
It's literally already possible to produce extremely good quality shit just by having a card ranging from a 3060 to a 4090.
Look into /sdg/ man, there are countless anons posting their outputs and I'm rather sure they aren't some megacorp.
>Show me a model as good as GPT4 that is open source.
Lookup Pygmallion AI 13b, it's rather new and very good at what it does. Also it can do NSFW roleplay.
Also the normal Stable Diffusion installation allows you to pick, or to even create, any model finetuned to your needs.
>Open source is crumbles and will never be at the top of the food chain. Never was, never will be.
Oh yeah how can I forget how many times the open source was NOT succesfull like:
- Literally the majority of servers around the globe using Linux
- Deflate compression algorithms
- FLAC audio encoder
- h.264 video encoder
- the PyTorch framework developed by literally Zucc used for the majority of the Generative AI software
- Tensorflow (although developed by Google which I don't personally trust)
- The Unreal Engine
- The Source Engine
- Blender software
Those were just form the top of my head but there are countless more examples where open source software is used because it is very good.
I can go on indefinitely here but I think my point was made.
>and there is not a fricking thing you can do to hide about it
Wrong. I can just never talk, write or move again.
Checkmate, AI.
Sorry I forgot to answer to you main point of painting vs photography, my bad.
AI can mimic photography and painting in mere seconds and there is no noticeable difference to the untrained eye. And again, it has issues NOW. But in 2 or 6 years? Like I said, the prompts are also being added to a dataset so even if you think you have the imagination to make a custom set of magical words that no one will ever be able to find out and that it is specifically catered to you, that shit in being stored somewhere, and in the future, you will be fed that shit. And when you don't like that? the AIs will figure out things you like based on your every action and feed it to you. You may find it great if you are a NEET with no aspirations for the future. But imagine a writer, anime/mange artist having to compete with that. You can't fricking compete with AI and the megacorps. AI will always be ahead of you because it can be trained to be used with people who are already ahead of you. It is an oversight, it is a lack of vision of the future, and it is a lack of empathy.
>Why do you not want privacy but support these datasets?
I'm not moronic enough to think I have any control over how data gets used when I publish it on the internet.
Yep AI is the great accelerator of human capability. Future success is deeper understanding of how the tech works to go further than you could without it, not seething about yiff commission tendiebux drying up.
>I'm not moronic enough to think I have any control over how data gets used when I publish it on the internet.
In the end it always comes to this in whatever we do. We think we are worthless and must eat shit and need to thank them for letting us eat shit. So you take it and do nothing about it.
>Yep AI is the great accelerator of human capability.
Why do you think that? Do you think you'll get access to this technology? like I said, this is all crumbles gated by powerful technology not even on the market. And then gated by electricity costs. This is the beginning of blatant (this is important) human subjutation and you are welcoming it with open arms. It's not about AIs conquering the world but AIs replacing humans and the people profiting from it controlling society like they already do but with a tighter grip. Whatever posibilies you think YOU can do, corporations can do that but a million times, better and faster.
And don't get me started on the derivatiions of that.
>Do you think you'll get access to this technology?
I run Llama2-70B models on my own hardware. There's plenty who recognise that free and open access to advanced AI models may be the only way to avoid dystopian hellscapes. Corporations are not some magical entity with unimaginable powers, just a bunch of people supposedly aligned to work on a similar goal. Don't underestimate what's possible with less structured forms of coordination, especially with technology this important.
Training and inference can also be distributed even when the hardware requirements exceed what's reasonable for someone to personally own - https://github.com/bigscience-workshop/petals
The first Luddites were upset about sewing machines replacing workers, thanks to out-competing them.
>just as a robot shouldn't be competing in boxing
>tfw no robolatina to be beaten up by
Shut up
they're actually seething lmao
Total Drawgay Death
>Dobson complex
These comic "artist" deserve to be the first one to go
I love the butthurt, keep it coming.
they (probably not so much the gay fish comic) would probably benefit from AI if they weren't so luddite or moronic. Literally you can save tons of time on drawing by:
>making a generic prompt with enough freedom to make different types
>get enough photos to have a collection of of them for concept art
>use bits if not all of it to trace the outlines in your style
>do what you want with such
Seriously why are artists universially moronic, programmers know AI code is bad but use it anyway to remove the grunt work, still including it in their toolchain, artists seem to avoid this concept.
Mind you most act like women or are (female) women, where they act like plagerism means frick all in the real world, if you hang about it you see quite a bit of drama over tracing some random homie's model etc.
This is a dumb statement. Concept art is fricking done already because AI can make up more interesting things in 10 seconds. You can edit it, sure but anyone who knows gimp or photoshop can do that. Meaning the middleman is cut off from the equation.
It's true that you can improve with AI art, but when twitter, pixiv, devianart are filled with these AI pics, trained with millions of pics with no effort put behind it, and the advancements of AI technology in the years to come, there will be no difference between the AI art and art made by artists and it will faster and cheaper to make too. 6 months ago all AI art looked like slop. Right now AI art looks less like slop and the fault mostly relies because Black folk don't know how to fricking prompt properly.
Anon, a sewing machine needs a human to operate it. It is a tool.
>but the prompts need to be made by a human!
Your prompts are also being collected and thrown into a dataset just like these pictures. In the future there won't even be a "AI prompter" job because AI will ever take care of that. You will have AI made content you, personally catered to you be it a movie, an anime, a videogame about all the dreams you ever wanted to see realised. All for a cheap subscription of 20$ oh sorry I meant 30$. Did I mention the suscription was 50$?
unlimited media for 50 bucks a month?
sign me up
You missed the last point. But thanks for telling us all how cheap you would sell your privacy for.
what is your point, because I can't make it out from all your useless rambling. prompters will be replaced one day by algorithms? sure hope so, I am working on an application to do exactly that
>muh privacy
algorithms using your data is nothing new and has nothing to do with ai. comoanies have been collecting your data for decades. every platform that streams or sells media content has an algorithm that tracks your preferences and gives you suggestions already
>ai gets trained on artists posting how they suck at drawing hands
>ai fricks up hands
Thats a man.
>rudimental technology in development since two years at best is rudimental
How fricking surprising!
to be fair, this technology has been worked on for far longer than two years, that was just the first time the wider public learned about it.
still it's pretty much in it's infancy and developing at an incredible rate that will probably only speed up.
Frick artist's consent. I hope they all starve to death.
This sentence has been added to OpenAI's dataset! keep the good work anon!
Every single one of these comics is done by someone I would not consider an artist but rather someone who draws shit and pretends it's good.
of course they are, if they were actual artist with anything of significance to express in their works, they wouldn't be worried about ai.
actual artist will still find an audience, because it's about the message of their art, not how it looks. drawgays who can only produce porn/dnd char commissions and unfunny web comics are the only ones in danger of losing their income.
Do we need daily AI homosexual cope threads.
You already have your containment generals, stay there.
Do we need hourly /ic/ incel cope posts?
You already have your containment board, stay there.
>steal
have a nice day imaginary property monopolist.
Having to join a 4 month waiting list for my $200 mlp furry fetish "art" is more immoral tho
lmao, he does have a point with the obsession that aigays have with adding wrinkles to their people.
Not everyone smokes two packs of cigs a day to look like that when they're 30
>lmao, he does have a point with the obsession that aigays have with adding wrinkles to their people.
i have never seen this at all
As this shitty web comic illustrates, it's the western shitty artists that try to copy manga without much success because they lack the skill that are going to be nuked out of existence. Another artists that are going to suffer is good illustrators with great skill but 0% creativity. Most top of the line manga and concept artists are not going to get replaced by this shit, but western comic artists and weabos with patreon accounts? They are going to get obliterated because they are greedy bastards with 0 skills and 0 creativity.
I only feel sorry for good jap illustrators, mainly those that draw landscapes and such, profesional manga authors, doujinshi authors and animators are going to use AI to get the shit done faster, much like they use grayscale photos , or more recently, 3d models in manga. Get fricked westoid shitty artists.
You are wrong about this, though. It's never about the drawing quality but about the community and the following the people have made. So that homosexual making that comic will survive because he is already established. Same with nip artists. The fact alone there are models named after artists demonstrates how wrong you are because those names are already worth being in an ai model in the first place. It's the unknown artists, who, no matter how good they are, will always be compared to AI. It's like buying the Mona Lisa. The Mona Lisa is an objectively speaking, average painting. It's not out of the ordinate for the time for the average court painter. Yet why it is so famous? because of the story they made up of her. Some random stole it from the museum and the media at the time made shitty stories about how he fell in love with the lady. Then they started making up shit like saying the mouth changed depending on who looked at it. If you had conciousness at the time you will probably remember this.
TLDR: It's all marketing and establishment of things.
Get an up to date comic moron, faces and hands have been fixed for months
So is your mom OP
>Machines take poor people's job (forklift operators, chef etc..)
>*No one gives a shit*
>Machines take rich people's job (programmers, writers, artists)
>NOOOO You have to stand up for us!!! Writer rights are human rights.
take poor people's job (forklift operators, chef etc..)
>>*No one gives a shit*
Objectively untrue.
Maybe some literal who group b***hed and newspapers wrote about those, but no one calls out like car factories doing this shit. On other hand once like a game dev company uses AI to make art, people lose their shit.
poor people arent on twitter
>Writer rights are human rights.
I hope they all get fired and start cannibalizing each other.
Hey, at least she's white.
Morals are bloated
>immoral
no such thing
I've seen you gays get mad about a meme image on a music video. Pathetic
>Morality
>Technology
Go back to your cave and finish your bottom surgery with a flint knife and no anesthetic, luddite.
kys troony
this. the whole 'look at this blob fish' is like having a halfway tortured land animal as a 'lel look how cute pet :3'
Seethe. Artists are obsolete before coal miners. Lern 2 mine
You will never be a real artist (or woman), twitter troony
What is the basis of your morality by which you decry technological progress as inherently immoral?
Anyone, including artists, can use AI. If artists can't use their vast knowledge of anatomy, form, and perspective to keep a significant lead over non-artists, they've earned their irrelevance by virtue of sloth, which is immoral by the objectively correct moral standards of Christianity.
Well, when you consider the moral panic that happened when CorelDraw was released, you will realize thet most artists are luddites.
Not for the reasons you list though
wtf she is white
AI is such a gift for artists
>Try to think of an idea for new art piece
>Hit writer's block
>Run AI software
>Looks like shit but this will work
>Touch the image up and walla, a new piece of work
It's the same in most industries using machines, computerization, and/or robotics to increase productivity. It'll be a golden age for art and the artists will still be the stars
Literally this, it made me want to learn digital art, I used to draw on paper, but now I think that digital art got too good to ignore. Imagine how cool it will be when people are able to make animated cartoons with those things, this will be really cool.
Even with the usual minor defects (which are SOVL btw), a good gen that my GPU shits out is miles beyond better than what any of the vocal anti-ai chuds will ever be able to draw in their lives
>which are souvl
Holy cope, it's one thing to recognize that AI art, with cherry picking, is good enough to replace shitty art grifters. That's something a lot of people can get on board with, even good artists. It's another to claim the many imperfections SD still shits out are "soul". It's not soul, it just looks ugly and becomes more prominent as other aspects of the generation get better.
post your drawings drawchud
I'm not an artist homosexual.
then kindly shut the frick up 🙂
>hurr ur not an artist so you can't have an opinion!!!
Listen to yourself, you're no better than some shitty art grifter, except you're an AI grifter.
>ur not an artist so you can't have an opinion!!!
correct
also I don't make any money off my gens, I do it for fun 🙂
Okay so you're just a hypocritical homosexual that's exactly like some midwit art grifter, got it.
rude :^)
modern "artists" are inherently wastes of space
It's immoral because it produces sexual images, not because it of whatever you're vaguely implying it does like take your job.
>Replicating a series of 0s and 1s is stealing
Lol. Lmao.
frick ai.
very stunning and brave dilatto sister!
ai is just a tool. it literally cannot steal art because it is just a tool.
As an inherently immoral person, that's not my problem.
The reason why artists are constantly assraped by corporations is because they never criticize the business or ethics they just laugh at corporate art and call it a day. They always forget that corporate art doesn't even need to be good it just has to be thrown in people's faces constantly and it'll eventually stick.
The reason why Hollywood is an institution is literally because israelites saw how moronic the average artgay is (in terms of everything outside of their art) and exploited them for profit. Even when artists get smart, release shit independently, and it finally gets success it'll just end up being drowned out by some 15 year old kid some israelite drug out of an upper class and connected family to dominate that space. See Tim and Eric vs Sam Hyde or literally any musician vs Olivia Rodrigo and Billy Eilish.
If these people are so against AI they need to start suing homies for their complaints to be resolved.
Didn't you post this on BOT? Are you just hopping board to board starting shit?
AI is pseudo-immortal. Since it was never alive, it can never die.
AI is inherently ethical.
I'm still learning2draw, I believe I'm ngmi, but I want to be able to integrate AI into my workflow. Either with concept art and generating random environments (like that gaugan thing) for me to slap my drawings onto instead of photobashing and roughly painting a detailed environment that will take 70% of my time on that piece, or to generate a random pose and perspective for me to kickstart my creative juices.
>AI Art is ugly and can never replace artists!
>AI art is a threat to artists and requires governmental oversight!
Isn't there something about depicting ones enemies as simultaneously weak and strong at the same time?
I dont really get how this AI stuff works to be honest, but would it make sense for someone like Disney (or marvel) to develope their own AI tool, or some kind of plug in or something, that is trained only on its own back catalog? Then offer it to people for some high price or subscription?
Are these threads ever anything but circlejerks about le leftism?
Don't you ever get sick of making the same threads with the same arguments every time?
based plato dabs on u
>But would you call the painter a creator and maker?
Certainly not.
Yet if he is not the maker, what is he in relation to the bed?
I think, he said, that we may fairly designate him as the imitator of that which the others make.
Good, I said; then you call him who is third in the descent from nature an imitator?
And the tragic poet is an imitator, and therefore, like all other imitators, he is thrice removed from the king and from the truth?
That appears to be so.
Then about the imitator we are agreed. And what about the painter?– I would like to know whether he may be thought to imitate that which originally exists in nature, or only the creations of artists?
The latter.
As they are or as they appear? You have still to determine this.
What do you mean?
I mean, that you may look at a bed from different points of view, obliquely or directly or from any other point of view, and the bed will appear different, but there is no difference in reality. And the same of all things.
Yes, he said, the difference is only apparent.
Now let me ask you another question: Which is the art of painting designed to be–an imitation of things as they are, or as they appear– of appearance or of reality?
Of appearance.
Then the imitator, I said, is a long way off the truth, and can do all things because he lightly touches on a small part of them, and that part an image. For example: A painter will paint a cobbler, carpenter, or any other artist, though he knows nothing of their arts; and, if he is a good artist, he may deceive children or simple persons, when he shows them his picture of a carpenter from a distance, and they will fancy that they are looking at a real carpenter.
Certainly.
And whenever any one informs us that he has found a man knows all the arts, and all things else that anybody knows, and every single thing with a higher degree of accuracy than any other man– whoever tells us this, I think that we can only imagine to be
AI doesn't exist.
/thread
These threads are full of script kiddies
>uhh, I can feel it, the model is trying to be free
They don't fricking know how any of this works, so they eat up what CEOs tell the media.
Being an artist is too, whats your point?
AI and machine learning are not immoral.
They're amoral. You can't ascribe human morality to something that intrinsically lacks humanity.
A cat maiming and mutilating a rodent just for fun might seem cruel for a human, but it is second nature to the cat.
Having said that, are you REALLY that moronic to use the "hurr AI art looks bad" excuse to denounce the technology? The fact alone that AI/ML can make such images in the first place doesn't ring any bells in your head? These are growing pains. We've seen the upgrades that happened from NAI to the modern models like abyssorange. And that's barely a year apart. 3 years from now this shit will be inevitably more advanced.
We should make an ai country
BOT is either replaced by AIbros, morons or actual AIs to support AI. Old BOT would have called out the scummy behaviour the corporations are doing but these indians with never address the points of the problem or AI because their livelihood depends on selling you low effort shit.
And saying this doesn't mean I support moronic takes like the frick in OP the typical twitter arthoe. You are being willfully ignorant with this technology and it's use.