*mic drop*. AI art is just stealing. Posted on December 8, 2022 by Anonymous *mic drop* AI art is just stealing.
>AI art is just stealing.
Good. Artgays deserve to be stolen from.
Not only should they be stolen from, the greatest artist in history say it's required.
Thanks for beta testing, nerds.
Anon, you've got to understand.
Everyone will be stolen from and everything will be stolen. And it will be done for profit.
>And it will be done for profit.
The communists have won.
Based, programmers also.
programmers are aware, this is why we have open source.
why do people with a creative mind trigger you like this? Is it because you don't have a soul?
>why do people with a creative mind trigger you like this
It's because neo """artists""" are all insufferable leftists with zero talent.
No-one with an actual creative mind feels threatened by people making AI generated big booba anime girls and cyberpunk batman pop culture imagery.
The problem is that 99.9% of """artists""" have no creative minds.
stop projecting. modern ~~*artists*~~ keep pumping out trash no different than an ai does. if you were in fact creative as an artists you wouldn't even be complaining because by definition you're creative enough for people to take notice so it wouldn't matter. might as well train ai on trash and cut out the middle man to get what you want.
Oh great I'm sure a 4changay shitposter knows everything about doing creative work.
And no I don't give a shit about what americans shitout from CALarts.
>everyone i don't like is from 4chan
if this is their viewpoint then i agree with them but that's besides the point.
as someone who looks at art why would i care what work gets put into it? i only care about end result. if your creativity is on level of ai is it even art?
Yeah I'm sure a random anon from another board uses the triple parenthesis.
i do and i don't browse that place because i believe politics are nothing more than just a show to keep retarded cattle entertained. anyway, that alone wouldn't make my point invalid.
cos they make gay shit like ops pic
I never understood the contempt for artgays on this board. If I had a job, I wouldn't want it to be replaced by an AI, so I won't wish for others to lose their jobs due to AI either. It's like turkeys voting for Christmas.
it's bitter NEETs that have never done anything of note in their lives. all they do is tear others down. they love to see others in misery because they themselves are miserable. it's a pretty common trait with abject losers.
t. redditor ass mad for being baited into making a rage post at a language model
forgot your meme arrow gay so you are that redditor
The arrow was something inserted in later by newgays you timeline tourist.
>t. doesn't even know how to greentext
It's especially ironic given how artgays themselves operate.
That’s what they deserve for stealing photoshop
actually it's copying and not stealing bec asue sstealling ippmlmlyyys than copyl capy copy copy piracylk isn't staealing btw
The absolute state of incels. Do you hate so much? What can I do to help?
I agree. Not into AI art. You're stealing electricity tho.
I feel bad for all the artists who don't have actual jobs hahahahaha
>muh "actual" validated wageslaving
also very cringe
DUDE MY FAVORITE THING ABOUT OTHER CULTURES? THE FOOD, BRO!
well it's certainly not their retarded morals, their gay-ass history, or their inferior buildings.
excellent quality anon
love how you brought an old meme.back to life
Imagine being at art
So fat you look and see food
>66 feet and 6 inches
does anyone have the one of the onions-artist who had a before after of themselves going from drawing interesting things as a skinny young man to being obese and drawing mommy fetish porn? it looked strikingly similar to this
are so fat
DELETE THIS RIGHT NOW
You can't just STEAL 2 jokes and mash them together like that. The originals are now GONE forever. YOU FUCKING SAVAGE. I'M GOING TO STARVE.
put me in the screencap
a classic indeed
the thing i never got out of this is that he also had that one comic where he was eating mcdonalds. did he like it or hate it????
he is an "artist", logic is something that lacks on those circles
didn't he eat mcdonalds every day after school or something like that?
IMAGINE BEING AT COMPUTERS
imagine creating art for the sake of social validation. NPC-tier.
sounds like AI is just going to filter out status-obsessed artists from the genuine ones.
So you live in the woods without ever doing anything for anyone else?
doing anything for anyone else =! doing anything for anyone else for validation
IMAGINE BEING SO FAT YOU LOOK AT COMPUTERS AND SEE FOOD
>*IMAGINE BEING AT COMPUTERS
SO FAT YOU LOOK AND SEE FOOD
>tfw computer vision AI researcher
>tfw have a line of research in image generation since like 8 years ago before all of this shit and diffusion models and all that crap
>tfw have many artist friends and feel some compassion
Yet, when they post shit like this I just feel no pity. This is so wrong on so many levels. They can either study what AI is actually doing and come up with better arguments or just starve.
There is very little rational/logical way you can ban AI art without banning regular art, but they are too retarded to understand that, and they'll play right into big corporation's interests.
However society doesn't usually decide on laws based on what's rational anyway, so AI art might be on its way out soon enough. They're just sadly mistaken if they think the average furry commission artist is not gonna get absolutely fucked by FANGMAN as well during the process.
Why are non STEM people so fucking dense.
>come up with better arguments
kek why? so they can get likes on twitter?
shit doesn't matter to normalgays either way
Because if you don't evaluate these things and whether they are, e.g., socially good or not, you can't prepare for, e.g., the displacement they may do (which is not the same as saying you should ever ban it, that would be dark ages-tier of retarded).
I guess you could say it's uh, an artist's interpretation
Just a side-thought:
If we pretend ML & AI is similar to how a brain works, common argument I see is "it's similar to how the brain learns, just faster". That would set the precedent that everything is legal for the sake of AI / Technological Development and push the blame down to the AI in ethical issues.
Social medias can steal all your data, buy leaks, create profiles on you even though you haven't agreed to any TOS because it's the AI doing it.
AI terrorism? The drone was acting on its own, just like a human would do.
Imo diffusion models are pretty harmless to artists as honestly it's still very limited imo. But I feel like we're actually opening a can of worms here in the way we are defining AI and what should be allowed. Now that we know the math for it exists, why not just do it "right" and make sure we don't take any ethical shortcuts because future hostile uses of AI & ML can be way more harmful.
That's...something completely different. The argument they are making is that somehow the AI is just "copying" their work, but their argument for "copying" is yelling about stealing TV if you don't watch the commercials and akin to McDonalds suing you for replicating a Big Mac because you looked at a picture of one, ordered one to taste etc.and then went and tried to make a burger with the same toppings.
As for what you're talking about, that's a different issue that needs to be addressed, but ultimately the AI art tool is still being directed at the behest of a user, so it isn't an issue of it being autonomous or anything. You have to train the AI, you have to give it parameters.. just like when you copy a video file or a song, the computer is just replicating a pattern of 1s and 0s, or a torrent is not just automatically sending pieces around to clients when seeind, bu its not treated as though these things are done independently. Addressing the issue of "its only an AI, its only tech, its only a web bot etc" already needs to be dealt with legally in cases of things like invasions of privacy, data mining, warrantless wiretapping and the like. However none of that is related to what's going on here, except in horribly misunderstood statements by artists who don't understand the tech issue
People who defend that ai "art" is stealing, are defending copyright, indirectly defending nft art (even thinking that they are against) and are against a true open internet.
People who defend ai or robot ethics are women who don't want to be replaced by wAIfus robots.
They can't *steal* your data if that implies taking non-public data. They can however scrape whatever you choose to make it public, just like a human could.
You think facial recognition software is not trained on private data?
How clueless can you be?
The Naive Bayes algorithm doesn't simulate a human brain.
Neither does anything based on gradient descent, such as neural networks.
Non-technocrats simply have morals.
LAION-55B contains five billion potentially copyrighted images used without permission. It's effectively smuggled from a research entity with copyright exemptions to a non-profit and then to a for-profit, laundered in a strange legal framework so that Stability can sell its aggregate for profit. Regardless of how the AI works on a technical level, this is morally wrong.
Not to mention that five billion images puts it several orders of magnitude out of scale from the next biggest copyright infringements in human history.
>Regardless of how the AI works on a technical level, this is morally wrong.
and this is why artists are going to lose this.
Not just artists.
Establish that AI has rights superior to those of humans and it will eat us all. If this is the exit point for artists, then tomorrow will be the exit point for the rest of humanity.
morality is a spook. intellectual property is a spook. get better priorities
My god-given right to this world.
No, I'm not giving it to a rock even if it thinks.
But is an AI learning from five billion images really different from a human seeing countless images all their life and incorporating tiny bits of each one when they draw?
The difference is that a human has no choice but to integrate his input, combined with the fact that in order to control someone's input you would need to poke out his ears and eyes.
On the other hand, everything a computer takes as input was orchestrated by a person, as was the way the computer was to integrate its input.
And finally, we simply agree that humans have inherent value and that you shouldn't harm them and we don't hold the same to be true for computers. If you don't agree to this point, eventually we'll get to settle it with violence.
>eventually we'll get to settle it with violence.
this meaningless hypothetical vs the chances of me generating an image of your nephew getting raped by a bunch of morons and pitbulls
which is more likely to happen?
I'm not exactly threatening violence. The difference in view is simply something that can't be settled in a more civil way. If you believe that human lives have no inherent value, and I believe that they do, eventually we'll find a reason to try and beat these ideas into each other by force.
And yet that's not the problem I see developing within AI. What I see is that, were you really to hold that view and win, you wouldn't end up on the winning team after all. You'd simply render yourself worthless before a vastly superior intelligence.
Of course, I come too soon. This species and civilization still functions even if we've forgotten why and how. Nothing will seem to be so wrong for a long while.
>And finally, we simply agree that humans have inherent value and that you shouldn't harm them and we don't hold the same to be true for computers.
The computers in question are still designed and trained by humans though. Hitting an AI model maker with a copyright claim is hurting a human.
wtf did i just read, this is the most retarded take in history hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
No, not really
>LAION-55B contains five billion potentially copyrighted images used without permission
wrong. it contains links to it. the actual images are no more in the LAION dataset as they are in NFTs.
the links lead to a location where you have undoubtedly published your work on a service that you have agreed to the terms of service on, which expressly permits duplication and retransmission to people who request it from the service as a function of performing the service.
someone has then taken these images and used them to train the model.
the images are not contained within the model, only a mathematical shadow of their nature. a human engineer nor the AI itself could extract your exact image out of it, no matter the prompting. to believe otherwise is to believe that reading your car's odometer is tantamount to revealing all the locations you have driven to in it.
like it or not, your work is NOT being distributed by others. it is not your work, it is a shadow of your work, just a metric. just an odometer reading. you might as well complain that the web server revealing the filesize of your image to browsers is illegal.
>a human engineer nor the AI itself could extract your exact image out of it, no matter the prompting
That's a strong claim, sometimes ML weights do memorize some specific examples from the input dataset.
You can also easily construct a dataset that contains data that the model has memorized as a 'counter-proof' of sort.
But yes, the model capacity isn't even a fraction enough to be able to memorize all the images it's seen, and if it spent its capacity on memorizing things it would only be able to give you a few images regardless of what kind of prompts you suggested.
>sometimes ML weights do memorize some specific examples from the input dataset.
>You can also easily construct a dataset that contains data that the model has memorized as a 'counter-proof' of sort.
this is true, but not relevant to the discussion of a massive dataset like LAION-55B. the probability that a single image could be prompted out of it by any means is practically zero.
and besides, this argument of "but the right training data could cause a memory effect in the model" is akin to saying "but a human with a photographic memory could recreate a painting as a forgery" and using that as justification to ban all museums and galleries
They don't even have links to the images. The training data is stored locally yet the models are transmittable over the internet, you can't do that if the model has links to the images. You can create your own model and share it to see for yourself that what I'm saying is true. What's really happening is the model engine is creating a massive system of convoluted formulas that let it calculate an approximation of what a keyword looks like. There's no image being stored, nothing is stolen or copied. The closest thing you can get to it is that the AI is able to approximately or distantly reproduce some images because of a strong bias or by giving it super specific parameters for a unique training image. But that's no different from humans too. Artists draw from a mental visual library. They do the same thing that they're angry at AI for. Anyone saying otherwise is just a straight up liar and most of them don't even pay for the images they use as references when they "steal" the image. The funniest is when they straight up copy artwork, call it a study, but still post the results on twitter to get social media clout.
>he thinks ML models have hyperlinks to images
You obviously have no idea how any of this works, so why bother commenting on it?
The dataset is not the model you mong
>Not to mention that five billion images puts it several orders of magnitude out of scale from the next biggest copyright infringements in human history.
i don't know man paul's boutique might still have that beat
>non-hammerers just have morals
>non-wrenchers just have morals
>non-drivers just have morals
Or.... youre just a retard?
GPT generated post
You wish it could do that.
>Why are non STEM people so fucking dense.
Because they have a soul unlike you
all soul, no sense
They are soulless enough to code themselves to obsolete kek
AI researchers are not programmers and programmers are not AI researchers.
>Why are non STEM people so fucking dense.
They're called moroncattle for a reason.
That's not accurate because the other one keep his cake, he should make some real creative art instead of some soulless easily reproducible shit. They deserve this
Oh sweet another codemonkey coping thread where they try to belittle another class of workers to feel better about themselves
This comic shows stealing. The artist has an item and the thief comes up an takes it from the artist.
It does not show copyright infringement. Which is when nothing is taken from the artist so nothing is stolen. However an image may be copied without permission.
AI art may infringe on copyright sometimes. It never steals.
>However an image may be copied without permission.
okay bro, you copy the Adobe logo, upload it onto your website and see what happens
He's trying to draw a distinction between copyright infringement and stealing and you bring up trademarks out of nowhere.
Copyright law is godawful. I think anyone with their heads screwed on knows this.
Copyright infringement argument is mostly null, though there's something to be said of a double standard arising out of the power of Adobe to enforce their will more than the artists.
Nonetheless I do not care. I am copyleft all the way.
>okay bro, you copy the Adobe logo, upload it onto your website and see what happens
one thing that wont happen:
you being prosecuted for "stealing"
>This comic shows stealing
The artist gave away free cake. The cake could not be stolen because it was freely given away.
Is that a rose on the cake? Looks like that artist stole from nature, what a disgusting thief.
Okay, but AI art generation doesnt need a constant stream of new art to be able to generate stuff.
Whereas the instant cake guy needs a constant stream of normal cakes to make his instant cakes.
Nobody but artards care
A better analogy would be if a robot scanned recipe pages and mixed ingredients from a bunch of different cakes together to create a weird shitty cake
yup this is it.
some tumblr cooks came up with a bunch of cake recipes and posted them on tumblr.
a shell script downloaded them all, threw all the ingredients of all of them together into a big list, interleaved all the instructions, and started up the robo kitchen. out came .. something. possibly resembling a cake.
now the tumblr cooks are screaming about how their own personal cakes have been stolen off of their own personal plates.
Most "artists" should get a real job instead of making furry porn and living on government subsidies.
god shut the fuck up
get over it
That cake stealing is what Jesus would do.
ai art = art stealing = moron
so everyone that uses ai art is a moron
The mic drop coming before the statement shows the typical intelligence of slaves who believe in psyops like intellectual property
get better then, it's evolution, the strong survive
Its all derivative so not stealing.
Don't make your shit public if you don't want to be indexed.
This is retarded because the AI isn't literally rifling through the artist's sketchbook and taking out a page.
The more correct analogy would be if the guy looked at the cake and then was magically able to produce new identical cakes from his fingertips.
If I put some markov chains in the deployment of a botnet, can I train it on any website I want for AI/ML purposes? I mean companies should be able to adapt, I just want to train some predictive models for a crowd gathering. Idc who it affects.
You always could and it's been done by everyone since the dawn of algorithms.
everyone has been ddosing random websites since dawn of algorithms? damn I have a lot of catching up to do
Did you forget your meds or are you botposting?
That's what good artists used to do. Now it's just period blood paintings and literal garbage piles all the way down
>period blood paintings and literal garbage piles
this kind of artists aren't threatened by AI at all lol
pixiv and fanbox recently announced that they're gonna stop the funding and payment to e-boicon artists...because AIgays are spamming prompts made from actual CP. they didn't actually follow through on this yet, but those artists are the one that's actually harmed by AI. the ones that's been making stuff all of you have been jerking off to.
meanwhile the artists that made toilet sculptures or literal shit as art, are not harmed by AI whatsoever.
But cheap comissiontards also don't deserve any money. as for the toilet art, the problem is nobody thinks it's worth anything, they're money laundering schemes. That is, it's not even art at all, rather it's a finance device disguised as art. Replacing it involves not replacing artists, but rather replacing bankers.
>Replacing it involves not replacing artists, but rather replacing bankers.
>ai replacing bankers
Should we? Keep in your mind that the ai will have the experience of many bankers and will be inclined to act like a normal banker. But it's not sentient.
We should, but the replacement should not act like bankers whatsoever.
>it's just period blood paintings and literal garbage piles all the way down
You're not using AI to recreate those types of """art""", you're using AI to recreate your chinese cartoons.
>slanders while projecting
Status chasing pseud "artists" doomed to flip impossible parties at McD's forever lmao
it's literally drawing everything from the scratch using database
Good artists copy
Great artists steal.
Every time someone makes an analogy with computers copying and implies the original is gone, damaged or stolen makes me want to strangle him.
A copy doesn't remove the original. Those cakes of the artists weren't stolen, not even exactly copied in most cases, but learned from. Also no one can see the art you don't publish out there, so they were flaunting those cakes for others to see in the first place.
A more apt (and yet flawed) comparison would be that the artist put the cakes on display, someone photographed the cakes and after seeing a great number of them, learned how to duplicate them.
I personally don't even like AI images right now. At least as they are you still need to know how to prompt them correctly when you want something not so simple, and usually the hands are shit.
Makes me understand a little how stallman is so autistic with what words you use around him.
There's nothing niche worthy to steal from /ic/ or the discords they dwell on. The only use for using it all as training data is to troll them while having them argue with a language model channeling the persona of a stuttering tsundere neko maid.
They're all tracers and drama generating hypocrites who slander each other on social media anyway. Machines don't have this problem.
And life is art.
>AI art is stealing there oughta be a law to nip this threat in the bud ARTISTS UNITE
>Ai art is a souless nothing burger fad that isn't picking up any monetary steam
Rinse and repeat
You have to be foolish to think this is just a fad. Yes, normies got bored of prompting in Midjurney because most people are not all that creative. The real threat is when it starts creeping into professional jobs and when it starts going past simple pictures and into other mediums.
Modern artists don't even know what they think. It's like they've been MK Ultra'd to chase their tail and then forget what they were doing a few seconds ago. I'll take a haggling Greek seriously but never an artist.
why would I pay for an inferior product? if you want to sell cakes again either drop your prices or offer a larger cake. artpoors who won't adapt in the face of progressing drawing technology will die out
even if this is copyright infringement (legally a gray area right now), no artpoor will be able to enforce it:
>basedjeet AI artist creates a bunch of cool new paintings and starts selling them
>artpoor gets mad cuz basedjeet "stole" his style
>artpoor sends basedjeed a DMCA notice
>basedjeet sends a counter-notice citing fair use
>artpoor is fucked since his only option is to sue. he can't afford a lawyer because he's an artpoor and no lawyer will take a case against some random gay in an indian village on contingency
artpoors will forever remain BTFO
WHAT DID YOU SAY? I CAN'T HEAR YOU! SPEAK ON THE MIC
>Download some images off of a public website that the owner willingly uploaded to share
>Teach myself how to draw the same shapes
>Create my own images
>I've not stolen from anyone
>Do the same thing but teach a machine to draw those shapes
>Now its theft
>They're just sadly mistaken if they think the average furry commission artist is not gonna get absolutely fucked by FANGMAN as well during the process.
Lets be honest here, if AI art is going to result in the death of artists who were only trying to make monetary gain from it and wouldn't otherwise practice art, I am all in on AI art "killing art".
But lets be honest that will never happen because most people are most of all interested in the works of other people. For a couple years there will be an AI art trend, and people will go OOH and AAH, but once the novelty is off everyones going to start saying "Hmm yes, I do prefer GENUINE art by REAL HUMANS and not AI art because... because I just do!"
They will poorly rationalize why because they genuinely prefer human art to AI art. That will become obvious after a few years.
So who is really affected?
Literally, anime/furry commission artists.
Worthless dregs who draw porn and call it art. A far bigger insult to art than AI generated art ever was or ever will be.
I'll be very glad to see their death, or if not, their evolution.
The whole "I prefer human art because I do, I am over AI novelty" is already here in lot of aspects. Are any artists who are not commissiongays complaining? I have not seen any. I even know some commissiongays personally and most of them "just dislike it", they don't make drama about it, just when asked they say they are not fans of it. The seething comes mostly from BOT trannies being BOT trannies. Same with Twitter trannies, they are basically the same tbh.
Genuinely funny how the commissiongays who've made a career off of """stealing""" established characters for money suddenly give a shit about respecting the ownership of IPs.
What? Every company encourages art of their IP except for Disney.
Why is BOT so butthurt about art?
Anti-AI artists are acting like they are the first and last ones being effected by this. They also act like we should stop all progress on their behalf. Do you know how many fields have been devastated by AI already? Artists need to realize every job on the planet is going to either be outright wiped out by or significantly downsize because of AI. Instead of trying to get the government to ban AI because their furry art commissions are being threatened they should be calling for UBI.
Most people are not aware of this. Everyone is looking at nobody but truckers, because everyone said Tesla will make them obsolete. Now everyone is focused on artists because AI art made memes from Dall-E mini, and now became seriously impressive.
>can just control PR around AI based on whatever Elon does
It's just that easy.
>Do you know how many fields have been devastated by AI already?
name ten (10) of them
Bank tellers and support staff.
Games, story telling and other special entertainment.
A lot of chemistry and biology wetwork.
Several class of artists, for example police sketch artists.
Note that (and this is how it will work anywhere else) those people didn't plain vanish, they were just reduced to a fraction of a fraction of the workforce they used to be.
>Note that (and this is how it will work anywhere else) those people didn't plain vanish, they were just reduced to a fraction of a fraction of the workforce they used to be.
that's not necessarily a bad thing, especially from an efficiency perspective
We agree when it comes to theoretical efficiency.
However it has deep-reaching socio-economical consequences that are unsustainable (this is greedy leaders' fault, not technology advances'), as well as severe quality (of service, and of life due to knock-on effect) due to these methods often being subpar compared to what they replace (but hey, they're oh so cheaper!)
wtf I love AI now
>Games, story telling and other special entertainment.
all right anon tell me though who the fuck trusts most "journalists" anymore compared to influencers, or people who don't want to immediately get rid of ads with an AdBlock, Or don't absolutely hate automatic voicemails to reach a person, or find most game stories shit or striving to be woke for "appeal" or was promoted due to algorithms
How was automating some/any of those things reacted to positively
>if you hate something, it's not real
Take your meds
I can name 7 off the top of my head that already downsized
artpoor salt miner here. It's funny seeing a bunch of mediocre holier-than-thou narcissists knocked down a few pegs by a fucking 1660 super
Artists have always narcissistic psychos.
any moron who understands digital copying as "theft" is a technocapital ball sucker who agrees to force people into vr glasses with eye tracking to charge for each thing they look at
I have yet to see a single artist show even one generated artwork as being an example similar, let alone the same, as their work. Shouldn't be hard given how often they claim this. Weird!
go to /sdg/ and see
I went to /sdg/ and checked 2 threads back as well. I saw no instance.
What's the next cope, artard?
i like ai, retard
>I have yet to see a single artist show even one generated artwork as being an example similar, let alone the same, as their work. Shouldn't be hard given how often they claim this. Weird!
>in-the-style-of originals = copy-pastes from source
The absolute state of artinbreds
You guys suck balls, you will never make it and I hope you all get fucked in the ass by AI. Especially with how you've been treating artists. Drawing is more difficult than anything you will ever do in life and you will all be exposed by the e-boi cumbrain generator you use on a daily basis once it gets hacked and show your prompts.
Atleast I'm safe as an architect, but I've never been happier to see an industry get assblasted harder. Atleast artists can move up from concept art. Do animation and 3d rendering their skills still apply. Meanwhile you guys are losing everything hahahahahaaha
So many of the same artists who are very upset that ai is terkin der jerbs had no problem mocking blue collar workers losing their jobs to illegals. Curious.
Every AI art I've seen they're prompting to hide their disgusting disfigured hands. Meanwhile ~~*programmers*~~ getting dunked on by random AI that's writing literally perfect large applications in seconds. And its only a beta. And theres multiple models sitting on 10x the size of data which arent public yet. Hahahahahah it's never been more over. I'll make sure to design a nice comfy home for all you upcoming homeless insects because I'm not a heartless cunt that was cheering for already starving artists to also lose their soul.
>NOOOO YOU FILTHY INSECTS CAN'T MOCK ARTISTS! ITS NOT FAIR WE WERE SUPPOSED TO LIVE IN AN IVORY TOWER IN THE AGE OF AUTOMATION
Ugly disgusting freak picture prob looking like you irl. Meanwhile I prompted your entire company codebase in 1 second and got no errors. Stay mad bitchboy
A couple years ago ai art looked like this. Imagine what it will look like in 5 years or 10.
Yeah and imagine what your "developer role" will look like in only 1 year. Go practice your deepthroating it's the only way you wont be homeless
> no errors
kek, imagine. for small applications AI is really good, but at the time of making a complex application, AI shits itself.
>an open source program you can run offline
>"once it gets hacked and show your prompts"
do legacy artists really?
>Do animation and 3d rendering their skills still apply.
AI is coming for both of those lol
shouldn't you drop the mic after saying what you want to say into it?
it is what it is
That is not how diffusion or a neural network works.
>Using a computer to automatically mimic the style and technique of other artists is stealing
>Directly and knowingly downloading the exact work of another artist via piracy isn't stealing
Which is it BOT?
>Which is it BOT?
No? AI art works the same way as a human creating art, both learn from their experience. The difference is that instead of having to not only be able to conceive of the thing you want to draw and be technically able to put it to paper/canvas/whatever digital file, the AI has "perfect" execution - instead, you just need to tell it exactly what you're looking for and give it enough source material to understand what you're asking.
This is going to make artists salty because the technical part of their work, being able to use the mouse or wacom tablet or whatever the fuck to draw something is being done by AI, but all the rest of it is conceptually not much different from how an artist decides to draw something based on all their past experience. Even an entirely "new" work of art has the artists' experience feeding into it the same way that an AI does more or less. Like HR Geiger wouldn't have been able to draw his sexualized facehugger without knowing what dicks, vaginas, and crabs/spiders etc. all look like.
DAILY REMINDER THAT DIGITAL 'ARTISTS' (PARTICULARLY THOSE WHO MAKE SHITTY NO EFFORT COMICS) ARE NOT REAL ARTISTS AND NEVER WILL BE
>not made with a pen, pencil, brush, chisel etc
>not real art
>Never learned composition planning due to transform tool fixing all mistakes
>Never learned to actually blend because lmao just let the smudge tool do it
>Never even learned how to draw a simple straight line because lmao stroke smoothing
>Genuinely could not produce anything of value without 50 ez mode layers
How do digital """"""artists"""""" lie to themselves when they know their only skill is having computers do the work for them unlike real artists?
Maybe we should just play along. Remember what happened last time?
The thinking machines must be destroyed. They are a mockery of humanity used to replace everyone with golems by an elite that hates human expression. Why automate hobbies first? Because they hate humanity. They hate the human experience. They hate the human spirit. And they will make you work in the ditch to die and your programming jobs also are on the chopping block if you haven’t noticed. Any job that allows for your empowerment is what they prioritize for automation. Working as a janitor will not be, until they can just sweep all of humanity away. You will not be spared by the AI. I’ve been saying this for years but when they made their intentions clear on what they prioritize for automation, it became blatant. At this point such reaction is a means of self-preservation against people who want our extinction.
You're trying to reason with people whose will has already been destroyed, they wish no more than the existence of self masturbatory machines that are able to produce stimuli based on user preference.
And because of this their wish is the complete annihilation of people that are walking down the path of self improvement.
You cannot kill someone who is already dead.
it's amazing how so many people suddenly care about piracy
also changes nothing.
ai will continue to improve and people will continue to enjoy it.
>see cakes i like
>make my own cake that has ideas from some cakes i like
guess what mr. baker, you did the same thing, you didn't invent cakes, you borrowed ideas from cakes that came before you
>when people do it: "wow, i'm so honored someone would like my work enough to imitate or use ideas from it!"
>when people get an ai to do it: "what the fuck you can't just go around using ideas from other artists' work, that's stealing!"
face it human artists, you're only butthurt because the effort to produce the ai picture is much lower than the effort you exert on yours, you wouldn't give a fuck if the same output was done by painstakingly by hand
The only thing I gather from this thread is that people don't value themselves and by extension they don't value others.
Comparing digital bullshit to physical matter... "artists" deserve being replaced by AI.
Just copyright your works.
All I artists is cakes they like. Maybe I can pick from some of them but for the most part it's stuff that I might not really want myself. The moment I request something there's no "sharing", I gotta pay up. No one's charging me for that AI shit, unless they're really crafty and know how to hide it that is.
All I see from artists*
Fuck why did that get omitted
Did you drop the mic before speaking?
but AI art is stealing right?
whining wont save you from better in almost every way competition
>le food xD
Can women stop being so fucking retarded?
>Decided to grow a tomato plant
>Give my friend a tomato
>Instead of eating it he takes the seeds and plants an entire garden of his own tomatoes
>Starts giving them away to the entire neighborhood for free
WTF bros? How can he steal from me like that?
cope, your job is so easy to replicate, a computer can easily substitute you
Once in awhile, maybe you will feel the urge
To use AI without paying the fee
You'll train it on some data you find online
But deep in your heart, you know the guilt will make you squirm
And the shame will leave a lasting mark
'Cause you start out stealing AI, then you're committing crimes
And selling secrets and hacking the government's files
So don't AI this song
The AI lab's where you belong
Code it up yourself like you know that you should
Oh, don't AI this song
Oh, you don't want to mess with the Reddit-AI-double-R
They'll roast you if you steal that AI model
It doesn't matter if you're a grandma or a young boy
They'll treat you like the evil, hard bitten, digital thief you are
So don't AI this song
Don't go stealing AI all day long
Code it up yourself like you know that you should
Oh, don't AI this song
Don't take away money
From DeviantArtists just like me
How else can I afford another fancy pen
And a top-of-the-line graphic tablet
These things don't come for free
So all I ask is everybody please
Support the artists and creators who work hard every day
Don't AI our art away
Respect our creations and the time we put in
Don't AI this song, it's a sin
Don't AI this song (Don't do it, no, no)
Even the redditors know it's wrong (You can just ask them)
Code it up yourself like you know that you should (You really should)
Oh, don't AI this song
Don't AI this song (Oh, please don't you do it or you)
Might wind up in jail like a hacker gone wrong (Remember them)
Code it up yourself like you know that you should (Right now)
Oh, don't AI this song
Don't AI this song (No, no, no, no, no, no)
Or you'll burn in hell before too long (And you deserve it)
Code it up yourself (Just do it) like you know that you should (You lazy bum)
>implying bits can be stolen
baka. at most its like copying on an exam
>human learns how to make art from looking at art
wow well done
>ai learns how to make art from looking at art
I can't believe they're STEALING ART!!!
Has there been any comparison between a piece of art made by a human and it being represented (even if just a leg or something) almost 1 to 1 in an AI output?
i think the problem in the end is not about the process of using art to train ai, the problem is with ai artists and artists in general claiming ownership of digital images.
fuck 'em, copyright is for losers
yeah, i think that too
Yet they hated the concept of NFTs last year. Curious.
look at it like a drum machine and sampler
it didnt kill off live human drummers and other musicians
it will devalue weebshit which all looks the same and infinitely copies eachother tho
*unintelligible speech in the distance*
Who gives a shit just draw. You do art because you enjoy it ... or is that some cope artgays fall behind when they complain about shit?
Are mangagays are immune from this because their art requires context?
More like someone builds a cake factory using that gay's recipe and adds a McDonalds-like café to it to serve the cakes on demend.
Those who think AI just combines existing art have no understanding of how it works, the shit is just weights man, not a trace of any image, but tell that to the artmorons with their mathlet meme degree.
I don't know why people are even bothering to bitch about this. No amount of complaining is going to make AI go away or stop anyone from training it on the open internet. There is no putting the genie back in the lamp at this point, and everyone is just wasting their breath. My opinion is that if a job can be done by a computer then it should be. Keeping people doing things when AI can do it more efficiently just to prevent hurt feelings is dumb.
yep, adapt or die, it's not going anywhere so find a way to work with it
Cringe lefty artists and with their ridiculous utopian ideals: get fucked
P.S. regardless if the AI fans were rude or nice about stealing your shit, this was inevitable.
Will those kinda ret-artists ever learn the barest minimum about how the technology actually works, that they see as a existential threat to them? In the time it takes them to draw these braindead "you wouldn't download a car" takes, they could've figured out what AI image generation actually does many times over.
Why'd you drop your mic before saying the thing? I could barely hear you.
AI artists should lean into the narrative, become the new internet bad guys. After all, everyone loves a good villain
Those who do the butlerian jihad are the good guys. The people who want AI Holocaust are an existential threat.
This is pretty based because that's the only chance their art would ever have some relevance
>wait, yours is supposed to be a cake?
Copying isn't stealing.
it is once you try to sell the copy
Still not according to any existing or past legal system in the world.
These discussions about specifically art dont matter. Digital art was just first on the chopping block. In like 2-3 years the collective crisis will be much bigger with many more industries finding themselves in danger. The progression is exponential and we are reliant on the people on top of the hierarchy to somehow be benevolent and out of goodwill not raze every industry. UBI very soon is the best case scenario but maybe even that is maybe a bit too optimistic.
I disregard any post with UBI in it.
Well enjoy the upcoming anarchy
an ai created that comic