https://www.theverge.com/2022/9/15/23340673/ai-image-generation-stable-diffusion-explained-ethics-copyright-data
Personally I think its one step closer to DYSTOPIA.
Thoughts on AI art?
https://www.theverge.com/2022/9/15/23340673/ai-image-generation-stable-diffusion-explained-ethics-copyright-data
Personally I think its one step closer to DYSTOPIA.
you can make logos yet? also could be possible to divide it into layers as a photoshop file? that would be based
If it can't write a sign it can't make a logo
>it can't make a logo
so it's just like BOT then
desing is more association based then art itself, of course no
>you can make logos yet?
Logos are about psychology and using a 'language' that already exists. It's not subliminal, but kinda. You wouldn't want that to be made by an AI unless it's specialized on logos.
I've used it for making icons, you can just set it generating stuff whilst you do other things and pick the best. I'd view it more like a starting point now, but you can get loads of inspiration to search through.
Think of it like an auto generated mood board.
There's videos of people doing it, obviously gotta edit it a little bit but the results were in impressive, look up a video
Really scary. Only trusted scientists should be allowed to do science. The peanut gallery allows entrance for POOR people and god only knows what wicked things the lower classes get up to.
No matter whats your opinion on the matter, its already here, its like crypto its going to stay.
For me the scary thing would be that someone somewhere finds a new usage for ai that the outcome is unknown.
Based anon. Computers and Mathematics should also have been kept from the filthy unwashed masses.
gas yourself garden gnome.
Holy christ, please go back retards
You jest, but this is literally how leftists and academics think. They're literally trying to gatekeep academia because they're terrified that real research will run smack bang up against their ideology, kind of like Planet of the Apes.
SD is the result of academic research. These hit pieces are pro-corporate dicksucking.
I'm a trusted scientist.
I have publications.
Let me in bros.
FREEDOM BAD
Freedom good. Freedom at the expense of others bad.
Free Market
IT'S MY GOD GIVEN RIGHT TO OWN AND RECREATIONALLY USE NUCLEAR WEAPONS YOU GODDAMN COMMIE
Don't forget about the 2nd amendment. The right to keep and bear arms doesn't only mean "guns".
With permission of the DoE, you can own a nuclear bomb. You just need a permit to store and transport nuclear materials.
AI has taken its first victim. Digital artists.
Who will be next? The music industry?
It seems like the progress happens in sudden leaps rather than continuous progress, making it surprisingly hard to predict.
I cant wait for AI to replace doctors
Soon, actually. DaVinci robotic assisted surgery is popular, and the docs love it. What they don't fucking get (because they're egotistical retards) is that the DaVinci will utilize AI to make small error corrections in the surgeon's process, using data from all surgeons who have used the davinci. Eventually, there will be enough data to not need a surgeon.
cool it with the antisemetism
It is so if you are only following the mainstream news, the architecture of the models used in stable diffusion are from almost 5 years ago (and they did make a splash wothin the field, they just dont have a cool application like this to be news worthy). Anyone working on these stuff could have guessed we would arrive here eventually
The architecture was there before but it wasn't affordable until recently SD model is worth less than 1M this wasn't possibly before I except to see more "popular" projects comming out the surface.
This is how revolutions in science occur according to Thomas Kuhn. He even wrote a book about it called The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Usually in hindsight we realize the initial big breakthrough went relatively unnoticed and it was only after the amazing products based on the technology begin to emerge.
In this case it might just be that feeding datasets into 'intelligent' algorithms, socalled 'deep learning' is actually a big deal. Digital Art now, self-driving cars soon, who knows what else it cna do
there is continuous progress we just don't see it
Hopefully jeet code monkeys are next.
AI art is a gimmick, it might work for quick decorations and shit but its going to get predictable very quickly and people will eventually be able to tell the difference between human and AI shit and it will be seen as cheap
See - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jcwtAFXtq0
People are learning to move it into their regular workflow. Typing Emma Watson naked boobs will get old for most people real fast.
>mediocre shooped shit
I guess giving better tools to mediocre "artists" don't make them any better.
We learned that when digital tools made it so easy anyway
95% of everything is shit, always has been
>Typing Emma Watson naked boobs will get old for most people real fast.
Speak for yourself
But yeah, digital artists will be able to use this tool as well just like anything else in their kitbox. It'll save so much time.
That's incredibly short-sighted
people can tell the difference if the art is just painted over the photo, back to midjourney discord, trannie
>AI has taken its first victim. Digital artists.
>Who will be next? The music industry?
You said as if it was a bad thing considering the state of modern "art" and "music".
I think it is positive. I don't know what part could make you think that I said it as a bad thing.
While it it true that automation has taken jobs, automation is not AI, or at least I do not count it as such, the same way that I do not count things like the assembly line or the email.
It is a liberation for the art consumer, not by the artist.
>automation is not AI
Yes it is. It's just simple and basic AI. In fact there's a cultural phenomenon where once we reach a certain level in artificial intelligence, we no longer consider it to be artificial intelligence and instead an algorithm or a program. Even by your definition of AI, artists are far from the first job that AI has replaced.
>It is a liberation for the art consumer, not by the artist.
Automation taking our jobs is liberation. Artists can solely focus on the art that they're passionate about rather than being forced to create art to earn money. Again, the only problem is the structure of society not the technology.
>Yes it is. It's just simple and basic AI.
I do not really agree. How do you define AI?
>first
Not even the slightest bit true. Automation has been taking jobs for decades.
>victim
This should be viewed as liberation. The only problem is that our society/economy is not properly structured in response to this.
>Automation has been taking jobs for decades.
and what we've learned is "it took my job" instantly causes everyone to completely stop caring.
Ok there is a whole field of automation that has been around for decades called CNC. Computers that machine (mostly metal) into parts. Its had decades to advance and improve and it hasn't taken any jobs away. Someone still has to program it, operate it and maintain it.
Then there is the cad/cam software that defines parts and generates code for the cnc machine and that's another job someone has to do. Cad has been around for decades too.
The point is automation doesn't take jobs, if anything it creates more. And there is no automated system that doesn't require human oversight.
Even when it comes to "AI" someone still has to provide input, someone still has to verify the output. Someone has to want the AI to do something in the first place and the reason is often arbitrary. Computers can be random, but I don't think they can be arbitrary. True AI will never exist
I don't care about your selection of examples or anecdotes.
>The point is automation doesn't take jobs, if anything it creates more
This meme has existed at least since the industrial revolution and it needs to die off. As technology improves, the only new jobs that are created become increasingly useless and unnecessary. These jobs arise solely because of how our society is structured and not as a result of the technology. I also don't see how you don't understand that eventually there will be a point where technology replaces humans at literally every task, even if it's centuries into the future.
>And there is no automated system that doesn't require human oversight.
...yet. Also this doesn't change the fact that as technology gets people, fewer and fewer people are required to maintain until eventually no one has to work.
It doesn't matter and I don't care because even under your strict definition of AI, artists are not the first to be replaced.
>I art will be restricted to imitations of the past.
Even 'creative' artists like Picasso based all of their art on things that they've seen in the past. You're being unnecessarily reductive to AI and glorifying humans. Also AI will eventually become good enough to not need any human input.
Its not anecdotal you dick shitter. If it was you should be able to provide an example of automation that destroyed jobs without creating more. But you can't
>Its not anecdotal you dick shitter.
You just pointed to a particular field which has been lackluster. This does nothing to refute my point.
>If it was you should be able to provide an example of automation that destroyed jobs without creating more.
Outside of maintenance, almost all technology replaces jobs without creating any new ones As I said before, it's our society that decides to create the new jobs, but this isn't a direct result of the technology of the technology itself. Eventually there will become a point where we can no longer keep artificially creating more jobs than is lost. We're beginning to reach that point.
> because it would have no desire to
And current AI does have desires?
>And if it does it automatically, it's because a human programmed it to
What's your point?
>Outside of maintenance...
You still haven't named one. Pretty funny considering you said "almost all". You should be able to provide many examples if that were true.
Let me provide another anecdotal example. When cars became affordable it put farriers and saddlemakers out of business. But car mechanics, detailers, race car drivers, cross country truck drivers, etc became new professions.
Literally just pick any kind of technology, like a spade, MRI scanner or a vehicle. What's the point of me listing these off? You're clearly failing to actually read my post and understand my point.
>But car mechanics, detailers, race car drivers, cross country truck drivers, etc became new professions.
Which further proves my point. Car mechanics falls under "maintenance". Race cars and truck drivers fall under "society". These jobs are created by how we structure how society and societal demands, not the technology itself. We CHOSE to create these jobs, they didn't just organically happen. Also the way we've structured our society has also resulted in more car mechanics/manufacturers than we actually need. We chose to live in a car centric world, which in turn resulted in more work.
>make argument based on personal definition
No I didn't. I've explicitly stated many times that no matter whose definition you use, you're still wrong.
>no matter what, you're still wrong.
president of debate club detected
The AI won't be able to make art without human input because it would have no desire to. And if it does it automatically, it's because a human programmed it to
so same as a human artist?
Everyone has to eat
>And if it does it automatically, it's because a human programmed it to
Once.
>It doesn't matter and I don't care because even under your strict definition of AI, artists are not the first to be replaced.
>make argument based on personal definition
>doesn't share personal definition because whatever
cool story, bro
AI generated music is already a thing in video games and it sounds like absolute crap.
>AI has taken its first victim. Digital artists.
Retard detected. All it did was lower the barrier for entry as a digital artist. There will still be good artists and bad artists even with stable diffusion, but that will no longer be a measure of their technical skills using various art creation software.
In order for AI to replace artists, clients will have to both know exactly what they want and describe exactly what they want.
Artists aren't being replaced any time soon.
>In order for AI to replace artists, clients will have to both know exactly what they want and describe exactly what they want.
In other words PROMPTING will become a legitimate profession.
AHHH IM PROMPTING
the only difficulty in getting ai to generate what you want, right now, is based in how young ai art generation is. we've only been playing with stable diffusion for a month, and already we've gone from dezgo/craiyon to... basically anything, just from finding more and more ways to tweak prompts. by next year, everything we're toying around with now will be pointless, as the models are only going to get better at interpreting natural language and spitting out a coherent/desirable result.
read: no, prompting is not going to become a profession.
>Who will be next? The music industry?
I tried but my model always hangs in a loop
hopefully
music garden gnomes bitch too much for muh copyright
I remember that there were an AI what recorded a rap albums but nigs got mad because it was appropriating the nog culture lol
I hope so. I can't stand modern mumble rap and tiktok music. the 90's and 80's were the best.
god i hope so
Web and app development for sure. Coding has less possible solutions than art or music and the payoff in terms of money and time saved is way higher. 90% of all development is js CRUD app development anyway, so lots of redundancy and repeating patterns.
ai will never replace the humble jenkem manufacturer
that took me back, anon
The beginning of an unironic cyberpunk dystopia. Artists will be powerless to stop the ignorant masses from automating their craft, and true art will die.
It's even more depressing than NFTs. At least those weren't freely available to every retard on Earth. Only retards with a lot of money.
art doesnt worth anything
>anon instantly proves that only thirdworlder ESLs or the uneducated think art is worthless
there are artist who superbs any old art in any time of human history, ive been seen some and they art is 'worthless' for common people even those whom invest in art, so ye worthless
So is it ESL or dropping out of school that makes you type like that?
What's true art? Art made on canvas? Wow, gatekeeping much?
True art has been dead for a century. AI will lead to a future where artists are revered once again for their skill with their chosen medium, instead of for how entertaining they are at cocktail parties
If you really think about it, AI has been kinda shaping what art is already due to social media algorithms and shit.
sounds fucking based to me you giant pussy bitch
pajeet tries so hard
im no street shitter.
you have your anal ring ripped last time?
what's stopping them from drawing exactly?
If its 'true art' it should still stand above AI generated art. Normies who wasted 4 years in art school or doing graphic design are just coping because they are now inferior to random neets generating hentai in their bedrooms.
>If its 'true art' it should still stand above AI generated art.
What they secretly fear is that this is not true at all, at least for their little works. A true century-level genius will stand out from the crowd in any case. Modern """artists""" with their paint blobs deservedly go to obscurity.
This whole situation is really funny to watch.
I remember back in the days when people thought AI could never make art and replace artist but here we are.
>thought AI could never make art and replace artist
That will always be partially true. They'll never replace either in terms of actual skill, quality, and creativity, but they can replace both financially, and that's all the corporations and NPCs care about.
>They'll never replace either in terms of actual skill, quality, and creativity,
This is blatantly not true either.
AI artists themselves are unable to produce the kind of artworks that their AI is based upon. That's just a fact.
>yeah but i press a button and it spits out a painting
Yeah, but you didn't paint it.
Very simple.
inb4 broke artists try to get it shut down through the only means they have: bitching and calling it oppressive, misygynystic etc.
>dumb edgelord thinks this will only affect broke artists
lol directive number 1 is replacing industry artists and artists that charge a lot of money for their work. Nobody gives a shit about the Twitter or DA user that shows anime fanart to 1000 followers, this is so Hollywood and marketing companies can stop spending big bucks on the pros that do designs and concepts for films and major promotions.
so some non-broke artists may also bitch and try to get it shut down
the point is they will have to absolutely grasp at straws to make an argument why it's "bad" or "immoral" and at least one retard will call it mysygynystic. which is funny
> this is so
Nah man people are just playing around with AI and making whatever cool thing they can. There is no big goal behind it.
You can't use this for concept art numbnutz it only ever shows rehashes of existing imagery
It's an absolutely beautiful piece of technology.
Right now it still needs quite a lot of artist-driven work (prompt engineering, img2img inpainting, composing different parts separately and combining them in photoshop, touchups) to produce results on par with something drawn by a human from scratch.
But that's still drastically faster, and multiples the potential output of one artist. It does threaten jobs, just like any technology that improves productivity.
Not that productivity ought to be the key metric for art, but this is definitely going to make an impact for use cases like video game concept art if it isn't already.
Not surprised in the least to find brainless edgelords in a thread like this. Honestly I feel bad for you. Not only were you raised poorly but you'll all suffer under the direction the future is headed eventually but you're too obsessed with punching down and laughing at others' misfortunate to notice that you're not safe from it either.
>only one of the replies is laughing at others' misfortune
Get a load of this coping d/ic/klet
>prompt engineering, img2img inpainting, composing different parts separately and combining them in photoshop, touchups
All of which takes a fraction of the time of actually creating something from scratch, and can be leaned in a day.
You can make your own adult pictures, soon movies will follow, with a reasonably good graphics card, and no more viruses from adult movie sites and their adverts.
We are all becoming more free than ever before, it's pretty great.
>closer to DYSTOPIA
look around you
>anyone can do X
>heres why thats bad
meh
>risk
What fucking risk?
It's a god damn program that takes in some text and output an image.
What exactly is dangerous about that?
That it might product the face god and your face melts ala radiers of the last ark or something?
the risk is that if we let people we don't like use it, then they might generate images that we don't like
I miss back when Stable Diffusion released their model and everyone was excited to actually get it to work to generate cool stuff and had good discussions. These retarded "ARTISTS BTFO" "WILL AI DESTROY THE WORLD" posts got old quick.
>These retarded "ARTISTS BTFO" "WILL AI DESTROY THE WORLD" posts got old quick.
Artist salt is what keeps it going.
Owning libtards is the only reason I post on the internet.
also i want to say that web comics artist should be targeted, their are the most easy to seethe
Anyone can, but as this board shows, few can generate something that doesn't suck.
even with a few hundred/thousand autists spending hours on this thing, they inevitably make some remarkable stuff. I was just dicking around and made some above-average album art
>People are empowered - that's the issue
why has no one made pictures of Klaus eating ze bugs yet?
:/
Fuck off, retard.
You can still draw and appreciate art made by humans.
It's like playing chess. One might argue that there is no point for humans to play chess, since they'll never beat computers anymore. But we still do and enjoy doing it.
If your own goal for art is monetary gain, then go and have a nice day.
>You can still draw and appreciate art made by humans.
Not if art dies once none of the artists can make enough money to survive when competing with a program.
>If your own goal for art is monetary gain, then go and have a nice day.
Are you a literal child?
>the only art that exists is for commission
>n-no, nobody ever paid premium for art made by a person that represents an emotion or idea!
Artists aren't going anywhere. The only people at risk are people like furry commission artists. And good fucking riddance.
Art for the sole purpose of monetary gain is soulless.
If those 'artists' will die off. Nothing of value is lost.
Yeah nothing of value was lost, just the vast majority of artists worth a damn. Name one(1) good artist that didn't expect to make a living out of his art.
Exactly, art is shit. Imagine how good it will be now once people do it for fun.
They won't be doing it for fun because they'll be too busy being wagecucks.
They were still commissioned to do it, they made a living out of it.
there's a difference between the patron of the arts system and patreon.
To Renaissance artists making an art was more of prestige thing. Capitalism ruined many things, including art.
>prestige thing
AND money. So it's the same as in 2022:
dollars and ego.
Art being exposed at the forefront of media is intentionally including ugly and degenerate shit and no one should be able to counter that.
I'm addicted to generating regal looking ladies
Me too
I'm cancelling all of my Patreon subscriptions right FUCKING now.
Wake me when an AI can make a simple strip comic that makes sense
Wake me when you can
| | |
| |_
Better than most of /ic/
Some clever integration with one of the advanced language models could probably do this.
Tell the language model to output prompts to send to SD.
People have already done similar tricks asking them to solve math problems, which these models can't normally do by writing python code to solve the problem, which they can do.
https://twitter.com/goodside/status/1568448128495534081
It's not AI and it's not art.
pooping on a piece of paper is art
I thought artists like egalitarianism. Something is bad because everyone can do it? Cry about it cunts
I'm happy, this is just trad down talking digital art all over again
egalitarians are either poor and want free shit or rich and stupid
equality for all is a cope in a diverse world
Artgays seething
Will AI take over programmers?
it will overtake physicians first.
as for AI art
1. our brains can fill the weird gaps
2. modern art is just money laundering at this point
no computer in the world can fill the weird gaps from AI programming
Look at the minor and hilarious errors it makes producing art and think about it applied to code. At best it'll be intellisense 2.0 where it can write simple blocks of code.
Have you not heard of Copilot?
I used, it's literally intelisense 2. Surprisingly good.
>duuude it won't be optimized
And that will be very important for the 1% of programmers working on things that actually do need to be optimized.
By optimized you mean impossible to spot bugs? It can't even do a 2D picture correctly and you expect it to write code in a 10,000 line project.
The problem with that assumption is code has success/fail states. Meaning ai coder just needs to run the code, if errors, correct.
How's coding bootcamp going, ivan?
No more than codeblocks took over programming. You still have to instruct the computer on what to do, its still programming just in a way that is much closer to our written languages. It will probably replace web shitters though.
I fucking hope so I hate programming
Github copilot is almost there anyway.
While not "almost there", I must have to agree that it has made my productivity shoot up incredibly.
I use copilot all the time. It is already there if you know how to use it.
In programming you have way less solutions to a single problem than with digital art. AI programming tools are trained on millions of coding projects, identifying patterns to frequent problems. If you got into coding just now, then you have to be way above the 80% of all programmers to even qualify for a junior position. A lot of senior developers use copilot and other tools, essentially erasing all junior tasks. I use copilot all the time and it's so fucking good that I'm scared sometimes. When I scroll through the ten solutions to my problem I can pick the best and it's all there, nothing more and nothing less.
Any moron can use an AI art generator, but can you do it in a way that's not moronlicious?
Just imagine with all things that constantly evolve and get better, this too at one point will work in video format, creating stories you want or generate something at random.
Inserting yourself as a character or other people you have media of. At one point it might get so good you can't tell at first glance if it's fake or not.
CCTV footage that gets completely altered or made up from the ground, fake scandals where someone commits a crime he didn't do, nothing will be believable anymore that's where the risk of digital dystopia comes in
Sir Niko, your table is ready for the mukbang.
But if a human didn't made it, then who owns it?
>just make your own AI, chud
>NOOOOO YOU CAN'T DO THAT
Fuck these gatekeeper gays they all need to burn.
He's right
We need big corporations like Microsoft and Google to police this tech for us. Who knows what might happen when it falls into some psychos hands? They might try to destroy our great democracy!
It's for our own good.
Basically anyone who actually can draw will be looked at as Gods, especially streamers. Artists will just move to become entertainers as the purpose of the pseudonym evolves to be more than just what you go by for your works.
access to a technology is a risk now?
what's the danger of a text to image generator?
Continuing advancement of this technology means hollywood is obsolete, so they’re getting in quick to try to stay alive for another couple years.
this is good, and i am training ai's to take more retards "jobs"
>Working 12 hours in a amazon sweatshop
>Manual labour hasn't been automated yet
>Listen to ai generated music and podcasts
>See a package of new ai generated posters posters for a ai generated movie
>get depressed
>call suicide hotline
>"Hey this is SuicideAI how can i help?"
>linking to the verge
kys
Running a prompt for my waifu right now, I'll let you know what I think of AI art once I see how it handles her.
Alright too tired last night, but to give the result. Normal pictures look decent and can get her reasonably close. Porn comes out cursed. All in all, not bad but the smut artists are going to be keeping their jobs a little bit longer.
Stable diffusion is unironically good art.
Lots of reactionary people on the topic right now but I think best case scenario is that we end up with a medium similar to photography, it's another medium for artistic expression.
>Stable diffusion is unironically good art
probably because it was trained on billions of unironically good artists' work
mostly watermarked images and porn thumbnails though
Almost like a human artist learning from those who came before them.
Just wait. Pretty soon AI will be making art better than any human can, then passing huge blocks of it to AI art critics, then finetuning itself using the good stuff to get even better.
But if humans stop making art, wouldn't that make AI art worse?
That's what I'm concerned about, if AI decentivizes new artists from appearing because it has effectively replaced them for production purposes, then the AI is gonna be stuck generating art based on the same artists for a long fucking time. If becoming an accomplished artist means your art will be fed to the AI to replace you, then no new artists will be motivated to get truly good.
In a way this is why copyright laws are in place, to protect creators and make sure people are incentivized to create new stuff, but AI seems like a plagiarism machine and creators are not protected at the moment, I really wonder how this is gonna play out legally speaking in the future.
a few days ago i played around with generating in the style of patrick nagel (image related, non-ai) and the results were not worth saving or even trying to "fix." as all the current models understand about patrick nagel is "is lineart." they can't reproduce the piercing stare aspect, which is indicative of an idea there will always be things people can produce that ai can't.
>I found a particular subtlety that this nascent AI isn't particularly good at yet
>this is clearly indicative of the fundamental inferiority of AI capabilities
Alright boys, we've got arbitrary cherry-picked challenge #473. How long until a model comes out that handles this just as well or better than humans? I'm thinking 3 months until Anon gets proven wrong and then clams up and never mentions his challenge ever again in the hopes that it becomes yet another one that people just forget about.
>isn't particularly good at
the point is it can't do nagel's style at all, beyond basic lineart. and since his style is pretty unique, its simply used as an example of how the truly new/unique is something machine learning can't produce.
furthermore, training a model to do nagel would mean fixing all the issues it has with faces in general.
another good example is norman rockwell, who's style is so expressive and subtle that the ai just merges all rockwell style faces into horror.
Alright, you've convinced me. 4 months.
you seem to have misinterpreted my position in all of this.
I don't think I have
ya did. completely.
Wrong 😉
then tell me, where do i stand on ai art generation.
Sure but the AI just keeps getting better, I guess it's up to be seen if the AI will just plateu at some point or continue to get infintiely better, but it's not unreasonable to believe the AI will be able to imitate anyone in the future.
If you want to be like China that barely produces anything new and just steals and copies, sure.
Art is based on subjective human points of view, I don't think the AI could create an Akira Toriyama or an H.R Giger out of nowhere, it's only gonna be able to imitate an artstyle once a human has created it.
>it's not unreasonable to believe the AI will be able to imitate
>imitate
that's the point i was making. all it can do is imitate. which means only the derivative are being squeezed.
it sucks at eyes usually
Copyright should be abolished anyways so... based?
you fundamentally don't understand
lets take your scenario and compare it to what we already know
deepmind has trained numerous models to beyond human capability in many areas (chess, go, protein folding, whatever)
lets say your hypothetical happened, no humans ever played chess/go/etc again and therefore they never had a new source of training data
except in literally every one of those instances they also then went on to train another model completely self-supervised that was an order of magnitude better than when they trained on human data
there is nothing special about art that means this won't happen again
>there is nothing special about art that means this won't happen again
Chess has rules and win conditions that can be used to objectively score the outputs of a model. Art does not.
Just train it further using its own output.
the only thing that I've seen from recent AI generated images that I don't regard as annoying spam is the pictures where the thumbnail looks like goatse or piccolo dick or something
certain combinations of keywords yield certain illegal combinations of ones and zeros, and this program makes it extremely easy to do such.
the act and intent is a stark violation of law.
the call to arms against SD has nothing to do with artists and you know that.
Don't lie to me. I'm a neutral man and uncaring about the unspoken, but I will get the entire board fed nuked if a single person tries to argue against what I said.
And you special retards think shit like Discord or crypted chats are invulnerable, rofl.
Just don't lie.
I'll argue with you, gay.
Having a harm-free solution for people who want to see illegal combinations of ones and zeros is a good thing. Imagine you're a vegan, arguing against pig farms or whatever, and someone invents petri dish meat. You continue to argue against the petri dish meat. Why? You want control is why, it's not about the pigs at all, it's about you getting to tell someone else what to do/think/act/feel. So go ahead, "get the entire board fed nuked" you fucking vegan.
btfo'd with facts and logic.
I thought part of the appeal of making art was the process of making it.
Shit + not my problem
media are scum
Media hire literal pedophiles and sexual assaulters en masse
Tbh media should all be shot, for the greater good. If you disagree with this, you are a child rapist.
>that's the risk!
Anyone can use photoshop too.
Yes, it can make a mid-level skilled person able to generate some types of porn, but if someone is really that determined, they can just draw it like that shadbase guy. And that's essentially what you have to do with Stable Diffusion's img2img feature in order to not generate body horror.
>Media hire literal pedophiles and sexual assaulters en masse
They do. This is more of a misdirection thing. Just like with OpenAI shouting that they don't want to let people use AI for political purposes, when you know the government is probably doing just that right now.
the actual risk they're talking about is people will now have progressively more control over what they see (and soon, hear) and the media will have less and less influence. mass media has already been mostly dead for at least a decade, but ai content generation threatens to remove what little capacity they had remaining to influence people.
thats the risk???? fuck these gays!
Some of the images look nice... some look like something out of a nightmare.
I dunno which one of those results is a worse signal of doom for humanity.
Kind of worrying that I recognised him before I read the name.
Bro, most of the shit you read on social media was written by bots, and a growing portion of the rest was written by shills or glowies. Next up in the menu will be music, which is much eassier for AIs to learn, and the schlock which musicians produce nowadays is so formulaic and just plain bad it might as well be alrorithmic already anyway. Reality is being replaced and if it weren't for the media sharticles, you wouldn't even notice.
There's already AI-produced music. I remember news from some years ago about a piece that resembled classical music.
>that's the risk
When did journalism become exclusively populated by boot-licking gays?
sometime during/after gafargalgalbe
testing testing
I think it's great, personally. Real artists with real talent will be in higher demand while all the calarts and globohomo minimal effort commie "artists" will have to learn to code or become otherwise useful to society, or starve like they deserve to.
good for concept art...and that's about it. Once it's able to replace efficient civil engineering, then there might either be a point where it's beyond going back because it's something too good. Too much of a good thing. But we're greedy in nature so it will never stop.
It might not even be fair to call it greedy. "Good" for the human race has happened for millions of years whether we all see it or not. The amount of things to happens on the smallest and grandest scales to live in this moment, reading this line of text...the amount of what we perceive as events of explosions to what irradiates moments into motion...
When the relative "good" happenings stops, it's good for something else. Meteors don't have a concept of good when hitting the planet.
bro machine generating functional blueprints is easier than whole images, as there are more fail-state criteria for it to navigate and automatically reject.
That's true, and I think it dives into what I think I'm trying to get at.
Will we see a retract in the necessity for human population to sustain itself, or a
ok that was weird
or a push into another growth period?
I am a sucker for these cyberpunk Mucha Art Nouveau images. AI making it almost seems fitting.
That is great actually.
Oh, no, human artists will need to start competing on the basis of skill. I'm not sure this is quite the apocalypse that some are portraying it as. There is always room for human inspiration, and above all the skill of craft.
Heathcliff! It's me! Kathy!
Art has gotten worse by the year, if AI makes good art then so be it, it's not like we make anything worthwhile in current year.
this is funny.
things like craiyon are the only one available, and they are absolute shit.
this is a scam, "AI" cant do this yet
...
Imaging not already having generated tens of thousands of images of Emma Watson and Emilia Clarke
There's no risk. AI art will be restricted to imitations of the past. Artists will be able to pioneer new styles and movements that shed the elements of past styles.
???
such as?
I don't see why anyone should be worried about this. The only people who should be complaining are mediocre artists who rely on Patreon for a living. Good artists will always be in demand, because richgays care more about the source of the art; regular people will either have easy access to quality art, or it just turns out to be a novelty and status quo is preserved.
On a side note, MLgays always assume their tech has an infinite ceiling, but everything is still theoretical. We'll see if that's the case. Capturing aesthetic style is one thing, but creating meaningful art is a hurdle I'm not so sure will be surpassed.
The good artists will be replaced too, even if it's just a few years after.
They will still be used to circlejerk and money launder. The arts world is like that. The size of the market will definitely shrink though
I now know fear.
why do artists have so little faith in their own skills and creativity/originality
because they all accepted that being derivative sells. and this removes all value in deriving from past works.
because we basedjak so much over these they feel like we can't appreciate actual art crafted by a human and this will be good enough for uneducated masses.
Taping a banana to the wall wasn't art anyway, good riddance to so called experts.
is nothing sacred
too much denoise
NOOOOOOO now p*dos will get to consume the content they enjoy, like the rest of us, without abuse or victims!!!! noooooo this is so immoral I will not stand for this!!!!!!!
I wonder what kind of shit Google has that they aren't telling us about? I mean, if this open source thing can do so much, Google must be doing insane things and manipulating everybody via the internet.
You maybe onto something anon
https://parti.research.google/
https://imagen.research.google/
stable diffusion is neat and all but its the kids version, source: I do this shit
It's the version that was proprietary to multibillion dollar corps just a few years ago. Now it's free on my shitrig.
oh yeah dont get me wrong, emad is based
anyone poo pooing the current state of things is in for a rude shock real soon, im part of a (huge) team working on video
any paper you read from them is 6 months old on release and one of their latest papers from open ai was about 12 steps to agi intelligence magnification
I'd guess that artists with styles interesting enough to have their names used in prompts will be fine. if anything, AI art could lead to more unique and interesting human artwork
>parses input prompt
>searches through a tagged and indexed DB of 6 BILLION images (LAION), all scraped from the internet without the artist's permission
>mushes up retrieved images into an incoherent mess
>general public goes wild
Same thing with GitHub copilot. Damn thing grabs the most common snippets of code and tries to push them over your way.
you have about zero understanding of what you're talking about
>theverge
I hate people treating Stable Diffusion as FOSS when it's ethical license garbage.
I don't know if this article does it, but I've seen a lot of people doing it.
What part of stable diffusion is covered by the license? The training process? The weights?
When the home printing press was invented people said the same thing, some people even would break into your house and destroy it if they didn't like the things you printed.
Nowadays, the government just makes every printer use tracking dots, so they solved the problem of unlimited speech.
NOOOOOOOOOOO THE HECKING REVOLUTIONARY ART TOOL IS ONLY FOR GOOGLE AND OPENAI ENGINEEERS AND THEIR BLUECHECK FRIENDS NOT YOU!
lol, graphic designers were always complaining becuase their shitty jobs being underpaid and now with this they gonna seethe because
I am a graphic designer and I never complained. It is like with any other job (or anything else in life, really). Adapt or die. I switched to 3D few years ago and while I've seen some AI-related progress that way, it is still nowhere near of replacing my job. And if it happens during my life (which I doubt) then I will simply move to second or third world and make a niche 3D fetish porn.
can it draw muhammad
All of the current "AI ethics" gays are just neoliberal chuds who are using ai ethics to both virtue signal and act as an excuse to keep the models private and in the hands of a wealthy few. Anyone with a brain can see that there is no need for AI """ethics""" until will have general purpose ai. Fuck openai
I am a communist and believe everyone should have full access to this
>“The progress is exponential,” said Jason Juan, a veteran art director and artist for gaming and entertainment clients including Disney and Warner Bros.
>“It will allow more people who have solid ideas and clear thoughts to visualize things which were difficult to achieve without years of art training or hiring highly skilled artists. The definition of art will also evolve, since rendering skills might no longer be the most essential.”
Such is life. Art will find a way.
I don't get what was so special about that image. It, like most other AI art I've seen, looks incredible as a thumbnail but as soon as you open the full image it looks terrible. Poor composition, inconsistency in style, and bits of just straight up poor drawing.
We're really nowhere near AI generating actual art
>actual art
Ah yes "modern art"
I'll take pic related over six vertically drawn lines on a white canvas.
As a hobbyist artist, the lighting, reflection, and the drapery in this image are *very* high-level. The composition is actually quite good, it's an interesting scene. Bad drawing? Where?
The main issue with it is the same you see with a lot of AI art, nothing in the image is an accurate representation of a real 'thing'. It's really, really elaborate gibberish basically.
I'd be pissed if I lost to this, and not even because he AI generated it.
The issue is that it's REALLY visibly AI generated and has that characteristic smudgy/melty look. If he actually went and edited the image into something coherent after, that'd be fine, but this isn't a prizewinning picture, you can go on fuckin' Lexica right now and get better images.
the data it's training on is dogshit the architecture is dog shit, it's gonna take a few years until it's actually putting artists out of jobs
its retarded
that's a skill issue
biggest bullshit ever. I tried all of them. literally ALL of them. and no, not everyone can use it. yes, people can type in random prompts and it will spit out bullshit.
as much as I hate it, "prompt making" is now a thing. https://promptbase.com - I am not associated with this shit PLEASE DONT SUPPORT THIS FUCKING IDEA reminds me of NFT, I am just trying to show how cancerous things have gotten.
but. yes. you need good prompts.
>no, not everyone can use it
bullshit
i can use it everyone can use it
prompts are free everywhere
>prompts are free everywhere
but coming up with one that creates what YOU want is not so simple.
It is actually. You just have to forget about natural language. The open source version is continually adding features to control what you want in a prompt, features that were in the code all along.
literally just go into the threads here on BOT, people talk about what works/doesn't work
failing that, go on fucking lexica.art and bash something together by editing someone else's prompt
>Do you really appreciate art that was created in 5 seconds?
most art sites and social media are designed to funnel hours and hours of work past your eyes in moments, never to be remembered
people don't appreciate art that took effort
>Killing artists this way you what are you left?
but really, if you're doing on-canvas work and selling it, you aren't (that likely) to get replaced, people want that physical object
if you're a designer for a studio, they're going to be looking for something that can't be done in seconds (unless they need clip art or stock images, both of which went from big money to fucking peanuts over the last 30 years anyway)
and if you're drawing for yourself, then put your ideas to paper and damn what someone else or something else can do
that being said, if you're doing commissions... become a farmhand or something, I dunno, you're likely to be totally SOL within 10 years
really, even if this system didn't exist, if humanity ever manages proper thinking AGI, it'll totally be able to just draw whatever you want anyway, putting artists out of a job (among MANY other professions)
Do you really appreciate art that was created in 5 seconds? The model is made so it will look appealing anyway despite what doofus is going to prompt it. It is killing the human aspect of it - it will feel empty. Killing artists this way you what are you left? Bunch of socially inept psychos trying their best to keep a charade, or accept the fate of being robots themselves, to for the inevitable replacement of all of human life into the machines.
This will lead to heavy police of the internet if it's not to be destroyed by corporations.
Art is against Islam so it’s a good thing that it’s dying. I hope all artists, especially the blasphemers, die poor and hungry
b a s e d
i don't give a shit about how hard it was to draw a picture the only thing that matters is if it is aesthetically pleasing. if a program makes a better looking picture than a human than the human needs to improve his skill or be made obsolete
I like this because i dont know how to model or illustrate and its too hard to interact with people to obtain people to do those things for me so having algorithmic generation of these assets might allow me to fulfill my ability to create a game all by myself.
why must homosexual gays ruin everything
morons kill each other with hammers does that mean we should license hammers
and this does much less damage than a hammer
>the risk
oh no people are going to create images that offend me and laws will need to be updated!!!
How is open sourced ai art generation dystopian?
Same way loving your people and history is "hate". It doesn't make money for stateless capital.
>technochuds steal art from artists
>while simultaneously saying that the art they're stealing isn't "real art" so it's "okay"
>while simultaneously saying that their ai generated shit is "real art"
>my neural net is trained on "generic garbage" but the garbage output that it generates is "as real of an art as anything else"
make it make sense
anything that makes humanities and graduates from other worthless majors, makes me really happy
that makes them seethe*
>Personally I think its one step closer to DYSTOPIA.
Contrarian boomer detected.
art brings nothing to the advancement uf human race as a species, they should learn to code, math or do something actually useful
need to come up with a distributed computing network to train a model on the entirety of the boorus. next level would be doujins
AI art and text will be like dating apps: extremely bad for society, everyone will eventually know this, and there's nothing anyone can do to stop it.
Fuck that, the real dystopia would be wealthy corporations monopolizing the technology so that they can cut out competitors and further lock people into their ecosystems.
just like what openai wanted to do
god bless that SD pajeet
kek. Yeah that was openai's plan. Wouldn't be surprised if a lot of the companies hosting sour articles about open source had a vested interest in OAI and Dall-E.
Either way, love seeing the petulant seethe from media and corporations as they lose their precious tech to the unwashed masses.
I've accepted our fate as a species, might as well enjoy art generated from Goatse and Niko's asshole while humans become increasingly irrelevant.
There were no anti-AI art and ethics articles flooding everything until open source stable diffusion came out
every other article i saw up to now was cock gargling dall-e as hard as it could
Not open-source. It has clauses that make it not FOSS.
Stable Diffusion was created by video card companies to keep the sales and prices of their overpowered, power-sucking pile of shit devices high now that cryptoshit has rightfully died and gone to hell where it belongs.
It's all manipulative bullshit. And people fall for it every fucking time.
cynical and retarded. truly a winning combination
the butlarian jihad is coming soon