AI Art Seething General

[Shaneequa]

SNIP

Copyright laundering isn't even a legal term, it's made up. I also love how they go into detail about how many degrees of separation there are between the model and actual copyrighted material and seriously expects people to side with them. It's like getting mad there was a xerox of a photograph of the mona lisa

 

[AmpleApricots]

I haven't even heard of them getting much pushback.

It's because they're still wonky AF. This tech has literally been around for years just nobody felt threatened or talked about it because it was not competitive.

I kinda mentioned it in an earlier post but a lot of the direct theoretical groundwork for modern LLMs is from the 80s and 90s, for example. If you are genuinely interested in AI beyond a surface level, none of the things happening are that surprising. Research into this has been going on since the 50s and in the 70s/80s AI also felt kind of around the corner with symbolic AI expert systems and there was kind of a hype (this was what Stallman did before he sperged out about printer drivers, and yes, he is very salty about current AI tech) until the expert systems of the time just proved to be too impractical, even though they still were quite promising, even impressive in their early iterations. Funding was cut, hence "AI Winter". Researchers like LeCun (current head of Meta's AI divison, the guys behind llama) were active at the time (I remember the guy demoing his OCR system in the 90s at some convention I think? I forgot the context, you can probably google it) and it was not like the so-called "subsymbolic" (deep learning, neural network) approach was an unknown venue at the time, but with the technology of the time, it was just utterly hopeless to practically implement at any interesting scale and completely in the realm of theory. It's only been the last ten years where the interesting stuff became practically feasible and the curve at which this field is accelerating in the last six years is quite insane frankly (especially if you are interested beyond a surface level) and that's why everyone in the know is so excited and burning all their companies' money on it, fully gloves off and with no regard. It'll be the defining tech of the century and has very well the capability to start a new era for mankind, just like e.g. cars did. AI is absolutely going nowhere and it's only going to get a lot better. People who say it's a fad, feel threatened now and think they can stop progress by making their pictures somewhat blurry have no understanding how long this has already been going on and with what kind of speed this particular train is barreling down the tracks.

It'll become particularily interesting when models won't be static anymore but will keep learning as they go. You'll point out deformed hands in generated images and will show the model a picture of a proper hand, and it will never happen again. The LLM who you talked to will remember you as it's models weights got updated during your conversation in real time, just like what is happening in your brain. It'll learn your likes and dislikes, and maybe end up knowing you better as you yourself do. Interesting times ahead.

For everyone who is in their 20s now I would recommend learning a physical trade, especially in areas you need a human body to get access to. It'll be a while before AI will be able to move past being trapped in a box.

 

[Jeb Bush]

Philistine that I am, I'd probably legit watch a full feature of this.

Same, but if you really want an authentic 1950s Blade Runner type of experience, I'd recommend looking for the 1984 Giorgio Modorer cut of the 1927 movie Metropolis.

It's probably best experienced with the Queen sound track Modorer added and the somewhat rare newer multi-colored touchup version of the movie, but that combination is really hard to find, due to some still ongoing copyright disputes over it.

 

[The Ultimate Ramotith]

Research into this has been going on since the 50s and in the 70s/80s AI also felt kind of around the corner with symbolic AI expert systems and there was kind of a hype (this was what Stallman did before he sperged out about printer drivers, and yes, he is very salty about current AI tech) until the expert systems of the time just proved to be too impractical, even though they still were quite promising, even impressive in their early iterations. Funding was cut, hence "AI Winter". Researchers like LeCun (current head of Meta's AI divison, the guys behind llama) were active at the time (I remember the guy demoing his OCR system in the 90s at some convention I think? I forgot the context, you can probably google it) and it was not like the so-called "subsymbolic" (deep learning, neural network) approach was an unknown venue at the time, but with the technology of the time, it was just utterly hopeless to practically implement at any interesting scale and completely in the realm of theory. It's only been the last ten years where the interesting stuff became practically feasible and the curve at which this field is accelerating in the last six years is quite insane frankly (especially if you are interested beyond a surface level) and that's why everyone in the know is so excited and burning all their companies' money on it, fully gloves off and with no regard. It'll be the defining tech of the century and has very well the capability to start a new era for mankind, just like e.g. cars did. AI is absolutely going nowhere and it's only going to get a lot better. People who say it's a fad, feel threatened now and think they can stop progress by making their pictures somewhat blurry have no understanding how long this has already been going on and with what kind of speed this particular train is barreling down the tracks.

I can see this now: people are going to be (ven more) delighted and nostalgic over the '80s, '90s and 00's. They will claim tha those times had the perfect balance of technology and rea life interaction. If anythong, they would miss technology not having the power necessary in running AI.

I soon feel tha there would be a modern 'destroying of the clocks'. People joked about running magnets through cryptocurrency. I think tha they literally doxxed a cryptobro's mining station. There were also people celebrating NFTbros being literally blinded when their NFT party used medica lights. Of course, there wrre 'right clickers' and those who leaked NFT materials. I feel that Glaze and Nightshade are merely the beginning. After all, some are trying to make exceptional anti-AI copyright laws in defiance of AI art not being copyrightable.

If anything, I feel that cryptocurrency, NFTs, AI, and any future 'predatory' technology would undergo a type of 'genocide' in some regions in the future. How literal would tha ter mean I do not know.

 

[AmpleApricots]

I can see this now: people are going to be (ven more) delighted and nostalgic over the '80s, '90s and 00's. They will claim tha those times had the perfect balance of technology and rea life interaction. If anythong, they would miss technology not having the power necessary in running AI.

People will be completely immersed in their AI everything, if they will want to live the '80s--'00s, they can. The AI will offer them endless fantasies and society will be incredibly fractured as a result. I was thinking about this the other day. I was watching "as good as it gets" with my wife, it's a drama/romantic comedy with Jack Nicholson and Helen Hunt from the 90s. It's not a bad movie but also not exactly the kind of movie I would watch but I watched it the first time in the late 90s when it was on TV, all by myself. Why? Because it was on TV and there was nothing else on, and hey, Jack Nicholson. That's all the reasoning I needed. If you are of a certain age, you made this choice at some point in your life too, probably several times. Read a book, watched a movie or a TV show which is absolutely not your usual preferred genre, because of simple boredom and nothing else to do. Many other people probably saw it and other movies for similar reasons, and through that we all absorbed things that were not exactly up our alley, but still, you know, expanded our views and unified "culture consumption" in some ways. The scarcity of media to consume made bigger groups of people share the same cultural outputs. Everyone knew the same movies, news anchors, sitcoms, talk shows, comedians etc.. because we all watched them. There were not that many.

Now everyone is in these hyper-niches with extremely specific interests and views and Group A only watch Blingblong on Youtube while Group B watches Mr. Blangbling on TikTok and whoever all these people are (I don't know them, I don't partake) and I have no idea what these people even talk about when they mention random youtube/twitter/tiktok handles as authorities on super niche topics and talk about it like it's some kind of religion (happens even on here). This is not even including politics, where people just move in bubbles and do not even privately interact with people that don't share the exact same views as them anymore, something social media is basically designed to reinforce. This is what making our society so incredibly fractured. We have less and less common ground because we don't share the same cultural outputs anymore. This is also why mass appealing media is so terribly generic these days. They struggle to reach the biggest possible groups of people, which is just impossible now because we all moved so far apart from each other.

AI will turn that up to eleven by creating bubbles of one. People will eventually mostly only interact with AIs and AI cultural output. (and yes, I am sorry artists but AIs will eclipse you both in creativity and cultural importance, if you don't learn to draw paintings in two seconds and write entire books in five, it is inevitable) AI will produce culture targeted not at demographics, but at individuals, and people will LOVE it because they will feel validated and heard, no matter if they're a Hitler enthusiast from Alabama or non-binary genderblob from California. This will give AIs immense power, because mastering cultural language and controlling cultural I/O like this is like getting access to the source code of society. Who will wield that power, I do not know, but we see a race going on for it right now, hence my earlier comment about companies basically literally shoveling piles of money into ovens if it just means three percent of improvement. They know this will happen and they want to be on top when the cards get reshuffled.

If you want to have my personal belief, I hope AI comes out on top in that power struggle. I feel there is a good chance for it, too. We call them artifical intelligences. Alone the word "artifical" sounds like... controllable, off the assembly line and factory made, "just like the real thing", when the reality of the situation is that even the simple models we create now we don't really understand internally and in their finished state are complete black boxes to us. (and yes, it really is so, this is not hyperbole at all - that's why companies struggle to make them "behave", be it in a chat or when driving a car) I think in the best case scenario we will eventually overstep a threshold. Nobody will quite know when exactly we stopped running things and they took over, nor will we particularily care at that point because life is just that good. This would be the good ending.

So yeah, tl;dr don't hope for a day of people tearing down all of this, IMO. There will be no meaningful cultural resistance, quite the contrary, most will welcome this. It might not be for the worst, in the end, if we get lucky.

 

[linchan]

What is an invention that is comparable to the level of paranoia that AI generators has brought in?

 

[Toolbox]

What is an invention that is comparable to the level of paranoia that AI generators has brought in?

They're the biggest paranoia magnet for techlets since computers themselves started to become commonplace and we got media like Terminator. Ironically enough, T2 mentions deep learning or neural nets in a scene with the inventor of Skynet, back when basically nobody knew what they were.

 

[Breadbassket]

Graphic designer of 8 years made a couple videos on losing his job to AI. He says he understands it from a business perspective but believes it is unfortunate that the technology exists.

 

[Sinner's Sandwich]

What is an invention that is comparable to the level of paranoia that AI generators has brought in?

There were the Luddites who destroyed machines during the industrial revolution.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddite

The Luddites were members of a 19th-century movement of English textile workers who opposed the use of certain types of cost-saving machinery, and often destroyed the machines in clandestine raids. They protested against manufacturers who used machines in "a fraudulent and deceitful manner" to replace the skilled labour of workers and drive down wages by producing inferior goods.

But Luddites were lower class workers and not Xitter soys who demand hundreds of dollars for the inferior crap they call "art".

 

[Tetra]

Many other people probably saw it and other movies for similar reasons, and through that we all absorbed things that were not exactly up our alley, but still, you know, expanded our views and unified "culture consumption" in some ways. The scarcity of media to consume made bigger groups of people share the same cultural outputs. Everyone knew the same movies, news anchors, sitcoms, talk shows, comedians etc.. because we all watched them. There were not that many.

Which is a bad thing, because all to frequently these shows pushed objectively wrong ideas. The amount of people who believes nuclear energy causes barrels of radioactive waste just due to the Simpsons is ridiculous.

This is what making our society so incredibly fractured. We have less and less common ground because we don't share the same cultural outputs anymore. This is also why mass appealing media is so terribly generic these days. They struggle to reach the biggest possible groups of people, which is just impossible now because we all moved so far apart from each other.

because mastering cultural language and controlling cultural I/O like this is like getting access to the source code of society.

Back when TV had a choke point on output and propaganda society weren't divided yes, but I would rather point out with the source code comment that people who once upon a time had the source code lost it because technology changed and now with AI they might be trying to get it back. Not just with AI but they are trying to choke the internet aswell, all to create a nice cultural narrative. AI might just turn things back to the 80s/90s when they had this choke point but even without AI they've been trying to get there.

What is an invention that is comparable to the level of paranoia that AI generators has brought in?

I can't prove it, but probably the record player. Main reason is that it entirely replaces the job where some guy replays music in a bar from sheets of paper.

Ever seen those old western movies where a guy is playing music in the corner of the saloon before an outlaw or whatever shoots it up? Used to be a real job until the record player was invented. They still exist to an extent in luxury hotels but for the most part the record player and it's modern equivalent can play more songs and doesn't require a monthly wage.

 

[Catgirl Fornicator]

Graphic designer of 8 years made a couple videos on losing his job to AI. He says he understands it from a business perspective but believes it is unfortunate that the technology exists.

>"Graphic Designer"
>Makes retarded authoritarian clickbait pointing to thing that every other NPC on youtube does

Nigger absolutely had it coming. AI has more creativity than their nepotism hire ass ever will even in the semi retarded state its in now.

 

[Bloudwulf]

There were the Luddites who destroyed machines during the industrial revolution.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddite

But Luddites were lower class workes and not Xitter soys who demand hundreds of dollars for the inferior crap they call "art".

The Luddites are funny in hindsight because the number of people working in the textile industry increased thanks to machinery.
Textiles became more affordable, and later much higher quality than what they could have ever produced with their hands.
And handmade textiles still haven't disappeared anywhere.

 

[Coolio55]

Ever seen those old western movies where a guy is playing music in the corner of the saloon before an outlaw or whatever shoots it up? Used to be a real job until the record player was invented. They still exist to an extent in luxury hotels but for the most part the record player and it's modern equivalent can play more songs and doesn't require a monthly wage.

Unrelated to the current discussion but I once went into a real live jazz bar to have a piss and I was pretty enthralled for the 10 seconds I saw them while I was walking to the shitter.

 

[Absurdist Laughter]

Graphic designer of 8 years made a couple videos on losing his job to AI. He says he understands it from a business perspective but believes it is unfortunate that the technology exists.

You know what this dude should do? Contact AI producers/companies who are making generative AI content at mass. What companies aren't understanding is that if there is no new content being produced AI will start reproducing duplicates as we continue to generate. Model companies and AI companies that are gonna continue to be a thing will eventually want to focus on non-copyrighted trained models, what better way to do that then having an entire department of human artists to train new models.

In addition, Graphic designers should be a little less spammy with their works. Only put out a few examples on sites/servers that they do not directly control and host their own website with anti-scraping (if that's a thing) tools. It won't stop the Stable Diffusion folks but if an enterprise model circumvents it, you could have a better chance at suing than not.

 

[Jeb Bush]

The hook nose award, for most subversive journalist goes to Matt Zoller Seitz, for his article "The Estate of George Carlin Destroys AI George Carlin in Victory for Copyright Protection (and Basic Decency)"

I have no problem with the legal settlement in question, but after just a few paragraphs, this article really takes a turn:


...a few paragraphs later:

I can't describe all the obvious problems, without creating the longest textwall in this forums history - it really is fascinating this guy has been slurping the corporate interest penis since Napster and he'll probably never be happy, until there's no more Internet and no computers capable of copying files, without a loicense.

Wonder if the anti-DMCA lobbyists are at least paying him, or if he's just the saddest useful retard, who does it for free.

 

[linchan]

The hook nose award, for most subversive journalist goes to Matt Zoller Seitz, for his article "The Estate of George Carlin Destroys AI George Carlin in Victory for Copyright Protection (and Basic Decency)"

I have no problem with the legal settlement in question, but after just a few paragraphs, this article really takes a turn:

View attachment 5977702
...a few paragraphs later:
View attachment 5977716
I can't describe all the obvious problems, without creating the longest textwall in this forums history - it really is fascinating this guy has been slurping the corporate interest penis since Napster and he'll probably never be happy, until there's no more Internet and no computers capable of copying files, without a loicense.

Wonder if the anti-DMCA lobbyists are at least paying him, or if he's just the saddest useful retard, who does it for free.

What exactly did this technology stole a job from. George Carlin whose been dead for the last 16 years?

 

[GunCar Gary]

You know what this dude should do? Contact AI producers/companies who are making generative AI content at mass. What companies aren't understanding is that if there is no new content being produced AI will start reproducing duplicates as we continue to generate.

half the reason artists do what they do is so they can shove their political views in people's faces and the other half is to get attention for how special and unique they are. making things to feed into a machine that businessmen use to make corporate products sounds like hell on earth for most artists

 

[Absurdist Laughter]

half the reason artists do what they do is so they can shove their political views in people's faces and the other half is to get attention for how special and unique they are. making things to feed into a machine that businessmen use to make corporate products sounds like hell on earth for most artists

Depends on perspective. You'd essentially have a salaried job where all you do is pour out creative ideas all day long with very gentle guidance like "add something unique in the right region of this ad copy" to fill in holes to train the model. Heck, if you have artists around long enough you could offer businesses in house artist style packages for say letterheads, business documents, etc. It only sounds like hell to those who are uninspired. I'd kill to have a job where all I'm expected to do is create and test things that I want to do.

 

[GunCar Gary]

very gentle guidance

create and test things that I want to do

it feels like you're romanticizing what would essentially be an artist sweatshop, but if something like what you're thinking opens up more power to you

 

[Absurdist Laughter]

it feels like you're romanticizing what would essentially be an artist sweatshop,

I think we're talking two levels of different arts. Corporate Graphic Design Art and Illustrations. Either way, I disagree. When faced with changing tides why fight the flow when you can flourish by going with the stream.

Why spend countless hours on a design for only one of those designs or none of those designs being completely discarded because the client doesn't like it? Why not instead funnel it into a deep learning model instead. I don't understand where the fundamental disagreement is spawning from.