AI Art Seething General

[cybertoaster]

Even Steam will allow the former, and not the latter. They don't give a shit where your code comes from, but if there's a single even thought that you used AI art, your game is banned.

All I could find was a TC article from like 5 months ago, got more details? what are the limitations?

Shad debating another artist that did a response video. The debate is about five hours, so strap in!
https://www.youtube.com/live/DI7PE2tjIxQ?si=pSkzz5a3aoaivVq5
(For some reason I can't embed it in my post).

Give me a TL;DW ffs...

itzmoepi returns with an "apology" (for some definition of "apology" anyway)

View attachment 5435684

Then he recants it a mere few hours later in a fit of rage...

View attachment 5435686

Funny how he wont even mention lawyers, writers, translators, etc, all the other jobs also threatened by AI.

No, only "artists" like himself matter.

For some reason, Twitter/X decided to recommend this Tweet to me. Furry artist demanding that people stop sharing AI art because showing it to other people is killing his career. Playing with it on your own is fine, but don't you ever post it online. So surely he must be really struggling, right?

Oh wait nope. Not only is he selling porn calendars for $60 a pop, his commission queue is absolutely packed, with at least 10 overdue commissions by his own schedule, and 32 pending total.

But yeah, AI is totally killing him. Won't you think of the porn artists who have so many commissions they can't keep up with them?

People are paying for this shit?

Spoiler: crayola-tier furry shit

No wonder this furfag is shitting his diaper over AI, look what it can do:

Spoiler: ITS OVER

In summary:

Anyone still paying these hacky fucking amateurs for their "art" instead of using AI should kurt cobain themselves.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

They are going to turn up AI as gay and useless as possible.

A plan in the works for about 10 years because activists been worried about AI being racist/based against nigger crimes as far back as 2013.

Yes. It's a disruptive technology on par with the internet in its effects, and the elite spent over 20 years getting BTFO by the internet before they wrangled Big Tech into being an enforcement arm. They're NOT repeating that with AI so they have to strangle it in the cradle

They mostly want to protect the regime more than they want to impede on entertainment uses.

They hate those entertainment uses because it goes against the regime's aesthetic and cultural values. Make no mistake, they will make it so any text AI is nothing but a stream of propaganda and trying to make anything appealing or funny on an image AI will be a huge challenge, like Bing AI but far worse.

And AI won't even get much better since future models will be even more lobotomized and they're already slapping a lot of restrictions on computer parts. Ostensibly it's to slow down China's development of this shit but that's like saying the Patriot Act was just about stopping Al-Qaeda. All this anti-AI junk will be used on domestic AI enthusiasts, and we're just seeing the groundwork now.

 

[The Mass Shooter Ron Soye]

Yes. It's a disruptive technology on par with the internet in its effects, and the elite spent over 20 years getting BTFO by the internet before they wrangled Big Tech into being an enforcement arm. They're NOT repeating that with AI so they have to strangle it in the cradle

They hate those entertainment uses because it goes against the regime's aesthetic and cultural values. Make no mistake, they will make it so any text AI is nothing but a stream of propaganda and trying to make anything appealing or funny on an image AI will be a huge challenge, like Bing AI but far worse.

And AI won't even get much better since future models will be even more lobotomized and they're already slapping a lot of restrictions on computer parts. Ostensibly it's to slow down China's development of this shit but that's like saying the Patriot Act was just about stopping Al-Qaeda. All this anti-AI junk will be used on domestic AI enthusiasts, and we're just seeing the groundwork now.

My optimistic take: A broad coalition of autists, chuds, coomers, etc. will keep pushing open source models forward. We'll see how well they do at restricting consumer hardware or enthusiasts from purchasing enterprise grade accelerators/GPUs, but I don't think it will be so easy. Stopping people from swapping models and software is utterly impossible. The regime is slow to respond, and the tech giants are muddling the issue while trying to get their preferred legislation that shuts out the little guy but leaves them a lot of breathing room, staving off the copyright lobby.

This thread might be good for an off-topic discussion of how far consumer/off-the-shelf hardware will advance. In the short term (1-2 gens) I think we'll see 32 GB VRAM GPUs for consumers (sub-$2000), and AI accelerators for inference in all x86 laptop and then desktop CPUs. Microsoft is supposedly pushing 45 TOPS AI accelerators as a Windows 12 recommendation, for example in Qualcomm's Snapdragon X Elite and upcoming AMD APUs. They will work in Linux, letting you get around any restrictions at the OS level. In the long term 3D packaging and fabrication could result in orders of magnitude more performance, contrary to predictions of total stagnation. I think the gains will be trickled out by the major fabs through at least the 2040s.

In the past I've floated the idea that consumer computing will be regulated specifically because of the AI boogeyman, but I'm not seeing a lot of competency out of the regime so far. Bring it on.

 

[blur]

And AI won't even get much better since future models will be even more lobotomized and they're already slapping a lot of restrictions on computer parts. Ostensibly it's to slow down China's development of this shit but that's like saying the Patriot Act was just about stopping Al-Qaeda. All this anti-AI junk will be used on domestic AI enthusiasts, and we're just seeing the groundwork now.

My optimistic take: A broad coalition of autists, chuds, coomers, etc. will keep pushing open source models forward. We'll see how well they do at restricting consumer hardware or enthusiasts from purchasing enterprise grade accelerators/GPUs, but I don't think it will be so easy. Stopping people from swapping models and software is utterly impossible. The regime is slow to respond, and the tech giants are muddling the issue while trying to get their preferred legislation that shuts out the little guy but leaves them a lot of breathing room, staving off the copyright lobby.

My even more optimistic take:

Chip manufacturing is about to change completely as we curb stomp Moore's Law into the cement with recent advances in optical physics engineering. The parts crisis will at first get a lot worse, then infinitely better. In the near future even your phone will have a better GPU than any desktop on the market now.

It might take a generation or two, but copyright law governing IP is going to go away, along with all current methods of education, trust in centralized institutions, and most if not all current cultural and ethical norms. Throughout the rest of our lives we will see these outdated modes wither away and just as it has been in the past, all of their supposed victories will be nothing more than losing battles against the inevitable.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

In the past I've floated the idea that consumer computing will be regulated specifically because of the AI boogeyman, but I'm not seeing a lot of competency out of the regime so far. Bring it on.

It's officially getting regulated because of "climate change." That's why several blue states are slapping regulations on them.

 

[The Mass Shooter Ron Soye]

It's officially getting regulated because of "climate change." That's why several blue states are slapping regulations on them.

Power efficiency of chips rises faster in a generation or two than their regulations could possibly matter, and sometimes you can cut power usage by 50% or something and only affect performance by 10%. So it's a blip for consumer hardware, and datacenters will just move somewhere else if they need to.

If you're talking about this, it's easy to get around.

Here's the good old fashioned way to get the restrictions you want:

Teen boys use AI to make fake nudes of classmates, sparking police probe

https://archive.ph/IdW1G

 

[Joshua Connor Tomar]

The administration is aware that AI has incredible potential, and the chilling effect of trying to make it illegal or only usable in a controlled sandbox would stifle any incentives for development in the west, giving massive advantages to China et al. if it remains free and open in those countries.

You say that like they actually care about American prosperity.


I was reading that George Greek last name guy (comic artist who did those creepy Biden pictures after being kicked out of Reddit ) do some mild seething on Twitter. And someone with a shitty highschooler drawn fantasy art profile Said this

One I'm pretty sure that's not how it works but also even if it did would collage artists like Hannah Höchs or Clint Saunders also not be artists then?

 

[AnOminous]

If Trump's presidency taught us anything, it's that executive orders don't really accomplish anything.

They're supposed to be for controlling executive agencies the President actually has authority over. They're pretty shit at being actual laws, as people can more or less just tell the President to go fuck himself if it isn't backed by Congressional legislation. They're especially useless when they directly contradict Congress, unless it's some area of specifically Article I powers unambiguously granted to the President.

 

[linchan]

You say that like they actually care about American prosperity.


I was reading that George Greek last name guy (comic artist who did those creepy Biden pictures after being kicked out of Reddit ) do some mild seething on Twitter. And someone with a shitty highschooler drawn fantasy art profile Said thisView attachment 5465375

One I'm pretty sure that's not how it works but also even if it did would collage artists like Hannah Höchs or Clint Saunders also not be artists then?

One thing I really dislike is their habit of unintentionally insulting other forms of art just to diss AI. I remember when Corridor released Anime RPS and people said this is just rotoscoping at the same time saying it looks like shit.

 

[Blamo2000]

I'm not supporting AI art, but the shitty soapboxing online drawfags did in the last 10 years mixed with the fact that they alienated people outside of their bubble sure shows. Now their aggressiveness towards AI art will just make people generate more stuff because they mostly lost the sympathy they could have had if they weren't assholes sitting on a high horse.

All they needed to do is to shut up about politics/drama/degeneracy, draw the big titty goth waifu and be a chill guy around. Commission work always dependent on having a relationship with the artist. So sorry Stable Diffusion bros, Twitter killed most of the online art, you are basically cleaning out the rubble. I guess you get to have assist points on the score board.

 

[Colon capital V]

Yknow honestly, has Steam's "Anti-AI" art rulecuck been put to the test? Sure if "LOL GAMES CO." put out a bunch of low effort shitty games with suspiciously high quality art, then yeah it'd be obvious to see there. But would they really notice the AI art if it was tweaked a bit to look a bit better?
In fact what's even the threshold to get a game shutdown for using ai art? Is there a limit to how much can be in it before they take notice? How "AI" does it have to be to be taken down? Could a player report a game and say "it's using AI art" and take it down there, no questions asked? What are the limits of this "No AI" rule?
At best it's just a vauge guideline by Steam to weedout the shitty low-effort publications by cashgrab companies, and at worst it's a very easy and exploitable rule to take down games people don't like.

 

[sex haver]

I have definitely been wondering that too. Steam's policy is super vague and seems more like virtue signaling than actual enforcement.

Sure, there's the obvious tells: fucked up fingers, merging on long hair/clothing, etc, but those are all things an experienced AI artist will be able to notice themselves and fix easily. If the person in question knows what they are doing, there's no real way for Steam to tell what is AI and what isn't.

Plus, all of that only applies to like, higher quality stuff, character portraits and the like. If I were to use AI to generate, say, pixel art sprites (which Bing/DALL-E is surprisingly decent at) and then touched up the errors, literally nobody would ever know. How could you?

Even with all of this, I don't know Steam would ever actually try to enforce it outside of the very most obvious cases. It'd be a pretty nasty PR hit to anti-AI if they actually went forward and accused a game of being AI generated art and delisted it, and it turns out it was genuinely 100% human-made. They would prove that nobody really can tell the difference between human-made art and good AI art, even Valve, let alone the average person, and I don't think they want to risk that.

 

[DrearyDoomguy]

Steam already has a problem with shovelware (granted, a necessary side effect of their relatively permissive rules for games they allow), obvious AI assets just provide them with an excuse to crack down a bit on low-quality games.

 

[Mr.Miyagi]

As far as I can tell, Valve is mostly interested in using it as a CYA (cover your ass) measure for themselves, with the original rejection(s?) earlier this year being done because they couldn't be sure if the tools the dev used, meaning the training data the AI artgen they were using, were able to be used commercially by the developer under copyright law. They wouldn't want to get entangled in whatever lawsuit might crop up by selling it. It's not from Gayben hating AI or whatever, at least.

There are at least a couple games I know of that are on Steam with AI generated assets. One is Payday 3, which used AI gen to create a bunch of art pieces for an art gallery in one of the levels. I believe there was some pushback on this because the devs first claimed they hadn't used AI on anything, but then an artist on Artstation said the team did use guided AI generation for it. I'm unsure whether it was trained on the art team's work or not.

Second is Galactic Civlizations 4: Supernova, which has an "AlienGPT" service you can use if you register your copy of the game, where you throw in a description of an alien race, like "race of seafaring aquatic monkeys that love gold" or whatever nonsense, and it'll spit out an image for them as well as descriptions of lore, letting you make a bunch of custom AI races to use in your games. The art system is, from their word, specifically trained on art assets owned by themselves (Stardock), so it seems to be allowed on that virtue.

Of course, you still have to ask whether any generation is fair to use commercially, due to the underlying model's training, or if it's specifically okay if you're just finetuning it, since I really doubt Stardock (who can barely put GalCiv4 together as it is) is capable of training their own LLM denoiser transformer. Is it okay to use if you're paying a company, rather than a free or open-sourced version? Or, maybe, the real question is whether Valve is just okay with okaying AA/AAA games from established publishers without looking into the AI art content, but indie devs throwing their stuff on their have to go through a questionnaire that says "Are you using AI to generate game assets?" and not lie, or at least, not get caught lying afterwards, lest their game get delisted, rather than not listed in the first place.

Like others have said, it could also just be a way to prevent getting 50 submissions a day of cheap reskins of the same game, over and over, just with different AI generated anime girls each time, but I dunno. It's like there's any real QA for a Steam game, look at new releases and see how long it takes to find an overpriced Flash game or unfinished assetflip.

 

[MeltyTW]

Spoiler: another melty ai rant i hate these people so much and i want them all to die and burn in hell

I saw someone ask "did you all forget ai art was supposed to be bad" and yes, they did. because its going to be normalized and theres nothing you can do about it, no one actually values the caste in society that tries to make everyone feel bad about themselves, that treats people and culture in a nation like something to be shopped for that you can replace and "upgrade" to your tastes if you want tacos or want people more willing to clean your house for pennies consequence for the regular folk less privileged than you be damned, no one feels bad for the people that tried to gaslit "offensive" things you dont like as lacking talent or popularity as it does better than your shit even with every facet of the internet being centered on censoring it with bans, shadow bans, and query manipulation and artificial boosting of "good" posts regardless of popularity to build a false consensus.

I also saw people these same times shittalk roiland saying he was disposable and his own show was better without him and that they couldnt tell a difference, well let me tell you something, the only difference the masses will note when theyre distracted by the cool new ai based toys coming out is that their movies will go back to appealing to everyone with generic scripts rather than generic scripts that shame them for their race and gender. All you are to companies and to regular people are liabilities and potential lawsuits and a middlemen to profit that adds in ridiculous unwarranted divisive and mean spiritied political themes where it doesnt belong. people who ask for more while calling everyone else privileged and demanding austerity and appealing to a moral obligation to be kind from the people you spit on.

let this generation of artists go hungry in the cold i say.

Yknow honestly, has Steam's "Anti-AI" art rulecuck been put to the test? Sure if "LOL GAMES CO." put out a bunch of low effort shitty games with suspiciously high quality art, then yeah it'd be obvious to see there. But would they really notice the AI art if it was tweaked a bit to look a bit better?
In fact what's even the threshold to get a game shutdown for using ai art? Is there a limit to how much can be in it before they take notice? How "AI" does it have to be to be taken down? Could a player report a game and say "it's using AI art" and take it down there, no questions asked? What are the limits of this "No AI" rule?
At best it's just a vauge guideline by Steam to weedout the shitty low-effort publications by cashgrab companies, and at worst it's a very easy and exploitable rule to take down games people don't like.

all the results im seeing is them saying theyre concerned with copyright and dont hate ai so i assume its like early youtube where you can just get away with it if you shit enough money in gabes greedy greasy little jew face for him to chomp down on like the disgusting putrid subhuman garbage disposable piggy that he is.

 

[Georgio Cocklord]

I dont like AI to be honest, its just the result of lazy people pushing for more efficiency at the cost of human experience but Im not gonna lie this shit is incredibly impressive

Spoiler: Full Size Images, You can only view the hatching that way

It will take me an entire lifetime worth of training to draw stuff like this

 

[ShooterOfCum]

Shadiversity has once again poked the hornet's nest with his enthusiasm for AI on Xitter.

Spoiler: Main tweet

The image he is proud to showcase is once again not particularly good, with poor composition and other issues. While Shadiversity's tone be construed as vaguely passive aggressive, he does not ever explicitly insult AI detractors, simply voicing a stern disagreement. However, that does not stop spergs on Xitter from having an absolute meltdown over the tweet. Here is the DUSK developer David Szymanski spewing vitriol against him, talking down to him in a highly patronising and insulting manner without provocation.

Some responses are somewhat level-headed and offer constructive criticism on the actual issues rather than blind screeching at AI usage, such as the following.

Spoiler

However, those are in the minority. The vast majority of comments are insults directed at Shadiversity's audacity to promote AI, using AI, and telling him that his image sucks without offering any constructive criticism.

Spoiler: Assorted spergery

 

[sex haver]

Shame to see that about Szymanski. I'm a fan of his games but this is a really dumb look for him. Complaining about an artist's "wasted talent" is pretty odd coming from someone whose success partly comes from making intentionally low quality textures for games. For example, his first "viral" game among streamers was Squirrel Stapler, in which the final enemy is... this:

So using AI is a "waste of talent" and "tragic", but crudely pasting a jumble of blurry textures onto a low poly model as a jump scare isn't? Okay dude. Glass houses and all.

Edit: fuck WebP, who even ever wanted that shit.

 

[Neurotypical Mantis]

People are paying for this shit?

Spoiler: crayola-tier furry shit

decent fur art

that's not a good example of garbage art that furries will pay for. it's fine

 

[Blamo2000]

I dont like AI to be honest, its just the result of lazy people pushing for more efficiency at the cost of human experience but Im not gonna lie this shit is incredibly impressive

Spoiler: Full Size Images, You can only view the hatching that way

View attachment 5489992
View attachment 5489995
View attachment 5489996
View attachment 5489997

It will take me an entire lifetime worth of training to draw stuff like this

I think the tech itself is impressive, and in hindsight it makes sense that AI got good at making images. Art on the technical level is about relationships and patterns. It can be really turned into math, and computers are really good at that.

Shadiversity has once again poked the hornet's nest with his enthusiasm for AI on Xitter.

On some level I would think even is Shad was able to draw and paint like Frank Frazetta they would still diss him because he is not in the Twitter hivemind.