AI Art Seething General

What even is Vercel? Idk why but that number's funny to me. Not in a comedic way, of couse.
Also what is this "Cara" thing artists keep talking about? Sounds like a western knockoff of Pixiv by how they're pitching it.
Vercel is an app hosting service. It's very convenient for projects that are free, like Github pages, but they have support for a lot of frameworks that makes launching a website really simple. That being said they are infamous for reaming your ass with their rates.
 
Either these people are getting scammed by their ISP, DNS, Glaze, or these people don't know how to manage an image site. Cara hasn't even broke a million users yet.
Not even half a million users! Glaze itself is free, just takes a lot of your resources to run it, even more so, if implemented poorly. This has to be the same situation, as Sam Hydes original Fish Tank site.

They must have gotten some scummy VPS contact (probably under Amazon), with many monthly limits in it in that small text nobody ever reads, that charges you $13 k to host and when you break the limits, you get finraped, the same way Sam did.

My previous comments might have been too idealistic, servers are not exactly free, but for a $100 k, you can surely just buy whatever server you can ever need, to run a simple image hosting site - and probably have enough money left, to have the server rack gold-plated.

wasting-money-toilet.gif


Edit: As you pointed out, it is Vercel (the most soydev of hosting companies), not even Amazon, so it's much worse. I said they're rich and don't have to care a few posts above, but if they stay, the bills will shoot up even further. So yes, this is the point, where money becomes a problem, even for people like this.
 
Last edited:
Not even half a million users! Glaze itself is free, just takes a lot of your resources to run it, even more so, if implemented poorly. This has to be the same situation, as Sam Hydes original Fish Tank site.

They must have gotten some scummy VPS contact (probably under Amazon), with many monthly limits in it in that small text nobody ever reads, that charges you $13 k to host and when you break the limits, you get finraped, the same way Sam did.

My previous comments might have been too idealistic, servers are not exactly free, but for a $100 k, you can surely just buy whatever server you can ever need, to run a simple image hosting site - and probably have enough money left, to have the server rack gold-plated.

View attachment 6062512

Edit: As you pointed out, it is Vercel (the most soydev of hosting companies), not even Amazon, so it's much worse. I said they're rich and don't have to care a few posts above, but if they stay, the bills will shoot up even further. So yes, this is the point, where money becomes a problem, even for people like this.
It's likely they will hit a million users. With no ads, only relying on the wealth of the owner and donations, how much can this last? I can't imagine having a social media website is cheap.
 
It's likely they will hit a million users. With no ads, only relying on the wealth of the owner and donations, how much can this last? I can't imagine having a social media website is cheap.
This humble kiwi farming website, continues to pay the bills, because of generous crypto donations, all while 80% of the Internet attempts to destroy it and Josh can't even process payments, from most sources - otherwise, even more people would donate.

Cara provides a valuable service to paranoid artists, who get all their art glazed through it, before uploading it everywhere else. Many of them draw for a living, so they'd probably donate quite a bit, if the hosting costs were sane. I believe this site could even be somewhat profitable, if they do the bare minimum, to stop burning money, at a record speed.
 
The art community is not immune to scams
How do you expect people that are atleast half retarded women, the other half on too many meds, to be immune to any adult problems. Yet alone financial.
Cara is run on spite and a nepo chink’s stubbornness to walk in business shoes that don’t fit her, because she managed to scam a court once and it inflated her ego to what is now the scam equivalent of tumblrcon, with double the furries
 
Honestly, I blame the resources on both a sudden influx of new users and the invariable application of Glaze.
I wonder if Cara is applying Nightshade, too.
 
Honestly, I blame the resources on both a sudden influx of new users and the invariable application of Glaze.
I wonder if Cara is applying Nightshade, too.
Just Glaze 2.0. Combining the two, would require even more resources and make the filters more noticeable - neither is good, for an art sharing website.

she managed to scam a court once
That lawsuit was not at all AI related and the painter she won against, was clearly in the wrong.
sketch-1717767092572.png
Photo on the right, painting on the left. It is a damn good painting, and I probably wouldn't sue anyone painting me, but good luck arguing it is in any way transformative.
 
That lawsuit was not at all AI related and the painter she won against, was clearly in the wrong.
View attachment 6062923
Photo on the right, painting on the left. It is a damn good painting, and I probably wouldn't sue anyone painting me, but good luck arguing it is in any way transformative.
1717768281647.png

I would consider it the second one.
 
That lawsuit was not at all AI related and the painter she won against, was clearly in the wrong.
View attachment 6062923
Photo on the right, painting on the left. It is a damn good painting, and I probably wouldn't sue anyone painting me, but good luck arguing it is in any way transformative.
It’s still a scam on the grounds of being a painting, and in that alone making it more transformative(Otherwise, I’d be baffled how photographers could sell anything)
And if it’s not, then every fanartist should be getting their ass dragged through court for selling art of characters they don’t own
Because where exactly does ’stealing’ start and ‘referencing’ end? On however many zeroes made up her lawyer’s paycheck, but that’s just imho

The artist deserved all the money, and if not, then neither did the chink for banking off a model-who in turn should’ve earned everything, because if we go by that logic, the photographer just copied her image and sold it.
 
Last edited:
I understand what you mean and I also find the painting way more impressive and transformative, than just taking a photo of a good looking model, at an artsy angle. I'm just saying that she was in the right, as far as current law goes.

Most fanartists can be sued for copyright infringement, unless their art is either a caricature, satirical, or so bad it's beyond recognizable - there is just not much, that companies could earn doing so (they'd probably have to spend more on lawyers) and on top of that, risk loosing reputation.

Even the transformative satirical Mario cartoons on Newsgrounds, had to go, once Nintendo hired a team of lawyers, with very small hats and long noses, that threatened to financially bleed out the whole website, if the cartoons they didn't like stayed up. Therefore I have to assume that fair use ends, precisely at the point, where these kinds of lawyers get involved.
 
Ahh, serverless. Look, it can expand to any load and we'll just bill you for it.

There's something to be said for getting a couple VMs and a queue and just letting your users wait for their stuff to be processed. About $90,000 somethings it looks like.

Do you need this shit real-time? No? Then maybe serverless functions aren't for you.
 
Ahh, serverless. Look, it can expand to any load and we'll just bill you for it.

There's something to be said for getting a couple VMs and a queue and just letting your users wait for their stuff to be processed. About $90,000 somethings it looks like.

Do you need this shit real-time? No? Then maybe serverless functions aren't for you.
You don't need it.

But on the other hand the tech-dumbass art chicks that are your audience will go 'site slow won't use'.
 
  • DRINK!
Reactions: GunCar Gary
Even the transformative satirical Mario cartoons on Newsgrounds, had to go, once Nintendo hired a team of lawyers, with very small hats and long noses, that threatened to financially bleed out the whole website, if the cartoons they didn't like stayed up. Therefore I have to assume that fair use ends, precisely at the point, where these kinds of lawyers get involved.
That's because they could bully individual Internet users or a site operating on a shoestring. When they had to face people used to their kind of bullshit (the pornographers who made Super Hornio Brothers), they just caved in and bought it to take it off the market.
 
You don't need it.

But on the other hand the tech-dumbass art chicks that are your audience will go 'site slow won't use'.
Those kinds of users already refuse to use it, because it's SFW only. If there's no hecking sexworkers and furry paintings of prolapsing anuses on main timeline, what even is the point in registering an account?

It's just too flipping professional, without all the tranny porn and what if some other company buys it?

You might think I'm joking, but these are their actual arguments - after they all left Instagram, to join trannyrun Fediverse instances, they won't join this app, until it becomes sufficiently flooded with all their favorite things to goon to.

 
Back