Debate me on why AI art/generated content is bad

[Gender: Xenomorph]

Are you a talentless hack who can't do better than a randomly generated smudge of pixels? Make your case.

 

[Neo-Nazi Rich Evans]

i dont think ai generated art is any worse than say furniture which is made on an automated assembly line. there is something to be said about hand made furniture, but for the vast majority of people buying a couch, a couch spat out by an automated assembly line is just fine. i consider ai art to be the exact same, especially when we are talking about things such as ai generated CGI effects in movies. who cares if the background character in the next marvel movie fight scene was hand drawn?

for me, the only time when it matters is if i were to buy a painting to hang in my house, in that case i would prefer to have it hand painted by a human artist.

 

[TheDarknessGrows]

Until it can do hands properly, it is shit.

 

[Avtistic 'gert]

I think it's very common for internet artists to dishonestly take the stance that all AI art is inherently bad, and then afterwards come up with a dozen justifications as to why, while hiding the real personal reasoning for it, which is caused by the perceived underlying threat to their livelihood. I despise this double-faced type of argument, since it's essentially arguing in bad faith out of fear that just your own personal slight against something isn't enough grounds to stand on as a reason as to why something is bad. And that's because it isn't, how many artists spoke up against all the other facets of life that have been automated and in the process lost the artistry that was passed down generation after generation?
Lastly I'd like to add that I enjoy drawing as a hobby and I don't think that human input is ever going away. Anti-AI fearmongering is peddled by annoying hysterical faggots, which many artists tend to be.
The "presidents playing video games" AI voice meme format already proved that even if you're given the Star Trek holodeck to make content in, most people will just regurgitate the same 5 braindead jokes over and over. AI is just another tool, Leyendecker didn't have the CTRL+Z command on Clip Studio Paint

 

[Slobs]

I could generate gay porn of two fat hairy men kissing while crossdressing right this second if I wanted to.
Is this a power you want in the hands of the general public?
I could even make one or both of them black.
I could even make you one of them.
Think about it, you kissing a fat hairy black guy.
He's wearing a tutu with a trans flag pinned to it.
You're smiling, you're enjoying it.
This is what you're supporting, this is what you're enabling.
You're basically consenting to a fat black tranny kissing you.
Pretty fucking gay if you ask me, OP...

 

[AgendaPoster]

But muh big titted lolis and 4090 RTX

 

[Fascist Frederick]

Being able to create perfect, indistinguishable from human, AI art would be objectively better for every single person on earth who isn't an artist, because there would be no more artists and every single artist I've ever met is a faggot.

 

[Chris_Stuckmann]

Current AI art is shit, but rapidly improving. Forget porn, AI will be used to make movies and memes. Think about the effect big properties like the MCU, Star Wars, and Harry Potter have had on international politics. Every leftist thinks they're a rebel fighting the Empire or the Death Eaters or whatever. That shit is going to get worse and worse as we enter an era where more and more fiction is created by machines.

 

[Gender: Xenomorph]

You're basically consenting to a fat black tranny kissing you.

Yes

 

[JamusActimus]

You're basically consenting to a fat black tranny kissing you.

It's called a xenomorph.

 

[Calandrino]

eh I can't be fucked so I made chatgpt do it

The rise of artificial intelligence (AI) has brought many benefits to society, but one area where its influence is particularly concerning is in the realm of content creation. AI-generated content has become increasingly prevalent in recent years, with software that can write news articles, generate social media posts, and even produce entire books. However, I argue that AI-generated content is bad for a number of reasons, and that we should be cautious about embracing this technology. First and foremost, AI-generated content lacks the creativity and nuance that is essential to good writing. While algorithms can certainly produce coherent sentences and paragraphs, they do not have the ability to craft truly original ideas or express complex emotions. Writing that is truly engaging and thought-provoking requires a human touch, and no amount of programming can replicate that. Secondly, AI-generated content is often rife with errors and inaccuracies. While algorithms may be able to scan databases for relevant information, they do not have the ability to critically analyze that information and determine its veracity. As a result, AI-generated content can be misleading or outright false, which can have serious consequences in fields such as journalism. Thirdly, AI-generated content has the potential to exacerbate existing inequalities. Because the algorithms that generate this content are designed by humans, they are not immune to bias. This means that AI-generated content can perpetuate stereotypes and reinforce existing power structures. Additionally, because the technology required to create AI-generated content is expensive, it is likely that only those with significant resources will be able to take advantage of it, further entrenching existing economic inequalities. Finally, the prevalence of AI-generated content threatens to devalue human labor. If algorithms can write news articles or generate social media posts as well as humans can, what is to stop companies from replacing their human content creators with machines? This could have serious implications for the job market and could exacerbate existing economic disparities. In conclusion, while AI-generated content may seem like a promising technology, it is ultimately bad for a number of reasons. Its lack of creativity, potential for errors and inaccuracies, exacerbation of inequalities, and threat to human labor all suggest that we should be cautious about embracing this technology. Rather than looking for ways to automate content creation, we should focus on supporting human content creators and ensuring that their work is valued appropriately.

 

[frap]

I can’t get upset over AI art. I’m still going to draw because I enjoy it. I can’t stop people stealing my work—this has been a thing for a long time online with Red Bubble and Amazon. AI is just the latest iteration. At the moment a lot of it has a very overly smooth digital feel, but I’m sure it’s only a matter of time before it starts mimicking the imperfections and textures that human artists include.

Artists would do better to stop trying to appeal to emotion with the “we trained all our lives and now a machine is taking over” (no one working retail or cleaning or a normie 9-5 is going to give a fuck) and would have more luck leaning into the dataset issues and the deepfake/CP issues.

 

[Soup Sammiches]

SHUT YOUR FESTERING GOB YOU TIT! YOUR TYPE MAKES ME PUKE YOU VACUOUS TOFFEE NOSED MALODOUROS PERVERT!

Oh you came for a debate, sorry this is abuse.

 

[RadioactiveMonkeyMan]

Can I use AI art to gather assets in order to create my own art? Oh, I can? Sounds like a tool artists aren't taking advantage of, rather than a replacement.

My 2 cents, anyway. Take it. Use it. Make it your own. Force humanity on AI. Make your shit, have fun, and rue the day you become a paperclip.

 

[Betonhaus]

The way that AI art works is that it makes composites out of preexisting material. That is both it's strength and it's flaw. It can create some pretty neat things. Want a ballerina pug dancing on a lake under the pale moonlight? Done. maybe. But AI art is inherently derivative, it can't create something without it being clearly defined and has enough references to source from. if you can't clearly describe what you want or there's no useable source material, you get edritch garbage. but if you are an artist, you can make some pretty neat things. if you're an artist with an AI, you can make even better things, faster. AI can automate the more boring or fiddly bits of drawing, and make some tasks easier (possibly can make it easy to fix mistakes like drawing on the wrong layer).

I'm looking forward to us getting AI movies. it will kill hollywood and give power to indy producers, as now anyone can make fancy CGI cinematic wonders, but only objectively good creators can make compelling stories

 

[Apochrypha]

I actually agree with the fact that AI art is for talentless hacks and it's generally worthless. But watching people complain about it en masse and post frothing screeds is even funnier to me.

AI voice acting on the other hand could be an incredibly useful tool if placed in the right hands.

 

[FILTH Tourist]

Honestly I'm just happy that we are almost at the point someone who is tech savvy can make an animated short film complete with voice acting and score all on their own. If anything comes from AI I at least want an explosion of high quality western 2d animation.

 

[AnOminous]

AI voice acting on the other hand could be an incredibly useful tool if placed in the right hands.

I'm sure they could do it especially in anime dubs where most voice "actors" are utter shit, especially the women, and just do the same shitty pedobait loli voice over and over.

 

[Penis Drager 2.0]

Can I use AI art to gather assets in order to create my own art? Oh, I can? Sounds like a tool artists aren't taking advantage of, rather than a replacement.

This is exactly what "professional AI artists" do. Just like how only half of a photographer's job is taking the right picture, with the other half being photoshop to get the levels just right, these artists give the right prompts to get the sort of shit they're after and then they go to town with image manipulation.

 

[Disheveled-Human]

Most art you see day to day like company logos or many digital designs are already as soulless and look as machine generated as the machine generated stuff. The stuff that has soul is either degenerate fap material, childrens books or shitty looking art that clutters swanky art scenes many of which is talentless hack shit. It is really only a small subsection of art that has soul and is worth its value this includes masterpiece works and indigenous art and that stuff is timeless usually being brush to canvas work that ML cannot do. Some works have literal depth and height (like acrylics) and techniques a digital program cannot physically produce.