Debate me on why AI art/generated content is bad

Penis Drager 2.0 said:
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.
Click to expand...
Exactly my point. Almost all modern art is digitally created or altered. Case in point, how much lolcow and/or fanart is produced here digitally? How much is composed of AI images blended with IRL ones? How much is made by hand via a Wacom or equivalent tablet?

I'd be willing to bet the vast majority has some elements of AI. Whether for isolation of a subject (Automatic selection and feathering), creation of a background, blurring elements, etc. It's been this way for a long time. Does it reduce the talent of the creator? Yes. But at the end of the day this is just another brush. It's up to the person using it to use it responsibly and make something unique. Most won't, and fuck em. Doesn't change the expression, which is a human thing.
 
RadioactiveMonkeyMan said:
I'd be willing to bet the vast majority has some elements of AI. Whether for isolation of a subject (Automatic selection and feathering), creation of a background, blurring elements, etc. It's been this way for a long time.
Click to expand...
I agree with your main premise. But I think you're being a little too broad with your definition of AI here. It's kinda like comparing selective breeding and GMO's when everyone knows damn well there are some fundamental differences between the two.
Like a Gaussian blur is essentially "make every pixel the average of every pixel around it." It's a simple algorithm with very predictable results. This is in stark contrast to what we typically talk about when we say "AI" which dynamically adapts certain aspects of its behavior as it acquires more input and generates entire images out of whole cloth.

That sperging aside: Every time I hear people debate about any form of AI art, I think about this Stonetoss:
1680242328162.png

Not only is he missing the point about what AI art is, he's missing the point about what photography is. Yet the analogy is still bang-on, hilariously enough.
In both cases, it takes some finesse and an eye for beauty to get your source material. But the real art is post production. The main difference is that photography is a little more weighted to the front end while AI art is 90% back end.
 
  • Feels
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Aspiring Artist, Neo-Nazi Rich Evans and RadioactiveMonkeyMan
RadioactiveMonkeyMan said:
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.
Click to expand...
This is exactly my take. Also, I've started to use it to pull assets for graphic design. Very easy to pull elements from generated assets and vectorize them for say logos, brochures, invitations, etc. It still requires human intervention and the art whiners feel threatened because they lack actual creativity and probably spent 100K on an art degree to draw porn for furries.
 
  • DRINK!
  • Like
Reactions: Aspiring Artist and RadioactiveMonkeyMan
Lots of people have been using AI to disseminate deepfake photos (eg. The Pope puffer jacket, Trump arrest photos). Many normies fell for these. I could see people wanting a solution to be able to verify "the authenticity" of images online.

I can see big tech using that demand as an opportunity to become that sole authority to determine which images online are "real and legitimate" and which are not.

Given big tech/government's track record, I don't want them to have this power but I also don't see everyone who has access to stop using it for deepfakes. Trolls are going to troll, bad actors/rogue states are going to use it to interfere with the West.

So that's my argument against the proliferation of AI tech to the masses.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: GoPro
JT Marlin said:
Lots of people have been using AI to disseminate deepfake photos (eg. The Pope puffer jacket, Trump arrest photos). Many normies fell for these. I could see people wanting a solution to be able to verify "the authenticity" of images online.

I can see big tech using that demand as an opportunity to become that sole authority to determine which images online are "real and legitimate" and which are not.

Given big tech/government's track record, I don't want them to have this power but I also don't see everyone who has access to stop using it for deepfakes. Trolls are going to troll, bad actors/rogue states are going to use it to interfere with the West.

So that's my argument against the proliferation of AI tech to the masses.
Click to expand...

Called it.


Protect Americans from AI-enabled fraud and deception by establishing standards and best practices for detecting AI-generated content and authenticating official content. The Department of Commerce will develop guidance for content authentication and watermarking to clearly label AI-generated content. Federal agencies will use these tools to make it easy for Americans to know that the communications they receive from their government are authentic—and set an example for the private sector and governments around the world.
Click to expand...
 
Being an 'AI Artist' is like asking for a customised meal at a restaurant, and saying you cooked it cause you told the waiter what you wanted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yeeted Teet
AI is one thing I can't make my mind up on supporting or not. It's just too complicated for my retard brain to parse the far-reaching, longterm consequences of. I support it in media, but how it might disrupt the economy or be weaponized is concerning.

The worst thing is Pandora's box has already been opened, now it's just a question of whether or not to let the government regulate it, or to what degree. I guess rule of thumb is support whatever libtards hate, I wonder how they feel about it.
 
Art is A Art because it takes skilled labour. Baking is A Art because it's a skilled labour. Welding is A Art because it takes skilled labour. Plugging prompts into dall-e is not skilled labour. simple as
 
some aibros are retarded but i like using it as a proof of concept or for personal entertainment
 
  • Like
Reactions: umami's milk
It's fine I guess, but I don't like it showing up when I'm looking for pictures/references of real life animals and people.
Here's a more infamous example just to demonstrate my point. I only see this problem getting worse over time.

1699731934228.png

"AI art" was at its peak when it was just a computer showing the (admittedly creepy) inner machinations of its brain to the rest of the world, then we neutered it and now it's just an extremely optimized generator that constantly spits out the most normie shit imaginable. sad.
 
I thinks it will do more harm than good. It ultimately gives way too much power to corporations owning the technology and means to use it. Right now the AI is still relatively easy to access but it is more restricted than it used to be even less than a year ago. In the end, an average person will have access to a simplified and restricted version of the technology. Governments and tech corporations will have the good stuff and will use it to control internet. Like JT Marlin already said in https://kiwifarms.net/threads/debate-me-on-why-ai-art-generated-content-is-bad.159821/post-15838788 and https://kiwifarms.net/threads/debate-me-on-why-ai-art-generated-content-is-bad.159821/post-17092728, AI will also be used to justify further restrictions on the internet. I would not be surprised if AI bots would be used as a justification to end anonymity on the internet too.

As to people saying that AI will be a tool to help the artists, they are naive. It will do for artists what industrial revolution and off-shoring did for cobblers and tailors. Cheap clothes and shoes flooded the market, and professionals were largely left to die. Average garment quality got worse than what it used to be, and fits got worse too. Most tailors and cobblers went out of business. Only a small handful survived when the elites realized that custom made goods are better than mass produced trash.
The future of art if AI isn't stopped is mass produced, low quality trash for everyone. Quality, custom made art for the elites.
 
AI is good faggot artists just can't stand that normal people can make silly drawings and they no longer have a monopoly
GoPro said:
The future of art if AI isn't stopped is mass produced, low quality trash for everyone
Click to expand...
so modern art that exists today LOL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back