AI and filters, are they bad?

[DokiDokiTsuna]

does that require it to necessarily take from other images or was it just taught to know when and where to use certain tools. In that case I think there are software that basically do the same thing but they just aren't called AI.

That's actually a good question too, since 'AI' is essentially just a buzzword that doesn't mean anything specific. ^^; I think most of the models that are being advertised right now usually rely on the 'consume lots of info-->spit out statistically most likely result' strategy...but from what I've heard, some of them are hybrids, and can be told to compute in different ways. I would have to assume that Claude has a setting where it actually does math instead of generating pretty numbers, because otherwise I don't know how programmers could rely on it at all...but I digress.

I think in 99% of cases it's safe to assume that whatever AI you're using is engaged in the usual large-scale theft, and even if it isn't at the current moment, it's probably still using the results of that theft to do whatever you're asking it to do.
After all, its claim to fame is using the most resource-intensive aggregate method possible to accomplish every task indiscriminately, simply because its creators find that impressive. Hence, the usual examples of it using all its big brain power to count 3 d's in strawberry, or tell you that 2+2=10.

These things can and HAVE been accomplished (correctly...) with much simpler programs that don't need to be powered by a data center the size of a football stadium...but, the people selling the AI clearly don't care, so I think the responsible thing to do is to assume the worst, most wasteful method is being used, even if you're having the AI do something relatively simple. Unless the company says otherwise, AND this is verified by third parties.

I guess it's possible that someone could make a normal pre-2020 photo-filter software, slap an AI label on it to attract investors, and you could use it on your art without really contributing to any of the bigger issues people don't like. But so far I have never heard of that happening, so I wouldn't count on it. =/

[ThunderChicken]

AI would probably make my shading work a lot easier... but it wouldn't be my work. Allowing AI to wrap its tentacles around work that you've done and calling it your work is like putting a Joe Satriani CD on and calling yourself a guitarist.

I'm not gonna lie: I spend a LOT of time on the shading and textures of my drawings. If a professional ever saw how I do it they'd probably laugh at me, because I'm certain that I do it in the least efficient, most difficult and time consuming way possible (seriously, if I knew how to do those time lapse things I would do one just to give you all a good laugh). But I enjoy doing it, and at the end of the day the final product is mine. Filters? I don't use no stinking filters - mainly because I don't know how to! All of my effects are created by me.

I will automatically skip over anything done by AI. Images, text, audio, video - if it's AI I can't stand it. Even though AI is improving (they finally seem to have figured out how to count fingers!) it's still soulless. And it's to the point that I will actively avoid businesses that use it in their advertising. You're trying to sell me a car part? Take a picture of the damned car part. Don't just feed a description of that car part into a computer and let AI spit something out that is "close enough", because it isn't. If you put that little effort into your advertising I can't imagine your engineering and manufacturing processes to be any better.

Speaking of car parts: As many on here know, I am a mechanic. Our shop recently was taken over by a new owner as the previous one retired. The new owner came in full of ideas, some good some bad, but I tore a strip off him when he suggested that we use AI to write the work we did on work orders. Apparently he's been using it to change the wording - not so much on my work orders, because I pride myself on grammar/spelling/etc, but he's done it for the other guys. I told him in no uncertain terms that if I ever found out that he'd used AI to change anything I wrote, then I would write nothing at all. Let AI figure out how I fixed the damned car.

[vapidink]

My issue with this -- apart from the ethical and environmental points everyone else has brought up-- is that it's not "upscaling" it's letting AI do the entirety of the rendering for you. Personally, rendering is the most difficult and time consuming thing for me to do, which is precisely why I wouldn't trust AI to do it for me. I want to improve my art and the way I do things on my own without depending on something built upon the stolen work of others. I understand the temptation to "streamline" the process, but at that point I'd say just don't bother because you're not making art, just a product.

Also, Adobe absolutely steals from users to develop its AI. Just because you think of it as a tool doesn't remove the fact that generative AI, which is what people have an issue with, is a result of stealing from actual artists. That rendering you added to the pictures was produced based on the work of people who spent years learning how to do it. And it does a terrible job at it, once you take a closer look at it.

To be clear, I'm not against AI as a whole. I think there are good ways to implement true AI and a lot of time, effort, and money is being wasted on developing generative AI that is only good for stealing the work of others and making some poor amalgamation of accumulated knowledge. Like, look at the original picture of the room. You can see where the roots break into the floor and the little details of the items on the shelves. Then look at the muddled mess in the image AI came up with. Look at how the roots just sort of melt into the floor and the vines are a mess of disjointed blobs of color and scraggly lines. Just because something seems better at a glance doesn't mean it's actually better, especially when you lose the intent behind each creative choice that only a human artist can make.

[kyupol]

More facts...

1) rise of antinatalism, mgtow, feminism, inceldom, neets...

2) society going away from any form of traditionalist religion. Rise of secularism and these "just make your own" type religions. No objective right and wrong. Its all relative.

3) rising cost of real estate, overall cost of living. It used to be 1 man on 1 income can support wife and 3 kids and live in detached housing. Now... youre not getting that unless your 1st name is "doctor".

4) Jobs being increasingly automated by AI. Entry level jobs harder to come by. Contributing to NEET crisis.

5) Global powers (Russia, USA, China) trying to posture up and threaten war or actually do war just to show the world they are still powerful. Like wounded dogs projecting a tough outer front while the issues on the 1st number plaguing their nations. And their military adventures exposing their weaknesses. Even so called "stable" nations like Canada being threatened with being broken apart. Alberta and Quebec wanna separate. Didn't UK exit the EU already? Trump wont have the balls to threaten Greenland if he knew he was gonna face a strong EU. There's a reshuffling of global power. All world powers weakening. Cracking from the inside.

6) 3rd world countries like Philippines who idolize the above mentioned powers... follow their decay... headed to destruction as well. Rich getting richer, poor getting poorer. The right and the left barking up the wrong trees like immigration with 1 side wanting uncontrolled and the other against everyone not born in the country. As they all fall apart.

---

The AI shall inherit the earth.

[BOMB]

You're right. There were some things that got changed unintentionally like the tree roots.

I've said this a few times now , but I suppose my curiosity or reason for having the question that I did is more so because I notice similarities between what Ai does, photoshop does, and filters do. Clearly something more like photoshop or illustrator will give better results, but I think I was more so interested in the comparison "if this thing can do something and it's ok, how about when this other thing (AI) also does it, is it ok?" I don't think anyone will argue that AI will give better quality than an artist, but say a non artist wanted to tweak a picture they can't afford to get worked on, if people were ok with them using Ai in a limited capacity would that be a possible solution for example.

I'm not going to argue for or against Ai, but I hope no one takes offense to comparing it to things.

[vapidink]

I will absolutely argue that AI isn't always better quality work unless you're judging it on a very surface level and with little knowledge and experience in art. AI makes all sorts of mistakes that a human wouldn't and can only "learn" by absorbing more stolen work. My entire point is that generative AI, unlike simple filters, is inherently wrong because of how it was created and that is why a lot of people here have never touched it.

And I don't think it's okay to run an artist's work through AI either. You get the quality of art that you can create or buy, and that's it. If I sold someone a sketch for $10 and they went and fed it to AI to have it fully rendered instead of paying more to have me do it, I'd be pissed. It's not only stealing my work, but also altering it and likely changing deliberate choices I made.

[KevinReijnders]

I'll just say this and leave it at that before this thread veers completely of topic:

While you raise a few valid points (amidst a load of nonsense), there's really nothing we're going through right now that's uniquely disastrous. Human history is filled with the rise and fall of empire, with countless wars and destabilizing events.

None of this is new.

As for the slopbots inheriting the world, that's just so delusional it's not worthy of response.

[abigaillmartin]

AI is cringe. Gimme my internet before this slop took over and my windows 7 slideshows
And flash player for crying out loud!
I want my customization back! And the bubbles!
Where are my computer bubbles? HUH!?
Get it together earth!

[KevinReijnders]

Install Linux lol

twenty characters.

[ShidoDraws]

Setting aside the generative AI aspect, just being an artist at all is hard right now. You have to post speedpaints and such to prove that you drew the damn thing in the first place. Why would I use generative AI? Like a very expensive, large-quantity-resource-consuming and fast-track-climate-changing magic trick, it's a tool to deceive people, to steal people's identity, to spread dis/misinformation, to commit war crimes. I believe there's plenty of reasons to not use it and not like it.

It is still a new tool and journalists are publishing works that talk about the harm it will do to the Earth if it doesn't get regulated. If this was in 2023, I might not be able to form an opinion about it but three years later I think there's damning evidence to show that the tool isn't here to stay. Though my gut was already on it.

With those findings people made, genAI tech bro's new "AI will replace workers by the end of x years" is now "we will build AI to fix climate change." Like, fuck off.

Humans are good at picking apart things and innovating off of each other, that's how humans created the calendar. It wasn't made in over a century, that's the work of countless generations staring at the sky, noticing the weather and followed with knowing how traditions work.

Generative AI inhaled everything but that, as humans we aren't useless but we sure are worthless to tech billionaires. So, you should appreciate the process of making things even if you believe it to be inconvenient, you should know, throughout history people suffered, and with suffering comes change. If humans stop making things then I'm sad to say that it is literally the sign of humanity giving up, artists and non-artists alike. I mean, look at the one rat experiment where someone wanted to see what happened if they over populate, spoiler they eventually stopped trying after one of the rat ruled over the population even if all of them were fed plenty of food. They didn't stop trying because of overpopulation, they stopped because of hopelessness.

Keep making stuff. We still need humans. Don't post it on the internet if you don't want to, so long as people are still trying.

[oshirockingham]

Depends on the context.
If you strive to be a creator, using generative AI is bad. That's why, no matter how polished the end product may look, you won't feel any sense of fulfillment from using them. Because after all, it's creativity that made us humans. Making art is showing your humanity.
If you strive to be a consumer, then, of course, using generative AI will help tech billionaires reach their goal, so they'll approve it.