Oct 2023
19 / 58
Oct 2023
Sep 2024
Aleksei
Oct '23

AI by itself isn't bad, as technology goes. BUT as long as it create their datasets without consent, compensation, credit and transparency, it will be only glorified art theft.

Also, as value goes, all that AI throws is garbage. Only fast food. It may look and taste decent, but it will only destroy your eating habits. Humans always will be needed, and their art skills will have higher intrinsic valor than any AI image. The problem is that the monetary value will not be the same, because capitalist society, but that's another problem altogether.

As long as corporations insist that we should push into something, society will go there -as car fueled with gasoline instead of electricity. Unless the population is really awkward about it and stops it full as there are only monetary losses isntead of an investment -as Meta, as NFT, as most of digital coins go- AI will have their days counted, at least as how the corporations want it to go. Its a trend pushed throw our throats, but as long as we defend ourselves, as SAG-AFTRA is doing, there is always hope for the artist.

KelheorRegular
Oct '23

It makes art better than I do, just like the millions other artists out there, some of which are twice as young as I am.
Honestly I am just really tired of this topic and I am not sure I care much anymore. If people consider themselves artists because they put in a few words in the program, it's on their conscious.

sushy00
Oct '23

F*CK AI
I found my work in a dataset, which is really not OK. Nobody asked for my permission?!
I just hate that there are now a few AI companies that are just making money by abusing the work of so many artists.

RedLenai
Oct '23

Oh and I must say, AI with the purpose of just being entertaining, dumb. That the person doesn't seek to profit out of it or at least credits the main source or database that it utilized. That's ok.

The issue is when you're trying to profit out of it and trying to deceive people into thinking you drew that thing as if you were an old-fashioned artist.

JadeFang
Oct '23

Paintings didn't stop being made with the invention of the camera and physical art still exist even with programs like photo shop being able to replicate it. Technology does not replace art but streamlines it, like a tool. An artist that implements it in their art may be able to cut the time it would take to complete a project in half or maybe more.

Lensing
Oct '23

Jobs disappear, that´s part of the progress of technical developement.
There will always be human made art, they just don´t make money with it.
The music business disappeared but people still guy guitars

Katzalcoatl
Oct '23

I can argue this. I have seen several of your works. And it does not pale in comparison. You are a pretty great artist.
That being said I am comparing the sketches I have seen you draw to similar art styles done by either AI or other artists.

When comparing yourself to others or in this case the AI do remember to compare the artstyle you are using and the amount of details you are adding.
It's not the same making a drawing for a comic than to do a drawing with way more levels of shadows and lightning.

LunarScyphozoa
Oct '23

Calling it ‘ai art’ is a bit generous, its more of a plagiarism-printer.

Teira
Oct '23

It looks like hot garbage and I don't like it. The fact that people are trying to make a profession out of generating ai images for profit is laughable. But it doesn't look like it's going away anytime soon.

DiegoPalacios
Oct '23

Many folks here already tackled the current ethical issues with many programs and the illegitimate means and uses of the database used to train A.I. , so i will focus on a pragmatic and practical analysis of this tool.

AI art is good at doing more of the same that's already there, but doesn't work well when you try to go outside the box.

They can't come up with stuff outside the database used to train them. Ironically, the closest it comes to lateral thinking are misinterpretations of prompts/objects, like "salmon swimming upstream in the river".

I prefer working with humans, they give more consistent results and give a personal unique touch to the art.

thepenmonster
Oct '23

If anyone has earned the title of pillock, it's Shadiversity.

PapaDomAdvanced Gorilla
Oct '23

I think AI is only good for shitposting or when you feel like experimenting around to see what kind of bizarre stuff it can come up with.

For everything else eehhhhh nah.

Making stuff by yourself is way more fun.

Headypigeon4180
Oct '23

Gonna be 100% honest

I was a writer that couldn't find an artist to draw my stuff. So I self taught myself to be an artist. At this point i'm just going to keep going as I'm going, i'll do my best to improve and keep drawing it myself.

AmysGames
Oct '23

I've given my thoughts on A.I. before, but to say it again: I don't think it's inherently bad. I think, with proper restrictions, it could be useful. I've used it before for inspiration.

But the more recent iterations of it I've found significantly less appealing. Results are too stale and less accurate to my prompts. I miss the more abstract results from earlier models because it left more open for interpretation, rather than just noticeably getting things wrong.

In any case, while it definitely needs to be properly regulated in the workplace, I'm personally not worried about being replaced by A.I., no matter how advanced it might get in the future. Because I create for the joy of creation, and no A.I. can replicate that.

sodathecoda
Nov '23

It helps to explore ideas, but I'm concerned that people who can't draw or do anything creative can profit from their "works" along with artists who actually draw something. At the same time companies start to prefer AI over real people. There was a huge issue with copyright and license from the very start. I hope that this will be regulated in some way.