AI should have been used to do work for us to give us more time for art. Not the other way around...
The flip side is that AI being able to create art democratizes art so that anyone with an idea can execute it. I don't need to have a steady hand to make a drawing of the idea I have and I don't need to be a software expert- I can describe what I want and what message I'm trying to convey and when the AI produces what I had imagined, I can share it with the world.
Or you could pick up a pencil and put it to paper, actually expressing what's in your soul through your own efforts. I know which one I'd prefer to look at.
Also, saying AI "Democratizes art" ignores several million years of people making art with whatever was on hand, whether that be 3D modeling software, or charcoal on a cave wall. Art has always been Democratic and Free; AI, notably, isn't.
I'm gonna get downvotes again, but: no I couldn't. Art class was mandatory for 9 years of school for me and I can still only draw shit with straight lines. Using a ruler. I can't do anything with a "free hand" as the teacher called it. If I had a project that required art on even a 3rd grade level I could choose between AI and hiring a person I can't afford.
That said, I hate what it does to professional artists. And luckily I don't have time to go through with the video game I wanted to create so I don't have to choose between AI and a real human with actual creativity right now.
Motherfucker I don't give a fuck whether you're a professional artist or a literal child drawing the most dogshit scribbles imaginable, I STILL prefer that over the most refined AI Slop that could possibly be generated. Its not ABOUT the technical skill on display, it's about the sheer fact that YOU, a REAL, PHYSICAL PERSON, picked up the tools and decided to TRY. That alone is what's worthy of commendation, not the fact that AI can shit out generically hot anime waifus in .0032 seconds.
hiring a person I can't afford.
That's the crux of the issue for me. Most models will be trained using everything they can find on the internet and steal the ability to draw from these images. Then nobody will pay artists and AI vendors will make money instead of real humans.
Capitalists win and we lose
The flip side is that AI being able to create art democratizes art so that anyone with an idea can execute it.
Is having a for-profit company intermediating and generating all art really "democratizing" it?
AFAIK "democratizing" something doesn't simply mean "makes it easier". That ease is also only temporary. Once you're thoroughly deskilled and dependent upon it, that's when the subsidies will end.
You misspelled plagiarism. Ai learned from stealing.
And as for art:
….
Actually , you know what? I’m not going to touch this. I’d rather watch you fail than help you learn via criticism. So You go head and call whatever you think you’re doing ‘art’ all you want.
No other real artist touch this one either. Save the criticism and lessons for real artists. Let this one fail on their own.
democratise art?
that's the most stupid thing I've heard.
everyone can do art, grab a pencil and a paper, or clay, or a stick and a knife, or....
Doing art is practically free. you cant have anything more democratised than art.
AI is simply not art, it is inherently unable to do anything creative and only makes cheap soulless slop.
If it's used as a fancy brush, an artist can do amazing stuff with it, but the creativity and art still comes from the artist, not AI itself.
Then the question is: whom does that favor more: people with good ideas or people with bad ideas? Of those two groups, which one was more likely to work hard and develop a talent?
Beethoven composed music while deaf and you are complaining about not having steady hands. If you really want to make art, just start doing it. It really is that simple.
When I had a good idea for art I wanted for personal use I went to fiverr and paid someone to do it for me. AI is killing the already meager income streams of starving artists.
AI produces what I had imagined
nope. AI is producing what AI imagined. It is not some kind of magic brain reading machine and never will be. I'd rather see palsy-drawn shaky line stick figures than midjourney six finger abominations any day.
By choosing the path of least resistance you're cheating your own creativity and robbing the world of yet another human voice.
And training the machines to take other artists jobs.
Cute.
No it is not. Because at some point it is paywalled. That's not democraticed. That is blitzscaled.
What does 'democratise art' even mean? It's not like everyone votes for a specific generated AI image.
Anyway, I think what you mean is Socialism, in terms of AI making 'skills' available for everyone.
But it's not. It's stealing your capability to learn and taking it for itself without paying you for your efforts. Every input you use trains the model. Even though you're not creating art, you're still creating a prompt and you should be paid for your labour.
It's already been said by the operators of this massive scam. They can only operate via theft.
Star Trek universe, anyone?
Tangentially related: Oh boi I just love AI bros coming out of nowhere defending GenAI when nobody asked for their opinion. Wish more communities / instances would take a hard anti-AI stance and just get rid of them. It's not like anyone will make them see where they're wrong.
I've started adding 🤡 or 💩 tags to people's usernames when they can't pull their head out of their ass.
Gives me a heads up on what to dodge without falling victim to an overzealous admin wildly swinging the ban-hammer.
And you tag people's usernames, while not being an admin yourself, how? Lol we should have these tags in real life to help avoid narcissists! 😂
Option in Boost, the app I use. There's an option "Tag User" when you click on a name, and whatever you type appears next to their name in all their comments.
I think the first page works all on its own. Whole thing is great tho!
I actually think the "it's soulless... FOR NOW" panel is pretty important.
People who believe in the value of human creativity have been pretty casual about saying that AI generated work isn't as good as work created by a person, but what happens if in another iteration or two it actually CAN produce "good" "art"? Like, what happens if it's cranking out screenplays and paintings that DO pass muster? We've got to be prepared for that possibility, and try to act now to make sure that our world is structured around preserving human dignity on its own merits. The existence of a faster work-doing machine shouldn't necessitate that all human workers must now starve.
A computer-generated "Van Gogh" is not art any more than a mass-produced coffee mug is artisanal, no matter how "realistic".
This has all happened before. Take photography. People thought it was the end of visual art. If anyone can take a photograph, why would anyone spend years learning to paint?
Artists answered by pushing the medium beyond the limits of realism. Impressionism. This did not make photographs go away. But when I see a picture of someone's cat, I don't usually go "art!" – even though 200 years ago the mere existence of a photorealistic picture would have implied very impressive artistry.
The work that clankers are very quickly taking over is that which does not require art. Visual filler. Lorem ipsum. Corporate communications. Out with artisans, in with industrial machinery. This is the same story that has already happened to almost every artisanal trade, from scribery to pottery to smithing. Visual artists and writers thought themselves exempt from the industrial revolution; they aren't. It will be a worsening socio-economic crisis. But it won't "end" art. Clankers definitionally cannot, and will never do art. Not until they gain a conscience of their own.
+100. I wish I could pin this.
That being said, I think AI Bro existentialism and singularity hype has a lot of people on particular edge, beyond what the camera and other past innovations triggered, since it's pushed at such high levels of our world. But (speaking a fervent local ML tinkerer), the proof is not in their puddin', as professional, foundational researchers would tell you as well. Not just because of technical limitations, but because corporate enshittification is already taking effect.
what happens if it’s cranking out screenplays and paintings that DO pass muster?
It's inevitable. Eventually we will be able to ask for, and then refine, the perfect TV show for our particular tastes. Want 'Buffy' but set in the Fallout universe with Dumbledore and Boromir? Give it a minute and you'll have it.
It’s inevitable.
Nope. Think about the massive amount of computational grunt going into all these LLMs now, they're thrashing AI into every possible nook and cranny, desperate to find some place that makes actual profits. There's also a tremendous issue with gigo - AI learning on AI slop is never going to produce masterpieces.
Firmly in the dubious category here.
It is definitely possible to create that. The question is, will it ever be profitable, or cheap enough to be user made/controlled? I doubt it. Tech growth isn't just limited by what's possible, but also by what's practical.
What you're describing is Clarktech, technology sufficiently advanced to be indistinguishable from magic. We don't know remotely how to create an AI artist that can actually create original works of art with their own perspective, critique, and soul. A system like any we know how to design has to create art from what is essentially the averaging of the work of many artists. Everything they make is a work by committee. Any individual perspective is washed out in the generating process.
We simply don't have any idea how to create an AI that would exhibit the kind of individual perspective of a human artist. Until we at least have some plausible pathway for that, we might as well be arguing about what happens if it turns out magic is real.
Not pictured: broke stenographers operating the rollercoaster in tears because their jobs were taken by computers long before the chatbots came to town.
(It's me, I am the stenographer :( )
YouTube added the shittest, laziest AI generated category graphics to the app, leaving me thinking “fucking Google doesn’t have any spare money knocking around to spend on this?!”.
printing press vs calligrapher
Comic Strips
Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.
The rules are simple:
- The post can be a single image, an image gallery, or a link to a specific comic hosted on another site (the author's website, for instance).
- The comic must be a complete story.
- If it is an external link, it must be to a specific story, not to the root of the site.
- You may post comics from others or your own.
- If you are posting a comic of your own, a maximum of one per week is allowed (I know, your comics are great, but this rule helps avoid spam).
- The comic can be in any language, but if it's not in English, OP must include an English translation in the post's 'body' field (note: you don't need to select a specific language when posting a comic).
- Politeness.
- AI-generated comics aren't allowed.
- Adult content is not allowed. This community aims to be fun for people of all ages.
Web of links
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world: "I use Arch btw"
- !memes@lemmy.world: memes (you don't say!)