Disagree. Appreciate your sentiment and won’t bog down the thread with it, but disagree.
AI images can attempt to emulate all of the technical prowess of an actual artist, all of the shading, the lighting, the rendering, the linework, but I don’t think it will ever evoke the same sort of emotion as human drawn art.
This isn’t some high art, it’s literally a child’s drawing, but it hits me so much more than anything artificial crapped out by a prompt.
https://twitter.com/eohiggins/status/1462885852460245005?lang=en
1 Like
No and nobody seriously argues for that. The majority opinion is “data used in training sets should be ethically gathered / vetted / licensed”.
Yeah piracy is bad as we’ve concluded and agreed on
No, where did I mention that?
You’re just again saying “these are the same things” while they’re not the same things apart from a very abstract reading.
add.
If somebody actually goes like “those darned artists bullied me… I will now only use AI art forever” it’s an INCREDIBLE self-own and honestly fine more power to you
1 Like
I’ll just quote starting words since it would be a pain to go sentence by sentence and would just feel disjointed in the and anyway.
The proportionality definitely matters, however the issue I see here is that there are both many rich artists and also pieces of art that are owned by huge companies in the same way big movies are (the creator was hired to make the piece of art, got cash for it, maybe even royalties from sales, who knows, and that piece of art was then sold by the company, for example on T-shirts).
The question is, if it’s not immoral (or at least far less immoral) to pirate a big movie, wouldn’t then the same apply to works of these famous artists? Even someone like Samwise is probably loaded after years of being important person at Blizzard. Would then using his art for AI to learn from be OK?
Current AI was taught on all art, so it doesn’t really apply, but I think artists would be equally threatened by this “moral” AI art in the end and the reaction to it would be similar.
This is a good point and the actor comparison is apt. However, Thuzar’s example illustrates well how even when AI is used in transformative way, people are going to be on the side of the AI if it’s “against the rich”. And I’ve seen AI being used by people to voice things with no voices rising in defense of voice actors (who often offer their services on Cameo, so it’s comparable to loss of income artists experience).
Which in the end is my main issue with moral grandstanding about AI: I don’t think many people who make these claims are in it because of morals, but because it affects them and their friends.
And for the record, that’s absolutely OK. Being against something because it hurts you or your friends is normal human response. But maybe it would be better to recognize that and try to explain things (just like for example Acrona is doing) instead of hopping onto a higj horse and just alienating others.
At certain point it’s OK to just go “Nope” and stop interacting with someone, I agree. Problem is that people enter this “Nope” phase the second someone says “I don’t understand why AI art is a problem”.
an echo chamber where using products built on art theft is frowned upon, rly crazy sheltered place, we should instead invite every bozo and argue with them on the same 3 talking points forever
Hey, better than an echo chamber
Then we’ll just agree to disagree.
Or just accept that other people have different opinions and try to focus on what you have in common instead of trying to endlessly argue.
One good common thing quite fitting in the context of the forum we’re on is called roleplaying.
I applaud you if you have enough patience and energy for that, I dont
And yet, you’re on the forums. Curious.
1 Like
And yet, you’re on the forums. Curious.
(It’s an echo chamber I’m literally an echo RN FR FR)
2 Likes
No, because of point two. Even if I’d be less sympathetic financially if Samwise (idk who that is) took losses than a poorer artist, I’d still object to their work being repurposed without their consent.
My thoughts aren’t meant to be mutually exclusive, but tied together.
I think this, especially when it’s done for malicious reasons, is also bad. Violates personal autonomy and that’s a big deal.
I think it took people a little while to realise this (myself included) when it started off as - for example - presidents playing League of Legends together in youtube videos, but the implications quickly became obvious.
To be fair, there isn’t an endless argument if someone joins a community that doesn’t permit computer generated images, posts some anyway, and is removed after refusing to listen after attempts to educate were made. The argument’s gone because the person has suffered social consequences and is no longer there to fuel said argument.
Anyway I think you’re coming from a reasonable place even if I completely agree with Emberblast’s sentiments so I’ll leave my side of there until later (aka I need to go 
).
2 Likes
I accept that, I also accept that de-normalizing and propagandizing against a thing that potentially directly hurts your and your friends’ livelihoods is a good thing to do even if somebody gets offended
1 Like
If you’ve seen any old Warcraft art, it was likely made by him. He’s mostly responsible for Warcraft aesthetic as a whole and (I’m guessing) is really loaded, which is why I’ve used him as an example.
Which is OK. In the end, every community has the right to create their own rules and if someone refuses to uphold them, they can go. Where it becomes a problem is when riddicule becomes response to someone sharing that art because the rule was unwritten or they haven’t read it, or when people decide to break friendships or ban people not because they were obtuse and kept breaking the rules, but simply because they made an image of their character with AI.
There have been many sources of discord and hostility between people on this server, but I feel like drawing lines because of AI generated pictures would be the dumbest.
Even though you’re right about the primary motive, I still think the overall moral core here (e.g. “it’s wrong when somebody takes your hard work without asking and uses it to power a machine that makes THEM money”) is still pretty sound and simple and kinda hard to argue against without needlessly bogging it down in sophistry.
I applaud Acrona for their boundless goodwill and patience and I can only dream of maintaining that myself, but still, the facts are out there - quite clearly showing the inner workings and implications of current AI generators, more than enough to draw your personal moral conclusion - and you’re all adults darn it, you can’t claim “nobody told me it’s bad” as defense, and you can’t shift the responsibility of educating you to people like Acrona when all that info is out there. So excuse me but if somebody’s willingly oblivious and contorts themselves for all sorts of justifications - or draws a personal moral conclusion of “eeeh it’s free tho” - i see that for them convenience wins over empathy/solidarity, that’s the goodwill they’re showing me as an artist and so I ain’t gonna have a lot of goodwill for them :shrug:
1 Like
Unfortunately true for literally most social issues right now.
3 Likes
Another example that I can compare to AI art is the sewage slime flood that are Mobile games.
How many of those are just copies of other games? And how many of those get copied by other games. The number of games that take aspects of Age of Empires alone is a gold example.
We already can see the results of what endlessly taking anothers content or concepts can do. AI art is akin to this.
Just copying art and mashing it together for, ultimately, what?
1 Like
It however devalues it a bit because there’s the underlying idea that the people who fight against AI may not have been doing so if it hadn’t affected them or their close ones.
There’s overall a big danger in trying to brand your opposition as immoral when the stance you’re taking (even if the stance itself is right) has not come from intentions that are viewed as pure. The others will see that difference and will be less likely to take your side.
The reason why I have problem with the line of thinking that tells people to just read on things by themselves is that with how much information is out there, they can end up reading the wrong stuff. It’s the unfortunate conundrum of learning about things, to know which information and sources are valid, you need to be knowledgeable about the topic. But the only way to do that is to read up on the topic and someone who is new to it will read BS without even knowing it’s BS.
So, suddenly you get someone who could have been your ally, but is now opposed to you because you couldn’t be bothered.
People like Acrona often end up persuading people to their way of thinking precisely because of making that effort and bringing the noob to the level where they can smell the crap when they find it.
I feel it’s a common detractor tactic to “purity test” you or summon the “you wouldn’t have cared if it wasn’t you on the line” argument, and if you get dragged into that fight, they will never concede however “pure” you show yourself to be due to how complex and pliable this topic is (and nobody’s perfect anyway). There’s only so much good face you can show and it may still not be enough for some (as once again, they will fight tooth and nail for both convenience and “not feeling in the wrong”), ultimately you just can’t win 'em all.
To paraphrase: I don’t want to feel compelled to do the same big song and dance of explanation and argumentation over and over, all while presenting myself in the Most Moral Light, while little baby over there who was born yesterday picks that apart and decides if that convinces them or if i’m just uppity and entitled. I feel that’s quite disrespectful to myself. I also live in the same complex world full of complex concepts and entities that wanna gaslight and exploit you for profit and I do expect people to also at least try and make sense of it. Maybe if next time they get a cold shoulder over this topic, and feel bad about it, and that prompts some reflection out of them, that would have a stronger effect.
1 Like
I wouldn’t at all be surprised if some of these games actually do use AI to make carbon copies of each other’s artworks in order to narrowly avoid lawsuits because it’s not technically the same image.
It’s been really weird seeing random mobile games be named vaguely similar to Age of Empires and ripping off literally the same assets for their adverts/images only for the game to be completely different in like, literally everything in its gameplay.
Same for the weird Mobile games that have a well done promotional material/images (likely stolen) only for the gameplay to be literally the same brand of this weird ‘dig hole, water floods in, dig next hole’ type of games (what the heck even are those???). It feels like some sort of Mobile game version of Elsagate honestly.