this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2023
533 points (100.0% liked)

196

16511 readers
2343 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] LemmysMum@lemmy.world 54 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (4 children)

Sketch artists gave way to photographs, traditional artists gave way to digital artists, now photography will give way to AI. AI is still enhanced by traditional art, as is our culture, and it's value won't change because the value is in the expression not the medium. AI is just another tool in the digital art tool-set. I've been a digital artist for 25 years, and if you're threatened by AI instead of embracing it's ability to improve and enhance your work then I'm sorry, welcome to the past, this is you:


This is an AI generated image made with copyright free community resources. Each AI generated image made contributes further to a global wealth of artistic knowledge at the fingertips of all. If you're interested seek out FOSS AIgen software like Stable Diffusion and community resources as linked below, or visit the various AIgen communities here on Lemmy.

See more: https://civitai.com/user/lorom
Referral link: https://civitai.com/login?ref_code=LOR-IYG

[–] TotallynotJessica@lemmy.world 16 points 11 months ago (2 children)

In the long run, perhaps, but this is a sudden change that affects people's livelihoods. It's a tool that requires significant artistic input to even be copyrightable for the time being. This means it can't fully replace big money projects, but can negatively impact some commission based art. They must focus on providing things that AI can't easily replicate, which takes effort and time that struggling artists trying to make a living don't have. It's our system where people must maximize their direct economic value to survive that's the biggest issue, not the advances in technology themselves.

[–] LemmysMum@lemmy.world 11 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

Copyright will be forced to crumble or be enforced with physical force. The fact is we're moving to a society where information recording and reproduction is improving to the point where physical likeness is a contributing factor in the socialisation of all knowledge and information. Anything that can be represented in the physical world can have a visual facsimile created. Our time is temporary but for the first time in human history something as little as having a photo taken of yourself can literally contribute to the advancement of all humanity.

Don't let the corpos steal the right to your likeness, everyone deserves to see your beauty.

[–] VinesNFluff@pawb.social 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It's FUNNY that an AI white knight thinks he is standing against Corpos when he is towing the line of exactly what corpos want.

[–] LemmysMum@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Corpos want independent artist supporting themselves with FOSS tools? Nice!

[–] VinesNFluff@pawb.social 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

"Artists" "Independent"

Corpos want artists to die, so does everyone defending AI """"""""""art""""""""""""

[–] LemmysMum@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

So why are you trying to help them by attacking independent artists? Here, I believe you were licking these.

[–] Ataraxia@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago

These corporate shills can't be convinced. It's their job.

[–] HerbalGamer@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

everyone deserves to see your beauty.

the Algorithm disagrees.

[–] LemmysMum@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

Then they deserve to be disturbed by your beauty. ❤️

[–] kumatomic@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Also when they make AI that doesn't require real artist input to even do what it does now then I'll believe it's anything but the plagiarism that it is.

[–] ShrimpCurler@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I don't find this argument very convincing. All artists draw some inspiration from previous artwork, that doesn't make it plagiarism. Even if it's heavily influenced by other artwork it's not plagiarism if it's something original.

[–] LemmysMum@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] Ataraxia@sh.itjust.works 4 points 11 months ago

My art started as copying sailor moon. Then copying other anime styles. I make totoro and other copyrighted characters into figurines. Creativity shouldn't ever be owned. It's not property. If these Chinese knock off companies can do it why can't I? Oh because I'm not a freaking corporation with lawyers.

[–] Saledovil@sh.itjust.works 10 points 11 months ago

Plagiarism is disguising another person's work as your own. Assuming the AI generated image is labeled as such, no plagiarism is occurring.

[–] LemmysMum@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

When real artists make art without tools made by someone else, or knowledge gained form someone else, I'll agree with you.

We stand on the shoulders of the giants who came before us so we can reach higher than they ever did.

[–] lepinkainen@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago (6 children)

The problem is that AI can't create anything new, it can just remix old stuff.

Here's a test: Try to make your AI system of choice create a picture of New York's streets without cars.

[–] HerbalGamer@sh.itjust.works 20 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Like how every populair song either uses the same four chords or is just a remix of Pachelbel?

[–] HerbalGamer@sh.itjust.works 5 points 11 months ago (2 children)
[–] HerbalGamer@sh.itjust.works 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 1 points 11 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

https://www.piped.video/watch?v=JdxkVQy7QLM

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[–] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 1 points 11 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

https://piped.video/5pidokakU4I?si=bP8XEeNk5ju6EPul

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[–] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 20 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

The problem is that AI can’t create anything new, it can just remix old stuff.

Oh, so you mean exactly like humans?

Even if we try to imagine anything we have never seen, we still use things we know.

That is why the indescribable cosmic horror of Cthulhu still are mostly eyes, teeth and tentacles.

[–] LemmysMum@lemmy.world 18 points 11 months ago (1 children)

30 seconds and a basic prompt, no specific training data packages.

[–] Ataraxia@sh.itjust.works 3 points 11 months ago

These people have absolutely no idea how AI create. It's baffling.

[–] imalemmy@iusearchlinux.fyi 12 points 11 months ago

create anything new, it can just remix old stuff.

Same thing different phrasing.

[–] LemmysMum@lemmy.world 11 points 11 months ago

Maybe you prefer zombies.

[–] KeenFlame@feddit.nu 8 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

A common misconception

You should try using it! If nothing else, you can then talk about it, instead of conveying misinformation

[–] VinesNFluff@pawb.social 10 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Yes yes we should all give up on human expression and let machines do everything. AI art is great and totally not an unethical monstrosity generated on plagiarism of people's actual efforts.

[–] LemmysMum@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Am I not expressing myself with every image?

[–] VinesNFluff@pawb.social 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

No you're just asking a robot to make shit for you. That is not expression, that is, at best, a more modern version of grabbing shit off google images and calling it "expression"

[–] PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee 4 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Your just using an auto collaging tool.

Like if you were to go to art school, but outsourced all the art making to some Photoshop artist in I dia for $3. And claimed it as your own.

If you don't put in the sweat and tears, you aren't creating. I'd go farther and say prompting is closer to story boarding at a marketing firm, and you're the boss/project manager.

It's pretty neat technology, but it's so far from actual content creation through the artistic process.

[–] LemmysMum@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

It’s pretty neat technology, but it’s so far from actual content creation through the artistic process.

And this right here shows just how expansive your lack of understanding is.

[–] LemmysMum@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Ok, on your bike, you have 30 seconds to post a reply image of your own making. Let's test your skill against mine.

[–] mriormro@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

You understand that just shitting out images isn't really doing your point any favors, right? Art isn't about how fast you can make something; I'd argue that how fast it took to make a particular piece of art is the last thing anyone would care about.

But, this is the crux of all of this. You're not creating art, you are making images. Images are a commodity all about the quick visual and so that's how you're engaging with these models. As though they were a throwaway commodity. There is no intent or exploration in any of these; no catharsis. It's all just empty and devoid.

[–] LemmysMum@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)
[–] Ataraxia@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

This IS human expression. I can finally express what I see in my mind. I can't sculpt or draw everything. This gives me inspiration. You don't want my art. You don't want my music. You never bought anything I created.

You want a slave in a machine called Warner Brothers or Disney to produce your entertainment and heaven forbid an AI had a hand in making her job easier. Such bad faith arguing!

[–] VinesNFluff@pawb.social 3 points 11 months ago

I mean, fuck yeah I don't want your art because by your own admission it's AI generated trash and therefore not art.

Yet I buy art from artists. All the time. I have framed and printed pieces from a couple furry artists I know.

Also corporations have been positively frothing with joy at AI's growth because it means they don't need to hire actual people anymore. Already they are looking to replace writers and actors with AI generated facsimiles. That was the entire basis of the writers' strike a few months ago. So the whole "AI ART WILL FREE US FROM CORPORATIONS" argument is a non-starter.

[–] pinkdrunkenelephants@lemmy.cafe 8 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Lol no honey, AI isn't the way of the future and some troglodyte like yourself certainly isn't going to dictate what social and moral path we take as a people. You are not in control here.

[–] LemmysMum@lemmy.world 19 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Of course I'm not, society will move on without the chaff by it's own accord, always has. So relax, sit back, and enjoy the view.

[–] pinkdrunkenelephants@lemmy.cafe 5 points 11 months ago (2 children)
[–] LemmysMum@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

You seem sad, here's a fox made of your tears to cheer you up!

[–] Omniraptor@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

ooh could we have another colorful polygonal bird please? Preferably one that looks like a hawk

[–] LemmysMum@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago
[–] TheFonz@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago

You seem really abrasive for no reason...are you ok?

[–] Ataraxia@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago

That's the most hypocritical statement i've ever read. The fear of change is a dangerous thing.