BRUH 😅

You claim you're human? Prove it! Tap each square with a car on it

AI is to art what the printing press is to books. It will make the product 1000x more accessible to everyone. Pretending that AI art only benefits "corporations" is patently dishonest.

License

@@TomFranklinX That's the catch he didn't say that watch the bloody video before saying shit like that...

This is something that scares me. As a person with musical aspirations, I already see AI slowly seeping into it. I already struggle with thinking I can make it without the existence of AI, now I might literally never have a chance because AI could eventually be better and way cheaper, so why bother with a real human? I still have the wound wide open and it's already threatening to jam its finger in.

If it helps, AI will never be able to understand themes, nuance, or niche forms of beauty in ways that humans can. Because of that, people will always want to commission art, even from artists who aren't top tier, to bring their incredibly specific ideas to life. I could easily ask an AI to draw one of the characters in my book, but it'd never be able to capture the little details in their expressions that I imagine. A real artist will always be preferable for things that personal.

Yes. Also I think the definition of "better" gets muddy in the field of art. I'm not here to be useful, affordable, and convenient for others' needs. That makes me a way worse tool than the AIs, which were designed and optimized for that specific purpose, and have now slowly gained the functioning toolsets to fulfill the requirements of the consumers/commissioners. Fine by me.

Maybe it's because I'm only a hobbyist artist, but I never felt this way about it. Maybe that's because I don't think about someone else making the thing I make but better. My ideas are so specific that nobody was ever going to make them if it wasn't me, and I refuse to let them just rattle around in my head without at least trying to take a shot at them. All the AI art does is make endless disposable mainstream stuff, and it allows me to at least make _something_ on the days when I'm too uninspired to draw for myself.

about right yeahh....

it's horrifying on a visceral level. not even the most creative and insightful science-fiction and horror writers imagined such an abomination (I think)

@@crediblesalamander8056 House of the Scorpion did. It's a world where an ancient drug lord conquered Mexico and turned the entire country into a gigantic opium farm, hacking people's brains to turn them into robotic slaves to run the entire operation. The US let this happen because anyone trying to cross the border just gets caught by the drug lord's guys and turned into a mindless slave. The drug lord got to be 149 years old by cloning himself a bunch of times and harvesting the organs of the clones. It's never mentioned what is going on in the United States because it basically doesn't matter. Man, that book was fucked. It's been years since I've thought about it, and that was supposed to be a young adult novel.

Only if you limit yourself to what was and not what could be

Once most of the content is generated by AI, people will begin to value human-created art much more. For now, AI generated stuff seems novel and able to replace humans completely, but after a while people will learn to tell the difference between the human and AI generated content. We will get fed up with tons of artificial mediocrity very fast and will crave for curated and hand-crafted things even more. At least people who have taste will.

Yes, because mediocrity isn’t flourishing already

I feel the same way about "artists" making 10k a painting just for splashing some paint onto canvas.

@@DivinityAwakened Didn't yo mom teach you two wrongs doesn't make a right? Just because those people pretend what they make is art doesn't mean it is ok for you to do the same, It is wrong for both of you to claim either ai or that rich person shit is art.

@@JubulusPrime it really doesn't matter at all. Art is totally arbitrary and holds zero real world value.

@@DivinityAwakened Depends on what you define as "Real world value" this is all subjective. It may not matter to you but it could mean everything to someone else. And for the boring cunts that see price as the most objective value then tons of old art sells for billions. You could say art holds no real world value the same way you could say life holds no real world value, you could say scientific progress holds no real world value, you could say reality holds no real world value. Saying anything doesn't hold value is just an opinion that holds no real world value lol. Value itself is subjective, just a concept, it is not based on reality. So why be a sorry cunt when you can just be less of an asshole? Ai "art" is not art in my opinion, but just as I see value in hard work, imagination and dedication of real art, I see the scientific progress in ai images. I value both, but I do not see ai as art.

I spent 13 years just becoming a decent artist, and another 13 becoming one that feels that deserve the praise their work gets. Typing 13 words is a joke.

I agree that’s gross, but unfortunately that’s been a thing for a while, basic deepfaking tech has existed for a ages no it’s not a new problem

This is disgusting. This is why such technoogy should be banned.

@@laurentiuvladutmanea3622 really? Not to try to downplay its gross and disgusting, but people have done far worse with phones, computers and almost any modern technology. Banning technology only limits human progress. We didn’t ban all planes after 9/11, we just made them more secure

@@breadstick4458 I never said it was a new problem? That's literally not the point at all dude. The point is teens shouldn't be afraid of their faces being used to generate pornography wtf

@@user-lf8tp9hj9h what I was saying it’s not a reason to ban ai or anything like that. I know u didn’t say just giving my opinion. I never argued it wasn’t gross. What should be done is crack down in those specific ai, most of the time people buy these deepfake ai so cracking down on those would help this issue

Looking at Ukraine situation I wouldn´t be surprised if ChatGPT is leading the Russian army at this point.

TRUUUUUUUUE

Yeah but wouldn’t it be nice if we could just make porn without actually hurting people (like the porn industry did/does for decades)?

@@realGBx64 training people to get off by completely dissociating from any real human interaction surely couldn’t have any negative effects.

@@zimzob mind you that already happened with real porn. Just because the pixels on the screen were generated by pointing a camera to (often abused, drug addict or even drugged) humans, that doesn’t make real porn “human interaction”.

Based luddites

@@TAP7a The only thing the luddites did wrong was smash machines instead of the men who claimed to own them. If they'd swarmed more factories and made red art of the management we might be in a better place now.

@@Frommerman They never go after the exploiters enough

Socialize the means of productions!!!

Marxist says what?

It seems super wrong

I’m looking forward to how good AI stories will eventually get

@@SigFigNewton but what is the point? reading a story means you connect to the experience of the author. how would you connect to a made up story by a machine? it's completely meaningless, is it not?

@@maximilian_degenyou’re right. it is. Humans can always tell what’s human. Hopefully lol. Good luck to our future!

@@SigFigNewton if you can't be bothered to write a story. Why the hell should anyone be bothered to read it?

I think that source-artists getting paid for contributions to monetized AI “art” is actually a huge step in the right direction and a fair compromise for now

@@forgotmylinetwice3010miss the point much?

@@AllmondMillk Can you read? I’m simply agreeing with his friends about source-artists getting paid for their work

Bwaaah

i agree and as a consumer, i don't want to see media churned out by machines, i want the human touch. an image made by a software to me is the most uninteresting thing in the world.

Ikr!

Eek

Yeah. But that's just because it turns out that it's harder to make the body than the brain. The bodies are in development and will be here soon. The thing is, just because AI can make art doesn't mean we can't also do it. We don't actually have to work more than ever either, we're forced to, but it's not because we really need to. We've already reached post-scarcity, we just haven't been able to get rid of the oppressive system and the people that enjoy it yet. But this oppressive system is even more obsolete than art, at this point oppressing humans is just something the economic elite does as a hobby because they're bored, there is no real reason for it. And in the same way we can all make art without there being any real reason for it. Pretty soon we'll have all the robots and gene editing and cure for aging and all that fancy stuff, and then we can just live for the sake of living, for ever. It's going to be an adjustment.

​@@daniel4647 What you said has nothing to do woth anything. The AIs are nothing like the human brain. They are mindless algorithms. They are just doing statistics really fast. That is it.

Commercial art is hard, repetitive work. Think of the people who sit down and do thousands of frames of animation for your TV show, or make the hundreds of art assets in games. I'm actually not scared, people have been shown to have higher levels of happiness in blue collar jobs vs white collar. There may be some connection between blue collar work and eudaimonic well being (assuming working conditions aren't bad of course).

@@daniel4647 very well said! Indeed if we move into the future as created by Star Trek where monitory value becomes obsolete then the idea that ai art is replacing the artist will become an irrelevance. Art will be created not for a living but for catharsis (and possibly innovation) I.e. art for the fun of it while we may as artists currently fear our work disappears as a result of ai it’s quite possible that simply will not make any difference in the long term

Ha! One of my college professors said the same.

One of the most interesting ways I've heard to describe this is from the 3 body problem series, where an alien kingdom comes up with a way to compute using cavalry and flags, although sets of switches also work as that's exactly what it is.

Only that the current AI is not stupid, actually it's smarter than the vast majority of humans. GPT-4 can achieve 130-155 in IQ tests, and that was without it even using vision.

​@@OnigoroshiZeroSource: I made it up

​@@OnigoroshiZero ...do you know what IQ is? It's pretty clear that GPT is smarter than *you* in that regard.

That's an interesting way of putting that. It's almost like, in analyzing someone's art, you're halfway saying "I like your personality, and I think you did a good job letting it show in your work." Finding out it's A.I. generated robs you of that human connection.

So true. Caught one of those AI bros in our art server. 😤

LITERALLY! it’s like saying that ai could replace human connection entirely when you say it can replace art… wait people do say that nvm

So that triggered you? I mean they are idiots in every group lying and pretending just to get compliments.

Yeah but that is just people being annoying and not really a criticism of AI art tools itself.

No such thing as a fun job.

Maybe this will have art look increasingly more like a hobby than something someone can do full-time, it increases the barrier to entry for art but nothing stops you from making it.

@@BlackMita Would you rather be forced to work from dawn to dusk on fields to be able to afford living, or have hundreds of different career options to pick from to afford living?

Artist is actually not productive job, now there is another way to push this job back to hobby, as it is.

@@BlackMita id say making art is fun, but idk about you

The AI bros mentioned in the "facts vs. feelings" section who actively despise artists are the ones who I fear as well since they're the ones who actively support the unethical parts of AI development and will enable corporate exploitation in the name of winning some culture war they have against artists.

Fr, exploitation is already such a huge issue in the creative field. An individual dicking around on it in doesn't bother me but we're already seeing corporations dropping their artists (most notably certain book publishers that are just using ai generated cover illustrations now). I actually don't even think automation in a vacuum is a bad thing but our society is structured in such a way that we *need* to work to survive, unless we entirely restructure society ai and automation will always have some damage that comes with it

i fear the ppl using the tool too. most of them seemed so entitle and vengeful to artists

Remove the word corporate and this exactly. I don't fear a knife. I fear someone using that knife to stab me.

small business can benefit greatly though. That allows people to more easily climb the social ladder.

They say everything we love is destined to die, fucking hell.

@@dragondelsur5156 everything we hate as well.

In other words, you're saying money is the root of all evil.

​@@dontmisunderstand6041 Nope. Just the anti social/human nature of what they teach in business school.

@@dontmisunderstand6041 Money as a commodity rather than a measure of value is what makes our economy so wrong. That's a whole different conversation though.

You’ve put into words something I have known without being able to explain. Thank you!

But if you take away the pen, they can't draw. That's what happens when you take away tools from anyone. Good for you. Some people have busier schedules or disabilities that make it impossible to draw. Why can't they make art?

@@Brandon82967 That's a lame ass excuse. I teach comics and have a girl with disability in my group. She does art about horses. There are also artists doing art with their mouth or their foot, because they have no arms. I also saw nude sketches from someone with cerebral palsy, who needed a big piece of paper to work, but had a real eye for the subject and his work was fascinating. Frida Kahlo was physically disabled and made it big, Vincent van Gogh had shizophrenia and also made it big. I follow a person with dwarfism on instagram, who does beautiful highly detailed pencil portraits. Also you can doodle during breaks, in front of the tv, on the weekends. Take a course to learn it for several days with a professional artist. I worked my ass off in different jobs before I could go full time and I still drew whenever I could in this time. What I see, is that you are not interested in learning art and think you are now entitled in calling yourself artist when you are just punching in some letters and let a program copy other artists work. Art is not a finished, highly rendered product. It is all the thoughts and steps in between that lead to the highly rendered, finished product and every artist, big or small, will tell you this one way or another. If you want to be an artist, then start drawing!

@@Brandon82967 You can understand the process without the tool. No tool is universally accessible, but you can find a way to make art by adapting either the tool or the use of it. It isn’t a matter of if someone can make art, it’s a matter of _how_ they can: which tools can be used without modification, which tools need to be modified, which tools simply don’t work. *I believe @@Nikitomate meant that if you take the AI away, those that use them won’t have the technical knowledge that’s typically learned during the process, because all they know to do is commission for art instead of making it* I make art in the scraps of time I have available. It’s slow, but it’s something. Time is a larger issue though, because I don’t have enough to enjoy the process of creating

@@Brandon82967 Disability is not the end be all argument to defend AI, you're just insulting disabled people by making treating them as worthless without a corporate blob. Disabled people have made art for longer than you can imagine, hell, one of the most famous musicians was deaf and that didn't stop him from using a piano.

Stable diffusion 1.5 (and I think a few other too) have been open sourced, and it is the only AI that I use or would recommend for that reason.

@@clydeberry8523 I was referring to the material generated by the models. To put it plainly, it seems a bit hypocritical to use a model trained on copyrighted data obtained without consent, and then turn around and whine when you can't copyright the output.

@@ny4nk0 I agree, but that seems besides the point of democratization. I am of the mind that art should be untethered from the creator, and all this business of who owns what and market substitutes is beside the point of why I both create (I do non AI art as well) and consume art.

​@@clydeberry8523 When most people speak of "the democratization of art", they are referring to the production, not the final product. They want everyone to have equal access to the "skill" of artmaking, but to each "own" the final result as a product of their own creativity. Most non-AI artists would disagree with you as well in regards to the untethering of the creator - most artists feel their work is a deeply personal reflection of themselves and their lived experience.

That isn't what they mean dumbass. When they say democratise they mean "I don't want to put in the work like real artist had to, I just want the end result immediately" Art is already democratised, anyone can pick up a pencil and draw, anyone can pick up a brush and paint, and with digital art programs you don't even need to pay for supplies . You aren't against AI art, you just want it to fit your agenda

Oh gosh, you're so horrifyingly, ridiculously right. :'D My my, but isn't the human condition absurd?

THAT EXPLAINS IT!!

Holy f+**

Never seen people so mad about an expansion of creative outlets

Absolutely. This is why so many of us are moving towards growing food and cloth making.

Exactly. Dressmaking used to be a profession you could go into and make a decent wage (as a woman, even back into the 1700s), but now all you can basically do is make dresses for yourself and for friends as gifts, because no one will ever be willing to pay you what the cost of your materials are these days, let alone the cost of the labor involved in sewing it. No one values the labor or materials anymore; they'd rather just buy plastic garbage a literal slave was paid pennies to make in Cambodia. I fear this'll be the way everything will be, where nothing can be a profession anymore, it can only be a hobby you do on the weekends that other people think is interesting but otherwise pointless.

hitting the nail on the head. I doubt people would care if we weren't barely surviving as is. I for sure wouldn't.

There is probably no way around going through hard times and risking regime take over by making a drastic change in the system. Most people don't want to hear that, which makes a regime take over more likely, because they are expecting governments to fix society's problems when what is likely needed is spiritual growth as a society, a type of thing that usually only happens after hitting rock bottom, unfortunately.

Karl Marx: "They Called Me a Mad Man"

Not at all, hey quick experiment try work with a comic artist, maybe Give them 1-2 week to finish up 5 page of comic. The answer is they won't, comic artist work on a page for 7-8 hours and get page 100-150$ calculate that and see where the problem arises. Art is not efficient and I get that many people don't won't that, but why complain we aren't getting paid enough. Doing inefficient work leads to inefficient results.

Ive been blaming the system since i was a kid. Growing up with really bad ADD and an unstable home life showed me that the school systems hate kids like me, someone who refuses to conform, and it extends to all aspects of western society. Capitalism is literally fucking all of us except the rich

Are you seeking validation

That's because art is a luxury if you're selling it. I have high demand for a new Corvette but that doesn't mean I'm cutting into my rent money to buy one.

​@@shenkichin6295gotta love the fact that you brought up a corvette there.

@@shenkichin6295 you have high demand for a corvette? don't. stop buying shit

Contemporary people assume that artists don’t work at their skill, don’t have to practice their craft. Because they believe it’s just an inherent talent, they believe that art doesn’t have monetary value, that people shouldn’t be paid for their time and effort that they put into making art. That it’s all ripe for the picking, since it was just sitting in our brains waiting to be spewed out onto a campus in a moment of “inspiration” without us having any actual reason how it got out of us. We are just the conduit for this inspiration. Meanwhile they now believe that creating a corporation is somehow a valuable skill that’s worth billions.

Imagine you are a musician. You've dumped thousands of hours and dollars into your skill, but you are broke because making music isn't profitable and you've had to sink so much money into equipment. You've worked really hard to put together an album. You wrote, performed, recorded, and produced the whole thing on your own because you can't afford to pay for help. Everything is set for release, except for the art. You're a terrible artist, you've tried very hard, but you have a nervous system disorder that causes your hands to shake, and creating passable art just isn't possible for you. You have no money to pay an artist, so what do you do? Not release it, release with very poor art, or use an AI art generator? Is art accessible to a broke musician who has a disability?

​@@carlfrancis156dude I know so many people who put out great music with shit art to get themselves started. It's fine!

@@ckoniges I think this is a reasonable response, though I will point out that if art was as accessible as this comment states, I wouldn't need to use my stick figure level art. Maybe my low quality art will make me stand out from the 100,000 songs uploaded to Spotify every day. Saying art is accessible is kinda ableist, which is the point I'm attempting to make.

​@@carlfrancis156 Your point is to pull a hugely specific example as to why you SHOULD use AI, it's fucking stupid.

@@carlfrancis156 "you have no money to pay an artist" yeah so release it with your shitty art. you're not entitled to free labor, and AI art generation is predicated on theft. this isn't a difficult concept, you just really want to find an excuse. edit: also your phone camera is free.

This almost made me cry, out of all the crap I see ai art doing, for some reason these sort of examples make me so sad, I hope it didn't effect you too much.

terrible....next time before you post a valuable piece of art online, take the image and downgrade it to be a much smaller image, less pixels...that way it stops anyone from using it but your audience can still enjoy viewing it

​@@ricoochie9149no, use glaze or nightshade on it. Both preferably.

"Manmade horrors beyond comprehension" is still one of the best phrases ever put to paper (keyboard)

​@@lostboi2271 There's now a post ironic version of this "ah sweet! Natural horrors beyond my comprehension"

Do you want Men of Iron? Because that's how we get Men of Iron

This is what I’m saying, it’s never going to make good art but that’s all anyone is trying to use it for when it should be doing math and physical labor

@@boid9761 love that version as well

I am sorry you along with many creatives have to go through this. Some supporters of AI have an almost cult like worship of it and display disgusting behavior. But never let that stop you from creating or voicing your concerns.

@@2265Hello thank you for your support! This all feels so uncertain but I am glad to see people who are seeing our side of the story.

In the near future, AI will be able to replicate everything every artist does WITHOUT the copyright problems it has today It is already doing that in a limited number of AIs who are being not trained with images or text but with the fundamentals of human comprehension You will be completely replaced and there will be no legal problems, even if today there are The rest of us will be replaced too, you will just be first

@@alezar2035 bait 💀

@@2265Hello Yeah... Buddy, I can't even explain the feeling I had just last Monday. Me and two of my buddies are sitting near each other around a table, all of us drawing and making art in our own ways. And behind our backs? Two dudes are talking about AI, phrasing it and wondering what it'll do, speaking of what all it might be capable of doing in the future. And all 3 of us are just... So. Extremely. Uncomfortable. We're looking at each other, try to just keep working and ignore it. But when these people are clearly unaware of the harm that AI is doing and are speaking of it like the new god - while we are concerned for our work and potential livelihood, the stuff that's going to keep us alive - it was super awkward. We kept our words to ourselves. All of us are so tired of trying to speak to people about this stuff anymore. We know they're not going to listen or stop. Our lives don't matter to them

I feel the same way. Just getting to the point of having the self confidence and motivation to actually draw again, for the first time since I was a teen, just in time for it to be made even more difficult for artists to make a living from their work. I wanted to be an animator, an illustrator. That feels further away now than ever. I never put the time into learning digital art and always felt behind because of it and now I'm kinda glad I didn't because it's like.. what's the point?

I'll say, as someone who hires artists often, I don't think AI comes close to competing. When AI artists try to trick me into paying for their stuff claiming to be "artists," what they're hoping for is that I'll pay for whatever random glob of pixels they generate. But I want something specific. I don't want a random glob of pixels. I had to forcefully end a contract with one who misrepresented himself as an artist a while back and turned around and hired someone who I knew actually could draw. The AI artist kept trying to cancel my requests to cancel despite never turning in what I asked for, complaining they had worked for hours to turn in stuff that I didn't ask for, and kept insisting they would "get it right the next time." They never got it even close to right. Shad's video on how he does AI art was also a good representation of this. It can only copy what it already has. It can't create something new. So when he tries to get it to generate his original character, even when he gives it a sketch to start from, it can't do it. He puts the two side by side acting as if he got the AI to generate his character, but the AI character is nothing like his original design. Because the AI can't create anything new, people like myself who have specific characters to make and need it done well have no use for AI generators, only real artists. Not to mention that I actually want to own the rights to publish the stuff. I hate that artists are getting so mistreated and feeling like their skills are worthless. You guys are absolutely needed by other people who care about their work. No AI is going to generate my specific character with his specific look, and I'm not going to pay for something subpar that gets something "sort of maybe kind of a little like him."

Addendum to the previous: I think of the art generation tools simply as tools and it's the way they're being used that's the problem. I don't have an inherent problem with the tool on its own, just how seeds are being fed to them and such. And I think they have their uses that are just fine. But they don't come close to the real artists and they're not replacing real artists anytime soon. There is no one using an art generator tool that would be able to come anywhere close to creating my book cover how I want it because there would be no seeds for the machine to draw from. The art generator would just mash together a glob of random stuff that it's been taught is "probably similar." It's much better just to hire someone who knows what they're doing. So I might generate a quick image of, say, a helicopter, or grab a photo of a helicopter, and throw it up in the corner to tell the artist, "I want a helicopter up here, but I want it to face this direction instead," and that's a potential use for a generator. But I don't see how they'll ever be able to sufficiently replace artists when they can only create from old and can't create new. That doesn't work when you need something very specific.

Started getting more serious with writing (was a childhood passion) when AI writing started popping up. As a non English native who prefers writing in English because it sounds better (imo), seeing AI putting my creative talents to shame in comparison makes it hard for me to work on my writing skills...

@@Atypical_Typo Don't despair. There's just a new set of errors for them to make because computers can't think like humans. Some mistakes I ran into were, "The windows set up a table." (supposed to be "A table was set up by the windows.") and "The Queen will have her way with my dead body." (supposed to be "OVER my dead body"...) But the machines don't understand the pieces. They don't think, "Hey, saying 'with my dead body' sounds kind of sketchy." To a machine, it's just placing 'correct' parts of a sentence together without understanding the overall meaning. They can be good at spotting certain things and terrible at others. You are absolutely an essential part of writing a good story, though. No machine is going to replace you anytime soon because they don't have the intelligence or creativity to. Your English is great, btw.

They know full well what they're doing, they have absolutely stepped back and thought. They just fully, completely, do not care. And they've convinced a significant portion of people that they shouldn't care either.

Careers are not games. They are services. In a free market the best service survives.

​@@OMGUKILLKENNY2 Like scratching your balls on a desk for 8 hours?

@@OMGUKILLKENNY2 Exactly. If I want to save hundreds of hours and money on generative AI for a hobby project, that's my business. No one owes these people anything.

wtf are you on about? this NEEDS to be stopped? go cry in your room and tell your mama and papa

I think the "problem" these techbros have is that they cant find an honest way to increase their stock price. They are just willing to butcher literally anything in pursuit of impossible growth.

no one is stopping people from being creative and to express themselves just because ai art is becoming a thing.

​​​​​@@yvindvego9404yes it does, because when you can't make a live out of your expression , you can't have the same time to make it, because now you need to work now on repetitive/ boring jobs, reducing everything to a mere hobby to have fun , in a world where the AI can give you the dopamine in seconds making you think you are expressing your way to see the world, when you are just consuming the way AI blend the works of art that humans made

@@yvindvego9404 How are they supposed to be creative when they are starving on the streets?

​@@yvindvego9404 What do we win if our art gives no reward?

Thats what is wrong with this all. Its the normalization of art theft. Not some technology that is coming to steal all our jobs--PEOPLE are coming to steal or creative efforts, and our jobs with it.

Disruptive tech is often like that, people who want to push the new product always have the money to push stuff for nearly free, killing all the other options by making them seem expensive and inconvenient Like how Uber killed the Taxi industry and now they're ramping up the prices nonstop.

I am sure that phrase get's said at least once a decade, with every technological revolution.

@@josephjarosch8739 Something being said often or regularly doesn’t always mean that it doesn’t matter or doesn’t carry weight. I cannot imagine a single more upsetting reality than one where the robots paint and write poetry and the humans toil away at menial jobs and fully lose the meaning behind creating art in the first place.

​@@GamingPandaCat That is in the USA. There are many countries were Uber failed or was even banned.

I'm sorry you're so ill, but as harsh as it may sounds, that's your problem. Nobody asked the workshops how they felt when the big industrial companies took their jobs away. Or the workers in said industrial companies when they were replaced by the assembly line. Automation will always take away more jobs than it can create, and the ones it creates will always be more demanding than those that existed. Whether you like it or not, this is the future. And as the past has shown us, the future simply doesn't care.

@@RealCodreX So instead of trying to make things better for the less fortunate, you tell them to just suck it up? How cruel and callous of you. What is the point in progress if not to help those who cannot help themselves?

@@RealCodreX Go outside and touch grass, you've lost touch with reality and what it means to be a human and it shows

@@RealCodreX What kind of dumb might-make-right argument is that? It's like saying "That bear might have just torn your leg off, but he's torn a lot of other people's legs off too, so that makes it okay."

What kind of art do you do? What type of collaberations do you do?

Crazy thing? I actually agree with you. This technology is legitimately to dangerous to be out in the wild.

@@laurentiuvladutmanea3622 Yeah the guy who helped create ai said he felt like Oppenheimer after having invented the nuclear bomb. He was right.

As much as I think that ai has its uses if it’s between Thais and just locking it away then I’d happily lock it away

....a pediatrist on youtube shorts posted about a (supposedly) AI version of herself that did look exactly like her, sounded exactly like her and the lip syncing was actually clean being used to promote a product without her permission. the FTC is also concerned about false advertising using such AI but more so in the context of the public getting tricked into thinking that the singer's AI version of them is the actual singer and therefore will buy the product upon being tricked.

God that’s depressing af. So I’m guessing they doing that instead of paying a background artist?

change the subject of study asap, otherwise by the time you finish the profession might be obsolete, check AI coca cola commercial

Hello, may I ask what studio this was? I'm a concept art student too

yeah im curious which studio. I'm a concept artist myself.

please get over it, change your industry, it will change to something you wont like at all. Trust me, Ive spent my fair lifetime on understanding where this world is going.

Given enough time, without constraints they'll find a way to automate performing arts too. Holograms and ai rendering, you name it. It's a terrifying concept, how truly invasive it could be.

@@ShaddyFromHatena I agree 100%. They already have AI music programs- who’s to say that actors, singers, etc. aren’t next? Like… I,m not a Luddite, I don’t want to sound alarmist- I agree with Tim that with appropriate, ethical models, AI could be a useful tool… but I’m legitimately concerned for all creatives out there, regardless of medium, if we keep going headlong without hitting the breaks.

Yeah for sure. I am a programmer, I like making ai generated magic cards using a text neural network even, these tools can be used for good, but there is so much harm they can do too. I hope we really are catching this one early, and that we can learn from the past to prevent the worst outcomes before the damage is done.

i actually believe performing arts will be harder to automate... because automation for that already exists! live action movies, tv shows and animation movies already basically give us automated performance. when i go to the theatre, i do it because i want to see the bodies of actual people interacting, in a dark place, with other people around me creating an audience. if i wanted to watch a hologram or something like that, i would just watch a movie. "holograms" are kind of redundant at this point.

@@vickytaa1 It is unlikely now because right now it is hard to make money off of, so there's less profit incentive compared to the difficulty. With enough time though, there will be no difficulty, and an AI that can model realistic indestinguishable theater experiences with the right technology will inevitably be cheaper than paying a host of however many actors, set designers, special effects artists, ect. Unless someone decides that the moral values outweigh profit or a law is introduced, it could happen. That isn't to say it will happen, it's likely that it won't, but just the idea that even something so physical, so human focused as performing arts might be automated? It's not a comforting thought.

Tech bros and their deranged contempt for actual artists 🤦‍♂️

the ai bros have given me lost hope for humanity, how do some humans just lack the awareness and empathy for whats going on. they KNOW that its gonna ruin artists' livelihoods, but they just "don't care" because their lazy arses want "cheap, fast, and better" art made by fucking robots. can you believe the amount of ai bro comments i've seen that advocate for this shit? one of the commentors that I saw whilst scrolling said: "“Art” is just a word pretentious people came up with to make themselves feel better about having no real skills. And now AI has made it so everyone is an “Artist” by default, they’re upset because their “skill” no longer means anything." - some apathetic, miserable stranger this is fucking terrifying.

… Not to mention actual experiences!

​@@Julez60 exactly

​@@ObsidianLife yes!!

Automation tools have been introduced to art before. You are all catastrophizing. AI art is already part of artistic production pipelines across the industry. It is used primarily by artists. It only scares precarious commission-based petite bourgeois artisans.

Panrokador hates carpentry and pottery. If they didn’t, they’d be talking about how tragic it is that chairs and bowls are made in factories.

This is the waking nightmare, man.

I am an A.I generated person

Imagine.. Even vtuber AIs are a thing now. Tbf, part of the appeal is collabs with actuall humans and the AI being a little bit schizo gassliting trolls

killer robot dogs, smart heat seeking fully-automatic bullets, smart nanobot viruses which mutate when contacting vaccines, ai overlord big brother government... eh :) it would make a good movie.

this already happens and has been happening, for like a long time now

I get it, but I don't. If the tool is available and easy to use, people will use it. Crying about it doesn't get money in your pocket for making art.

@@markmurex6559 but they backed out of a commission, revoking the job that the artist was counting on because they'd agreed to it. Its one thing to tell AI to make art that looks like a small artist's when they didn't give the AI developers permission to use it, but it even worse to offer a job, get the details hashed out, and then back out part way through. And it's not just that they backed out because they didn't need it anymore because AI made it, they got AI to mimick that specific artists style which she spent year and years cultivating.

@@kemerydunn9532 Whilst I can imagine the pain felt by this artist, the chance of humanity can just press a delete button collectively and revert the AI research back is almost non-existent, I afraid they will just have to acknowledge the competition and hopefully, correctly convince their customer that AI is still a limited imitation for now. Artist will have to compete with better quality and human interaction, it is......unhinged, for lack of a better word, to expect current situation can be improved when a random guy with cheapest GPU can took album on IG and generate a somewhat convincing copy of the artist style. 6 months ago or so I occasionally commission artist in FFXIV (the mmo) with some basic work here and there, nowadays I only commission major piece, and a filthy rich RP group I knew also greatly reduced amount of low end work. The amount of money they spent on commissioning didn't really decreased, but all of which now went to higher end artist, low to mid end were completely cut off and were essentially starving now, even with generosity of FFXIV community. For example, back then they hire an artist to sit in their FC house (think guild HQ) during major events and that artist will do free quick sketches/insert other art, they pay cash generously on per night basis, now this role is reduced into a discord bot that visitor can prompt whenever they enter FC discord channel.

@@Verpal but how can artists compete when their competitive attributes are being stolen? What sets artists apart from each other is their individuality and style-- it's like a fingerprint. When a human looks at and admires another artists work and incorporates aspects into their own, they will only ever get a piece of it and it will still have their fingerprint on it as well. A customer can choose between all of the artists and find the one that fits their vision. How can human artists compete when the very thing that makes them competitive -- their human individuality -- is stolen? Ethical AI is absolutely necessary. Talking about commissions from a business side of things, I'm trying to understand what you're saying, but it sounds like you shifted away from commissioning everything and only commission the big stuff. That's fine, but the problem that this redditor had was that they backed out of an agreed upon commission. It isn't that the customer stopped going to them, it's that they cancelled an order already placed.

@@kemerydunn9532 I am not trying to argue against the idea of ''ethical AI'', but you cannot realistically regulate something that can be trained in most high end gamer GPU, even if you change GPU driver, there are always unofficial driver you can use, the cat is out of the bag, you can regulate however you want, but it serve nothing other than a bit of political scoring points. I don't know the detail about whatever that deal is, just trying to give another perspective on change in commission behavior from my experience. it is particularly noteworthy for me since I know that artist personally, this is actually the best nighttime job she ever had, and now she have problem paying rent. I tried petition on her behalf, but FC leadership crunched the number, and hiring her consistently become less than optimal. She was ''optimize'' out of work, which is sad.

as a professional illustrator, i just wanna say that your comment was beautifully written and spot-on.

Preach dude. These bloodsucking ghouls will cause human creativity to atrophy and decline. Just nuke Silicon Valley already. These fuckers are ruining the world

THIS 🙌

Hah! Thats exactly what ive been calling it The "Infinite pretty picture maker" "Art mutilator" I feel bad for people i consider friends who do it. They dont understand at all even if they commission real artists too. As though giving artists money somehow makes it okay to then contribute to it being stolen. No thought, just pretty picture, want. Like hours being wasted away on youtube, you want a distraction, here you go.

"when they can’t get us to make them art for free, they immediately turn to cheap imitations of our labor. people buy shitty sweatshop clothing because it’s cheap and it’s easy, no matter how terrible the quality is." EXACTLY. This is what I've been saying to people.

I don't understand the point of this comment. It's well-written, I think.

@@DavidSartor0 It means if your passionate about something, keep doing it even as a side which in her case it brings her fullfilment which AI will never give. Besides you don't need to worry about any possible copyright heading your way with AI. Right now AI art is still in beginning stage when it comes to that and there have been many lawsuits already

No, what she's saying is if you're passionate about something, keep doing it - and that INCLUDES using AI to make art. She's saying that she's already a talented artist, and she uses AI to make things that she's always wanted that she couldn't make before. She doesn't assume it's going to make a masterpiece for her with a few words; she understands that AI is literally just a tool and the only reason why it's a "danger" to artists at all is a result of capitalist exploitation of the tool, not the tool itself. She's saying "hey listen, 'real artists use AI too'" in a sea of people saying that it's impossible, nobody understands the technology, while not making any effort to actually understand it themselves

This is true passion. You don't need any praise or compensation, simply creating is enough to keep you creating, and that is what makes a true artist in my book. You have my utmost respect.

@@rammym23 If a restaurant allows it's patrons to give orders for custom dishes and I walk in , giving the most detailed description of the meal I want - without telling the the measurements of exactly how to make it - does that make me a chef? When someone describes the tattoo they want to me, I painstakingly will draw and redraw it a few times before it might be exactly what they want - but I am still the artist in my line of work. Creating with AI is not creating art. However, using the AI to get ideas, find inspiration, or use as reference for size, shape or composition - that still makes you the artist with your work. The point of me telling my story was to describe the very long process of becoming an artist that can create work that people enjoy. That process taught me how to be patient and how to wait a long time for a big payoff. I almost didn't pursue art because it seemed to take to long to cultivate the actual talent of creating the art from my mind with my own two hands. I was terrible at drawing compared to other kids and even teens in middle school, with sloppy handwriting. It's my belief that any person can cultivate an artistic discipline without shortcuts. And they best part is that after I create a piece, to this day, I stil look at each one with a layer of disbelief and pride, that I actually made the thing sitting in front of me, its a feeling only a creator can get. I didn't get that from using Dall-e

Artists can't fight AI by crying more. Sad, but true. The era of AI will ensure the demise of the artist. Adapt to survive.

​@@markmurex6559 might wanna work on getting some bitches so your genes can survive lmoa

​@@markmurex6559 I don't think it would be so devastating. It won't destroy art in general or most artists really, only "lesser" ones who rely entirely on their ability to make nice pictures for their income and, as practice shows, often feel entitled to their success, despite there being tens of millions of them around.

​@@markmurex6559 1. You are one defeatist person. We eliminated leaded gasoline, many countries put succesful laws against guns, people managed to limit malware on the internet, we bullied nfts from the internet and in many places, people work to make the cities car free and walkable. In conclusion we have control over how technology will spread. 2. Dude. Artists adapt by opposing this.

@@laurentiuvladutmanea3622 Good luck opposing this. You will find it an impossible task to defeat AI.

that means that artists just sucked

​@dickjones9207 or the judges were distracted by fancy rendering while the fundamentals were lacking.

​@@dickjones9207 have you seen the art submitted to these compitions

maybe it's more like „Allowing people to use a car during a trip democratizes travelling“? 🤔

@@bezhimr you could walk to travel. What AI is doing is removing the hurdle of actually being skilled in art. Using your analogy its clear what people really want is expediency, so "Allowing people to use a car during a trip expedites travel"...its a cheat code to the monetization of art. You no longer have to work for the piece of capital that artists have been starving on for all of these centuries. And even if say...I don't want to sell it, I just don't want to pay for it...I can now do that.

@@mickiemallorie You just described photography

@@EkoFranko and no doubt still life artists said the same thing about the camera when it was invented.

​​@@EkoFranko Different things entirely . Have to stop you right there. If you are making such a arguement, then you're likely not going to have a solid case

I dunno, if I own it, I own it.

I dunno, if I copy it, I copy it.

@@ultimabarricada7859 Then I take you to court and I own you

@@martletkay He lives in China unfortunately..

Even just watching an anime from 20 years ago felt less meaningful. It felt that even this unique experience may not matter anymore in a future os indistinguishable noise

AI can write

​@@sadscientist9995 he knows that, he said so

Some people are easily discouraged and others easily inspired. I've been a starving artist most of my life but I'm on the optimistic end of it. I always see these amazing photos and drawings that are beyond my own abilities and think man I'm a pretty shit photographer, artist etc. But I aspire to be more like those works. It pushes me forward. Funnily enough though soon as I start something I feel great. The up and down motions are normal, but even when you feel demotivated try to remind yourself why you love art, why you write and look for inspiration and send appreciation to others.

Why do you think it is the "good" fight?

Greed will destroy all it can like a fire, because when it stops or is stopped, when it has destroyed all it has been allowed to feed on, it dies out,

Glad you liked it! There are some things I would add now, so feel free to reach out if you want more detail. Though I do stand by it. ~ Tim

Isn't crappy hands and uncanny valley a form of imperfection? Or is that also taken from the original artist lol

You don't give consideration to how it could inspire someone to make something new. You don't really question the notion of what "Something New" is. You try to paint this visage of what the process of artistry is and an artists journey, while disallowing AI or the strives as humanity we've taken to get here the same kindness; basically leaving a muddy footnote at the bottom. You biasely respect imperfections in some cases but not in others, basically amounting to choosing when to see the Forrest for its trees. This overall view is just Biased-- And it sucks no one can see when they're doing it. I mean I'm biased towards AI for it being perceived as "Evil" essentially, but I'm also an artist and can see the worries-- But ALL you guys can see is the worries, the revenue loss, this breaking down of what we call "Art"-- Yet it's mindsets like these that in my eyes are the signs we've lost that long, long ago.

@@null7198 1 and 0 is not art. Get it through your thick skull: Art is made by humans for other humans for it is we that assign meaning and it's we that need meaning.

Van Gogh wasn't actually particularly original. Many of his paintings are very blatant copies of other artists' works, and even "his" signature impasto style was borrowed from Adolphe Monticelli. An AI or even a photoshop filter could have generated most of his paintings, by putting a Monticelli impasto effect over the works he ripped of. Van Gogh is famous today because his next of kin knew how to do a successful PR campaign.

​@@psyche1988 ok boomer

He's not talking about that though. He's talking about situations where a digital artist, for a movie or a videogame, will use AI to do the grunt work of creating the "textures" on repeating surfaces like walls. It's essentially just a piece of art pasted onto the digital surface, kind of like a matte painting might be used for the background in an old movie, or a digital version in a modern movie or game.

​ @CaptainKeen Repeating textures are not a problem that needs solving by AI. Tiling textures barely even exist anymore in game development. Nearly everything is already produced procedurally through a series of layering and combining nodes of noise and math and distortions. Computers can already programmatically generate these nodes, so when an artist or tools programmer doesn't use those, it's because they are looking for very specific controls, at which point it's much easier to build and arrange texture elements by hand.

I don't want to discourage you but if you look up developments in any aspect of motion capture (from face to hands and full body capture) there is AI based research and major progress towards automatically converting any captured motion (sometimes even in realtime) to character animation. Last of Us Part II and maybe the remake of the first one already use a technique called motion matching, where instead of handcrafted animation for defined inputs and scenarios, the game searches a motion capture/animation library to fit the current pose to the situations (alongside some IKs).

For now at least. It's moving so fast, in a decade or less, we will have fully made feature films using this tech, and be indistinguishable from real, tactile media.

@@Glowbox3D well I don't know about that. Something that people never consider about saying stuff like 'in 10 years...' is scalability. A lot of current advancements in AI tech is due to billion dollar companies like Google, OpenAI, Nvidia etc. aggressively scaling their resources against the problems rather than strongly evolving their methodology. We are already experiencing diminishing returns on these investments. We can't and won't scale hardware resources forever.

Hey, cool art, followed you on Tumblr. Taxes in your country aren't proportional to what you earn as an artist/freelancer? That's messed up. (I feel like taxes, social security and retirement are lacking in some way in most countries for artists) Hope you're doing well.

@@mink2882 In Spain, is you earn 650€/month or less, you have to pay 250€/monthly. This means even if you earn 0, you still owe the state 250€. I had to take care of my sick grandma last year and had no time for work, so I had to survive on my savings. The number you pay monthly does increase the more you earn, but it's so poorly done, it's not proportional at all. People who earn +6k€ a month, have to pay 500€ monthly. A person who earns monthly 650€ or less has to pay minimum the 30% of their salary, someone who earns 6k or more has to pay less than 2%. We can barely survive with 650€ which isn't even the official inter-professional minimum wage, imagine if we end up with only 400€ because the government takes the rest just in freelance taxes.

They are "good enough." Not pictures, nor art. But they are poison.

@@xhagast luddite

@@BlueGamingRageAnd proud of it.

Honestly to be fair, I'm an artist myself and AI is just much better than I am technically at a lot of things, even if it makes some weird visual hallucinations sometimes. The problem is that AI is using data from all of the greatest baroque/classical/romantic/modern/postmodern/anime/furry etc. artists to ever live, and that's what artists who want to make money have to compete with. No artist is competing for their bread with the AI itself... they're competing against mass-produced Beethoven. Can I do that? Hell no, if AI is capable of reproducing novel art based on the works of the greatest artists in history there's no point trying to make a living with it. Why would anyone pay me a commission, the bare minimum 70$ it takes for me to break even on food and rent for time I put into my full pieces? No, they would pay for mass-produced Beethoven for 1$ a generation, and the market would flood out artists like me. The AI doesn't have the talent, the GOATs that trained it do. There really is only 1 option. Put in enough time to become a Beethoven, or GTFO. This "democratization" of art is actually the opposite, it's the gentrification of art that will crowd out every single ok, average, good and great artist. Unless you are a GOAT, you will not succeed, and the only art that will largely survive are the hobbyists. This is fine, of course, as long as there's a way to live. Using the USA as a framework, unfortunately in the current system, aiming to do something as time-heavy as art/writing/etc. is a non-starter if there is no monetary incentive. There are 24 hours a day and we spend 3 hours doing chores/health maintenance/errands 2 hours relaxing/eating and 7 sleeping, leaving us 12 hours to put into work or hobbies. now take out 6-8 of those hours a day for work to support a living. 4 hours a day maximum to put into art is not going to make you the GOAT unless you're supremely talented. The reason Michelangelo was so good was he lived in his boots and barely took a shower, and had other people feed him. He absolutely maximized those 12 hours a day dedicated to just art, sometimes more. The real truth was that he was miserable and obsessed as a human being, and that's quickly going to become the necessity for people to compete monetarily with AI art. The benefits of AI art go solely to those with the resources to employ the most AI compute power at once, which would be corporations. The small time AI generators that get kicked out of anime conventions for selling AI art are not the enemy. I don't really care if people want to use AI art instead of me to generate their weird art or whatever, but I have a problem with the fact that the real winners in all of this are the people who make MidJourney and such things. Every well-made AI piece has that hidden tax of 1-5$ for a generation... and well, for every AI generator at a con selling AI-made commissions for 30$ a pop, they probably had to spend 20$ to get a good one. Now spread that across the entire draw-for-pay industry and MidJourney et al is making billions of $ and the AI generators can barely afford their ramen, and actual artists are left to find alternative employment. AI art looks great to be sure, because its sampling includes the best of the best human art. It's not practical to make a living off art anymore if this becomes mainstream, and that's fine, but there is literally no incentive to do it if the time required will cause you misery and death. Assuming you're okay with the literal death of pay-for-draw artists in the United States, even the new wave evolution of the genre of AI users who tell the AI to make art will not be the winners either, because MidJourney et al is taking most of that profit. AI art is not democratization, it's distilled capitalism and elitism.

@@bluenewtdragon Michelangelo used data from the greatest artists that ever lived. As an apprentice he copied/analyzed contemporary masters and some works from previous generations. He was also personally interested in Ancient Greece. Later in life Michelangelo also had assistants and partners. He did a larger portion of his pieces by himself than most well known workshops at the time, but majority of the manual labor was done by others. With frescos that meant plastering, transferring the sketches, mixing paint and few other things. It hasn't been proven that he used others to paint backgrounds and "less important" parts at least earlier in his career, but that was a very common task for apprentices and a standard work practice with renaissance era workshops. Majority of his career he was under the patronage of the Medici family and Vatican was his biggest client. During that time capitalism wasn't as nice as it is today and elite played by a different set of rules. There is no modern day equivalent to House of Medici in the western world. If you're looking for an example of a hard working starving artist, old masters are an unlikely match. Now I don't personally consider anyone using just text prompts any more an artist than someone commissioning a piece from fiverr, but following any social media discussion about art it has become clear to me that most people have a very rose-tinted view of what it means to be an artist and especially how the old workshop system functioned.

Or a very terrible one.

i also quite enjoy the thought.... in the ideal case, that would be truly endlessly useful but first, such ai must be almost impeccable in its knowledge of the subject it's like, yeah, human teachers make mistakes and can't know everything, but when you learn from the machine there is something that makes you trust it gives you unbiased advice with backing of thousands of great minds all the while we have our "ai" spitting out almost pure nonsense at times because of its learning algorithms, how it consolidates information, how it takes or doesn't take feedback of other users into consideration (sorry if something's wrong with my english)

same boat here, i've had artistic interests since i could count my age on two hands and they have only accumulated and grown stronger with age, then right as i start putting in the legwork to realize my dreams ai barges in and crushes everything, born just in the right time to both be inspired by the works i grew up with AND be prevented from ever manifesting that inspiration. what a shit world.

​@@averyhappysock You have the full potential in you I know you can do it GO BEYOND!!!! PLUS ULTRA!!!

That's part of the problem of growing up. You start out as SpongeBob then slowly turn into Squidward.

Writing is dead.

I can't wait for strong AI advancement *BECAUSE* I want to see ordinary people making their own movies. Imagine having the tools to create a high quality, full length feature film and it's just you in your pajamas sitting in your room at home, designing and hacking away at the story. Could you make a living doing that? Would a studio buy a ready made film from some rando they've never heard of? I bet it'll happen, once those tools exist. (And as long as you don't use trademarked characters or copyrighted stories, you could probably even skip the studios and sell streaming access on your own website.) Personally, I'm going to redo the Star Wars prequels like they should have been done in the first place. And no Jar Jar Binks in my unofficial fan version. Not to sell, but to put things right in the galaxy. Even if I'm the only viewer.

How disgusting can these people be?

It's like ok .. if you do that why do you have to tell people? As if to brag about it, do these people have narcissistic tendencies , they seem like attention res

What the heck do you expect from a fanfic reader lmao

​@@agme8045I expect basic decency from everyone, just because someone is a fanfic reader doesn't make them a bad person

I always find it fascinating how the marxist culture of the artist community is so outraged by attacks on private property. Meanwhile, the engineering culture worships forking the work of others. Create a software library is a giant creative work. And we upload it to Github, a platform designed with the explicit purpose of making it easier to "steal" and modify your creative work. With 3D printing and China's PCBway, we fork hardware components and eletronics harware circuit boards too now. We are all in love with Copilot/Codeium. It's so funny how the rabid marxists worship private property of cultural content so fervently after two centuries of trying to outlaw private property of others.

I agree with everything except the last point, because that’s not what political anarchy is.

^ thats not what anarchy is

Taking the power to create art away from artists and handing it to every person who can type into a text field isn’t anarchy? I guess it isn’t since the people in charge of the AI tools will be the ones with power. It’s a sticky subject and terms aren’t defined yet

I think with the huge rise of AI "artists", art will generally become very private form of self therapy for those who really enjoy it. Think of it as yoga or meditation. Majority of people will never care enough to take a look at someone someone else's art because they will be obsessed with their own. Needless to say, death of music, writing, painting and other similar industries will occur that will manifest through mass depression among artists who established their career to a point where it pays their bills.

Anyone with a cheap camera can easily take a photo that is a more accurate picture of an object than any artist can produce ... so why paint? Most artists will never be as good as the best artists, so why bother learning to paint ... Inexplicably people still do ... People also do Sport, Crafts, etc ... even though they are not very good at them and never will be ...

If you cry more, people will give you money. Actually, you could probably make more as a beggar than you would have made as an artist anyways.

Don’t give up. There is nothing stopping you from telling your story. It would be a shame to deprive the world of your unique pov and art style. I believe in you. Keep going. Don’t give up!

Create out of spite, don’t let some smug crypto bros who don’t value art beyond a consumer commodity scare you.

Create anyway.

@@viridianacortes9642 yes there is something stopping him the fact i would become a time and effort sink without payment stop being disingenuous

Dont worry Once you draw good boobies, that never goes away

Honestly, Furry nsfw artists will come out of this better off than all other nsfw artists. They all seem to have coding skills already.

​@@gircakes2that and fa is one of the first site to flat out ban the tech

I've seen AI porn, and I gotta tell ya it's not very good.

Learn to use AI

@@CynotheWhite No. Ai has no skill, nor does the people who use it.

@@rat_in_a_bucket What a stupid thing to say. Of course AI doesn't have skill. It's a tool, not a living being.

​@@CynotheWhite There's nothing to learn with that puke generator.

​@@CynotheWhite selling AI art? Stealing someone's work from a dataset? No way.

As I get older my perspective on humanity becomes increasingly bleak. This is one of many reasons. Most people like stuff that’s light, pretty, happy, or otherwise lacking in emotional or philosophical depth- GENERIC. I gave up on pursuing my talent in art because I recognized that even if I was eventually popular or appreciated for my unusual style/content (my work was often very dark/violent/gory/sexual, displaying the dark side of life and human nature, etc), it would almost certainly be long after I was dead. So I took up work as a builder that earns enough money so that I could finally buy enough property to finally just get the hell away from everyone else and get some peace. I’m using my creative skill working with my hands to build things for myself, I spend most of my free time as far away from other people as I possibly can, and I’m the happiest I’ve ever been, lol. It’s a sad statement but damn, people are just so disappointing I can’t bear to be near them anymore, much less show them work that came straight from the darkest depths of my soul just so they can spit in my face. This disgusting AI catastrophe is just more icing on the shit cake of humanity. Fuck em, I say

@@alaskaface7147 you can go deep into a forest and still hear planes fly over, there is no escape.

What is more "generic" than something that's broadly popular? All efforts designed to reach a "broader audience" inevitably end in something lacking character. It's also what generic AI models are designed to do in the first place, produce something inoffensive and broadly popular, because most people aren't intimate with art enough to see beyond a surface level.

Oh man, you've only realized now that the common pleb has dogshit tastes? Just look at the state of music for a second to see what I mean. Of course when it comes to art, the average pleb will also like photorealistic generic bleakness. The more "photorealistic" something is, the better it is in their minds. This has always been the case, they don't care about your composition or story, most people don't see it. They just see a "pretty" rendered image. I guess the most upsetting thing for artists is realizing that most people are simply art illiterate, and they fail to absorb what the artist poured into the image. The only people who can understand are other artists, and a few people who appreciate art, analyze it, and can even give proper criticism despite not being an artist themselves.

@@alaskaface7147 You are absolutely correct, couldn't have put it into words better myself and I'm not even an artist. This AI stuff is shocking. Not because it's good, because if you look at the bigger picture you see it for what it is, a data recycler, pattern reading. It's a complex piece of software, but its scope is ultimately to be an overengineered trash factory. Utterly worthless, utterly pointless at least when it comes to art and most other things. But it showed another dreadful aspect of humanity, it showed how ugly envy can really get and how disappointing most people are as you said, how lazy they are, how they want to go through life with a minimal amount of mental effort, doing nothing more than just consumer every single day. My advice though, do keep making art if you still have the time for it. There are still a sizeable bunch of us who enjoy the work of artists, and more importantly you have other artists to interact with.

It's a crutch, a stepping stone to the audience being it's own creator. Any text based middle man will be automated. If you need a person to translate your vision into visuals using the AI and you plan to describe that vision to the person via language, then there is an AI for that. Needing prompt jockeys will be akin to needing an expert to access your emails for you in the 90s if you were over 50, with just a little more progress on user interface and a chunk of general upskilling of the general population it will all be done away with. Basic competence with AI tools will be foundational to education.

@@Silverfirefly1 lmao

How are they using "Serfs" if they're literally just using efficient tools to avoid having other people do it for them?

@@Cha4k You're treating the whole discussion as if its still on square one and every premise needs justifying. This is the clearest possible sign that you're approaching it disengenuously

@@Cha4k where are you people coming from??? there's like 20-30 of you parasites writing under every comment about the "marvels" of ai?? please tell me where because i will have an easier time breathing knowing all of you crawled out of the same hole

At least we now can shut the old folk who tell us stories about 'stable jobs' and how we should get one. Their talk now is noting but fairy tales.

​@@tarazzzsA stable job is as much of a lie as the american dream.

Ai pics made me want to touch grass and paint for the first time since COVID

As someone who loves to draw and paint and never learnt digital art, I really hope you're right.

Somebody has to feed the machine

YES, I second this. I was someone who always drew on their iPad and did digital art. (I still will though) but now i've for the first time picked up watercolor brushes and will start with traditional art. This decision is all due to AI ruining the digital landscape of art.

Why would that be? It's more expensive and not as good. You see my point?

Quite possibly. Its there to stay. However if you want it enough then just make art. Regardless. Plus the automation is happening across the board. Most jobs will go. So then you can do it as a hobby, as there wont be jobs anyway. Coming back to the original point. If you want it enough then do it. Job or hobby, does it matter?

​@@Wimpiethe3 The same automation that will dilute the very concept of art and turn it into a product?

@@dragondelsur5156 Does that matter? Those that enjoy art will care

​@@Wimpiethe3 If everything art related is replaced by AI, there won't be any art left to care.

@@dragondelsur5156 Of course there will be. Commercial art isn't the only type. There are plenty of artists with a following because of their style/personality. That will remain. It will soar is my guess.

So that our only option is to work for them. Unfortunately AI will replace them too in the long term

I mean, yes and no, there are a lot of uses. But a lot of those use cases are ones where 'AI' doesn't actually offer any better utility than the technology that came before it. What's the difference between asking ChatGPT for a recipe and just asking an old school search engine, for instance? ChatGPT isn't formulating a new cookie recipe using deep knowledge of chemistry and thermo dynamics, it's just regurgitating a cookie recipe it scraped from the internet. And there's a non trivial chance ChatGPT will remember part of the recipe wrong because of how it stores information. Google maps won't be made noticeably better with more advanced AI, since it relies on tracking cars in the traffic stream through user's android phones as the ultimate litmus for its predictive algorithms. These sorts of AI are, by definition, not good at logic or setting up problems to solved in physics/engineering. They're unreliable as reporters. They can't find things out for themselves . . . It's a powerful tool, but it's ultimately not as robust as people are claiming. The big thing that's caused it to blow is not that the power it holds has drastically increased per se, but that it has become more accessible.

For all the crap Google gets, deservedly so, they were being a little bit more ethical about AI untill they were driven to this stupid arma race by Open AI. They also created Alpha Fold that is a real breakthough that could help people.

@@Bustermachine I think your ideas on the limits of AI are a bit outdated. This technology is developing shockingly fast. You talk about AI logic, not good at physics, cant find things out for themselves, but this is rapidly changing. GPT4 has a dramatically better grasp of logic than chatGPT that came before it. It has developed theory of mind, and it is far better at predicting outcomes of someones hypothetical actions,. It still makes mistakes, and there are some areas left where an average human is better, but we are seeing decades of progress in months The difference is not merely is of access, it truly is orders of magnitude more capable. GPT4 can do things now that I thought would be impossible within my lifetime

Corporations will steal everything they can. But just because thieves can use a hammer to break through your window, this does not, in my opinion, make hammers the evil part. I think a lot of people just don't realize that the foundation of how our economy works is in fact a decision we made, an assumption, that can, and should, be challenged, so they dismiss the idea of stopping corporations taking people's livelihoods and move on to the only thing they think they can change: the tools they use to do so.

You can still create stuff with your free time, even if you don’t sell it

​@@LucasDimoveo why are you being so disingenuous? if they can just make a similar copy of it for free its theft and if you don't get back anything for the effort you put then its expense reserved for the rich, have you no shame? its not like this isn't clearly obvious to you so why even write that comment?

"If bots do our jobs for us, we will have time to do other things, like art or something." No, we won't have time for other things unless we are paid for the time or for the other things. "Paying for free time" is not 'efficient' for companies. "Paying for the other things, like Art," is what we constantly try to automate away. So no, the premise is bullshit, because that is not how this stuff works.

@@nielskorpel8860 No, if bots do our current jobs for us, we'd be paid enough from what we do in our 'free time'. Look to classical civilisations and what the employment situation of _citizens_ was. There's a reason we see it as such an artistic, philosophical and scientific peak - aside from the lowest strata of citizens, they were free from work as we know it. They achieved that by having so much work done by slaves. Slavery is morally abhorrent, but the point is that they didn't have to work the way that we see work, because that was all 'automated' with slaves. It's absolutely how this stuff works.

Vast majority of professional artists begun by doing it for entertaining without compensation, while doing a different job. Many of us would keep doing it anyway for free even if AI out-do everything we do a million times. The problem is that if factory becomes the only job left (until it gets taken too), it goes back into doing art only in free time. For some people it would become impossible to keep practicing it due to now having more responsibilities than the past and having different priorities.

The human race is indeed steadily becoming more atomised.

This guy called ai girlfriend scams

This is techincally why calling all these stable diffusion art generators "AI" is incorrect. They are "machine learning", they are not Artificial Intelligence. Because true AI is defined by the ability to grow and learn and create new things on its own without external input, like a child does. True AI doesn't exist, yet. But people are probably calling all this machine learning "AI" because it sounds cooler.

AI can absolutely create new, original and creative things. You just let it combine ideas that are not usually combined. However, at this point in time AI cannot distinguish quality from trash, and imaginative from derivative. To consistently get good creative results, it needs a human to come up with good creative prompts, and to filter the bad results from the good. It needs a human to provide it with a creative spark, or at least to sift the original results that resonate with humans from the derivative trash.

@@GeorgeThoughts By AI, you mean AGI here.

You don't really need AI replacing people in its totality to create a doomsday scenario. You just need workflows that have AI integrated to be 10 times faster than traditional workflows. That means a team of 10 people now only requires 1 person to do the whole thing, thus making 9 people jobless.

I think that significant amounts of creativity is in synthesis - taking two disparate ideas and combining them - and Stable diffusion is definitely able to do this.

This is probably exactly the same mindset that landscape and portrait painters had when photography replaced them. And yet the latter has mantled the former.

@@RealCodreX Are you okay? You're rambling like an insane person

Terrible, thanks for asking :3 I have a story I want to write thats very personal.. And then everyone says, hey, f you, that has no value and we're gonna steal it for ourselves. Almost makes you not want to do it, but I do anyway because I want to inspire real creativity and.. I just love art, its crazy i know, doing art for the love of it, who even heard of such a thing?

If you have a creative voice, go pursue that. That's all that matters.

You're giving AI art too much credit. Go for it! It's good for references at best imo. Studios very much still need to commission people.

@@niteward4309 the more I personally use ai, the more I realise that without a solid vision or idea, no one is going to care. So nothing has changed.

You could try actually attempting to use an AI to work on character designs. You may find they're not anywhere near as straightforward as they've been cracked up to be .

I find toying with the AI art tools quite interesting, although I share others concerns about copywrite issues and stealing artists work for profit. But at the same time I think the value of a piece of art isn't simply in it's visual aesthetic value, but also the core essence behind the piece, for lack of a better term. When you sketch a character it may not be visually stunning in the same way as a professional painters work, or some of these generated images, but it is imbued with your unique creative vision and personality as an artist, and I think that's just as valuable. I think the real danger of these tools is to outsource our own creative vision and allow the machines to start to dictate that core essence. To the extent these tools can be developed and used ethically, I think we need to make sure to remember that our creative essence and impulse is an important part of art. Not just because it expresses it's self at the level of aesthetics either, but because it guides the core direction of the piece at a deep level. You can never get Midjourney or Stable Diffusion to replicate that level of depth because there is no actual mind with a harmonious concept guiding it.

No, I think you got it We all have our own experiences & thoughts on it, and I'd say yours are very valid Let me first say that I find it wonderful that you took the step of trying to sketch out your own ideas and visualize your character through what your own hands can make

personaly I do a little bit of both, I find Hero Forge to be a lot of fun, but I also like doing my own sketching, the thing is though... unless something has changed recently? Hero Forge is not AI. Hero forge is a collection of assets that were created by human artists that users can then combine in a variety of ways to create a customized miniature. its not especially different from the way player character customization works in video games or even going further back - the way playing with paper dolls (or Mr Potato head) works - where you have your base figure and you can attach outfits, accessories and even facial features and hair. but all of those were created by humans who got paid for it. and while combination of any given set of features will look different - those individual assets remain unchanged. that said... as someone currently going to school for art degree and hoping to maybe take my art further then a personal hobby.. it is incredibly disheartening to see the way people treat human artists vs AI.

⁠​⁠@@ForgefaerieI wasn’t saying Hero Forge is AI, sorry for the confusion. I stopped using Hero Forge because I felt it limited my creativity and design concepts, and because I wanted to practice drawing. I brought it up as context to my actual experience with AI.

@@flintlocke1344 oh I get it, and yeah I guess I was mostly trying to say that even some professional artists relax with coloring books sometimes :D and it may be different from you, but for me sometimes it can even jolt inspiration of my own :)

As a kid, you probably had a better sense of imagination and optimism about the world. Its still the same now, and it's still possible to view AI today like that, with wonder and awe and hope - It's just that it's easy to be pessimistic and cynical about new things in a world like this, I'll admit.

@@rammym23 Um, no. I literally just sat through a uni lecture about AI - specifically generative AI, which this video is about - and you know the ONLY positive thing they had to say about it? It would add a couple of trillions to the worldwide GDP. That's it. Which means the rich get richer and the poor will get poorer. People SHOULD be pessimistic and cynical about AI when it's predicted to replace 85 million jobs worldwide by 2025. That's more jobs than there are people living in the UK. AI is expected to replace roughly 60% of the workforce. A part time job at McDonald's is going to become extremely competitive in the near future. Let's see if you still feel the same way in the next decade when it is impossible for you - for your friends and family - to get jobs, and you are forced to collect benefits or food stamps.

@@aelie8198 I dunno how to tell you this, but I'm literally a graphic designer and a writer. I've been dating and living with a musician for the past three years, and pretty much all of the people who I interact with these days are artists, musicians, and other creatives. I have a four year degree in printmaking and library sciences, and right now I'm teaching a multimedia arts class with a nonprofit, and literally every single one of us also have to work second jobs (my teaching job is actually a third job, but whatever) and guess what? I actually LOST my food stamps LAST year, before any of this was a real discussion, because I "don't work enough hours." It seems like you don't live in the US, so I can't exactly blame this on you for not really being familiar with what it's actually like to live and work here, but let me tell you this, too - "a job at McDonald's" has been "extremely competitive" for a looooong time now, and my government ALREADY thinks that what I do for a living isn't worth paying benefits out to, lol. "My friends and family" have already been forced to collect benefits, and they've already had them taken away, all without the help of AI whatsoever. The introduction of AI changes nothing about actual current working conditions for actual working artists, it just shifts the problem around, because the problem is, and has always been, the systems that artists (and other working class folks!) are forced to exist within. I don't bring this up to dispute statistics or whatever you got from your university course, but this entire conversation, like most things, is not actually that simple, and I just want people to consider that there are more positions to take other than "AI is the future, automate everything, replace humanity, fear nothing," and "fuck AI, there is no way this technology could EVER be useful in ANY context and no meaningful art could EVER be made using it," and if I as a literally struggling working artist don't get to have an opinion on this topic, I don't know who does. I'm not saying to be a centrist about it, either. I don't even entirely disagree with you. But you need to realize that the problem, like it's always been, is capital and the people who want to exploit others for it - not the people who are just trying to make a fucking living in an increasing small and exclusive space - and we did not need AI to help us invent "gatekeeping" last I checked. The institution of "the arts", both its appreciation and creation, has basically tacitly been an exclusive club for rich people forever, and if you think AI is going away at this point, I don't know what to tell you, either. As artists, we might as well learn how to use the technology for ourselves while we still have the chance and governments and corporations DO start using it in even more inaccessible ways - that's how I see it, anyway. Before you start talking about "plagiarism" too - nobody owes you compensation for work you put on the internet for free. I wouldn't tell another artist they're "plagiarizing" my work just because they looked at something I made one time and then used that thing to make something literally completely different. I can't copyright a literal concept, only the actual work itself, and I don't need to ask for permission to create a new piece of artwork just because I used the same tools as another artist or yes, EVEN if I *gasp* used someone else's artwork to make mine! "AI is basically just plagiarism" demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of copyright law, its actual purposes (hint: it's not to "protect artists") and how the technology itself works, and in my opinion, only serves to hurt artists even more by spreading even MORE misinformation about the topic and gives corporations and regulators an excuse to legislate even further restrictions on AI - and if you think that that's going to affect anyone other than the working class, while the government and CEOs keep doing whatever they want, you're being even more naive than I am. Are there discussions about ethics that need to be had when we're talking about AI art and compensation? Absolutely - it's just that that conversation shouldn't be about who gets to use what ideas, and what can and cannot be "real art". Artists being exploited by capitalism is far, far, FAR from a new problem, and quite frankly, I kind of find most arguments like yours pretty disingenuous because if you really cared this much about the economics of the issue, you'd realize that the problem is NOT people who want to use new technology to make new art, but the people who want to CONTINUE to avoid underpaying artists and exploiting our work for profit (and yes, even to the point of replacing us with literal machines). As an artist, I believe one of the closest things to a "function" I have in "society" is to always be questioning existing power structures and dynamics, and to always be looking for new ways to challenge them and other popularly held beliefs. AI sits right at the exact intersection of that, if you ask me, and it's anti-art and anti-artist to try to restrict how and why an artist (yes, even that kid on Twitter who generates anime waifus all day) chooses to make their work. But that's just me, you know? I've only been struggling with the same problems trying to make money with my art for like, you know, the past 15 years or so. Forgive me for not really seeing anything new happening right now, and fuck me for trying to actually find SOMETHING useful for myself to make out of the fucking capitalist nightmare I live in, right?

​@@aelie819885 million jobs? I'd love to read the methodologs for obtaining this number. It just sounds like every other extremely pessimistic prediction about AI, we've been having those for decades and nothing is happening. I expect to read this in 2025 and laugh.

​@aelie8198 also, in my country the ratio of workers to retirees is only getting worse by the year. It's good if AI replaces some jobs, that means productivity per worker increases and I can have my hope of retiring one day. Yes, it will suck for a bit. So will having to work until death while your health is deteriorating because pensions collapsed.

My fingers are permanently bent and twisted from using my hands in hard manual labor and mechanical repair my whole life. I personally don't find it so wonderful that my hands are fucked from doing work. But that's just me. Edit: I meant no offense to anyone here. I was just taking this opportunity to post about my hands being ruined through my desire to fulfill my passion to create.

@@winstonpoplin oh you poor thing, I hope they don't ache constantly and/or that you've found ways to soothe any pain, at least for a bit

@@winstonpoplin I am genuinely sorry for the condition of your hands. I know tone and intention is near impossible to gauge online, but I can only promise that I mean that sincerely. You are however making a comparison that is entirely irrelevant to the OP's comment. What's happened to your hands is a result of harsh exploitative labor conditions that, by design, dehumanize and devalue the worker to the point of treating their mental, emotional, and physical health as utterly disposable. Someone finding beauty and wonder in their artistic expression, the voice of their soul, leaving a tangible mark on their physical body is not the same. One is the product of our deeply flawed economic, social, and political systems, the other is a physical manifestation of an artists passion and love for their craft.

@naritazaraki177 I find great beauty and wonder in building and maintaining machines. Machines and mechanical design is every bit an art form as much as making a painting is. The care and love i put into the caring for and designing my machines is the deepest love i have. It is how i express myself and sooth my mind. Does it really not meet your criteria for valuable self-expression and art? (For context i am working on my own personal machines in my own free time at my home. Not as a job.)

⁠​⁠@@winstonpoplin ​​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​​⁠​⁠I think there’s a bit of tonal inconsistency there. That beauty, wonder, and care for your craft isn’t captured by the description of fingers being “permanently bent and twisted” and hands being “fucked from doing work.” And yet, someone who’s completely regretful of the physical effects of working with machines wouldn’t describe it as how they express themself and sooth their mind. So, I’m not entirely sure what you’re trying to get at. Maybe that it’s unfortunate that the human body is sometimes not well equipped to meet the lasting physical demands of work we enjoy doing? Maybe that people doing work they choose to do is satisfying and meaningful to such a degree that any consequences or lasting effects are minor in comparison?

Trust me, when the AI revolution will be complete, artists will be the ones who will better survive. If you drive a vehicle or your work has anything to do with repetitive tasks, or interrogting databases, you'll be replaced. The paint on the wall, the live concert, the creation of something actually new... will survive.

​@@ChristianIce I agree. Work with actual experience emotion and intention behind it.

Yeah, I feel this too. I’ve never felt so adrift at sea than staring down the barrel of my 30+ years agonizing over being a skilled enough artist (and being in poverty the whole time) only to have shitty kids laugh about how ‘they can do better with prompts for free’.

@@GeahkBurchill Anyone genuinely laughing at artists for having their jobs automated (I support AI art and think artists whining about the ''emotion within art'' are hypocrites for reasons I can elaborate on if you wish but I am not laughing at artists and putting them down for their passions) are not the ones having the last laugh because art related jobs are just the first drops of rain before a major flood happens in the work industry as a whole. This can easily turn bad but equally turn very good (post scarcity society good)

@@thelelanatorlol3978there’s not going to be a post scarcity society as long as capitalism exists.

Oh that's terrible to hear! If you just use that to write your essays for you, you won't actually learn anything

@@RowanArk Many students would tell you that they already don't learn anything

That is already terrifying, C's get degrees. If it's even capable of that we're already in bad territory

Chatgpt does not understand what it writes. It will "hallusinate" sources and facts. But yea, cheating is a huge problem. Humanity evolved to act first think later to a large degree, which could doom us all. Or create damaging side effects. Or maybe we'll just get something akin to post scarsity and will end up as pets to AI overlord who's goal is as foreign to us as our goals are to an ant.

Maybe in the future students will be graded on assignments more like an interview, where they deliver their work verbally, and then you ask questions and judge how well they respond. Something that forces them to demonstrate some personal understanding of the material they're presenting. That, or we could just require students to also keep and turn in handwritten outlines and rough drafts. That should be a lot harder to fake.

Which movie did he say that in?

@@darthrevan5976 the first novel

@@grandadmiralzaarin4962 thanks

That's funny😊

If you like creating things that you envision, generative AI is great news for you. If you were hoping to get paid for your creativity, your odds have gone down

Just because AI "creates" something doesn't mean that an artist doesn't have fun or see meaning in their work. What most people don't seem to understand is that art is not defined by how valuable something is.

​@@ickebins6948 You don't see the value on art seeing you support AI. Commercial or not, AI will never replace the humanity on art.

Don't worry dude, most commissioners I know actually want to support artists, and even artists who are scared of their work being stolen by these clowns are switching over to traditional work. We'll be okay

@@dragondelsur5156 I'm not "supporting" AI "ART" in the slightest. Because it's not artby definition. AI does not devalue the art of real artists, just because the world is now being inundated with pointless AI creations.

Where I kept finding my thoughts going when I thought about the future, it, it hurts, a deep pain in my soul that dosen't go away, a fear an anguish that screams for me to do something, and yet how can I? I'm not great in schooling, but I'm creative and think fast, now? Now what?

It absolutely can, humans are not omnipotent and there is absolutely the possibility of inherently more intelligent entities than humans in this universe. Whether we create them or they come from another world or whatever is irrelevant tbh.

It will, in time. The tech we see right now is worst it`ll ever be.

​@@lostgarbage4055 Honestly if that does happen I think it will happen like it does in Hitchhiker's. When technology gets good enough to replicate human intelligence it will replicate human flaws. At the point AI surpasses us it will already be sentient so who cares as much, I doubt it would view us as "obsolete" because that's a very inhuman way of thinking. We train AI on ourselves, if it does get as smart as us, it's gonna act like us.

@@tentativegazer People already treat each other as obsolete and wish d**th upon those who do as much as disagree on some topics. If AI starts thinking like us - we're so doomed

@@lostgarbage4055 Personally I think it’s probably going to follow the same path as smartphones - first 5-6 years it develops like crazy but comes to a careening halt once they start to hit the upper limit of ways it can be optimized. The tech industry is frankly addicted to this idea of constant revolution and growth, and I think it’s in for a pretty nasty shock going into the late 20s-30s. We’re already seeing the beginning of it with the failure of self driving cars, metaverse and web3.

Oh god it would be early 2010’s Deviantart all over again But this time with lawyers

ORIGINAL CHARACTER DO NOT STEAL

He's pretty obviously a guy, cops are just transphobic.

This is the way.

I imagine a speedpaint recording would be a bit more convenient than screencaps(possibly more interesting as a secondary piece too)

People might as well generate Videos of painting a certain image if the AI get's sophisticated enough...

I worry this is a tragically optimistic solution, but it's something

"Art is how people express! It's an extension of their soul!" Yes! But, the results of the votes of 19 shareholders is not. I think the main problem is the continued pairing of art and money. Let AI take over the corporate drivel work that already had no soul to it, and implement UBI so artists don't starve.

@@NovaPax that's the piece that AI bros (willfully) don't get. if UBI existed and there was actual support for artists- for EVERYONE- then no one would give a shit about them. they'd be allowed to do whatever they wanted, even though what i think they'd be most likely to do is fail. but UBI can not come second. you can't gleefully push to eliminate millions of jobs with the vague promise that it'll eventually lead to UBI 'someday'. technology should be in service to human welfare- not the other way around.

...you described a netflix watcher instead of artists.

@@isfrenchjei I think he's being sarcastic. When all someone needs to do is type one sentence into a prompt and "create art", that isn't art, and they are not an artist.

@@carultch i think I wasn't sarcastic enough

Definitely

I personally dont agree with it. You commission an artist because you want a piece of art and you want the artist to add their own personal flair to your ideas. Its their art with your character in it. With AI theres no personal reasoning or style to it, its just loosely based off other peoples already existing work. To me its more like a google search.

@@ptolemaicfoxxo3032 exactly. People who make AI art weren't going to pay for art in the first place. They don't really appreciate art.

Do you really thinks artists will beat out AI by some miracle? No matter what happens, the artist is no more.

Man this comment really summarizes everything I hate about AI art! It's absolutely pathetic that they would rather use a machine to replicate an artist's unique art style, than to just commission the artist for some artwork! It feels like most people want to be an artist, but don't want to put in the time and effort to become one 😢

Good points. Also, AI does not work like a human at all. It is not doing what a human does; a human can create from nothing; being inspired and creating a style is not at all the same as what an AI does, which is literally steal work and profit from it. Put simply, if a human did what AI does, the human would be infringing on copyright. Furthermore, AI is going to be used to oppress people and decrease freedoms and turn us into even greater wage slaves. These losers that want AI don't realize that it isn't going to save them; it is going to be used for the sole benefit of the so-called "Elite," whilst the common plebe gets the inferior version that only serves to take away all the creative aspects and leaves the human as a literal slave

​@@markmurex6559 You are one defeatist person. Just as we beat leaded gasoline, we can beat AI.

It's not about AI arts anymore, it's the peoples, we can't stop them. The models is being public. Thanks to CIVITAI the source of various models all around internet, NSFW and *public. More and more AI arts platforms, app generator using those models and sharing on social media getting 100k likes and views in short time. AI arts getting bigger and gain more supports everyday.