Throughout history Evil is always disguised. The wake up call should be listening to artists responding to their stolen work state in "AI vs Artist: The biggest art heist in history" I knew AI was created to replace us...What's disturbing is the majority of people are groomed to accept "artificial" as the new norm. AI will accelerate the "anti creation" agenda along with outsourcing gender to government...

It's fucking horrible man

A round of applause!!👏

AI + Art = ART-ificial intelligence

Thanks for the video ❤

The only thing I am truly scared of is the inevitable end of innovation. I think if greed is pushing tech the way that it is now, it's going to eliminate innovation before an ACTUAL AI is even created, thus preventing itself from evolving into something that can innovate, thus furthering progress. But right now it's just innovation, until we can cut the middle man. Then we will stop.

Every book i ever read had justified text...

They are money hungry greedy Should be criminals. Maybe not the ones that programmed it But the businessmen behind them.

makes me so mad!!!!!

Super helpful thanks

Most galling is the amount of people who have come out publicly and proudly declaring their pure disdain, even hatred, of actual artists. The phrase 'knocking them [the artists] down a peg' is extremely common in the ai tech bro space. Remember when the vision for ai and automation in the future was replacing all the boring, repetitive and dangerous jobs so we'd have more time for fulfilling pursuits like, say, art? And yet the very first thing tech developers came for, with a fury, is art. One of the fundamental things that are uniquely human. Cannibalized for profit. Yay, Capitalism.

every time I see ai art it just reminds me of the program not the person

Why would you make a thumbnail using a picture that's not in the video?...

Pull the slot machine over and over again yes! It's pretty cool and I have a lot of images saved on my computer. But once you realize every little idiot online can do the same, it feels worthless. There should be a add on to every browser that has a large button, "block all AI art". I don't want to see it anymore. All I see is the words that were used to generate. I can't believe Deviantart actually accepts AI art. Uploaded AI art should lead to a ban.

I feel for you guys, we want AI to be positive, its largely inevitable that AI will be superhuman at all things, most people dont see it but they will, we need to find a way to reframe our place in the world, we have no choice

If generative ai is theft, art school that teaches students based off of existing art styles is also theft. It sucks that artists will lose jobs, but that does not make it immoral. AI art generation benefits everyone. We don't get to decide that a new technology is a problem because a certain group of people lose work from it. Technology has always led to job loses. The point is the overall improvement for society. The assembly line lost a lot of people their jobs, but it in turn allowed almost everyone to be able to afford a vehicle, transforming ALL of society. Generative AI will be the same. Art may not have the same massive effect on society that affordable automobiles did, but it will allow your average joe to produce the art that they want. The average person that would never be able to afford to hire a human artist to produce custom art, that would never end up being exactly the art they wanted in the first place. Art will be accessible to everyone. That is a great thing. People need to stop thinking of information available on the internet as proprietary, because it never has been. Even images sold behind paywalls like shutter stock have always been available for people to access for reference. It just simply is not theft. Commercial art is NOT being replicated by ai. Training on images and mimicking styles is how we got the entire history of art. It's sucks for artists, but it's very exciting for the entire world. Arguments against art are entirely based off of personal investment, not on actual logic or ethics. We are going to be in a massive transition where a lot more than just artists will be losing jobs. Maybe I'll lose my job. Very possible. I've already started planning for that, building a business that would be much harder for ai to replace. Artists, instead of sitting there panicking about what will happen, take the reigns of your life and figure out how you can adapt to the inevitable new world. It is extremely selfish to see people able to turn their imagination into reality, or see every small business able to produce their own unique marketing, or every indie developer from being able to finally afford concept art, or a million other examples, because you will be impacted. That never has or will be the correct approach to technogical innovation. Technology improves to improve everyone's lives. We have to adapt to the newer, better world. And believe that AI will impact everyone's lives much more than it's impacting artists now. We all will get hit in some way, but, if things go right, all of our lives will be improved much more drastically. This video says it itself. Generative ai serves our fast paced and impatient society perfectly. It is not the right of any individuals to say that something is a problem for them and therfor the benefit to EVERYONE is not worth it. Being against ai art is attempting to gatekeep bringing ones imagination into the real world.

We didn't yet talk about very young generations. The children are born into a world where nice pictures are made by saying the computer to make it. What would those kids think about real artists when they first hear about them? In a non artistic family (so many of them) the parents would have no explanation for their children of why art shouldn't be a matter of a prompt. Such people would never ever pay for a painting or illustration or logo or pattern that they might need for personal or commercial use. And artists have never bee rich anyway. So it's not just the copyright of a certain art style, it's the general ability of making high quality pics with no effort that pushes our species into an own digged hole. There are so much more non-popular artists on the planet then the couple of hundred that we always talk about, either due to a lower authenticity or a sort of shyness of bragging with their work. How about them? Photographers are also victims since photos are mostly digital as opposed traditional painting, drawing and sculpting. Technical professions are much more legitimate to be heavily aided or replaced by AI, now art too?! It's too late for legislations regarding specific art styles. The generative AI will not need references from real artists soon. Perhaps it doesn't already. Don't pay for picture generative services and the development will slow down or close due to low profit. Remember guys, they still rely on chips made in Taiwan to be able to run those computer farms! :)

Thank you for this excellent presentation! I can't believe I am just learning about this! Where have I been?! Thanks again!

15:22 i would say 6, because it completely removes the incentive of cooperations to create these energy-expensive algorithms and run them.

Really good video, I have been an illustrator designer and art director for numerous above the line ad agencies for 30 years and AI is going to rapidly invade advertising, probably not so much in the finished ad, but certainly in the process of development, it could potentially remove the need for many of the disciplines that advertising currently employs, and no doubt it will be considerably cheaper, the results will not matter, advertising is already a rapidly declining industry and regardless of one's opinion on the ethics of advertising, it has been a considerable employer in the creative industry. AI will essentially put an end to the need for storyboard artists, mock up artists, potentially art directors and copy writers and become the account man's medium of choice, AI will not argue with its programmer, it will not say "that is a dumb idea" or "that looks like a competitors campaign". We are only at the beginning of this movement and no doubt it will take over the commercial world and thte only way to resist is to refuse association with the brands and corporations that choose the computer over the human. I entered the world of advertising as the Mac was becoming a serious tool for design, retouching, illustration and final artworking, I graduated with reasonable skills which made me very employable at the time, but very soon into my career I realised that the computer is soulless, and consciously decided to focus on using my hand skills as much as possible, originally because i thought if there was a magnetic flip I would lose all my work, but steadily more because I loved the look of art that had some humanity in it, even if it had been scanned into a computer and enhanced further along the path, it had something within it that the software couldn't mimic. By the time I left my last full-time position it was regarded as primitive that I still looked at books and kept pads and pencils and pens on my desk. Around me I had watched as new staff came in, that there was a complete sterility to the way they worked, they would lift simple styles and just work like they were serving burgers in mcdonalds, there was no heart or passion in what they produced, they would actually feel proud of having bootlegged better known designers or illustrators, but they had nothing of their own in the work.

So it's ok for humans to steal art styles and sell them but not machines? grow up

I saw your illustrations in Pinterest and was so amazed by these works! And I got even more delight when found the author on youtube (T - T)

If I go outside into a public area, I can be filmed or photographed by anyone. Other's are free to observe and think. Now, If you put things out there, you really cannot complain when systems are available which enjoy the same access the public has to this same information.

We humans are free to make art in any style we want, view and internalize any copyrighted art we want, and make derivative works, but when AI does it and makes it more accessible, people start complaining

By seeing this content I improve my designs, thank you

Awesome, enjoyed learning

I hope the EU will do something

Yes, AI generators are here to replace artists. Engineers have been replacing workers with tech for centuries and artists never cared about it before. But now that it's their industry on the line, oh, man, it's suddenly the hugest deal in the world! If you didn't care when cars replaced horses and buggies, didn't care when data entry workers were replaced by scanners, didn't care when factory workers were replaced by robots, then you have no reason to expect people to care when your overpriced work is replaced by a cheaper, faster, more efficient alternative.

7:25 I once had a thief break into my house and steal my stuff. The key defining characteristic of the experience? My stuff was gone. Unless you can point to an artist that was deprived of their property, then nothing was "stolen".

So if an artist uses another artist's work in his or her creative process, you call it inspiration, and if software does the same thing, you call it theft. That's unfair. It seems like artists main issue here is how efficient the software is at this. A sweater can be made on a machine for a long time, but the one knitted by grandmothers is much more valuable... real artists can be sure of their future.

Great information! Thanks!

we learn skills from viewing art and using examples from the internet. We also adapt work and aquire inspiration from artists we admire. Could this mean that we as people are also stealing art?

It's already happening, it will become a kind of commodity: authenticity. Those who can hold on, ride the storm, will become like the man with one eye, in a world that is blind.

I just started getting into Midjourney over the last 6 weeks, learning the properties and prompts. And the results I got in a very short time were amazing. As a designer, it looked like a great way to ideate and do comps quickly. I could be more efficient and execute concepts where I was not as skilled, etc. The turning point was when I realized Shutterstock was taking art that I "created" on their platform and making it available for license. Then, I started watching a few videos and going deeper, and decided this is not for me. I just quit my Midjourney account. If this means I am less marketable, so be it. This is blood money.

Artists who say they wouldn't mind using it if it was made ethically are the biggest liars ever. Adobe Firefly gets skinned daily on Twitter even tho it was made ethically. They fear the tool. They couldn't care less how it was trained. AI is a revolution that will impact almost every single industry as it evolves. The world has to move forward and we as people must adapt to it, otherwise, invention will just stale.

If there was a button or pill to get jacked. People would take it and in turn do something else instead of training as much. That is how stuff like this works. Maybe artists need to produce more and focus more on the creative aspect rather than the technical skill. Should we remove computers in order to cater to the pencil and people with nice hand writing?

No arguments will change anything. AI is a revolution. It's like inventing electricity and flooding the world with electric light. I can style lamps. I can also continue to use the candle. By the way, candles sell very well. Art has become global, not individual. Art is now the property of civilization, not of an individual artist. Its value is determined only by demand, supply, marketing and, simply put, laundering huge amounts of money. Lazy artists - people who want to stay on the market by only shouting "I am an artist" now have to do everything ten times faster and ten times cheaper. There is no going back from this acceleration made by AI. A good artist and his work will be bought anyway. 80% of the weak ones will drop out. They will go to another job or adapt. That's all... We fly on planes, drive fast cars, but we still appreciate and love people who can run fast. What I saw, knew and experienced is already in my head. What I have thought about is already in my head. AI is just external memory - a big notebook. To tell the truth, a real artist sitting in his studio, creating his works, doesn't give a damn about all this technology and the surrounding world. He just does his thing. And those who don't want to share are not artists.

I really don't know what the fuss is, they passed a law that states AI art cannot be copyrighted. This was later upheld by a federal court judge. So, all these companies are creating copyright free art for everyone to use. Your 10 word prompt, does not trump my 10 years of skill. I get paid, you just generated a free to use picture.

AI artist is a misnomer.

I saw artists come to an agreement about the use of their art. Maybe that's the case. "It's a lot of work to do and you're stealing!!" (bee movie) ANALOGY.

That last one is far fetch.

Worth to watch. Thank you!

People, it's time to understand the real issue with 'learning'. The real targets should be the companies that drove up the prices of art to unaffordable levels, and the subscription models that exacerbated the issue. AI is making creativity accessible and affordable. Pointing fingers at AI misses the broader picture.

Has anyone run into the issue with the update to Beta 29.5.0 that this does not work anymore? I have tried various images and all I get is a result as if I just gave it a prompt of "oil painting" without creating channels

If people using A.I are taking your jobs, then you obviously where never a great artist to begin with, other wise your customers would have stuck with you.. shrrugggggg

I have a bit of a rhetorical question. People will copy the style of famous artists stroke for stroke and sell art based on it. And yet, people will still call them artists. How many painters like Picasso or Van Gogh are there out there? THOUSANDS. Art in it's essence is the creation of of a vision. It isn't painting, sculpting, or filming techniques. Me getting into AI has given me inspiration to get into Blender, Marvelous Designer, After Effects, Photoshop, etc. If not for AI, I wouldn't have picked up any of those software. I create realisitc AI character models of specific people (clients). I also film things like smoke, fire, and waves then create motion models based on them to make trippy effects. So filming > use AI to copy motion > creation of VFX. So it is a tool, no matter how badly you don't want to believe it is. You know how's having the greatest success with AI tools? Artists. Person #1 creates AI image Person #2 as an artist gets hired to create character sheet/wrap for Person #1. Person #1 then uses it to animate in Blender/Adobe Animate. You guys are so near sighted.

Wait, stock images are contributed by contributers, who contribute expecting to receive royalties on their contributions. How is it OK to use this content to train an AI? These companies "have" a large body of work THAT ISN'T THEIRS. So, the company selling their work now uses it to train an AI to produce work like yours??? How do you see this as acceptable?

If those creators were as vocal about other people from other industries which have lost their jobs because of AI then I would care and feel bad for them. But I will support them as much as they supported others who lost their jobs to AI by simply saying "Good luck bro" I love generative AI I no longer need to spend money on fiverr and upwork and I create so much, so fast, for FREEE!!! No one ever cares until AI shows up to their doorstep

Images are made to be seen by humans and not used in any software. AI is software. If image have not official download button provided by author or platform where image originally uploaded, then you can`t download it using 3rd party tools, such as bots, scripts and even take a screenshot. AI devs trained their AI on pirated images.