/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>6976935
>gets caught out
i genuinely can't do anything but laugh at you at this point.
my god take your pills you fucking shizo.

>>6899063
>this retard really thinks anti tards actually understand anything well enough to offer explanations.
I AM THE ONE OFFERING EXPLANATIONS. pretty much always. and you are the people choosing to ignore it because it sounds like voodoo magic to you so i must be
>disingenuous
>lying
>using semantic tricks
>etc etc etc etc
and that's pretty much how you shitters always "refute" me. there are no explanations, you can't make any. you don't understand shit.
it's literally always the same. :)

>>6899005
what part is disingenuous?
again, you only think that because you don't actually see the parallel at the bottom of it.
because you think AI works a certain way, but your understanding is simply incorrect.

you call it datascraping because you think the AI copies and mashes up the data and then uses parts of it to create new images. (or something along these lines)

artists have tons of folders of their favorite artists, they look for DIRECT inspiration in other artists all the time. you would never call that datascraping because here you DO understand what those files are used for.
but in the case of AI your understanding is different. even though none of you ACTUALLY know what happens with the data and how it is used. how the AI actually makes images.

and when someone tries to explain, it's always
>it doesn't matter how it works broooo
even though as i explained just now, having an understanding will fundamentally change your viewpoint on what the AI is doing.