/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>6859117
i asked you whether it's appealing and you're talking about originality again suddenly. you moved the goalpost. ever wonder why?

and again, this focus on the nodraw using the AI. with everything you're saying here you're screaming "they're cheating but it's alright as long they only make "AIslop".
Not even saying they won't. but i am here to discuss machine learning, how it can be useful how it actually works and is not stealing.
ever wonder why you and others like you CONSTANTLY derail it to this point about nodraws and how "they'll never make it" instead? because you're just addresssing your own insecurities, because this is a way to cope.

>I have yet to see big-name artists adopt AI to enhance their work without betraying its original look and style of the original author (see pic related). Until that happens, this is pure cope for those who think that their AI-generated slop is worth more than the watts they spent generating it. No
matter what you say anyway, AI art reputation is irrideamable tainted and only coomers care about it.
you know, that's fair enough. but if you understood what it can do and how it worked, then you'd realize that none of the limitations you're talking about actually exist, not in the long term.
also as you can see, people (especially in japan) are more eager to experiment and accept AI.

>What are you doing here anyway? Discussing the semantics of AI stuff wont get you anywhere. You want validation? I dont get it.
i was originally talking about AI and how learning is not stealing. but you can't help yourself to steer the conversation towards nodraws. it happens every time i now realize.

honestly i should thank you. it dawned on me that you people indeed do not care to hear about any of this.
but this also means you don't care about the honesty of your claims towards AI.
the only thing you care about are the nodraws. which is just bizarre to me.