/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

Photobashing v2

>>6836142
>https://twitter.com/chatgptair/status/1666282616310628358
iPhone and Snapchat filters are the old thing.

>>6785487
>AI general
and then general for tracing, general for photobashing and so on? >>>/g/ , they have general for AI.

>>6753126
>b-buh it's actually u-um using references and learning just like a real human bean
No it's not.
All it does is reproduce the images that it's trained on and associate them with keywords. Everything that image generation algorithms generate are interpolations between and rearrangements of trained images. It is, at best, an automated photobasher.
>u-um it's not photobashing
Explain picrelated then.

>>6741337
>Poses
Because people don't take pictures of themselves standing in stiff positions and AI is just photobashing v2.0

>>6696948
This thread's premise is a retarded bog standard AI shill talking point. Let me give you the QRD as to why this is of absolutely zero concern-

Image generators are only able to recreate data that they've been trained on, and INTERPOLATIONS BETWEEN THOSE POINTS OF DATA.
The upshot? AI- or rather, machine learning algorithm, since there is no "intelligence" whatsoever, only a fixed input -> output- image generators are, in effect, photobashers. Have your doubts? See the funny Keanu Reeves maymay that Midjourney regenerated here. Everything, and I mean everything, is interpolation and rearrangement of data.
Image generators need millions and billions of images to be trained on to have enough legible interpolations to be even remotely viable. Something only possible when you trawl the internet for everyone and their dog's artwork and photographs, data that is COPYRIGHTED.
See, the thing is, AI shills will try to redirect the conversation by saying that so long as they aren't generating Mickey Mouse or some BS there's no copyright issue- but that's a baldfaced lie. Because EVERYTHING generated by an ML algorithm is interpolations of trained data, each piece involving who knows how many copyrighted images- hundreds, possibly- that means that NOTHING it generates is eligible for copyright. That goes for everyone- if there is copyrighted data in your dataset, the whole pot is poisoned, you can't own ANY of the output. That's it, that's the bottom line. NOBODY CAN USE IT. There's your regulation, nigger.
To put the cherry on top, there is not nor ever will there be enough public domain or uncopyrighted images to create an effective imagegen algorithm. You think Adobe's image generator, which runs off the exact same tech, is going to be worth a tinker's damn with their dinky little image library? Lol. Lmao even. All this is is AIggers crying wolf. Image generators are a dead end technology that is completely unviable for both legal and practical reasons. End of.

>>6695108
>it's honestly surprising how pathetic the reactions to tracing are.
>it's honestly surprising how pathetic the reactions to photobashing are.
>it's honestly surprising how pathetic the reactions to AI are.

>>6684966
>>6684989
>telling people to proompt
>"just let the GPU draw for you lol"
>"ummm the world is going forward, le cat is out of le bag, just use it bro"
Daily reminder that image generators are nothing more than automated, gacharolling photobashing machines. You see this image? This is all this garbage is and ever will be, and don't you dare @ me with "duhhh da technogoly will improve," because it won't. The technology is 100% built off of creating interpolations of images fed into it. No amount of OOOOOH I'M GONNA, I'M GONNA IMPROOOVE is ever going to fix a fundamentally flawed design. The only people that it will ever be useful to are grifters and scammers who were already stealing other people's work, who have to live like roaches, scuttling about in the dark snatching up crumbs and fleeing when the lights are turned on. Image generator output is not copyrightable and is being banned or soft-banned on more and more platforms as time goes on. There is no future there.

>>6683478
>AItrannies try to start another thread in which they will be bullied into considering 41%'ing themselves yet again
>>6683536
>>6683546
>>6683575
>>6683612
>>6683624
>AI "artist" who actually made it really for reals and will totally replace us is another shit-tier scammer who was outed immediately
BAHAHAHA
At this point I really have to wonder why you faggots even start these threads, you're literally just telling on yourself and making yourselves look bad. Just like picrel was found out when you AIggers were crowing about this "artist" on ArtStation and their stand for transAIrtist rights, lol. I would have unironically remained demoralized for so much longer if I hadn't seen this image and went down the rabbit hole of figuring out how this stuff really works. You greedy parasites really are your own worst enemy at this point.
Remember, AItrannies, you can only memory hole and build up that cognitive dissonance up for so long. Eventually, you won't just be looking longingly at the noose in the corner of your room, you're going to actually use it.
Daily reminder that you are not an artist, all that image generators can do is produce interpolations of images, your generated slop is not copyrightable, and all the sites that matter are banning you wholesale, one by one.

The day has finally come when AIggers are getting bullied so hard they either straight up leave the board (no new AI threads in the last few days!) or they start having a mental breakdown.
These fags have been getting thoroughly dismantled and deconstructed in every thread they've started in the last week and I am LIVING for it. The catharsis of seeing these smug roaches getting dabbed into the soil after shitting up this board and other spaces for so long borders on the orgasmic.
And since no one's posted it yet, here it is. This is all that your AIshitters ever were- automated photobashing. Stealing shit and mixing it together. This illusion of unlimited creation and "democratized" art- ha!- is crumbling to dust. Your magical machine that learns and creates like a human was nothing more than a fantasy this whole time.

Bros, I can't photobash this good, this fast... my concept shartist job is OGRE...

>>6674247
Explain this then
PROTIP: You can't (without incriminating yourself)

>>6675696
You just took someone else's art and img2img'd it, didn't you.
Don't bother replying to this thread.
These fags get btfo in the threads they make, memory hole the brutal sodomizing, and then go make a new thread to repeat the exact same things they always do.
I'm leaving this behind and then I'm out. Janny, please clean up this thread, thank you.

>>6674916
Here, I'll post it.
Here's your originality and style, bro.