/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>6229471
>10$
What are you going to do if you're wrong, pay me with your 4chan bank account?

I'm hoping someone gets sued by using AI generated images.

>>6229480
i was kind of hoping for something else

>>6229480
it will happen.

if anyone is retarded enough to use it in their "art gallery" autists will find the original art in a second.

>>6229480
I'll believe it when I see it, that's all I'm saying about that one...

Could you imagine attempting to explain to some boomer judge about how the AI "stole" your artwork but actually isn't using it, but it is?

>>6229485
if anything, boomers are more easily convinced than retarded millenials or zoomers who unironically push for a nihilistic cyberpunk dystopia where machines replace humans, as humans kill each other in the streets

>>6229485
You'd just overlay the original art pieces over the AI images. The autistic image forensic experts are going to get a massive pay bump soon.

>>6229471
>Sure most "career" Artists will have to move on and find other sources of income
Well that was the part that was making people worried, who gives a shit about the rest of it?

I think you're right it will fall out the public consciousness... until it starts rearing it's head again and again in other industries such as music, or transport.

We might see a new Luddite movement.

>>6229480
I think there's going to be a massive class action lawsuit involving graphic designers, illustrators, artists, photographers, and their unions/guilds, against these AIs. The while fair-use definitely protects the AIs creators currently, the entire point of copyright laws for creatives was to protect their source of income and encourage them to continue creating by ensuring their work wasn't misused.

I imagine a case will be made that copyright laws have failed artists and an attempt will be made to change them. If this happens, it will essentially handicap these AI's, as they require the use of billions of others work in order to have enough of a library to create decent imagery.

I remember the dancing baby gif when it came out.. nobody cares now

>>6229547
The thought of these hobbyist users getting sued and having their wages garnished for the rest of their entire lives makes my dick HARD AS FUCK.

>>6229548
People used to cry and fall down in shock at seeing paintings in a gallery. They couldn't comprehend what they were seeing. A porthole into the unimaginable.
Art has been devalued to the point of nothingness. All we experience is numbness when we scroll through our daily dose of social media. Nothing will move us ever again

while there's still time I want to shill this petition to people just for the fun of it. If something happens then it happens, if not then not. Worth the effort I guess. Any recommendations on who I should dm?

>>6229562
https://www.change.org/p/regulate-ai-image-generators

>>6229547
>We might see a new Luddite movement.
>Be techfag
>Automate a shit ton of industries
>Get rich
>Decide to fuck with a group of people who historically are unstable and poor retards with nothing to lose
>Get a shotgun slug to the forehead cause he thinks you're going to stop him from drawing MLP porn
Kek, One can only hope

>>6229548
I still care. Mostly because it reminds me of old internet, I miss old internet.

>>6229570
god I wish It was 2005 - 2010 again. I almost want to cry due to how much I miss those times. the internet was just perfect

>>6229575
Dancing baby was 1999 dude. Not to shit on your parade if you liked those years but late 90s and early 2000s was peak internet. 2005-2010 was already mid-descent.

>>6229582
Anywhere is better than here

>>6229582
I know when it was from, but imo the period i've mentioned was the best. i feel like 2010 is where the descent has started, and the internet instantly began to fill like trash in 2012

>>6229586
>in 2012
Isnt that when corps started astroturfing everything hard?

>>6229583
>>6229586
Pretty sure you can thank Facebook for that.

>>6229575
when i entered college in 1992, i got my first real email account and internet access (dialup through school, and in the school labs). i wasted too many hours on efnet, but i got to interact with some interesting people. julian assange used to pop up to chat occasionally, there was a grad student who specialized in breaking into sgi irix systems, and i looked him up years later and he was the cto of amd. this surfer dude from hawaii basically saved my 3rd year hardware design project by helping me understand some stuff with digital electronics, he became a pioneer in the security field (timothy newsham).

i'm sure adventurous kids now have the same fascination with some aspect of the internet. it's hard to recapture that feeling as one gets older.

my school email account still works, which surprises me.

>>6229471
Replying as 1) someone who has been playing around with Stable Diffusion and 2) someone who works alongside an "automated" industry.

First point: Making AI art work is a lot harder than it should be. Not engineering your prompt correctly makes your generated image look wonky as fuck. Even if your average consumer figures out prompt making, they'll likely be limited by hardware. I'm using a 3080 and I'm only able to get up to 512x512 resolution. You *could* upscale, but the generated images are already vague in their details and it just gets worse the higher resolution you make them. Running the image through the AI again and again to make it "better" like images some anons are posting isn't nearly as easy at looks either. It's fucking annoying to work with and would be easier to just hire a fucking artist after all of that headache. This isn't even getting into the potential legal ramifications of artists who didn't consent to their work being put into the databases (dead artists count too - estates are a thing).

Second point: Even when you manage to automate a job, there's still some human review that's involved. We use machine translation to quickly push content like instruction manuals out to all of the marketplaces my company is in, but we still have various localization teams we work with that compare the English and MT versions to make sure everything makes sense. Almost every time we introduce new words or sentences, there's some manual fixing involved (we specifically ask the English authoring team to use the same wording they've used before whenever possible). It hasn't replaced human translators, just changed how their job works. I don't think it'll even go that far with art - it's more complex than making sure MT didn't use the wrong translation of "patient".

>>6229604
>either artists are completely fucked or they're stuck being a fucking caregiver for the ai, which has almost nothing to do with their original job, nor was it why they became artists in the first place
fucking techies
also
>did you see how hard I had to work to write a fucking sentence? Do you know how much I had to pay for this gpu just to press a button?

>>6229547
there is no fair use protection for scrapping internet data and releasing products with them.

no law needs changing.

the AI companies think they are rushing ahead of legislation, whe copyright legislation already fucks them in the ass, what they are trying to do is launder copyright by using the AI as a middleman.

>>6229604
Well even in your scenario, it will displace alot of jobs. Instead of hiring 10 artists to do 10 illustrations, you get ai to generate 10 images and then one person to touch it up. Artists who work without ai will have even worse crunch since the time taken to do things "the long way" won't be appreciated.
Also, I think most of us in this industry like drawing and painting. I'd rather shoot myself in the head than be touching up some generated pixel goop. lol

>>6229610
>Artists who work without ai will have even worse crunch since the time taken to do things "the long way" won't be appreciated
correct me if i'm wrong but doesn't this basically already happen with photobashing?
>Also, I think most of us in this industry like drawing and painting. I'd rather shoot myself in the head than be touching up some generated pixel goop. lol
Same. I either do this myself or I don't. i'm still learning but I have strong visual images that I plan to put on canvas. I don't care about fixing suggestions, and removing the process would make it so bland

AI fags get the rope.

>>6229614
Yes, it did happen with photobashing. The difference is though that it's not magic, you still have to be skilled to utilise it properly. Alot of the pros can work faster and better than artists who photobash as well, if you've got a good technique.
I think this kind of thing is unprecedented. Knowing most client work, they already think they know better than you and very rarely are you allowed to express yourself creatively. If our jobs are only to be a human printer for someone else's vision, especially one that seeks to be generic and algorithmic in the first place, we can easily be replaced.

>>6229617
>Yes, it did happen with photobashing. The difference is though that it's not magic, you still have to be skilled to utilise it properly.
for sure, but I wasn't talking about that. I was mostly talking about how if you want to be fully involved in the process from start to finish, you won't be appreciated and will be coerced to push out shit through photobashing. something I don't care about doing in art, and I never plan on doing. so in a sense, people like me already gimped themselves out of personal preference

>>6229625
was meant for >>6229618

>>6229484
You don't understand how AI works.
If you tell one of the algorithms to draw "grey-colored laptop resting on a light brown wooden table in a kitchen" the end result will not match anything in existence, because the picture is an amalgamation of hundreds of thousands, if not millions of pictures. Neural networks are pretty much just glorified black boxes fed with specific types of data and fine-tuned until the outputs match a specific prompt/input.

>>6229634
All it takes is one legal precedent to happen and one instance of plagiarism, they're not mashing out perfectly ineligible copies all the time, I've seen some carried over artifacts from an paintings in some examples.

>>6229634
The issue for me is that they were trained on those images without consent and with the knowledge that it could damage the livelihoods of the millions of artists who's work was used to train it
Rather than the end result

>>6229643
you're using a device that put many people out of jobs without their consent

>>6229645
The issue is this is not some black magic that has come out of nowhere. It would not be possible for it to exist with a giant collective body of work that artists have created. And now every single one of those artists will lose their job as a result of it

>>6229653
Every single artist has built on the knowledge of older/dead artists

>>6229645
yeah nigga, but I am not feeding my computer with the works of these people without their consent in order for it to be functional, it needs electricity, not stolen human labour.

that's the whole point we are making.

>>6229640
I think AI art would fall under fair use protections if remixes like Youtube Poops are able to. It would be incredibly difficult to draw a connection between a specific piece of art and an AI-generated image, even if there are some similar elements (Because elements of similarity exist in all media)
>>6229643
All throughout history jobs have came and gone. Industrialization displaced craftsmen and women who built pots and pans with their own hands. It is just a natural consequence of progression. There will always exist a demand for hand-crafted, human goods, however. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9bt1W4SyRI

>>6229655
>this retarded argument again
it's getting tiresome. unless you can feed real life footage to an AI and transcribe that into an art style, I don't care about your human/ai comparison frankly. that's not how the human mind works. visual libraries are not full of stolen artwork

>>6229655
The ai is not a human. It is an algorithm. It consumes data in a fundamentally different way than humans do. So the process can be examined from both a legal and ethical view.
If an artist inspires another human to paint something, you feel honoured. If someone churns out 400 mass produced generated images from your art, you feel raped

>>6229664
Fair use also relies on the work not displacing the value of the original. Which is absolutely not what is happening here

>>6229655
you are comparing someone working on a job and buying furniture with their own money, to someone building a machine that breaks into stores and steals furniture, all while saying it's the same shit, since it's just a way of acquiring furniture.

seriously kys.

>>6229471
no idea why but AI art generation has been a thing for a while now
it's just a passing fad right now and will die down 70% in a year yeah
>>6229480
some of those AI sites are parading actual well-known artists styles so it's just a matter of time if one of them actually gets the law involved

>>6229664
>>6229671

>you can't copyright a style
imagine being this wrong

if you point an AI to the gallery of a living artist, and make it run on these artworks until it can imitate that artist, you are absolutely removing the value of the originals.

fair use my ass.

>>6229674
>>6229666
>>6229665
Artists don't matter so its ok to replace them
Enjoy being homeless
Google, kensington zombies
Thats your future

>>6229676
Ai art bas been around and it was shit
Now its still kinda shit but a fuck ton better. Its good enough to replace most artists already

>>6229679
I listened to a podcast with the Indian ceo dude of stable did, I think they're gonna announce something in the next few weeks like artists buying back their dataset to generate stuff for you or something. Nfts and crypto will definitely be involved one way or another.
What a nightmare we're living in.

>>6229679
You can't copyright a style
Only the elements in your art

Pack it up. The schizoids have found the thread.

Holy fuCk its OvER
>>>/h/6806584

>>6229696
*stable diffusion

>>6229697
The breach of copyright is in using your data in a training algorithm that will supersede your job.

>>6229696
>having to buy back the rights to own your OWN fucking work

this pajeet needs to be minecrafted, what a fucking scam holy mother of shit.

>>6229703
its time to arm the most mentally unstable within the art community

>>6229698
Wait until the non-artists get a taste of big tech surveillance using their digital footprint to birth infinite online tulpas wearing their skin

>>6229702
Wrong
Thats legal

>>6229711
based retard.

>>6229709
Can Putin kill us all already

i'm ruined
i discovered my gender through art, i express my sexuality through art
and this ai thingy is going to take it away

>>6229711
https://discoverdigitallaw.com/is-web-scraping-legal-short-guide-on-scraping-under-the-eu-jurisdiction
Monetising copyrighted datascraped content is illegal in the EU. I am not sure about other jurisdictions.

>>6229718
it's ilegal almost everywhere anon, copyright is like financial law, shit is international law.

I got bored of dalle2 pretty quick. Stable diffusion, I got 10k+ images out of it, and didn't really see signs of slowing down. I think the pay models etc, will prevent most normies getting deep into it. Having it free, hd and 9 images at a time was so good, but it would cost $1000+ if I were to do that on their new plan.

>>6229706
>>6229703
AI niggers are worldwide in every major metropolitan city.
Good news is if you're near any city it's likely you're near some AI nigger that's currently working on these things.
You should be cataloging Linkedin connections, Subreddits, and Twitter accounts. They're all relatively small teams so they're connected via their social media.
What you choose to do with any additional information you've learned with any additional offline sleuthing and practice for self defense purposes is your business, in minecraft.

>>6229717
>i discovered my gender through art
Isn't it on your birth certificate though?

its not even ai that thing is dumb af, it has to be fed thousand of pictures to produce some deformed shit fucking dumbass machine

https://twitter.com/fabianstelzer/status/1561102406292996096
https://twitter.com/SALT_VERSE/status/1539588118961168384
Its OVER

>>6229735
It's because SD is the least ethical of any of them. DallE at least makes it difficult to replicate living artists or real people. Iirc they curate their data set more too, and are keeping it closed source until they can properly work out the lethal implications of their software

>>6229718
>eu
Nobody cares

>>6229748
**legal
Sorry I'm waging at work on my phone...

>>6229747
ok so you're actually a shill, good to know

>>6229706
>>6229736
by the way, by arm i mean arm them with a universal basic income so they can navigate this new up and coming world we are about to live in. i am in no way endorsing violence towards any one individual in one way or another, i am AGAINST violence unless in minecraft

>>6229748
Withholding information and progress is more unethical

>>6229758
I just searched stable diffusion on twitter and that came up
The cyoa is neat desu

>>6229761
it's the information of other people dumb fuck.

>>6229776
And they released it to the public
Don't get mad when others use it

>>6229761
Offer up your moms cunt for me, not doing so would be unethical

>>6229776
>>6229783
Why are artists so greedy?
Just let people use your art. God i can't wait till you fucks are replaced

>>6229785
I want your moms moist cunt

>>6229740
pls no bullying
support trans-rights

>>6229748
I am almost thinking this whole thing is a set-up to get people on DALL-Es side and accept AI art,

>StableAi is a false company, set-up by Open-Ai owners, fucks around with everyone's data, breaks copyright and is extermelly unethical on purpose
> StabilityAI claims to be open source
> Dall-e joins a class action lawsuit against StableAi on ethical/copyright violations and data breach, wins.
> nobody is allowed to use StableAi's source code again,
> DALL-E promises to be ethical, respect copyright, opt-out policies, blur out faces, don't copy existing artists
> People start trusting DALL-E and OpenAI as the ethical choice, moving away any backlash against AI art, OpenAI regains monopoly on AI art market.

>>6229794
>> nobody is allowed to use StableAi's source code again,
Its too late for that since its on torrent sites now
Its over

>>6229694
yup but it's not going to actually take away relevant art jobs like advertising and motion graphics
it will serve as a great tool for concept artists and conceptualization in general

>>6229480
>>6229484
>>6229634
>>6229693
>>6229485
>>6229547
>>6229676
There's already cases of AI spitting out logos. Picrel has the Just Jared logo on it. What is Just Jared? A company all about celebrities and if you look up "Emilia Clarke Just Jared pics" take a look at the right hand corner. Shutterstock had this happen to them already. I got the pic from /tv/ and it was likely Stable Diffusion since they were going crazy over it. Lawsuits incoming.

>>6229799
Legally.

Companies like cloud flare or Google and it's notebook service start forbidding hosting sites that run the model.

Basically treating it the same as CP would.

>>6229747
its literally just another nft scam...

>>6229794
>> StabilityAI claims to be open source
it is
>OpenAI as the ethical choice
GPT-3 is trained on copyright content as well. your fantasy story makes no sense

>>6229807
what the hell is that hand

>>6229807
this shit is so fucking scary WHAT THE FUCK
ITS LIKE MATERIALIZING MY NIGHTMARES

>>6229815
But what if DALL-E and Stabilityai are the same model but just trained on different datasets?

Dall-E is closed source, so there would be no way of knowing it.

If stability was made on top of an unethical database on design in a attempt to stifle open source competition, and DALL-E the "ethical" one.

Just crazy conspiracy theory.

Just lmao at the "AI is inspired like a person" cucks. I've seen another midjourney image about a horse that had shutterstock on it. We need to make a compilation of all cases of this logo shit

>>6229824
they cant be the same model if they are not trained using the same data. you are ignorant on how neural networks work

>>6229826
i foresee people that use this having to be transparent about the words they type in so they can't just simply type in "in the style of x artist"

>>6229826
>posts the same low iq shit like it's gonna make it less stupid
you can cope, you can dilate, you can deny
it won't change a thing

>>6229835
"Art Nouveau" "Neoclassicism" "90s Anime"
It may become a faux pas to use real artists names.

>>6229815
They are going to be monetising this through the roof soon btw. The ceo talked about how they're going to be selling the tech to governments and the united nations and half the apps on the appstore lol
the only reason it's becoming opensource is so they can make the largest amount of progress in the smallest amount of time and get a foot in the door before any of the competitors

>>6229471
its novelty, everyone but shills know this

>>6229846
Look at this shit
>>6229700

>>6229843
>>>/x/

>>6229851
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQ2QtKcK2dA
he literally talks here about partnering with the UN and singapore and indian governments and sending the noise generated pngs to african orphans to educate them.

>>6229855
piss off yannic, you already trashed this site once

>>6229855
i like tikka msalasa

>>6229838
You're right fa/g/, it won't change the fact that these algorithms are stealing and the creators will face some kind of lawsuit. If you'd like to contribute to the machine you love so much, film your suicide. I'm sure the fucked up vomit the AI will make of the images will be sold as an NFT by some pajeet for approximately 1 dollar. You should be happy that a dollar is the most value your existence has.

Bros, I'm telling you. Getting a peek at GPT-4, which is 100 trillion parameters (1000x current models), makes me 10000000% confident humanity is fucked. I mean there is literally no way on Earth we're going to stop AI at this point. There are 70+ AGI projects going on simultaneously and all it takes is one of them to destroy humanity. We are about to get raped so hard it's unreal. Life is hell.

>>6229471
>another AI thread
you niggers do literally ANYTHING but drawing

>>6229872
all that fucking rage lmao
nigga, my livelihood is not in imminent danger because there's some software that can possibly make me obsolete
i don't lose anything if this tech fails

>>6229895
You never had anything to begin with.

>>6229895
>nigga
This explains so much. I'm assuming the Planned Parenthood in the ghetto got peacefully protested before your mom got a chance to join a certain statistic. You really should finish the job. Actually....
>I'm not in imminent danger
Something tells me another statistic will end up catching up to you. I'd say the odds are about, 50 percent or so.

>>6229826
>"AI is inspired like a person"
Do people think the AI is "inspired"? They even outright admit they're using art and stock from the internet to make this AI. I think google has written it has used hundreds of billions of samples of photos and art.

To say the AI is "inspired" is just retarded, and incredibly ignorant from these so called AI appreciators.

>>6229891
We'll form Amish like communities; where we have cool things like the electricity, but free of the AI chains!

>>6229872
>the creators will face some kind of lawsuit
did OpenAI face a lawsuit for training GPT-3 on copyrighted material? no? then your story is pure fantasy

If someone wants your livelihood dead and gone it is only fair that you extend the same courtesy to them in minecraft.

>>6229912
>We'll form Amish like communities; where we have cool things like the electricity, but free of the AI chains!

Yeah, I'm sure an AI-run woke dystopian empire won't disband you for "disparate impact". Face it, the walls are closing in.

>>6229471
>asians jeans is why i can't get likes
>neuroplasticity is why i can't get followers
>the algorithm shadowbans me
>AI on social media will drown my work
>what's the point in drawing if i never will be rich and famous?
You could make a fuckin song out of all the shitty meme excuses you fags come up with to avoid drawing

>>6229929
an ai can make this song

>>6229892
>>6229929
>DRAW 24 HRS EVERY DAY OR YOU'RE NOT TRYING!
>WHY ARE YOU POSTING AND NOT DRAWING!
>IGNORE THAT I'M POSTING AND NOT DRAWING!

Shut the hell up idiots, we're having conversations relevant to the art world.

>>6229949
pyw

>>6229953
post yours

>>6229949
i'm literally drawing inbetween every post and inbetween every drawing
I'm drawing when i take a break from a drawing

>>6229693
not an argument

Techbros already claiming they can teach it new characters and concepts with only a few hundred images.
My only cope is that img2img won't improve much and it will be hard to get good, consistent, specific results with it.
Once someone builds an easy UI to train it on any anime character without needing technical know-how though, it's going to put a huge dent in the commissions market. The last few days have proven that people don't actually care about artistic quality, as long as it looks close enough.

>>6230267
At this point I genuinely don't get people who are worried about the future of art when AGI is clearly not far away, and with it our extinction.

>>6230281
I still don’t think we’ll see AGI in our lifetimes.

>>6230286
Try 2028. That's the Metaculus estimate.

>>6230281
wheres the evidence of AGI being close? This big data machine learning shit is completely different.

>>6229484
that's not how ai works

>>6230281
this is like 70 year old technology applied to recent image recognition tech, anon. it's not "new" in terms of "AI" itself