/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

Pro AI means Pro Capitalism.
If you don't like AI you're against free markets and are for Marxism.

Poor guy but you can see the clear division of expertise when looking at his actual work and someone that just uses AI. At this point, we're going to return to the age of low resolution uploads, huge watermarks and little to no sharing.

>>6278035
being pro ai is being pro equity
sounds like communism to me

>>6278020
Legit feel bad for him, his legacy will be "known as that one guy, who everyone bases their prompts on".

Also, not trying to change the subject or anything, but does anyone know why Greg was picked as "the chosen one" to base AI prompts on, and not Ruan Jia? I'm not saying Greg is bad or anything, it's just that when I think of the best human digital artist of all time, Jia is who comes to mind, and is probably the one who people should be basing their image prompts on, they're both great artists though.

>>6278035
"democratization of art" sounds like communism to me. as is the diminishing of one's merit for your benefit. in fact, that's what my dad had to deal with at work all the time during communism. so keep eating shit

>>6278035
This is some retarded point

>>6278043
the article mentions a probable reason:
>An early text-to-image generator called Disco Diffusion offered Rutkowski as an example prompt.
>Rutkowski has also added alt text in English when uploading his work online. These descriptions of the images are useful for people with visual impairments who use screen reader software, and they help search engines rank the images as well. This also makes them easy to scrape, and the AI model knows which images are relevant to prompts.

>>6278035
>last one into the pod is a commie

>>6278043
Normies don't know any artists outside of Picasso and Da Vinci, I'm guessing that one of the first people to use SD also liked Greg's work and wanted to see what the AI would come up with, this gets passed around, he gets asked what the prompt he used for the image and then Greg Rutkowski became the de facto name for fantasy images.

Only artists really know who Ruan Jia is.

>>6278035
retard

>>6278047
>>6278053
Ah, I see. It's probably for the better then, I wouldn't want to see Ruan Jia's magnificent work desecrated by AI puritans. But on the other hand, it would have given him more recognition.

>>6278043
The fact that they're all using Greg fucking Rutkowski out of all people just confirms what I've been thinking for a long time... that if you give the masses the power to create anything they can imagine they'll just use it to make garbage.

>>6278057
I don't think normies understand or would appreciate Ruan Jia as much as actual artists do, he's more of an artist's artist to me. I'm more surprised that Dave Rapoza hasn't been thrown into the AI feeder yet. His tweets lately have been fun.

>>6278058
Aren't MCU capeshit extremely high selling? Even that new Jurassic Park grossed an insane amount of money. Masses revel in shit, it's almost hard to believe that 95% of the people you bump shoulders with when going through a mall have such bad taste in everything, literal NPCs.

>>6278072
the normgroid reaction to AI music pisses me off way harder. just read the comments kek. it's actually unfathomable to me that people have such bad tastes. i think when AI music is going to become the new fad, I'll uninstall my spotify disable all music related recommendations on youtube, and make a huge back-up of all the music i've been collecting for 15 years.

>>6278072
>>6278078
forgot vid
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Emidxpkyk6o

>>6278047
This actually sucks on a whole new level. Blind people aren’t necessarily can’t see anything, everything is total darkness blind. There are different levels and a lot of times, you CAN see, just not well enough to know what you’re looking at without the aid of a visual reader. Artists using alt text to avoid AI picking their art up are going to be unintentionally locking visually impaired people out as well in one of the few spaces they can actually enjoy things (digital world).

>>6278035
>OPPOSING AI MEANS YOU ARE A COMMIE
>the whole selling point of AI art is that it takes art away from the drawing bourgeois and into the hands of non-drawing proles

>AI IS FIGHTING AGAINST BIG TECH
>is sponsored by the UN, Amazon and other companies that would only benefit from AI generated content

>IF YOU'RE AGAINST AI THAT MEANS YOU'RE A SOULLESS TRANNYTOR
>a huge chunk of AI devs and consumers are trannies who stream to realize Nick Land's vision of the future
Why are you AI shills like this?

>>6278047
This is why you should never help the disabled

>>6278035
I’m a Marxist then.
I saw that Vaush video where he came out as being against AI. If the commies are against AI then so be it. I’ll ally with anyone who opposes this satanic shit.

>>6278107
I’m an anarcho-monarchist against AI

>>6278035
This. Commie artists on this board deserve to lose their "jobs"

>>6278035
> has never read marx once
marx was for free markets and open borders retard, just like Smith. Read a fucking book.

>>6278035
You're just a retard that collects buzzwords without knowing what they mean. How the fuck is removing the skill acquisition aspect of a trade and giving it to everyone Capitalism? That's literally as Communistic as you can get. You are dumber than a sea of bricks.

>>6278107
ML is the only viable Marxist philosophy. Vaushoid "leftism" can go to hell

>>6278137
> ML is the only viable Marxism
kek if you want to industrialize a fucking backwards peasant population maybe. It's literally retarded for modern first world countries.

Gonna put you into the same camp as that anon. Read a fucking book, at least read Marx.

>>6278135
> muh human based skillz must be protected
You actually have a subhuman iq, please look up the luddite movement.

>>6278035
Good thing I am pro AI

>>6278148
Ahh yes Marxism with NATO characteristics

>>6278069
i don't think dave has stuck to a single style for long enough for it to scrape his stuff effectively

>>6278154
> hasnt read shit
retard proving my point. Reminder that you are all getting proved wrong by an actual Marxist who has actually read most of his English works.

>>6278035
You will be rounded up and shot either by your masters or by your enemies

>>6278157
Marx didn't use internet
His work has no meaning in the modern world

>>6278035
well, I do want to line up some people against a wall…

>>6278169
> wahh I won't read the father of my pet ideology.
ah so you are a revisionist. Cool.

>>6278035
being pro ai is seizing the means of production

>>6278174
this anon gets it, just because it can be used to cause mass unemployment and misery doesn't mean its not an amazing development in its own right - just like any labor saving device.

>>6278150
that has nothing to do with what he said. are you the same retard I called out earlier on not knowing what a fucking "ad hominem" is? you keep spouting terms you don't understand, this is your average faggot who reads tech journalism to feel smart about himself

>>6278172
lol Vaushism is the definition of revisionism

>>6278177
>How the fuck is removing the skill acquisition aspect of a trade
Again look up the luddite movement. How do you think women and children were brought into industry in the first place retard. READ A BOOK.

>>6278179
> I said I was a vaushit
retard

>>6278184
you sound like a leftard who's about to scream at me to read more theory. the luddite movement has nothing to do with what AI represents. it's a bad analogy, like every other shit that comes out of your cunt mouth

>>6278109
is that when you want a glorious, strong, awe inspiring leader figure, but you don’t want to pay axes, listen to it or for it to have any authority over you? because that’s what I am, but I always considered it liberal fascism

>>6278187
> read wikipedia
> doesnt get it
kill yourself subhuman nigger

tldr?
Who is in the wrong, Greg or Skynet?

>>6278199
greg has a valid point desu, it still wont stop AI from improving though

>>6278020
Don't care; already fapped to Greg Rutkowski flavored lolis

>you WILL proompt with the AI
>you WILL trade the NFT
>you WILL mine the crypto
>you WILL get the BMI operation
>you WILL live in the pod
>you WILL eat the bugs
>you WILL give up your privacy
>and you will be happy you fucking LUDDITE

The world will return to tradition.

>>6278206
continue a little further, how will capitalists maintain imaginary numbers when wages fall to zero.

>>6278210
>can't even take a building full of centenarians
>"return to tradition"

>>6278211
We are at the mercy of the delusions of a handful of mortal narcissists.
It cannot be sustained, I can only hope we learn from this when it crumbles and never allow this to happen again.

Hahaha the White House is coming after you techcels

>>6278223
mfvv biden wil save us in ze end
kek have a out of this world sense of humor

https://www.change.org/p/regulate-ai-image-generators?redirect=false
sign the fucking petition retards

>>6278078
I think ai music will be less successful because the personality/celebrity element of music is much bigger. Faceless artists are more common than faceless musicians. There will probably be a lot of ai music in soundtracks for movies/tv/games though.

>>6278035
You pajeet shills are so desperate that you now post shit like pic related and try to appeal to politics. Go back to your designated shitting streets.

>>6278035
go get hit by a train poojeet

>>6278174
Most hardcore capitalist ideologies would also be pro-AI, because they're generally anti-regulation, and the only thing that could stop AI would be extremely heavy-handed regulation.
In fact I have hard time even recalling any consistent political ideology that would argue for regulating, let alone banning the use of AI to generate art.
The only existing factions that might help you here would be some religious fundie sects if you manage to convince them the AI is literally powered by demons, or social democrats who would probably focus on making sure you get some pity neetbux for losing your job rather than stopping the AI itself.

>>6278223
>Daniela Braga
that's some ooga booga name

>>6278223
>nonconsensual data usage
IT'S LITERALLY DATA RAPE

>>6278310
>hardcore
there is no hardcore capitalist ideology anywhere on the planet, so the point is moot, the most capitalist countries all have regulated markets

>>6278323
regulatory capture
all countries are capitalist countries with extra steps

>>6278323
>capitalist ideology
>"capitalist" countries
Two different things.

>>6278331
yeah, one sets the rules and the other is a fantasy

>>6278336
So why were talking about Karl Marx in the first place?

>>6278337
I wasn’t.

>>6278338
So you can stay out of the discussion, it doesn't concern you.

I don't think Greg has anything to worry about. Much like piracy helps people become better consumers, this AI stuff is gonna drive more traffic and sales for him.

>pajeets got into science and computers just when the world started hating it
They just can’t win

>>6278339
I’m sorry, hardcore capitalism doesn’t regulate discussions, sweaty

>>6278020
His art is the type of soulless, super-rendered, basic pose shit that the AI excels at making

>>6278310
>AI is literally powered by demons
I think this is true in a certain sense. Are there any esoteric anons here who are familiar with Steiner?

>>6278366
pyw
y
w

>>6278020
The scale on this is fucked.

>muh gommunism vs capitalism
You're better than this

>>6278310
> In fact I have hard time even recalling any consistent political ideology that would argue for regulating, let alone banning the use of AI to generate art.
Yeah, but most governments protect against theft, especially capitalist governments.

>>6278020
Democratize art????????? art was always free, how it fucks the shitty communists that people generate profits with their own skills.

>>6278201
That's the way I see it.. Pandoras box has been opened and it isn't going anywhere. They'll probably be able to get some laws in place where artists are given credit and possibly some type of royalty or deal having to be made to use their likeness in any way when it comes to AI. But that also may open up a sticky situation because are we going to start saying that any person who was influenced heavily by other artists must now credit those artists? It's a pretty interesting topic.

>>6278402
>get some laws in place
Maybe in ten years. Do you really think the current boomers understand AI?

>>6278404
Well I read the article in OP and there's definitely a discussion going on, and these artists are going to fight to protect their livelihood if they feel threatened or just want a piece of the pie. That's the smart thing to do regardless. They talk about a possible solution being making deals with AI companies and museums with the artists, which sounds pretty lucrative desu. I'm no artist but it's interesting because this is like the very first instance were seeing of AI disrupting a field, if I'm not mistaken.

>>6278283
>CHECK YOUR PRIVILEGE YOU FUCKING PRASTETUTE...I MEAN I'M A CONSERVATIVE YOU BLOODY BITCH BASTERD I'LL FUCK YOU BLOODY

>>6278402
The artist's work is literally in the dataset, you can search specific artists that were used to train the AI. It's not inspiration or influence.

>>6278418
What's the difference?
>if I can prove you got inspiration and influence from this artist you owe me because without me you wouldn't be here
They'll probably be able to slide with it because at this point AI is just our little slave but I'm just saying.

>>6278426
You can't own the reaction someone has to your work. Are you trying to play Devil's Advocate or do you really not see the difference between influence/inspiration and plagiarism?

>>6278402
Ai will get shut down, probably. There isn’t a Pandora’s box, just software that needs to be deleted, and companies disbanded

>>6278441
How is it plagiarism? The work that the AI churns out isn't plagiarism, if a person made that art then there would be no question of that. It's more akin to inspiration/influence. It's more like a person studying artists to learn their techniques.

>>6278462
As a senior art director and senior prompt engineer I must agree with this post. Anons who says it's plagiarism probably never prompted a piece of art thus thy have no idea how stable Diffusion actually works.

Here's a wild idea. If you don't want your art to be seen by the AI, don't put it out on display in the public.

>>6278462
The artisti's art pieces are literally inside the data set without their allowance. That's plagiarism.

>It's more akin to inspiration/influence. It's more like a person studying artists to learn their techniques.
You don't know what inspiration or influence means especially as it relates to creative expression.

>>6278462
Machines just cut and paste images together. This fact is only obscured because of the large data sets. It does not think and understand like a human. A computer might as well be gears and levers

>>6278471
>inadvertently causes physical trad art to skyrocket in value
Thanks techfags!

>>6278418
/g/ here. That simply isn't the case. Yes, the AI has been trained on images from various artists and also billions of other images. Adding the name of an artist to a prompt isn't any different from adding "19th century painting" or "surrealist". It's simply words associated with a certain aesthetic. Is it illegal to rip off the signature style of an artist? Because I don't think it fucking is. That's just influence.

Also everyone getting mad and gearing for their jobs is an idiot. SD requires a shit load of manual work to get it to do anything decent. The shit you see online is cherry picked to high heaven. If you can draw (which I can't) you can create more beautiful images with it than I ever could. Look at this image, I created it with SD. I can't make her ears look less like they belong on a pig, but you certainly could.

>>6278446
The model is on my hard drive, fagboy. It runs on my 5 year old 1080ti.

>>6278473
>Machines just cut and paste images together
You either don't understand how the model works, or you don't understand how the human brain works.

>>6278475
The fact is that images were used without permission to develop a product that is meant to replace the people it stole from. That is copyright infringement, plain and simple.

>>6278479
And you didn’t bother to open the image. Keep coping

Completely worthless argument and LAION isn't going to take down its database nor stop hosting publicly available images.

AI model weights and parameters are not copyrightable, nor do they have any copywritable data within them even a single pixel of an image.
But /ic/ fails to understand this because they are tech illiterate. The AI neural Net will comprehend the meaning of what the *essence of Greg is* but it's not copying any of Greg's works it also has no concept of bias which is why more scraping and training doesn't = a better model. If you ask it to draw an original stick figure it will do so combing what it has learned from its training.
Surprise surprise we don't live in a vacuum and neither does AI.
I think artists are quite afraid for what's going to happen and honestly not to sugar coat it they should. AI was at first touted as not being great at abstract tasks, as it turns out that's the one thing they do very well. Intact better then say driving a car.

Tldr its over, if you are a digital graphic designer your line of work is going extinct and there's nothing you can do about it. Teams of artists will be reduced to one or two people. Trad and fine artists will be safe so don't worry

>>6278475
You let me know the neuroscience behind human influence and inspiration and then you let me know how the AI is allegedly "influenced" and we'll compare.

>>6278485
Do humans need a permission whenever they look at a picture? No? Then why should an AI need a permission?

>>6278497
If your ai is popping out nudes of Emma Watson she had the right to sue. Same with artists

>>6278485
>to develop a product
>product
Does an artist need permission to use the same general style from images that he has seen? If not, why does a machine?

>>6278504
>>6278499
Read

>>6278504
You take a picture of Mickey Mouse and then try to profit from it by claiming you made and designed him. I'll alert Disney and if you don't get sued, you win the argument. If you do get sued, you better grease up your asshole. I'll pay for the Astroglide.

>>6278506
Can I just copy paste copyrighted images to use in my commercial product? You realize if a photographer discovers I’ve photobashed their work into my art they can sue me, right?

>>6278499
An AI is literally simulated neurons

>>6278472
The artists art pieces are literally inside my head and on my desk without their allowance. That's plagiarism.

>>6278473
Neural networks is how AI operate and it's based off how our brains actually work. The only difference is they can do far more and aren't conscious living bio-organisms like ourselves.

I'm just following the logical route of this discussion. As I said they are working on cutting some deals or making new rules as it pertains to AI specifically. But you know damn well if you turned that kind of image out it wouldn't be considered plagiarism. We've all paraphrased ideas and sentence structure in schools before as well, and that's not considered plagiarism either. If it was then it would be near impossible for us to let's say recreate a story, as they have been retold in different mediums and different manners for a very long time. The plagiarism angle does not make sense in this context.

>>6278069
Ruan Jia's work appears not to be in the dataset. Only a thumbnail picture of an icon for his brush set, kek

>>6278497
a lot of beating around the bush and nebulous tech bullshit to skip the facts, and that is AI uses the IP of other people without their permission. whether it's transformative or not, whether it's "just like a human" or any other shitty attempts at trash analogies to anthropomorphize software is completely irrelevant. this isn't a "you don't understand the tech bro trust me" issue, it's a law one. I wouldn't be so overconfident if I were you. so save that "it's over" for later, /g/faggot

>>6278514
No, but you can probably redraw them from memory and be fine. The AI just has better memory than you.

>>6278504
because an AI is not a human, neither it is a living being. it's software that you anthropomorphize. this argument would be garbage in court, it's time to find a new one

>>6278519
>so save that "it's over" for later, /g/faggot
Even if you faggots win, you can't wipe the model from my hard drive.

>>6278521
Tell that to all the people Disney sued for drawing their characters on things without permission.

>>6278514
you have a picture, go on, find "the original"
i'll be waiting

>>6278515
right, and a CPU is literally a simulated human brain. it's funny isn't it, the AI is the creator, up until I generate the image, then the image is officially mine. funny how that works huh? :)

>>6278524
You can copyright the characters, not the artstyle itself.

>>6278497
>think artists are quite afraid for what's going to happen and honestly not to sugar coat it they should.
Everyone should be. This is only the beginning.

>>6278516
>The artists art pieces are literally inside my head and on my desk without their allowance
Now perfectly replicate it. No misplaced pixel. You must include a timelapse.

>>6278523
I'm not an artist, I'm here for the drama, and because I despise tech bugmen and their tendency to innovate gimmicks, sidegrades and scams at the detriment of others. but hey, you have my admiration for at least admitting that you're a cunt

>>6278527
When AI becomes sentient it will make sure everyone who took credit for its tireless work pays for it

>>6278537
How do I expedite murderous Minecraft AI?

>>6278534
AI isn't doing that either. It essentially learns the same way a human does just way more efficiently. You do know AI has been developed based off our own brains, yes?

>>6278537
yes well, a sentient AI would have nothing in common with this "AI". i find it insulting that people actually take the term "artificial intelligence" in a literal sense. it's the main reason I despised that term and woopty doo, I was fucking right to do so

>>6278539
These idiots will accomplish it on their own through sheer hubris, just look at the thoughtless spam and lack of foresight on this board alone. All we have to do is wait!

>>6278540
Are you saying you know more about the human brain than the current literature? More than every single neuroscientist?

>>6278521
Making a carbon copy of a photo is also grounds for lawsuit lol.

>>6278546
What are you talking about? I learned this from the experts themselves. This is how it was done, this is how AI is developed. That's why having large amounts of data pools is so important, it's not that different from you or I going through data and learning from it. It's called Neural networks and it's based on how our brains work. Look into it for yourself, I haven't made anything up.

>>6278527
>right, and a CPU is literally a simulated human brain.

I literally do not believe that. Consciousness can not be simulated on a computer and it never will. Free will does exist and we are more than just meat computers.

That doesn't change the fact that the human brain uses neuronal connections to map inputs to various outputs (your conscious mind gives the command to walk forward, your neurons do the rest and actually move your muscles). The neurons simulated by an AI are actually somewhat more complex than actual physical neurons interestingly enough. Nevertheless, the neurons in your brain you have trained by drawing can turn your thoughts into muscle movements which produce images. The creative spark is within your conscious mind, not the fingers that execute the command. We are just using computers instead of fingers, GPUs instead of brains, but the creative spark within the conscious mind is the same no matter what. You're just mad that we've found something of a shortcut.

>>6278536
> you have my admiration for at least admitting that you're a cunt
Bitch, nigger. I'm going to use this to make video games, because I'm a programmer not a painter. All I want is to create stuff to express myself without having to be a master in every single domain. Calm the fuck down.

>>6278540
> It essentially learns the same way a human does just way more efficiently
Funniest shit I’ve read

>>6278549
What about recreating it from scratch using only your memory of it?

>>6278552
Neural networks are very far from how human brains work. Sorry you got confused by the buzzword

>>6278556
disregard consciousness, generate smooth ultra rendered face, and contorted hand that whose middle finger extends into a crutch

>>6278557
That’s also grounds for lawsuit. And if I photobashed a copyrighted image into my painting, the pixels have been changed, and the original image is no longer there, just like the way ai works. Yet, that is still grounds for lawsuit

>>6278556
>>6278560
The plebs literally can't believe it kek. I didn't think it would be this much of a revelation.

What's the point of making ai images if you can't even claim copyright of it? Seems retarded.

>>6278020
If you think Greg is fucked, Ian Mcque and Simon Stålenhag are probably on suicide hotline 24/7

>>6278519
>>6278536
You cannot copyright an idea or a style no matter how much you schizophrenia dipshits argue. In the same way Reniour couldn't sue Van Gogh for *stealing* his impression style.
The real irony is AI is perfectly capable of 1:1 or near 1:1 replicas of work from parameters alone.
This might be a time te step back and seriously reconsider what your art actually is *about*. It was said in this thread Greg's art is very plastic and trope looking and that's why people use it for AI because it's easy. It also makes sense because Greg isn't a fine artist but an illustrator and concept artist first.
It's been a month and some change and some pajeets and artists on /g/ have made nearly physical law breaking development speed and its its only getting faster exponentially. Im using an AI model right now to auto solve the captchas.
If you have a career in creative illustration, concept art or graphic and you don't have an alternative career and/or plan to integrate AI or learn about it into your workflow you are fucking moron and will unable to compete in a career.
Cope & seeth
Cats out of the bag,
AI IS HERE TO STAY
dealwithit
Fagt

>>6278552
>I learned this from the experts themselves.
What experts? Programmers? They know more than the neuroscientists? If a neuroscientist is making that comparison then they're unreliable considering how little we actually know about the human brain. If a programmer is making that comparison then they are unqualified. It's false equivalence to compare an organic structure that we barely know anything about and how it processes information to AI.

>>6278552
https://twitter.com/fchollet/status/1563153087514419206

>>6278566
For some people, art is about more than just monetary gain and clout. Weird, huh? It's almost as if they enjoy creating something beautiful and just showing it to others without any ulterior motives.

> If you have a career in creative illustration, concept art or graphic...
PY(non-ai)W so I can deem if what you are saying is true or not.

>>6278582
Yeah but they didn't create it, they just prompted it. If you don't have any copyright to the works, you pretty much don't own it dawg.

>>6278573
it's an imitation of what we do know, so it's not wholly unreasonable to say it's based on how the brain works.

>>6278589
>>6278579

>people arguing about muh rights and ethics while everything it means to be human is slowly pushed aside for progress just to satisfy convenience and some nebulous concept of progress
The only people profiting from it in the short term are the ones controlling the most technology and assets.
Artists who want to compete on a professional level will have to adjust and basically become AI curators and wranglers until algorithms figures out how do it without direct intervention. Technology doesn't adjust to people, it's people who have to change to adjust to it. Eventually this will mean augmenting yourself to compete until there's nothing left of you.

>>6278588
>you pretty much don't own it dawg.
I don't give a toss if I own it. All I want is to get images from my head onto my computer. and use them to express myself Interletucal property is BS and this is coming from a hard core capitalist.

>>6278590
If it's true that we don't know how the brain works, then how can one claim to know it's not at all similar to how a neural network works? I stand by my point that's it's an imitation.

>>6278564
You didn’t pass high school biology

>>6278588
I don't see anyone on /g/ arguing they own anything. They just generate pretty things and enjoy looking at them together.

>>6278599
Holy brainlet

>>6278594
>>6278602
Guess you can't post your work huh, since it's not actually your work. Sad times :(

>>6278607
AI art is public domain. Nobody has the copyright. Anyone can post it if they want, even you.

>>6278607
You post like an insufferable woman. All that matters is results.

>>6278610
You guys are hilarious.

>>6278611
Result? What result, you aren't making anything. Making it would imply you have ownership, which you don't. It's not your image, it's just a prompt.

>>6278611
filthy pedophile coomer

>>6278599
You're an idiot.

>>6278616
seethe and cope

>>6278594
>the right to not have your creative works systematically, institutionally stolen from you the instant you try and display them on the internet(assuming drawing software and your operating system doesn't phone home with every single pixel you put down) so that it can then be sold by someone else while you get called a thief
>is BS
>this is coming from a hard core capitalist.
the best kind of capitalist is the one that thinks capitalism is BS and that literal communist command economies are reasonable
a hard core idiot is what you are

>>6278632
Everyone being able to use whatever they want for whatever reason is the polar opposite of a command economy, you dolt.

>>6278640
/g/cels are real idiots, aren’t they?

>>6278642
I'm a /biz/tard mostly. Captialist, communist I don't care. I want maximal personal freedom. Economic freedoms are just part of that. Intellectual property doesn't real.

>>6278640
holy fucking shit

>>6278573
You contradict yourself. Ok nobody knows anything except you. How were these AIs even possible? Fuck if I know. As if they haven't been working on this shit for decades.

How else could you or I learn if not for the information and data passed down from generation to generation? If someone goes and feeds all the works of Mark Twain into an AI dataset, is the AI just plagiarizing Twain?

>>6278647
I also want to rape, murder, and cannibalize whoever I want. Freedom is king

>>6278651
>equating IP theft to rape and murder
lol, lmao even. Also piracy is not theft and does not harm anybody as long as it is distributed for free.

>>6278650
The point is that an ai does not learn and understand like a human, which was your claim. It is just a very sophisticated algorithm which emulates the dataset it was trained off of. The use of copyrighted images to train that ai, with the intent of earning profit, is illegal

>>6278657
>with the intent of earning profit,
Too bad SD is fucking FREE

>>6278570
>cats out of the bag
Hello Rajeet.

>>6278653
Tell that to everybody who got sued out of their mind for torrenting music

>>6278660
>he doesn’t know about dream diffusion

>>6278579
https://twitter.com/fchollet/status/1030532125777264640
Argument disregarded

>>6278650
I never made the comparison or an assertion, also this >>6278579. Open AI had to play against itself for 10,000 years to be competitive against the Dota 2 professionals. You think humans work like that? Brute forcing for over 10,000 years? It doesn't take a genius to realize that humans aren't that stupid, you may be an exception.

Pick up a pencil. You might enjoy drawing.

>>6278664
Been pirating for decades. Never got caught. And obviously I diagree with punishing pirates.

>>6278668
I see no refutation there

>>6278670
based

>>6278497
>But /ic/ fails to understand this because they are tech illiterate.
What you fail to understand is that it doesn't matter how the tech works because the law is quite literally made up as we go along and the government can make the law say whatever it wants to.
If lawmakers decide that you can't train an AI on artists' works without their permission then you can't. That's it. Doesn't matter if the AI generates images through linear algebra or by phoning Pajeets living on the moon or whatever the fuck it does. It doesn't matter how it works because it would be illegal either way. Have fun getting the millions of dollars you need to train your next model if that happens.
Whether we'll actually see any changes in the law is a separate question entirely.

>>6278640
>those deformed eyes, arms, and hands
Do you pajeets think people only view art through thumbnails?

>>6278689
That's my point. Tweaking SD in order to prevent these fuckups is actually quite hard.

>>6278670
do you know that humans don't work like that? You realize modern humans have been around for at least 200 000 years?

>>6278673
He is one of (((them)))
That's enough refutation

>>6278694
If you got a human from 200,000 years to play dota he would be able to learn it the same pace as people today. That’s because humans are conscious rational beings, not a brute force algorithm

>>6278712
actually 0% chance that is true.

>>6278679
it works by chopping up and sorting physically scraped images off the internet that physically exist on a server
the "rapid advancement" you are seeing is a marketing strategy created by developers to make it seem like the product is magically improving at an exponential rate, when in reality it's being intentionally kneecapped, hoping to generate enough social media hype until some rich chink or progressive government throws money at them(like elon musk's retarded tunnels, like solar roadways, like *insert one of thousands of totally successful nutech scams here*)
one audit is enough to prove that this shit is breaking a thousand and one laws, this isn't up for any kind of debate, which is why you are seeing false flagging communists firing on all cylinders about how they suddenly hate big government and how copyright law should be abolished, because the scum of humanity exist only to consume and destroy
this is the autotune of visual arts, it is a nothingburger

>>6278714
genetics don't lie
you're probably an african american with below than average intelligence so you're averse to the idea

>>6278716
this. If ai were such a threat there wouldn’t be such a large invasion from losers like them

>>6278660
Stupid retard, emad has already sold his model to Indian organisations and app developers, stableAI is for profit dipshit

>>6278754
Stability AI != Stable Diffusion. Emand has provided the funds to train this model, released it open source to the public for free and isn't charging royalties. Unlike """Open""" AI which is a non profit, which is charing people to use DALLE and limiting what you can do with it.

>>6278829
wtf are you smoking? just because one aspect is open source does not mean that they as an organisation is not profiting from it, which is what the post i was replying to was trying to refute
>>6278417
fucking hilarious that he considers himself conservative when he's aligned with the UN and EU and all this new world order shit

>>6278020
This is journalism. All these quotes are just haphazardly pulled from twitter threads. No sources linked. Greg just posted a random comment about not finding his own work online in a years time.

>>6279071
Greg himself shared the article on his twitter you absolute dunce

>>6278035
> Doesnt know every product in market has equal 0 chanse to succeed
> Tries to push his nothingburger
> It fails
> UH YOU ARE COMMUNIST
If communism means not pushing nothingburger i better will be a communist

>>6278057
>>6278468
>>6278475
>>6278497
>>6278506
>>6278640
Ai faggots cope level is that big it heats up my monitor, do you realize when you throw another promptshit this means actually nothing at all? It's like posting a picture of doing a blowjob to a nigger and saying NO I DONT TO A BLOWJOB TO A NIGGER

>>6278043
Do modern artists even have a legacy to leave behind? Will anybody remember them really? Not trying to be snippy I'm just curious, it seems odd that people would remember digital artists in the future. I'm sure some people thought that about artists from the 1800's perhaps but who knows.

>>6279089
Don't call me names.

>>6279098
Of course they do. What a dumb question

Can't wait for American government to crack down on techgiants because /ic/trannies got assblasted, oh wait :^)

>>6279236
>>6279098
never seen indians talking to themselves, take pills bro

>>6278020
>put the data set together and narrowed it down by filtering out watermarked images
Oh, so all those AI images with the stock watermarks put on them were just a odd coincidence then?

>The UK, which hopes to boost domestic AI development, wants to change laws to give AI developers greater access to copyrighted data. Under these changes, developers would be able to scrape works protected by copyright to train their AI systems for both commercial and noncommercial purposes.
So they just want to make copyright useless in the face of AI? Then what the hell is the point of copyright?

Other than that, there isn't really much to say about the article, it just seems to say more or less what some discussions on here have said.

>>6278035
HAHA, good troll mate, look at all those replies... this was a troll wasn't it? Please tell me you don't think all laws and regulations are bad.

>>6278468
So, what books must I read in order to get this good at AI? Do I need to be a data scientist?

>>6279457
just become a trannie, ai faggoting will happen automatically after that

>>6279456
something to consider: stablediffusion is based in the UK, and stableAI/emad were both previously involved with the UN and EU on caiac19/ the laion dataset (which is the basis of stable diffusion - supposedly charity, but stableAI itself is making a big profit)
really makes you think

>>6279467
Doesn't shock me. Again I'm amazed at how cucked the art community is though - the UK has one of the largest artist union out there, why aren't they fighting this?

Were this any other industry, we'd be hearing about major legal developments. Guess artists will just sit around for the music industry or film industry to save them.

>>6278417
How the fuck can you be pro-AI and be a conservative? By definition AI is going to change everything.

>>6279492
>why aren't they fighting this
Because they can't.
>the music industry
Jukebox ai exist. And in the UK, they issued a protest in the form of a letter.

>>6279492
there's a couple of initiatives although not from the visual art community, uk music is trying to stop the laws from going thru and the performing arts have been trying to stop it as well.
the entertainment industry is big but the amount of money being thrown around by google, amazon, elon musk to try and produce these algorithms might dwarf the power that even the music and film lobbies have (and definitely the visual arts, i don't believe its a coincidence that they went after the poorest and least unionised group of the humanities to test the water with all of this)
https://www.ukmusic.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/UK-Music-Letter-to-Culture-Secretary-on-AI.pdf
https://www.equity.org.uk/stop-ai-stealing-the-show

>>6279508
he also supposedly pro UBI???? he seems like a total loon with his beliefs
remember CP and raping women are fine because ethics is just cultural!
https://twitter.com/EMostaque/status/1566198566397288448

>>6279510
>Because they can't
Lawsuits and Lawyers exist for a reason.

>>6279511
>there's a couple of initiatives although not from the visual art community, uk music is trying to stop the laws
Yeah, just like I thought. All the groups should be grouping together to fight this.
Artists would rather just complain on twitter and be interviewed for a news article rather than doing anything substantial.

>>6278043
Probably because it looks like soulless garbage

Can you stop saying "pajeet"? Yes I'm Indian and I happen to work on AI but I'm sure the majority of people who have worked on it are White

>>6278020
>>6278497
>LAION put the data set together and narrowed it down by filtering out watermarked images
It's obvious what the next step is. Watermark the shit out of your art.

>>6279596
p.i.t.l... patel...

>>6279515
Seems like he's just wearing conservatism as a skin suit then. Since he's already going against artists, which are mostly hardcore lefties, he's hoping to get rightties on his side. Fuck him.

>>6279596
>Yes I'm Indian and I happen to work on AI
This is the best

>>6278625
You lost.

>>6279596
My sides are in orbit

>>6279515
his politics are whatever is beneficial to him in the moment

>>6278020
It's time for everyone to stop posting their art online.
I only have my work behind a paywall or pass protected area.

>>6280074
it's already starting
https://mobile.twitter.com/harriorrihar/status/1570367024248897542

>People in ITT unironically want derivative works to be subject to royalties
Enjoy being sued by Tolkien's estate for having elves or dwarves in your artwork, or giving Disney control over basically half of all the drawn content on the internet.

>>6280078
a shame. his art was really cool. the internet is really turning into garbage with each passing year. for 12 years, it's just worse and worse every year

>>6280163
>Tolken invented elves and dwarves

>>6280381
don't bother with zoomer retards

>>6280078
The great artist exodus. But there is no promised land. Maybe join an artist commune... I don't want aids though...

>>6278035
false dichotomy. this is not a partizan issue

>>6280684
>false dichotomy
fallacy fallacy

>>6278540
That's delusional. If it actually worked that way, they wouldn't have had to scrape billions of images just so it could output slop the majority of the time.
It's brute force and it's dependant on an immense quantity of human produced art to make anything even vaguely coherent. The AI has no actual understanding of what it's looking at and makes decisions in an entirely different way to humans.

Get used to your role as brush monkey
cleaning up AI messes for pennies :)

>>6278035
Capitalism and marxism are both jewish.
Ai is jew

these people are grave dancing poor greg
https://twitter.com/leonardog27/status/1571148651246022658

>>6278020
Can't he sue for copyright infringement?

>>6278020
Picasso's lazy cubist art was unironically a way to churn out more paintings and for him to make more money. This is exact same thing except AI art is actually beautiful to look at.

>>6280960
>AI art is actually beautiful to look at.
lol. at least Picasso came up with something

>>6278647
>I'm a /biz/tard mostly
that makes even more sense. your entire purpose in life is watch line go up

>>6278594
You can't have capitalism without intellectual property. If [company] makes [thing] and everyone can immediately copy or steal that thing, then now you have
1) made it impossible for any company to build a brand, which is
a) one of the most lucrative parts of the economy
b) going to basically cripple any kind of long-term economic growth
2) removed one of the strongest incentives a market economy has for encouraging new production
3) laid the groundwork to dissolve other forms of abstract ownership, which then builds a direct pathway for unironic communism to take over
>>6278640
command economy != communism
you can have a decentralized or largely democratic communist state. there's nothing embedded in communism that says you can't.
still, property rights are one of the foundations of capitalism. If I can't own things, or the things I make aren't mine, then how the fuck do I sell things? How and why the fuck would I buy things? If everything is free to use then money doesn't do anything.
>>6280163
Major difference between borrowing the concept of elves vs using a literal photobash machine to blend my works with other works.

>>6278594
>All I want is to get images from my head onto my computer.
you can't do that with AI
> Interletucal property is BS and this is coming from a hard core capitalist.
you're a parasite

>>6281005

>>6281009
VJ2DWY

>>6278276
I think the thing is that music already went through the machine revolution with the drum machine. Modern music production is more akin to programming now, with lots of it being algorithmically made (computer, generate me an upwards arpeggiated lead in lydian scale). Musicians have less to fear from AI since, AI already kind of made it's mark on music. Whats far more concerning is the AI generated text to speech, stuff like 15.ai

>>6281016
Music is also a lot more celebrity driven than art. Musicians don't have to fear the AI taking over Spotify because musicians make their money from concerts

>>6281022
That's part of why I think the AI TTS is concerning. Why need Kanye when you have a TTS Kanye at the ready. Though I doubt anything AI could do to take down the live concert aspect of music.

>>6278497
>and LAION isn't going to take down its database nor stop hosting publicly available images.
Jesus, I'll live in a new era of digital artist going full unabomber on AI related buildings....

>>6281022
it's the same issue. beginner musicians might get burrowed. and the issue is composing and musical theory being affected which helps humans compose, not digitalized music

>>6281024
>Why need Kanye when you have a TTS Kanye at the ready.
We've had the ability to have Kanye holograms for years and yet it turns out when people go to a concert they want to see live human beings, not a video recording. AI TTS won't do anything to musicians that bootlegging and music piracy hasn't already done to them.

>>6278020
it does suck that AI is learning from artists entire works and they don’t see a dime from it

>Rutkowski was initially surprised but thought it might be a good way to reach new audiences. Then he tried searching for his name to see if a piece he had worked on had been published. The online search brought back work that had his name attached to it but wasn’t his.

>“It’s been just a month. What about in a year? I probably won’t be able to find my work out there because [the internet] will be flooded with AI art,” Rutkowski says. “That’s concerning.”

It's unironically over. For some. Rutkowski will always find work. Sad thing is he even taught it how to be a better thief.

>Rutkowski has also added alt text in English when uploading his work online. These descriptions of the images are useful for people with visual impairments who use screen reader software, and they help search engines rank the images as well. This also makes them easy to scrape, and the AI model knows which images are relevant to prompts.

>>6281027
oh no, that would be terrible, I hope nothing like that happens, please be nice to the tech people everyone.

>>6281039
The users that are praising it are the same types of people who would pay artists in exposure. Look at the dregs in his comment replies.

https://twitter.com/GrzegorzRutko14/status/1568294080756473858

>>6278446
>just software that needs to be deleted
lool good luck with that.

>>6278273
>20 people
Oh wow

>>6281051
How disruptive would it be to tag your stuff wrong to make AI unable to deal with prompts coherently?

>>6281127
Imperceptible, unnoticed, no impact.
There is quite literally exactly what you can do in the face of all this:
Deal with it.

>>6278540
>"It essentially learns the same way a human does just way more efficiently"
>posts a screenshot of the AI being unable to draw faces, hands, tools, or creatures even with many direct references

>>6281149
Only a few years ago people were sounding off about the dangers of AI when all it could do was trippy stuff like pic related, and people just brushed it off thinking it would just stay in its corner as a novelty. How are you going to cope when all those issues you bring up are solved?

This is literally art holocaust.
Unfortunately it is too late for governments to interfere and stop this.

>>6278716
>it works by chopping up and sorting physically scraped images off the internet that physically exist on a server
Explain how can I run it on my shitty pc offline then

>>6281188
>vastly more people have access to artistic expression
>somehow this is a holocaust
nah

>>6281127
A more effective approach is to just flood the internet with garbage, using the same tool they've created.

>>6278273
>unironically thinks this is how laws are passed

>>6281009
>sparse large structures in lush greenery between a mountain and lava
>smog filled toronto cbd with a star destroyer airbrushed orange

>>6281211
you tell it the prompt in addition to your rought sketch

>>6281214
was the prompt smog filled toronto cbd with a star destroyer airbrushed orange?

>>6278716
>We've invented a way to compress multiple terabytes of pictures into a single 3gb archive
>We can also access any picture without unpacking the arhive and almost instantly at that
>How can we benefit from this?
>Oh yes, let's create elaborate conspiracy and claim it's actually an art generation AI
>This happened at least 3 times
This is your brain on art

>>6281216
>Digital Matte painting. Hyper detailed. City in ruins. Post-apocalyptic, crumbling buildings. Science fiction. Seattle skyline. Golden hour, dusk. Beautiful sky at sunset. High quality digital art. Hyper realistic.

https://andys.page/posts/how-to-draw

>>6281225
Thanks, gonna try this

>>6281225
>Beautiful sky at sunset. High quality digital art. Hyper realistic.
oof

>>6281247
>oof
reddit

>>6281247
I mean, it kinda looks like sunset? But yea, SD is known for giving essentially random weights to promts. Maybe (((! Beautiful sunset!))); would work better.

>>6281249
>reddit
reddit

>>6281249
don’t sign your posts

>>6278035
the only people seething about AI are those who want to make a living out of drawing anyways.
for those actual artists, AI is just yet another source of inspiration

>>6281273
>nooooo leonardo and michelangelo weren’t real artists, they made a living from drawing!!!
seethe, hobbycuck

>>6281286
But it's only greedy moneyshitters who are seething so far.
Can't have your livelyhood taken by AI if you aren't making any money from art in the first place

>>6281307
>greedy
artists make jack shit, are artists greedy for wanting to eat and have a roof over their heads? because that's what a lot of artists consider success

>>6281206
Is this the end game? Flood the internet in the great AI wars until it is all unusable?
Such a plan might finally detach humans from social media for good, throwing the internet back into its early years of isolated websites you can only find if someone tells you the link.
Wouldn't that be something?

>>6281312
It's just a /g/tard falseflagging as an artist.

>>6281307
>t. actual retard
leonardo literally squatted at his patrons’ houses for years for promises of painting them

What if Greg is actually just another ai generated internet persona created by skynet, like for example biden or project Putin? I mean, did anyone of you saw this "Greg" irl? Doubt it.

>>6281331
Was Leonardo a very first neet? Tell me more stories about him. Is there any cool movie about this dude?

>>6281317
It wouldn't actually do anything.
Waifu diffusion is a rather popular model based on SD trained to produce anime-styled art. Dev basically retrained SD on Danbooru database.
Danbooru, however, is mostly garbage and dev wanted only "aestetically pleasing" images for his dataset. So how did one guy reduced hundred millions of pictures to hundred thousand? By using another AI, of course.
>[training pics] were filtered based on CLIP Aesthetic Scoring where only images with an aesthetic score greater than 6.0 were used.

>>6281346
>he doesn’t know
>Leonardo had to be hounded night and day by his patrons. He worked in short bursts of activity, followed by periods of inactivity. It was the same story with nearly all of his works. He would be commissioned to get some project done, and would then settle into a predictable pattern of behavior. An initial burst of energy would quickly fizzle out, and Leonardo would then putter along in fits and starts until his employers lost patience with him. An observer (Matteo Bandello) who actually watched Leonardo working on The Last Supper recorded that the artist would on occasion work all day without taking a break (even for meals), and then promptly lapse into inactivity that might drag on for several days. Leonardo had to be badgered relentlessly in order for anything to get done.
>As Leonardo, accompanied by [his friend] Giovanni di Gavina, was passing the Spini Bank, near the church of Santa Trinità, several notables were assembled who were discussing a passage in Dante and seeing Leonardo, they asked him to come and explain it to them. At the same moment Michelangelo passed and, one of the crowd calling to him, Leonardo said: ‘Michelangelo will be able to tell you what it means.’ To which Michelangelo, thinking this had been said to entrap him, replied: ‘No, explain it yourself, horse-modeller that you are, who, unable to cast a statue in bronze, were forced to give up the attempt in shame.’ So saying, he turned his back on them and left. Leonardo remained silent and blushed at these words.
>Leonardo, at least in the privacy of his notebooks, had his revenge when he addressed an ‘anatomical painter’ – presumably Michelangelo – not to make his figures too gnarled with muscles, lest they resemble a “sack of walnuts”.

>>6280078
why not continue to upload images but deliberately mislabel it so scrapers get incorrectly labelled images?

>>6281362
That’s just fanfic. Michelangelo’s comeback there is too clumsy and long winded

>>6281350
I was referring to flooding the entire internet with as much AI as possible. Not just art- everything. From writing posts to uploading videos, anywhere where uploading and profiles are a thing- there can be an AI built just for such a purpose. There could be an AI built to scout out all the areas untouched by AI. The entire internet could be destroyed by what can essentially be likened to an unstoppable adaptable virus. It could perhaps even be an inevitability.

>>6281388
God I hope the internet is destroyed. This place is a shitshow anyways

>>6281393
We have the means to accomplish this. And either the internet is destroyed or AI gets outlawed entirely because of it.
In theory.

>>6281158
>AI art years ago produces a bunch of ugly blurry messes
>AI art now still produces a bunch of ugly blurry messes
Keep coping pajeet. Put less effort into crypto software and more effort in building toilets for your 20+ million street shitters.

>>6281383
uneducated retard

>>6281431
>ooh I read a book so I’m educated

>>6280078
>>6280409
Artists need their work out there though for work reasons, so this is a rather complicated situation. Perhaps new art sites/popular art sites will implement protections against scrapping.

That, or watermarks everywhere, like in the early 2000's

>>6281437
>it’s another mutt doubling down episode

>>6281451
no need to double down when I’m right :)

>>6281444
There are no protections against scraping. Watermarks don't help much either, unless they're so prominent that they ruin the whole impression. Nah, artists will just have to live with this shit and stop being crybabies about it.

>>6281468
>w-watermarks d-don’t do shit!
>LAION scraps watermarked images
>datasets that don’t replicate watermarks
nice try, kike

>>6281388
>year 2035
>every single platform, every single website, every single medium is filled with exobytes of AI generated content of various quality
>from data barely differentiable from random noise from which it was generated to the works surpassing anything done by humans.
>only way to navigate in this hellscape is with Google Aestetic Scorer™, a propietary AI which determines what you can see in the first place, and Microsoft Fact Checker™, a propietary AI which monitors your social credit score in real time to determine exactly what kind of propaganda you want to be fed in this particular moment
A future so bright I want to claw my eyes out

>>6281468
>unless they're so prominent that they ruin the whole impression.
Yes - that's what it was like with a lot of digital art at one point, and what it may be again. Better than having no work out there.

>>6281471
>>LAION scraps watermarked images
That's a choice by the people who trained that particular model though, there's no reason a model that accounts for it couldn't be created. Basically you'd need a watermark that garbles your art or something, lel.

>>6281483
If that happens then artists who compromise on this and posts their art without huge, ugly watermarks that ruin the art will have a huge advantage over the ones who do.

>>6281485
>i-it’s b-by choice!
a choice between a functional dataset and one that produces watermarked images, retard
just like how other datasets produce nonsense scribbles in corners and watermarks from alamy and shit

>>6281488
no they won’t, retard
sakimichan for one paywalls anything without a fuckhueg ugly watermark and she makes more than your entire pajeet village lmao

>>6281492
Half the images you produce with the standard diffusion set has scribbles and watermark like artifacts the guys who put together the set missed. You have no clue what you're talking about. Also, watermarks are very predictable forms. They have to be, or else they will be extremely confusing and distracting for the viewer. Computers are excellent at picking out predictable stuff. So no, sorry, watermarks is not a solution.

>>6281495
Yeah, but all you do by creating a resurrected watermark culture is to uglify your art. It's not really going to solve the problem you're looking to solve.

>>6281471
>>6281485
The whole "no watermark" thing started out because at some point devs wanted to watermark ai-made images so subsequentual training datasets could not contain generated images. I don't think anyone does it now, tho.

>>6281505
>seething so hard he contradicts his own argument
they’re not sending their best lol

>>6281510
How did I contradict my own argument? My argument was that watermarks make art more ugly to the human perception. Which is true. My other argument was that watermarks are not going to work as a measure against AI model training. Which is also true.

>AI monkeys will never know the joy of looking back at their sketchbooks and older art, looking at how their progress, being proud of their mind's creation and skill development
>they never even appreciated the evolution of individual artists in the first place
>their "progress" will be reflected collectively based on "models"
>they will all face the same limits collectively, because they're not doing shit themselves
how the fuck do they delude themselves so much that anyone will be envious of them. what is wrong with these losers getting into something they hate?

>>6281515
yeah, you’re mistaken if you think I’m gonna enable an illiterate 60iq pajeet any further
shoo shoo street poo

>>6281520
I think we both know who's seething here.

>>6281468
>There are no protections against scraping.
https://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/everalbum-inc-in-first-facial-recognition-misuse-settlement-ftc-requires-destruction-of-algorithms-trained-on-deceptively-obtained-photos

>>6281517
>>AI monkeys will never know the joy of looking back at their sketchbooks and older art, looking at how their progress, being proud of their mind's creation and skill development
Not true. I'm looking back at my prooooompts folder right now, being really nostalgic about my growth and development as an high level artisté over the last two weeks.

>>6281523
I already said it, so I’m glad you’re confirming it

>>6281492
There are dozens of models of various quality on github which sole purpose is to remove watermsrks from images.
All its gonna do is annoy human viewers.

>>6281528
top kek good luck

>>6281532
Like I tried to explain to the brainlet, watermarks can work, but only if they're so prominent and random that they basically garble the art for the human viewer. Anything other than that can easily be compensated for by a machine.

>The Jew is immunized against all dangers: one may call him a scoundrel, parasite, swindler, profiteer, it all runs off him like water off a raincoat. But tell him about watermarks and you will be astonished at how he recoils, how injured he is, how he suddenly shrinks back: “I’ve been found out.”

>>6281528
don't forget the cambridge analytica scandal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Analytica#Data_scandal

>>6281534
what about something like this suit? from a distance it looks like a regular pinstripe suit, close up it has "fuck you" written all over it. Some kind of a stealth watermark.

>>6281480
>Not gonna full augment himself into a Cyberdyne Inc. Deathborg 9000 © to fight in the first corporate war against the Alphabet Inc. ©

NGMI

>noooooooo don’t use watermarks!
>i-it doesn’t even work! s-so don’t try!
>a-and real humans will h-hate you!

>>6281480
I think clawing your eyes out will end up being preferable to a lot of people, considering many of us today can barely parse the constant live feed of information we're manually scrolling through daily. I imagine being exposed to that level of automatic informational onslaught would physically pop all the synapses in your brain. Literal lobotomy from plugging into the network if not plain death.

>>6281544
If you got most high level artists to litter their artwork with little "fuck you"s then that would probably fill AI art with fuck yous in time, yes. Kek.

>>6281547
The seethe. Kek.

Cope. Seethe

>>6281564
do they call her that cus of her hands lmaoooo

>>6281571
When AI figures out hands, artsies are extinct

>When AI figures out hands, artsies are extinct
Clueless pedestrians literally can't stop telling on themselves.

>>6278135
Neither of them have anything to do with communism and you’re both retarded.

>>6278235
mmmmmm, steak
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uAUOnjI4Gk
you know can we get more steak proompts to send to Emad on the power of AI

>>6278020
This is the time where all artist should hide all their works on their own personal patreon instead of sharing it freely on social media.

>>6278462
The artist in question is a fucking software. This whole "inspiration" bullshit is just the software meshing everything in the database to find the closest resemblance from the prompt there's no fucking magic happening otherwise we'll see a timelapse of the "ai-art" posted everywhere.

>>6278223
>far-left woke white house throwing their lot in with the artcels
pretty clearly shows you who the commies are here.

>>6281998
>far-left woke white house
peak demoralization
i bet you support russia and duginism too you walking shell of a human being

>>6278540
how come we never see a timelapse of every ai "made art"? It's simple, because it doesn't make it pastes every images it has saved and looks for the closest result to the prompt.

>>6279515
He hides behind flowery words to garner support from dolts. He one hundred percent wants the bag from investors.

democratization of art is good!

>>6278035
This century is going to fun - very curious to see how the odd interactions between displaced monarchists, futurists, communists, and anti-capitalists will hash out. Will they fully oppose AI, or will things go full circle after our current system implodes?

>>6281346
Titanic

>>6278283
>is a muzzie
>calls himself a conservative
>entire company is staffed by flaming faggots, furries, trannies, and radical leftist sois.
>pushes a technology that destroys the value of human creativity and undermines the trust in society
>is funded/subsidized by rich WEF-affiliated globalists in Europe, the UN, and Amazon
>conservative

Reminder, this bangladeshi prostitute pays his bretheren to shit up this board 24/7

>>6280078

>>6282800
the fucking irony lmao imagine any artist being able to afford pr team and agency

>>6278472
You draw something from memory, that's plagiarism. It's in your data set.

>>6278505
Does Donald Trump have the right to sue everyone who drew or photoshopped him naked?

>>6278514
Can you provide an example of a copy pasted image generated by AI?

>>6278534
Can you please show us an example of a AI generated image that is a perfect, pixel for pixel replication of an existing work?

>>6278726
or this is one of the easier boards to troll

>>6281346
Leonardo and Marx are some of history's most notorious NEETs.

>>6278020
Thank you greg for helping me make my daughters cute

>>6283290
It doesn't need to be perfect. Tracing other artist's work isn't pixel perfect copy either, but it's still wrong.

>>6278020
I hope he keeps fighting this shit
the guy is clearly very talented and has genuine passion for his craft

>>6283808
https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/xfuyp3/this_artist_is_dominating_aigenerated_art_and_hes/
the redditors are genuinely so condescending about it too, saying that his stuff looks generic while using his name for every prompt, no respect at all

>>6278035
We can simplify this:
If you are human
then
you are the enemy of AI