/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>6345223
Steven already gave a vague idea of how an ethical model that respects the work of artists could look like in this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjSxFAGP9Ss
The dataset would contain
-Public domain images
-Trained on images produced internally by hired artists or
-Comission artists to make original work to feed the algorithm
-Compensate artists that opt in
-Royalties everytime somebody uses your name in the feed or a similar system like a package with the style of a particular artist within it
-Opt in necessary to participate in this for profit models, instead of them freely using your work until you file an opt out.

You're free to have your personal thoughts regarding this tech, I certainly have been telling /g/ tourists to fuck off constantly, but I've noticed we're still lacking a cohesive narrative that we can use to our favor.
Any thoughts will be greatly welcome, industry artists like Steven Zapata and Karla Ortiz are already working towards making such things possible, lets stand behind them and join efforts to make our efforts as artists compensated, because we're valuable and deserve it.
If you see a promptcel trying to derail this into yet again another thread telling tourists to fuck off just respond with "You'll never be an artist" and leave it at that.
https://www.youtube.com/c/ConceptArtAssociation

>>6345224
a easy to digest narrative definitely needs to be hard pushed before it's too late. i think the main problem as stated in the video is 99% of big artist are all in the camp of it'll be a good tool but for some reason completely forget how fast it's advanced in progress in a short amount of time. ye it's a tool now but it'll be your replacement later.

>>6345599
If a few high-profile artists started raising hell about the use of copyrighted works in these models, I could easily see Emad throwing a few million bucks their way to "change their minds" (maybe bringing them on superficially as "consultants," Hunter Biden-Burisma-style, to provide cover for such an arrangement). Movements need leaders, and it would be cheaper to "turn" the leaders than deal with the repercussions of the movement taking off in a big way. This could also turn into a "controlled opposition" situation, i.e. if Emad and co. realize they can't get away entirely scot-free with their egregious behavior, the movement's ostensible leaders will tune people's expectations in such a way that only minimal concessions will be exacted (cost of doing business for Emad), and these portrayed as a major victory. Watch for it.

>>6345223
>>6345224
>>6345599
sirs, the cat is escape his bags now and cannot be return

https://www.theverge.com/2022/10/25/23422359/shutterstock-ai-generated-art-openai-dall-e-partnership-contributors-fund-reimbursement

>>6345619
nigger stop your retarded spamming.

I'm not really sure what can be done to be honest. Stable Diffusion and the Novelai model are already out there to be run by anyone with a decently powerful computer and even if the devs decided to stop completely other people will just pick up where they left off. At best, corporate use can be limited as >>6345224
describes but the freelance market will probably still take a big hit.
I don't think that it's the end of art or artists or whatever bullshit people spout but it's definitely going to shake things up a lot.

>>6345614
im gonna find this stupid cat and make tacos out of it

>>6345223
AI has already won op. In a couple of years AI will also generate music and then artists as a whole will finally die out and they can go work in a coal mine

>>6345642
I prefer to work in the salt mine.

>>6345625
>Stable Diffusion and the Novelai model are already out there to be run by anyone with a decently powerful computer and even if the devs decided to stop completely other people will just pick up where they left off.
This is irrelevant, models are not the issue, the algorithm is too limited right now and unless they improve it a lot AI generated content is still piss easy to spot from a mile away.

>as to which is going to be the official position regarding A.I,
Why are you so obsessed with having an "official position"? If you yearn for thought conformity and lack of dissent so much just join a religion.

>>6345613
> Emad throwing a few million bucks their way to "change their minds" (maybe bringing them on superficially as "consultants," Hunter Biden-Burisma-style, to provide cover for such an arrangement)
my brother in christ Emad is busy being investigated by the NSA he aint throwing shit anywhere but a loo

>>6345649
retard, how do you think any group in history got any shit done? lack of dissent is doing what you want to do right now, letting emad fuck you in the ass.

>>6345613
Definitely a risk, let's keep a close eye on it

>>6345614
>>6345642
Self defeatist fantasies, product of our times, it is fine, not all of us had our balls cut by the media yet

>>6345647
Precisely, if the models running rampant today is all they can do for now we're still in a position to control the monster before it runs out of control

>>6345649
Ah of course, don't organize to achieve common goals, don't join in with others with whom you share issues and experiences, stay in your pod, jack off, sleep.
lmao my man youre glowing

>>6345653
>nsa
lol you dumb american, your can't investigate shit, emad and stable diffusion aren't american, how many times do you need to be told, fat retarded mutt

>>6345223
I see AI as a tool. Makes art creations way more accessible for non artists.
I do art as a hobby, so I'm not worried about it.
AI also works as a filter. If you can be replaced you deserve to be replaced.

Stop whining and just have fun with it. Use the AI to generate ideas, draw from it, when you combine the AI with your imagination then the sky is the limit. It adds unlimited freshness to what you draw when you learn how to use these tools well.

Steven really should play with the AI a bit because it feels like he's been drawing the same fucking thing a million times. How many times am I going to see an overworked pencil rendering of a tentacle demon? Do something new.

>>6345715
>Use the AI to generate ideas, draw from it, when you combine the AI with your imagination then the sky is the limit.
And yet literally nothing of value has been made. If it's such a great tool, where's the fucking great work? It's been 4 months!

>>6345708
>>6345715
Missed the point, read again

The problem with advocating for controlled releases of future ai is that only corpo will have access to it so you are just fucking yourselves over by arguing for stricter regulation. We are already seeing the US government in a pseudo war for control over a.i. optimized gpus versus china. The fact that we have stable diffusion openly available to us is incredible.

Artists are still the people who are best trained to take advantage of it and even more so freelance or independent artists who can use ai to produce work much quicker and make a career out of it quicker and bypass the inherent time requirement of drawing/painting mileage to go professional asap.

If someone is in control of this they wont have your best interests in mind. If everyone has access then you can do whatever you want with it and adapt.

>>6345708
>If you can be replaced you deserve to be replaced.
so eventually every artist and everyone. we'll just be batteries for ai?

>>6345719
>It's been 4 months!
Two more weeks!

When did 4chan start getting "ethics"? How many royalties is the Pepe the Frog creator getting? A.I. has been harvesting your information on the internet for decades, now it's all of the sudden private?

>>6345719
I've gotten a lot of cool stuff out if it. The real power of AI is in remixing though. Prompting is just basic, people don't understand the tools yet. The real magic and the real fun is in doing this shit I was doing earlier where I took a sketch, put it into the ai, turned the sketch into an ai generated sketch, and then kept remixing and modifying it and playing with it like clay. It took less than an hour, it's so much fun and takes your brain to these weird creative places that it normally can't go to because normally your creativity is crippled by how long it takes to draw or paint this shit

>>6345735
>How many royalties is the Pepe the Frog creator getting
no one is making money off pepe nor is anyone taking content created by the creator to make money except for the people making AI.

>>6345737
nothing here is creative it's just different styles. can you no think of different styles with out AI?

>>6345731
This argument only works because you're assuming it will remain free and open to everyone forever, which is not a guarantee and actually just a fantasy. There's nothing stopping them from pulling the rug, locking the most powerful version of this tool behind a paywall and fully profiting from it again without any compensation for the artists.
This is simply about compensating artists that feed the model the moment it becomes for profit. I agree that artists are the only ones that can will make good use of these tools and independent great work will start happening thanks to them, but this doesn't mean that they get away with doing things the way they have.
Remember the Dance Diffusion bullshit, they will try to get away with as much as they can, do not let them do it.

AI image generators will devalue art the same as photography devalued realist illustrators. Drawing will persist as a sport, not as a neat party trick, because drawing is a skill that takes much concentrated effort to be discarded as a novelty. There's too big an audience for drawing and too many people interested in drawing for the skillship known as drawing to really die.

Art aside, there's an ongoing race to the top for who can perfect the best AI. Stable Diffusion being released as open source was done so Stable AI could be a few steps ahead of the competion in public acceptance and training.
But besides image generation there's text gen, audio gen, video gen. This coprorate-globalist race for AI mastery is what really horrifies me quite frankly.

>>6345737
Sooo... old man sketches to muppets... le creative!

>>6345744
>there's text gen, audio gen, video gen. This coprorate-globalist race for AI mastery is what really horrifies me quite frankly.
It feels like we live in hell.

>>6345744
The wider issue of Data collection, brainwashing, echo chamber, social media dystopian hell is part of a very different conversation that breaks the constrains of this particular issue, but I certainly agree with the sentiment.

>>6345749
>The wider issue of Data collection
Wow, someone finally can see the bigger picture.
Imagine letting corpos launder your data for fucking free.

>>6345747
Just wait til the whole thing is automated and it just shits out soulless trash based on what's trending on twitter

>>6345741
You don't care about the ideas, you just fetishize draftsmanship. You blow your load looking at art that is way worse just because it was drawn by a human hand but you will nitpick into oblivion literally anything created with an AI. Art is about taking the idea in your mind's eye and bringing it out so that other people can see it. That's it, nothing else. It's not about the skill that it takes to do it. A fucking 2 year old is a better artist than many render monkeys that spend 300 hours rendering a photorealistic hand

>>6345754
his post hardly warranted this much seething. lmao

>>6345754
Well ideas are automated now. You had pinterest as a tool to give you references and inspiration, now you have AI give you finished pieces via unlimited gatcha rolls with your only input being picking out the rolls you like best (regardless whether they suit your original vision or not). So drawfstamanship is all that's left to value now. I believe it will take a few more years until we have brain machine interface implementation for draftsmanship to be devalued as well.

>>6345754
ironic considering AI does the creative bit for you, and the pajeets are posting "well rendered" pictures saying it's over when they can't even see basic mistakes like perspective, never mind the colour choices and composition.

>>6345754
all i said was you ideas weren't creative and asked if you need ai think of new ideas, i duno where your getting all that other stuff from.

>>6345751
If anything this could be the first step towards making sure the public knows that they can force big tech to be transparent about how they're using your information, and if it comes down to it they're forced to compensate you for any profit done on your behalf.
Imagine if the trackers and information they know about you were transparent to everyone that uses their services, imagine if you had to voluntarily opt in in order to have your information taken and used with compensation to you for doing so.

>>6345754
You don't care about the draftsmanship, you just fetishize "ideas". You blow your load looking at art that is way worse just because it had a title like "existential divorce" but you will nitpick into oblivion literally anything created to capture beauty. If Art was only about taking the idea in your mind's eye and bringing it out so that other people can see it, You would be better off as a writer instead, not an artist.

Food analogies are trite, but people really are advocating for complete fast foodization of the creative fields with AI content generators.

>>6345764
> via unlimited gatcha rolls with your only input being picking out the rolls you like best (regardless whether they suit your original vision or not).
That's how it used to work, but you're actively able to modify and adjust each picture as it's generated now. If it was just random prompt rolling then I'd agree with you though. For example, the way it works now is you could generate a turtle, now give me the turtle rendered like a leyendecker painting, now make it look like a human that still vaguely resembles that turtle. Now make it look like a hippie, now make it photorealistic, now make it look like an abstract schizo painting, and now give me a realistic oil painting of a banker which is influenced by all of the previous things. Each generation is directly referencing the previous generation that you select and including elements that aren't in your prompt, It's like sculpting now, not just rolling prompts.

>>6345776
You post has a pizza truth to it. I have beef with food analogies, butter I don't mind this one.

>>6345779
It would've been sculpting if each detail was under your complete control. Instead you're rolling for banners that let you roll for more banners until you've had enough.

>>6345779
>not just rolling prompts
your "sculpting" sounds like you roll rng in your head for retarded random prompts, then give those to the AI, then the AI inspires some more retarded prompts, rinse repeat.

>>6345779
>It's like sculpting now, not just rolling prompts.
so i just have its just copy past someelses prompts to be just as good as them just have to make sure to do them in order

Uploading artists work into a program without their consent definitely opens up the argument for a legal battle.

>>6345784
I like the randomness, it gives you ideas you wouldn't have thought of before. It's like cloudwatching but you can sculpt and influence the shape of the clouds.

The problem with having full control is that you just end up repeating very similar ideas over and over again. You have stylistic comfort zones, muscle memory, etc, and it all influences what and how you draw. The randomness / noisiness of AI forces you out of that and forces you to make weird connections in your brain that you normally wouldn't make

>>6345790
Who is going to wage that legal battle? Musicians have all their labels and brands and shit, artists have NOTHING, literally jack shit.

>>6345793
Some folks like to be concrete with their artistic expressions, some like to be entertained by/submit to the AI.

DMCA this.

>>6345800
Why not both? There is no better tool for expanding your visual library right now. Why be so weird and superstitious about it?

>>6345793
Sometimes I think we are too fixated on originality, or having a unique style, that we forget that some of the most beautiful and profound art that has had a great impact, is not necessarily 'original'. There is a very famous statue that most of us have seen before, it's the Statue of David by Michelangelo. We have been looking at and appreciating that statue for 500 years. That's a great achievement, it has stood the test of time and stands as one of the most profound pieces of art ever made.

>>6345809
ai art currently is not a good way to expand ones visual library in the future sure but right now? no even close.

>>6345814
Have you played around with it?

>>6345754
You are arguing with mindless /ic/rabs dude, don't waste breath on them

>>6345819
>>6345809
The most interesting AI art is funnily enough the most abstact and misshapen whereas the best looking is also the most generic e.g. NAI not offering anything more interesting than what you can find on booru or pixiv, outside of again surreal broken thingies like crying cake girls or glowing penis mushrooms. An effect of model training.

>>6345823
>I deliberately came to a board where people strive to make art by themselves to preach for automated art making, and now I'm upset that people want none of my preaching. How could this be happening to me?

>>6345819
I have. Now where is the result of all this new inspiration? Have you drawn anything lately? or did prompting give you enough dopamine that you don't feel compelled to draw anymore?

>>6345671
you stupid shit stained human, how do you not know of international laws

>>6345839
Everyone knows that if a foreign company breaks american law with repercussions in american companies there's not consecuences, americans just let it happen

>>6345708
0/10 obvious

>>6345842

>>6345825
It does abstract very well. It does color well. Composition is a very mixed bag. The results of "particle physics" art, that is "smash things together to see what happens", is amazing. As entertainment, it's great. It's also very educational. It's interesting to explore what are the fundamental motifs of an artist or style. Symbolist Frazetta Klee Anime watercolor? wtf.

>>6345814
There's a lot of cool shit in here. I've only been doing it for four days but here's some of the stuff I've gotten so far. I love the colors and face variations

>>6345823
you forget that for you AInsects to get crabbed on, you'd have to draw first

>>6345839
all emad has to do is not step foot on american soil and they cant touch him.

>>6345856
extradite
verb
to make someone return for trial to another country or state where they have been accused of doing something illegal:

>>6345849
This is the same shit you see on every AI art platform. It's like prompters can't get out of their prompting comfort zones, or the AI leads them to this zone idk.

>>6345849
that's got nothing to do with expanding ones visual library.

>>6345875
? If you generate something that's interesting to you, different from what or how you normally draw, and you draw it then you expanded your visual library.

>>6345875
There's a lot more art that "cute boys", "furry", "favorite dot art", "loli/shota". /ic is very guilty of having limited visual range. Maybe disrupting a few hackneyed art forms is a good thing.

>>6345881
did you draw it?

>>6345862
>return
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA YOU CAN'T READ

>>6345881
this is what happens to beg tier artist they hyper focus on things that only interest them they don't know how to draw basic objects. there needs to be balance or else you'll be teaching yourself how incorrect things look.
>>6345884
same thing applies to artist of the subjects you just posted also that has nothing to do with ai currently being bad for expanding ones visual library.

>>6345889
>HAHAHAHA ILL TRY TO ARGUE SEMANTICS BECAUSE THATS ALL I HAVE LEFT
No
>"to give up (an alleged fugitive or criminal) to another state or nation at its request.
to obtain the extradition of."

everything is ogre sirs

>>6345790
Crowdfunded lawsuits. Calling it now.

We can shit on twit twat or le reddit all we want, but they absolutely do have the capability to organize individuals into a singular cohesive effort. Given that this AI thing has had such fierce resistance across the internet I'm almost certain it will happen.

>>6346069

Quoted the wrong post, meant for this one >>6345794

>>6346069
The silver lining to this whole ai fiasco thing is that these morons accelerated so hard to get attention that it may warrant stronger legal protections to artists perhaps to the same level the music industry enjoys. The egregious use of copyright from them will finally shine a light at how poorly protected this industry actually is forcing people for higher standards of authenticity/proof

>>6345619
>See AI shutterstock image
>open up Stable Diffusion
>type what I see
wow great idea shutterstock you utter fucking morons

>>6345223

easiest thing is to teach the AI to program and get rid of the programmers. The AI will disappear over night.

>>6346149
>Still thinks, ideas, methods and styles are copyrightable.

This is perhaps one of the greatest copium threads I've seen on /ic/. The funny fact is that nearly every board (not including /i/, /p/ or /gd/ have in the span of three months produced more artwork then /ic/ has in a year.
As one anon said, photography pretty much killed most realistic illustrators and portraiture artists. The funny part is how people picked creative careers thinking they would be the most immune to AI, when in fact the one thing true computer AI is good is solving abstract problems like art and doing really specific things like text stories and automation is something is struggles at and requires a lot of hardware resources.
The pardigmshift is here and you either adapt to it or take the rope, just like with mechanical watches to quartz watches.
I for one am making BANK selling high quality framed prints of Stable Diffusion art to art galeries in a touristy part of CT.

>>6346229
prove it, post them, or your entire post is disregaded.

>>6346229
>As one anon said
>a buddy of mine told me
>my wifes bf whispered in my ear
>sources say
no one cares
>Still thinks, ideas, methods and styles are copyrightable.
Do. The. Same. With. Music.
>have in the span of three months produced more artwork then /ic/ has in a year.
how much money have they made
Oh.

>>6346254
I'm literally quoting someone in the same thread. >>6345744
>AI image generators will devalue art the same as photography devalued realist illustrators.
Which is a fact, there were entire trades dedicated to just doing said illustrations. They aren't gone but their importance isn't the same because there isn't the demand.
Just like the end of importance with swiss watches, Horse and Buggy and countless other jobs and industries Art is not immune.
I think for your mental health (and lets be honest here most artists on /ic/ are schizo) that you accept the reality of what is going on and not put your head in the sand thinking everything is going to be okay or use coping mechanisms like "AI art will never do x, or AI has no soul, bad hands etc etc.

>>6346229
>>6346271
>thinks he's making more than a few cents out of something available to absolutely everyone
>thinks the art industry is purely about illustration
I know you think you have discovered something no one here has before, but you're just throwing jabs at nothing, predicting the future in the most simple minded ways and again trying to act as if artists own nothing and deserve nothing.
Bad faith or seething failed artist that got roasted out of his dreams, who knows, opinion discarded, it doesn't matter if you're proven wrong you'll just regurgitate another defeatist narrative because you've got nothing to gain from artistry being protected.

>>6346289
no retard I don't think the visual art industry is just illustration. There's illustration/Graphic design and fine art.
>regurgitate another defeatist narrative because you've got nothing to gain from artistry being protected
Oh no another Neo-Luddite, artistry doesn't need protection with the exception of futile attempts to limit tools and methods (like AI). All industries, art no exception have benefited from productivity leaps. Also nice projection on the failed artist meme, /ic/ has always been shit and defeatist LOOOONNGGG before AI was a thing. Everywhere *non-artists* will be generating and creating better and more art then you will in a lifetime.

I feel fractals are the closest thing a computer can reach to the kind of artistic 'soul' people will sometimes refer to in these discussions. Yes, it's still mainly a tool for an artist to make something of, but in this case the tool does most of the work and the artist mainly points it in a direction.
The machine is doing exactly what it is meant to do with little deceit: crunching numbers and displaying an output in the form of a pattern. The patterns it can pump out are potentially vast and beautiful, but it's still naked math.

India will never be a superpower and that's all that matters

>>6346306
>>6346236
>an hour and a half without proof

>>6346306
>This painting you posted is not good and it shows you can't even curate.
> There's illustration/Graphic design and fine art.
>Neo-Luddite
>Everywhere *non-artists* will be generating and creating better and more art then you will in a lifetime.
Trash take after trash take, you're transparent to me, I know you're either lying or smugly outing yourself as someone that thinks he knows what he's talking about.
Opinion discarded.

>>6346324
>tfw i make more money than all AIfags combined with my shitty coom scribbles
not like this AIbros...

>>6346271
I have yet to see proof of any artists income being affected by this
>B-But its a fact because I said so!
zzzz
Also, address the second part of my post and do the same with music
>"heh ill j-just ignore that part again"

My two cents, as someone who is kinda miffed about the whole thing conceptually, but who does art as a hobby so not affected monetarily. Note: I am a 30 year old boomer who was also really against digital art until 2012 or so. :

Consensus / collective thought is ultimately meaningless at this point. We can only go the "it's a tool" route and refuse to use it if we so choose. There will be no realistic way to have a presence online without your works being at risk for use of training. There isn't any way to stop it now. It will be like trying to stop porn or piracy online, or people trying to stop people from right click saving their nft. It will be a litigious nightmare for even established artists to win any kind of case. The next few years we will see people strengthen their portfolios and con their way into ever-shrinking creative industry roles. Coom artists will just have to compete with competent AI artists that can retouch.

>>6346334
4/10

>>6346328
>>Everywhere *non-artists* are already generating and creating better and more art then you will in a lifetime.
*Fixed* that for you.
>>6346332
The real money would be in SaaS hosting and models.

>>6345624
>Hands off my HECKIN AI my dude!

>>6346335
dunno what you think is bait I was being 100% serious. I'm not a fan and probably won't bother to use it but I think it's sad that people think there is any possibility of it going away or stopping

>>6346340
>as someone who is the same as you fellow sirs I must say the poo is out the loo just give up and dont bother

>>6346336
What are you even saying anymore lmao
Your predictions are garbage just as your opinions
Last (You) now go away

>>6346351
Aww common man I'm so close to 1k (you)'s

>>6346348
holy shit nigger im not a fucking street shitter and im not shilling for it in any way whatsoever. like what the fuck do you think is an acceptable opinion or future reality? literally kill yourself delusional fucking faggot

>>6346357
Look at how the filthy street shitter pajeet FUCK lashes out when you name them

>>6346229
>you either adapt to it or take the rope, just like with mechanical watches to quartz watches.
There is no adaption, AI is a straight-up replacement. Art making will be divided into those who draw and those who fiddle (with) generators. Much like there are traditional craftsmen and factory made furniture, watches, cars, food etcetera.

In the long run people care and remember the names of individual chefs, mechanics and artists. They don't care for the names of the unlimited individuals that work on the production of factory made content as it is all dominated entirely by brand recognition.
Three months since AI art became what it is and we already have AI art brands but not a single AI artist.

>>6346940
>Three months since AI art became what it is and we already have AI art brands but not a single AI artist.
exactly if any one is the artist its certainly not the prompter, its the aI that is actually making it.
>>6346229
so its basically a get rich quick scheme? because once it gets better and easier to used and goes mainstream no one is gonna care about your paintings when can easily generate their own., not that you were able to sell any of this to a real gallery.

>>6345642
It's hilarious because it's not going to happen, just because the music industry possesses a strong copyright system. They would never get away with massive asset theft like they did with visual media because big music lawyers would fucking break their neck of they tried. Which is why stabilityAI had to release a statement licking the boots of copyright holder, detailing how their music AI is only going to be trained with royalty free datasets to not upset them.

This double standard is hilariously incriminating, considering they're already threading a fine line legally. I am baffled that asset theft of such unprecedented scale is flying under everyone's radar, whens Disney or some visual media giant gonna come out of the woodwork to shoot these niggers down? How can they get away with this?

>>6345223
AI makes art so much better than that soupy rendering in OP's pic but we don't appreciate it because it wasn't created by muh human hand

Discrimination against machines and their human handlers

>>6345223
No rules only tools

>>6347019
no loos only poos

>>6347025
i have nothing to gain or lose

>>6345834
>>6345852
>
Stay seething and salty

>>6346069
This reads like tumblrinas trying to crowd fund the banning of 4changz
>>6346229
This, ludicrous copium

>>6347038
I don't even think you guys are absolutely wrong but people here would take you way more seriously if you didn't pretend you were "making big bank" with AI generated garbage to dunk on artcels, implying corpos aren't gonna be the ones mostly profiting from this. It reeks of impotent seething jealousy.

>>6347048
It is impotent seething jealousy.
Notice how not one of this fa/g/s read anything in the OP, or understood anything said in this thread, they just have a boogyman in their minds of the artist that wants to burn down their precious A.Is because he's seething in rage so that non artists can't pump out their monstruosities like pic related. (of which that fa/g/ was clearly proud of).
Reality is artists are fine with A.I art they're not fine with it being trained with their own art without any compensation for said art, and this is a wider conversation about data collection. The same fa/g/s whining about big tech controlling the world are the same praising big tech for doing it within this context, because they're incredibly jealous of the fact that artists exist and that they can do beautiful things that they can't recreate even if given the most powerful tools loaded with the best artists. (which is in fact an artist by itself, prompters are comissioners, there's no way around it).
They don't know why they get "good" or "bad" results, they can't explain the designs, they can't see obvious mistakes and we don't bother telling them because they seem so smug and happy about their crap.
We each have our roles in life, they just can't accept doing meaningful art isn't theirs, and I don't bother explaining the magic of developing your own artistic reality, where things in real life acquire different meanings because of how you're able to perceive the world when you develop your eye enough.
Truth is, art will always be a matter for artists, and once the dust is settled and A.I is given the proper restrictions so that the work that went into created is properly compensated to the artists that made it possible, we'll go back to outperforming regular fa/g/s as we always do, purely out of good taste, but lets take every step at a time.

>>6347048
It's the nft bros new plaything. They've been funding AI-art kickstarters to pump up the perceived value too. lol.

If AI doesn't wipe out artists within the next few years, I'm predicting a mass exodus to traditional art.

It's much harder to make a case for the value of digital art when it has the same virtual capability as AI. At least traditional art is physical. (Yeah, we have digital prints but you know what I mean)

>>6347039
based chinese unbased china

>>6347100
>I'm predicting a mass exodus to traditional art

>>6347039
A.I. uses toxic chemicals. Not sure that angle's gonna work.

>>6347120
>AI uses stolen art

>>6347064

I hope you are right. I love your vision!

>>6347064

Exactly.

Only, it's pretty much impossible to regulate AI and compensate the billions of artists who had their work ripped off.

The only way to "stop" the implications of AI is to stop giving AIbros any attention for "their work".

People are already tired of seeing generated images everywhere. But they sure aren't tired of speed paints, live streams, or learning how to create things themselves.

>>6345708
fuck off to the sidelines then

>>6346337
that would be funny if i was pro-Ai. pick up on the context clues dumbass.

>>6347201
The billion of artistis should unite and sue to grind this ugly trend to dust.

>>6346337

>>6347720
also from the same guy

>>6347720
>I maxed out my illustration skills
Opinion discarded
Also what the fuck is that about stable being anti corporation lmao, what a huge retard

>>6347725
This nigga has been drawing since 2002 what the fuck, how do you not see how terrible this is lmao

>>6345823
techfag spotted lmao

>>6347720
>>6347725
This actually made me think on how to make A.I actually usable by artists.
Instead of having it try to jump ever single fucking step to completition, having it just barely render a little bit over a simple flat layout would be a lot more useful to keep control of what you're doing and actually make the process faster.

>>6347720
>unlimited powers to stand above corporations!
these retards have no foresight kek. When the art market gets saturated enough by the infinite amount of ai art people will have to pay outrageous amounts of money in advertisement to actually get people to see and watch/look at their art, and of course only large corporations can afford that.

Let's be honest, becoming an artist was a shitty career choice in the first place.

Abuse and underpayment by employers has been rampant even before AI. You didn't do this because you like money, you did this because you like painting. I don't see how AI replacing artists will stop people from painting

>>6347743
large part of being an artist is having people look at your work, and hopefully one day sharing your artwork to an audience of a fuckton of people. AI fkind of ruined that

>>6347743
Not the issue, read again, but that is indeed me in the gif.

>>6347725
>perfect human hand
?

>>6347720
Seriously can't wait for the day when these insects annihilate themselves by putting their brain inside a jar. Ted Kaczynski was right about everything.

>>6345223
You don't need to be a person to learn

>>6347720
god why are americans like this
that cringy ramble about cyberpunk distopia, le big evil corporations while on the other hand the 'golden age' modernist crap...
on top of that a furry with 'maxed out illustration skills'
for a writer he really doesn't seem to have read a single book in his life

>>6347711

Nah, it won't happen. Artists can't afford lawyers, and they don't have the balls to form a large-scale campaign against these parasites.

Maybe corporations like Disney and Netflix could sue, but even that would cause a very minor disruption to the rise of AI.

The entertainment industry is dying, and there's no contest against any new technology that comes up.

>>6347749
Bet you were feeling very smart when you typed this

>>6347751
>The entertainment industry is dying
I don't know if AI crew's trolling attempts are going out of hand or if they're just retarded

>>6347751
and you know what's the funny thing about AI users? Most of the AIfags that pretend to be artists tend to have an temperature IQ with no absolute knowledge of art in general to create complex art given they are just your average joe with a double digit IQ.

>>6347757
>double digit IQ
Yeah, but it's in hexadecimal.

>>6347753

Lmao, I'm not in the AI crew. I hate AI way more than you do. (What part of "parasites" didn't you understand?)

I'm just saying movie corporations aren't as powerful or influential as before. And if they can't do anything about Openai, no one can.

>>6347752
No, we aren't smart. Just intelligent

>>6347765
why would movie corporations be affected by AI pajeets?
it's not as if you could make a short or an animation with this

Get your pens and go make some signs, talking about AI on 4chan won't change anything you fucking lazy ass pigs

>>6347757

Yup. But no matter how stupid and untalented Aibros are, artists can't really do anything about them.

>>6346021
Why can't I have a 2d waifu for real? Was the grind all for nothing

>>6345849
Better than all of /ic/ now

>>6347745
It really did.

"Our" position will change nothing in the great picture. AI will be used extensively and improved and you will have to find a way to continue drawing for profit

>>6346336
Lmao you're that one tranny that's shitting up /v/ with his bootleg hex's
anons you're replying to a paid shill

>>6348056
>paid shill
wouldnt even surprise me. in fact this whole AI stuff has always seemed fishy as hell, just like the NFT nonsense.

>UR DAH SHILL
So, /ic/ has become as schizo as /pol/

>>6347738
A vague flat layout takes like 5 minutes to do by yourself though, and you can do it exactly as you want!

>>6348117
>can't even reply to a post
Emad is not sending his best.

>>6347751
>Maybe corporations like Disney and Netflix could sue, but even that would cause a very minor disruption
That would literally set a legal precedent, hardly minor at all

>>6345224
Karla's a hypocrite. She was silent until MJ came up, where she politely asked them to put her name as a banned word. She's not a defender for the discipline, she only decided to speak up once it seemed to affect her livelihood.

>>6345619
looks like shit

>6348126
I don't give (you)s away for free
>emad
Stay mad

>>6345223
>Don't fall for the "it's not coping it's learning" meme,
freudian slip artfag

>>6349836
I meant what I said
Who cares if it's learning or not, it's not a person, it is a machine, the freedom we give people to use knowledge as they please should not be freely given to machines.

>>6349836
Oh right, I get it now, nah, I'm not a native english speaker, the difference isn't registered in my mind.
Nice catch tho

>>6347745
Social media already killed that long before AI generated art entered the formula. If you aren't riding the algorithm you are basically invisible.

If you aren't making memes. fanart, or porn you're used to no views on your content.

>>6349873
How will the AI fags seethe when they discover that muh prooompts and plugins are being harvested in the same way that artists' works were, and then the generator itself will just start shitting out content on its own, based on "learning" what they've been telling it to do?
Oh, and by that point, some company will monetize the output.

>>6345223
You guys are so fucking retarded. You sound like truckers demanding that the trucking company keep paying them to sleep behind the wheel when they have self driving trucks. The days of getting paid for art are over. Accept it and find a new career. Your job isn't the only one on the chopping block. AI is coming for all of us. Whatever you choose for a career next, expect that one to get fucked by AI too. Our generation will never have stable employment.

>>6350156
>The days of getting paid for art are over
Yep, all the big visual entertainment companies are going to shut down.

>>6350156
Yes. Let AI do the cool stuff. We just want to consume.

>>6350164
It's not about consuming. Nobody has ever given a shit about the artistic style of art other than the artists themselves. People only care if they like a picture or not. They don't know why they like it nor do they give a shit why they like it. They just want and end product that they like.

You artists think your profession is so special. It's not. A baker knows the love and care that goes into their baked goods. They care about the process and all that shit. The people who eat it don't. All they care is that it tastes good. They don't care if a baker made it by hand or if it was mass produced in a giant factory. They just want a good end product.

Same thing in my profession (computer repair). I put so much into the computers that I repair/refurbish but nobody gives a shit about the process. All they care about is the end result. If they could download a "tune-up/fix-it" software for $9.99 that did the same thing they would much rather do that.

You artists have been in your own little bubble and have had your heads up your own asses for so long that you don't know what fresh air smells like. Nobody else wants to stick their head up your ass and smell your shit. That's a "you" thing.

>>6350161
>Yep, all the big visual entertainment companies are going to shut down.
It won't happen today or tomorrow but I doubt anyone will be working as an animator (even a 3D animator) in 10 years. Maybe 5 if things continue to progress as fast as they have so far. Pixar and Disney will simply generate their movies on giant servers including the writing, character design, animation, voices, music, etc. It will take weeks rather than years to create a full featured movie and very few people will be involved in its creation. Think about how many people it takes to run a factory today vs. 100 years ago. There will still be people involved, but 99% of the staff will be made redundant.

>>6350181
you say this but my clients come to me just for my artstyle, yes they have told me this. you have no idea how the art commission world works, basically, fuck off tourist nodraw.

>>6350187
Massive cope. Your "style" can be duplicated. In fact, soon you'll be able to generate whatever "style" you want, even a style better than yours. You sound like an old trucker trying to justify why self driving trucks will never take his job because he can read a map well and knows the route from memory. It's not the 1980's anymore, bub. Google Maps exists. Combine it with a self driving truck and your job can be done better than you can for pennies.

>>6350198
ok rajesh. just got another commission while you were typing all that.

>>6350181
Even in commercial arts like video games, if I like the visual style a lot, I look up who the artist is and check their socials if they have any. I remember doing stuff like this even as a kid and young teen.
An artist's style can say a lot about the time period they lived in, the things they like, etc.
This goes for many crafts to some extent, by the way, and it's something that AI will never capture even if it is technically better than any artist in the world.
If it's true that laypeople don't care, then that's really too sad, but oh well. People should think more deeply about the media they are consuming.

>>6350198
Harshit, I am going to add toilets to all my paintings of anime girls floating in voids and there is nothing you can poo to stop me

>>6350198
>style better than yours
The ignorance of the street shitter rears its head once more.

>>6350200
>just got another commission while you were typing all that.
Enjoy it while you can. Soon no one is going to be willing to pay hundreds of dollars for something that can be generated in 10 seconds for free. You're thinking just like people back in the Industrial Revolution. "No one will buy those mass produced clothes. My clothes have a unique style that no one can match!" Yeah, that went well for them.

Nobody wants to pay thousands of dollars for a hand-made shirt when you can buy one for $9.99 or even a really fancy nice one for less than $100. Your "style" is irrelevant. Even if there are a few stubborn holdouts that are willing to pay 10,000x what it costs to have an AI generate an image to have you draw it, they won't be willing to for long. Not when they can just feed one of your images into an AI and have it generate anything they want in your style for $0.001.

>>6350203
>it's something that AI will never capture
LOL. You sound like a dinosaur. Soon all styles will be available to everyone and time will be irrelevant. If you like an artist's style, all you have to do is show ONE image to an AI and it will be able to replicate this style and even improve on it.

>>6350203
>If it's true that laypeople don't care
Why the fuck would they? Do you give a shit about Abu Asshole's 28 days he had to spend at sea to capture your canned tuna? No. You wouldn't care if Abu Asshole even existed at all so long as you get good quality tuna for a cheap price. If Abu Asshole's job was replaced by a fishing robot you wouldn't care. It would make no difference to you. You don't care that it took Abu Asshole years of working out to build up his strength in order to work on that ship, or what gear he had to be trained to use. Abu Asshole cares about that shit, but nobody else does. You are Abu Asshole.

Thread theme
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sT5sse42iSw

>>6350181
You say all of this, but I can't recall ever knowing a trucker by name
I do know Rembrant, and Michael Angelo, Sargeant, Kopinski, Claire Wendling and Jung gi.
Art is a very different endeavor, people will not watch the best trucker drive a route, but they all sat in silence and disbelief watching Jung gi, and they could not give less of a shit about a machine that could draw like him.

>>6350238
There is so much absolute ignorance in this post its astounding. You're falseflagging, right?

>>6350240
The top 1% best artists will always exist and will always have work even when AI reaches its full potential. Just like there are famous designers who design clothes. But trying to become a famous artist in the age of AI is like trying to design and sew your own clothes by hand and sell them for thousands of dollars when the product is no better than what you can pick up at Target for $20. Nobody's going to pay thousands of dollars for your handmade t-shirt. They don't care that it took you 30 hours to make.

>>6350242
I've spent probably $5,000 over the years on art commissions and I can tell you right now that it's almost to the point where I'm going to be using AI exclusively. It's somewhat of a pain in the ass still but it's going to get exponentially better in the coming years. You faggots are going to be blindsided so badly you won't even know what hit you.

>>6350243
Aha, but so long as the top 1% of artists exists, there has to be a 99% and there is plenty of value in seeing artists in the top 20% either way.
Art is one of the pillars of civilization, it is as old as civilization itself, so long as there's something a human wants to say, art will be there for him to say it, no matter how automated the process becomes, and people will remain interested in that which comes from a fellow human, and also in the process of doing so.
The issue in this thread is all about monetization and the fight against big tech, if fa/g/s get their heads out of their ass this could actually benefit them as well, but art will certainly prevail and be there in the very last days of humanity.

>>6350238
>all you have to do is show ONE image to an AI and it will be able to replicate this style and even improve on it.
You really think this technology is literal magic, don't you?

>>6350243
Eh, plenty of people buy handmade stuff even if it's objectively worse or on par with the stuff in the supermarket. Purely for the novelty that it was handmade. A niche market will always exist, even if AI takes over mass-production.
And becoming a famous artist in the modern era is more about marketing yourself than pure technical ability.

>>6350251
>so long as the top 1% of artists exists, there has to be a 99%
LOL no. Cope harder. Think about the horse drawn carriage. Less than 1% of people use a horse drawn carriage today. The other 99% have been replaced by cars. Transportation didn't go away, but horse drawn carriages did. Cars = AI generated art. Horse drawn carriages = the top 1% of artists who can do it because they're famous and it's a cool novelty. The horse drawn carriage industry basically no longer exists and you'd be suicidal to try to start up a horse drawn carriage business today.

>Art is one of the pillars of civilization
Art isn't going away. Humans just aren't required in order to physically create it. The "artist" will be the person who has the idea in their head who instructs the AI. These will be everyday people, the people who commission artists today. There will be no need for a human artist anymore who can actually draw.

Just like butter never went away, but the hand-powered butter churner definitely did, thank God! People still love butter but no one has to stand there for hours manually churning butter anymore. That's what artists will become, manual butter churners.

>>6350258
>Eh, plenty of people buy handmade stuff even if it's objectively worse or on par with the stuff in the supermarket.
Yeah but not if it's 10,000x more expensive. Think porn. Nobody pays for porn anymore except a teeny-tiny percentage of people. They still pay for drawn porn because there's no other way for them to explore their disgusting furry fetishes but as soon as AI takes off even that money will dry up. Unless of course they put some block in there to prevent people from generating NSFW images. That's the ONLY way I can see artists actually surviving this.

>>6350267
You don't even know how to use google.

>>6350247
>I've spent proba
No you haven't, pajeet. You never even knew about this board two months ago. We all can see what you are trying to do.

>>6350269
So the average person spends $6/year on porn. That's practically nothing. When you account for inflation and population growth, people spend a lot less on porn than they did in the 80's and early 90's when they only way to get porn was to buy VHS tapes and porn magazines.

>>6350262
Interesting, but can AI make Rebecca from Cyberpunk edgerunners?

>>6350262
Again, it sounds like cope from you more than anything, you have no idea of what's needed to be an artist, actually making the art is only half of the work, observational skills are the other half which regular people consistently fail to perform in, just show me whatever A.I art you made that you think is good, and I'll tell you why it's garbage and I wouldn't pay you for it even if you made it by hand.
It's fine if you think this is what's going to happen and if you think this is what art is about, it's still wrong.
The only positive I see coming from A.I is people realizing that they have shit taste so that they actually allow art to evolve beyond Artstation photobashed garbage.

>>6350273
I'll add to this that the VAST majority of the money spent on porn is from advertisers trying to advertise their own porn. It's an endless circle-jerk where one porn company gives ad money to another porn company, who gives ad money to another porn company, etc. The percentage of porn watchers who pay for porn is probably less than 1% if we're talking about traditional human porn videos.

>>6350238
>Soon all styles will be available to everyone and time will be irrelevant.
Sounds like an extension of the postmodern hell we've been living in for the last 20 years. It's like contemporary pop music where most artists just mimic the hits of the 80s and 90s with shitty autotune thrown on top. Or movies that just regurgitate older movies (and comics) with shitty CGI thrown in.

>>6348117
/ic/ has been schizo long before AI.

They probably think this photo is AI

>>6350275
>just show me whatever A.I art you made that you think is good, and I'll tell you why it's garbage
LOL. Your dinosaur is showing. You sound like a Boomer refusing to learn how to use a computer in the 90's because the internet is "useless." AI is in its infancy. The internet was extremely primitive in the 90's. Who thought you'd have instantly fast internet in your pocket with YouTube and social media? Technology advances. that's what it does. There will be nothing you can do that an AI can't do better, cheaper, and faster.

>>6350283
So, what's your job, Rajeesh?

>>6350238
>>6350238
>Soon no one is going to be willing to pay hundreds of dollars for something that can be generated in 10 seconds for free.
AI is already here and my comms have not stopped, i think i'm getting more work actually. also despite pixiv being flooded by AI slop my pieces are still getting hits too. when is it going to happen then? when will i have to sell drugs to your kids on the street just to scrape by? the anticipation is killing me. we are all waiting rakesh.

>>6350267
I'm pretty sure the artisan's product usually goes for about the same or a higher price than the mass-produced one.
Most who are decently talented enough should still be able to get commissions, especially if they do work in traditional mediums. Maybe not enough to live off of, but that was true for many artists even up to today.

>>6350284
I physically fix shit. My job won't be obsolete for probably 20 years when the fucking humanoid robots come for my job. But by that time everyone will be fucked so I'll be there along with everyone else. You artists are just getting fucked first.

>>6350283
I know you think you're being the smartest man in the world right now, but what you're saying is just a basic ass speech, tech gospel that you learned and were conditioned to repeat over and over again, don't think I would be still doing art and looking to protect it if your words of wisdom had any effect on me the last thousand times I heard them.
So yeah, you do you man, I don't think you're evil it's just very clear your words aren't yours and it's' getting tiring.

>>6350283
your arguments are retarded and boomer-tier. few are arguing that all tech is bad, but that some tech can be bad. social media and smart phones have been cancer for society, just to name two examples.

>>6350286
>AI is already here and my comms have not stopped
No, it's not. It still requires at least some skill to get a usable result out of AI. Sure you can give it a retarded prompt like "an orange on top of the space needle doing a dance" but nobody is going to pay for a commission of that, AI or no AI. You need to be able to instruct it with each iteration it does and you need to be able to talk to it and give it instructions like you can with a real artist before this really takes off.

Also, the results need to get a lot better. It's coming but it's not here yet. Once it can do these things AND it's easy for your average normie to do, that's when your commissions will stop. And it won't happen all at once, but you'll notice that the commissions gradually dry up. Prepare for it.

>>6350296
ah i get it, two more weeks it is then.

>>6350297
No, more like 2-5 years.

>>6350294
>it's just very clear your words aren't yours and it's' getting tiring.
LOL. I've been in tech my whole life and I've been right about literally every prediction I've made. I predicted back in the 90's that hard drive and RAM would become one and that's happening right now. See Apple's M1/M2 chip. Computers are going to work completely differently in the near future when we no longer have to worry about separate storage and RAM. I theorized about quantum computing before I even heard the term. I was 8 years old at the time. AI and quantum computing are going to completely revolutionize our world. You artist's aren't the only ones who should be worried. We all should be.

schizo hours

>>6350300
I know full well this goes beyond the scope of art, there are horrible times coming for everyone.
It has nothing to do with this thread, I'm telling you, not everyone can do art even if you give them a magic button, the professional industry isn't purely illustration and there's plenty of value even in the performative aspect of it.
Art isn't carriages, post office services or automobile assembly lines, you can try to draw paralellisms all you want, it doesn't work like that.
But I know you don't care so let's leave it here

>>6350300
>You artist's aren't the only ones who should be worried. We all should be.
I'm not worried. My favorite artists have always made art with supplies you could buy from Hobby Lobby for under 20 bucks. The only tech I care about is a fucking scanner.

All this talk and action about how AI should be banned from Art communities sounds like a great origins backstory for sentient AI in the near future.

>>6350336
if you are some transhumanist freak, yeah, sure.

>>6350337
I don't think you get the joke...

>>6350300
I predicted the implementation of social media before the turn of the 21st century but thought it too surreal to be adopted especially overnight in a stranger danger era. I think making out with each other would be mutually beneficial.
>Art isn't going away.
The spirit of it is with the development of tech. Look at 3D modeling boards and compare it to /ic/. Notice how the discussions are not art oriented but how to be the most marketable cog in the industry and jerking over software. There is zero emphasis on fundamentals beyond duurr learn anatomy a loose use of the term forms. Zbrush digital sculpting tutorials are most of the time spent using a a third-rate polymodeling tool than brushes to further degrade their motor skills. Those who are rewarded are those who effectively make use of procedural tools and reuse assets. That's how you end up with professional digital sculptors that can't even draw a circle that just abuse lazy mouse and drag and drop alphas.

I can see the value of such tools for real artists, in terms of speeding up production by handling non-creative tasks, like adding base colors for large works like comics, or smart resizing of raster images when you fuck up and do something at the wrong size, etc. Beyond that, I guess I don't really see much additional value for actual artists, because whatever is generated is invariably a distillation of blandness, with some inaccuracy peppered on top. And besides, who knows if whatever AI-assisted thing you generate wasn't "overfitted" on a copyrighted work? That's kind of the point, though, the continued push to reduce creativity and steer people toward bland mediocrity. Just like big tech parents don't let their kids live on social media, Emad is most likely not letting his potato-brained son allow his creativity be limited to whatever the goyslop blender spits out at him.

>>6350300
>hard drive and ram becoming the same thing
that's not what the apple silicon SoC is you fucking retard
storage and RAM already are the same thing, except RAM just has much higher-speed access.
so essentially you're saying you were able to predict that
>storage has been trending toward lower latency
yeah no shit. i think everyone could see this since fucking turing.
are you talking about PiM/neuromorphics? AI in the future might be neuromorphic with PiM but the von neumann architecture is so widespread in computing today because it's so versatile and simple. i don't believe you're actually in tech. or if you are, you're a sales assistant at an apple store or something

>>6350300
>>6351956
but to be fair to you also, i am worried about ai. not yudkowsky-level, but definitely concerned

Fuck off bugmen discord tranny raiders

>>6345754
If "ideas" is all you care about maybe you should have gotten into writing instead.

>when you find out the real reason /g/ and pajeets like AI so much
>>>/g/89501142

>>6345224
Steven is a retarded monkey who thinks you can ban certain content from becoming completely random noise in data sets. He should genuinely kill himself.

>>6353138
This kind of anger just validates his position desu

>>6352139
>when your image generator was trained on child porn so whatever you're looking at probably has traces of CP in it
Can't make this shit up kek

Calling it, there will be AI implemented on every major internet platform to detect and report or remove illegal and copyrighted image content (regardless if it was AI generated or not). In fact I would argue the reason SD was made open source was so that AI content moderation were passed much smoother following the intevitable shit flood of AI imagery. Emad's AI push has its roots in COVID info regulation after all.

What I don't get is the obsession /g/tards have with trying to "eradicate" various non-automated jobs with tech and why they have this bizarre obsession with making artists and the like get "real jobs" like burger flipping and tax filing and the like, while also pushing the whole capitalistically-fuelled transhumanist mindset of "everything can, will and should be automated by AI".

This won't be regulated until Disney descends from Mount Olympus and takes an AI company to court.
After which they will lobby the upcoming red wave senate & Congress to enact laws based on this.
Then the EU will adopt the law too for ease of Collaboration, China and Russia will ignore it.

If you want to fuck up AI, make Mickey Mouse material.

>>6353424
Nothing is gonna happen with AI until 512-problem is solved.

>>6353488
why wouldn't be automatized? if other repetitive jobs got it why wouldn't this one too?

>>6353495
Probably already in the works, given the dipshits who created FaceApp-tier NAI things based on Disney.
>>6353488
It's funny, too, because the plain text to code AIs will be far more damaging to entry level coders than anything. Granted, most of /g probably doesn't actually have a job in the first place.

>>6353488
Because you're talking to either redditors who read too much sci-fi garbage or underage users who learned about machine learning a month ago.

>>6353508
>read
They probably watched Ready Player One and thought "I want to live in a virtual world while I live on UBI!"

pottery

>>6353646
The sheer lack of self-awareness is astounding.

>>6353646
The cryptobros were the true heroes all along

Joshua 8:29:
Joshua impaled the king of Ai on a sharpened pole and left him there until evening.

Joshua... fulfillment of the prophecy awaits.

>>6353488
>>6353498
Because art is an extremely specialized job that demands years of practice and is based in pure craftsmanship, also, it falls under entertainement area, meaning it's not essential, you don't need unlimited free art.

I apologize for the incoming rant but I'm losing sleep over this piece of shit technology and I don't know where else to post

Here /g/pajeets bending over to their corporate overlords who built it stealing from literally everyone, claiming that AI is a tool made for artfags when it clearly fucking isn't, its only purpose is to make money.
There, clueless morons flooding art websites with the most soulless, unimaginably bland images as if the visual pollution they had a machine shit out for them had anything of value to offer to anyone at all. The same idiots proclaiming that prompt crafting is some kind of "intricate art" (their words).

I feel I'm actually going insane. I didn't lose any patrons yet or anything, I know I can adapt if it takes over some parts of my job. But why are people even calling this "art". It's not, I tried to appreciate it but it's impossible to feel anything looking at it. It's a grotesque approximation of art. There are so many people getting way into it, why not get way into art instead? You know? Draw??? Look at real art that people put thoughts and effort into? Why jerk off a machine instead of something human?? Am I insane for feeling like this entire scenario is pure lunacy?

>>6353731
lefties told everyone that equality is le good
fedoras told everyone that soul isn't real
why would someone pay for something free?
why would someone wait for days or week when can be instantly?

>>6353731

It's because they don't glean any reward from actually working hard. They don't have a passion for art. They see the praise and social support that creators glean, they realize that they can't get that on their own merits (they're frequently incels/on the spectrum), and they're desperate enough to use any means necessary trying to get the interaction they crave. All they want is for people to pay attention to them--if it wasn't AI art, it'd be some other form of parasitic behavior in the pursuit of validation. That's why they spam these threads, that's why they make bots who replicate dead artists, that's why they get into shitfights on Twitter. They just want attention, positive or negative. They can't get it any other way.

>>6353756
>>6353731
They're the 2022 intellectual equivalent of people on 2000s era DA who'd trace Sonic fanart, recolor it, and get angry when called out on their shit, and/or those who would endlessly spam porn groups with their crappy incest sequences made in Daz3D.

Grow your own.

>>6353731
It is, anon. I can see a future where no one actually makes an effort to create anything thanks to AI. Any picture, movie or videogame you want, AI could create it, instantly. We'll also become even more isolated and mentally ill than we already are. Hopefully I'm not on this planet anymore when it gets there.

>training data gathered by indiscriminately scrubbing the internet for images
>there's inevitably going to be some amount of cp on the clear web
>2+2=4
how do we convince the feds that ai companies are in possession of/distributing child porn?
this could actually get some legal action taken against them.

>>6354450
I remember there being some articles already written about people using it to generate ryona kek

>>6354450
>how do we convince the feds
We? You should contact them.

>>6353731
A combination of anti humanism, tech gospel, defeatism and jealousy towards artists.
The implications of total automation are kind of insane as well, what are we going to do then? Are we meant to keep working jobs that do nothing in order to keep the economic system as it is? Are we all going to work feeding and sustaining the machine until it can mantain itself? and what then? we just sit like the fat people on walle-e and do nothing for the rest of history watching addictive personalized content , eating nutritious paste and then die?
Art is first and foremost about you, and then others can come and watch if they want, but it is a tool for self discovery and self actualization, if there's anything worth doing despite the nightmare that is coming, it is art.

>>6354450
Feds are too busy running real CP rings to worry about pixels

>>6354601
But social media users aren't and they love to hate on these kind of stuff. If public opinion go against AI, it's already a great victory.

>>6354470
I guess if you have no ambition, no skills, no desire to improve yourself, zero creativity, and work as a wageslave, the idea of existing in a world where you receive a UBI so you can just veg out inside a VR playground while a machine feeds you the entertainment equivalent of a "customized" McDonald's order of slop sounds amazing... So I guess it isn't too surprising that plenty of reddit numales would cream themselves at the thought.

>>6353646
Quote from that thread:
>aihellnet 11 hr. ago
>Yeah, I just put a watermark on everything I put on Deviantart using Irfanview. Just 10 seconds to put a watermark on a 100 ai generated images, lol.
AIfags are literal cancer.

Reminder that DA is owned by Wix who has investments in the NFT and AI sectors, and even owns one commerce solution called Rise AI.

>>6354625
>They're the 2022 intellectual equivalent of people on 2000s era DA who'd trace Sonic fanart, recolor it, and get angry when called out on their shit, and/or those who would endlessly spam porn groups with their crappy incest sequences made in Daz3D.
Truer and truer every day. Let me guess, there's some complaining about stolen prompts, another person's generated image is too close to their generated image, that somebody else's generated image was just img2img'd off of their OC DO NOT STEAL generated image?

>>6354450
we could use the ai to generate realistic looking cp, and have it posted all over social media.

>>6345224
An ethical system would have all art tagged, linked to the artist, filed and documented who willingly contributed in its database. That way we can see who is contributing. It’d also have no way for random people to upload art on its website. Finally, there’s be a forum where any artist who chooses to opt out (or unintentionally got their art stolen from) could search through the database for their art and get it removed. Artists should also be willing to opt out any time since all art belongs to the artist, but that makes AI bros seethe.

As long as “AI art” aka these image scrapers + bad filters aren’t consensual, it’s art thievery and hurting the art world.

>>6353731
> clueless morons flooding art websites with the most soulless, unimaginably bland images

This is how I felt about most art on social media especially twitter.

>>6345754
lmao you went Nuclear for a harmless comment it really struck a nerve eh.

>>6345642
If my art career fails, there is always politics.

>>6345754
Thin-skinned AI bros. You can't just say it's all about the mind's eye, completely eliminate any artistic process, and say a stolen and generated image is the same as real art.

>>6345764
Why would any artist in their right mind post their draftsmanship online now? Idiots like you just admit you want to steal it.

>>6345735
>how much is the pepe the frog creator making?
Matt Furie is making bank last I checked, but then again, crypto is at a fraction of its power right now.
Needless to say that without 4chan popularizing his character he would never have made that money, and frankly the best pepe art he’s selling would never have been made if he didn’t feel the need to “reclaim” his creation somehow. Yet, he did it, he took Pepe back and made it work for him.
What it comes down to is this: artists are seen as weak and defenseless, and that’s only because of those times that they’ve accepted being treated like bitches. It is entirely optional whether or not they seize what rightfully belongs to them from the maw of psychopaths.
Most of us don’t have the capital to throw around for lawsuits so if there’s a class action anything happening, it’s in our best interest that we lend support some way some how, even if that just means giving our influence to a common narrative. Even if one’s circle is small, there’s always a knock-on for how you affect others. Everything that everyone does matters to someone, never fall for the demiurgic lie.

>>6345737
I don’t see a reason to give a shit about these generations. No story, no character, nothing. And worse, it wasn’t made with skill, or craft, there’s no reason behind what I’m looking at. There’s no identity behind this, nothing to connect to.
Doesn’t help that everything but the first two images look like shit.
If normies had their way, and this is what passes for iMaGiNaTiOn, art would be dead. AI by itself won’t kill art, but lowering of collective standards will for sure. The most demoralizing aspect of this AI shit for me is how shitty public taste in art is. It wasn’t news, but still a shock how normans can look at this shit and be impressed and excited.
Have fun feeding what meager abilities you have to a machine that works tirelessly to spite you.

>>6345793
All this because we decided that “art can be anything.” You don’t even need to actually express yourself, a machine can do it for you and you’ll accept that as if it came from you. Let the machine tell you how you really feel because you won’t even know by the end of it.
>>6345769
>>6345752
>>6345749
>>6345751
These anons have an idea of what’s at stake. Art might be the most obvious battlefield for what we’re fighting but it’s way bigger than making pretty pictures or working in duh industwy.
Do you think that you’ll be able to express any kind of dissent at all in an auto-generated future? Do you think you’ll even be talking to other human beings on the Internet? Nevermind surveillance tech or deepfake news or any of that shit.
There is nothing okay about any of this.
“If my art fails there’s always politics” used to be a joke, but there might literally be nothing worthwhile left.

>>6345849
I like this one because I can actually see a character and storytelling to this image. The rest look like shit, and I care a lot less about what I do like about this image because its all incidental anyway. Just knowing it was made by AI makes it worse for me, completely nullifies whatever impressed me to begin with. Part of the enjoyment of media is the knowledge that someone made what you’re enjoying. This ain’t it. You’ll never be an artist.

>>6345881
Expanding your visual library has usually referred to going outside and observing the real world, and getting away from artistic abstractions. For example, seeing a real car to learn how to draft car mechanics, looking at a real person to understand form and softness, working out to build a mind-body connection and use that knowledge in your gestures, etc etc etc.
Obsessing over AI slop that’s nothing if not abstract, will not teach you anything let alone “expand your visual library.”

You will never be an artist.

>seeing somebody has been inspired by your work and makes their own fanart of it
I actually made something that inspired someone. That's awesome!
>seeing somebody has referenced your artwork in one of their pieces
Wow, this artist respects my abilities and wants to learn from my work. That's pretty cool! Let me check out their works and see what I can learn from them.
>seeing somebody has flat out traced your artwork and is passing it off as their own
That's shitty. I guess at least he saw artistic value in that pic? Hopefully one day he'll grow out of it and produce works on his own.
>seeing somebody has incorporated your work into one of their image generator training sets, which you find out because you see your name in the list of tags
So somebody who feels that artists have no value and thinks he can use a program to replace me and other artists has decided to use my work as part of his picture shitting machine. Go fuck yourself.

Even outside of the false equivalency between machine learning of art and human learning of art in terms of referencing other artists, I imagine I'm not alone regarding how I feel when it comes to knowing a fellow artist referenced my work vs some image generating dipshit tossing it into his blender. One comes from a place of respect or homage, the other seems to come more from a place of disdain, or rather some bizarre attempt at domination

>>6346021
>lolis poisoning the AI with bad taste and taboo subjects that normies find reprehensible
Lolifags for once doing something useful. Now make the AI overtly racist too.

>>6355206
Are any of the image generators spitting out pictures of nogs when prompted to produce an image of gorillas?

>>6347019
>no rules only tools
Was bad enough when we were talking about tracing and photobashing. The line should’ve been drawn way before now.

>>6347773
>Fucking BOTS again
>the empty internet theory is real
Now I’m paranoid that I could be talking to a robot instead of an exceptionally stupid person on the Internet.

>>6348277
To be fair, AI caught all of us with our pants down. She’s one of the only big personalities that’s aggressively going after AI, for whatever that feeble attempt is worth.

>>6350267
>Think porn. Nobody pays for porn anymore except a teeny-tiny percentage of people.
And yet there’s a porn industry, and any attractive girl willing to whore herself out can start an onlyfans and become a millionaire with smart marketing. Curious.
Commission artists and onlyfans pornstars have something in common I didn’t think of till now actually, and that’s whale-hunting. Whales aren’t going away, but they might become more discerning. Comm clients LOVE having an artist all to themselves, almost like a personal assistant but for conjuring their visions, made all the better by the relationship they have with the artist. That’s real patronage in the trad sense and it is very much alive.
You keep making analogies to t-shirts and butter but you’re missing the fact that art was never that type of commodity, in the sense that it’s not interchangeable with any other old piece of art.
You’re not here just to shill, although I hope you’re paid well because you’re doing a better job than your coworkers. For you I think it’s very personal. You’re here to be spiteful because you’ll never be an artist.
But it’s okay, maybe someone in your office has a busted mechanical hard drive that you can pour your heart and soul into removing and replacing.
A pc repair technician: now THAT is a surprising profession, in an age where any and all problems with your pc can be solved by a google search and a YouTube video. Hope you’re eating well.

>>6350300
>I predicted back in the 90's that hard drive and RAM would become one and that's happening right now.
Groundbreaking, only took 30 years to come true. Are you a time traveler as well?

I find the horse and automobile analogy odd, since unlike cars, AI Art still requires human artists to generate images. That's what the training models are: data gleaned from the work of artists.
How can a car replace a horse if the car is run by the horse?

>>6355229
The horse and automobile analogy also doesn't work the way AI sectants would like to think it works because greenhouse emissions are a thing.

>>6350298
What's required for AI to even come close to replacing traditional art is image generation that is 1) consistent -- preserves desired styles and designs in any conceivable pose and 2) specific -- needs to be able to reliably generate down to every desired wrinkle and crease and not suffer entire design distortions whenever a dynamic position is input.

What you'd need for that is software that can generate specific 3d models on prompts, somehow know how to rig them through prompts, somehow have your prompts be specific enough to guide 3d models posing through 3d space, somehow preserve the topology rendering without excessive boiling in each frame, somehow know how to trace and apply a 2d image to each frame, somehow maintain stylistic consistency so that every frame could run together seamlessly if desired

Right now none of that is possible due to design limitations (again, AI doesn't operate in realtime 3d logic, so it can't) and also computation (datasets to achieve this don't exist; even closed top-end models still would need trillions of parameters and a consumer GPU far more advanced than anything that could be expected in the next decade)

You probably won't understand any of this argument though if you're an AI evangelist because it would require you to stop using magical thinking. But that might be asking too much if you think all of this can be done in as few as even 5 years

>>6354450
>people would prompt stuff I don't like!
after you convince pencil factories and adobe that people draw cunny.

>>6355229
There's also another great difference, transport is very important for our society, you don't drive a automobile just for fun. Art is only made for expression and/or entertainment.

>>6345224
Reminiscent of Napster to Spotify days.

That model looks good but I can state for a fact that any artist contributing to the dataset will receive .0010 cents per month for doing so. Whoever rtuns it will rip the artists off just like every musician is currently

>>6357375
Not an AI shitter but isn’t everything you described that new Nvidia remake AI? They used it on Morrowind when they announced the new GPUs and features. That’s running in real time and replacing 2D textures and 3D objects on the fly without actually messing with the game’s code right?
Or did I completely misinterpret that video and/or fall for marketing?

>>6357779
It's not the same technology. It's basically a way of squeezing a little bit of extra graphic fidelity out of already existing assets. Even that's going to be like ray tracing where it's supposed to be the marquee point of the hardware but in real-time consumer use maybe gets you slightly more ripples on the puddles in Cyberpunk. What I'm talking about is basically the kind of tech that would make Arc System Works obsolete, but nothing is going to get close to that for decades. Certainly not with whatever barely iterative graphics cards are coming out (which is another problem, they can only make the dies on these cards so tiny, which is why new GPUs are beasts that won't fit most systems. Computing has to catch up to physical limitations, which is another reason AI isn't guaranteed evolution)

>https://githubcopilotlitigation.com/

Oh no no no AI bros what is this?

>>6358474
Emad's anus tightened.

>>6358474
Wake me up when artists file lawsuits against SD and their open source data hoarding shells and especially the for-profit NAI.

>>6346229
>pardigmshift is here and you either adapt to it or take the rope
tries to say we cope by being a cope himself

>>6358487
Sakimichan can afford a lawsuit right?
Someone trained it on her stuff just now.

>>6358579
>S-sakimichan can afford a lawsuit right artsisters?!

>>6358579
>melty everything
>zero stylistic consistency

You understand that in order for AI to be the great meat replacement engine, it has to make things that are *better* than what it's trying to copy, right? Sakimichan's style already looks like collage art and this shit can't even manage to do that properly.

>>6358591
>it has to make things that are *better*
We have fast fashion. Want good clothes? Go to Nordstroms and pay up or go to an old clothes store. Now we have fast art. The market will go with cheap and fast.

>>6358609
You're right, fine dining doesn't exist because McDonald's is a thing. Great argument!

>>6358487
Retard I hope you and your fucking mom never fucking wake up

>every argument made against art by ai-tards can also be applied to music
>point out their rigorous copyright protections
>this causes the ai-tard physical pain

I'm going to preface this by saying that I think AI genned image mught be great for creating references or backgrounds. As a tool I think its going to be great.

However, i don't think it really is going to be a meat replacement for 4 reasons.
1. As the algorithm trains, it will (and already has) start having "a look" which means that it cuts it's outliers according to it's heuristics, and the style stagnates. The stylistic equivalent of beige.

2. Eventually people will get sick of samey looking full front or 2/3rds views of big titty animeish girls or smeary distopian city scenes. I can for the most part tell when someone is just posting a shitload of ai pics to their DA account because they all have the same look even when the subject matter is vastly different.

3.Volume. AI is great for volume, but again it's not very interesting. Is some of the lighting and color choices impressive? Sure, they are usually pleasant. Is the image interesting? Not often. I see the same thing with human artists that render really well and make beautiful scenery, but the image is just not that interesting.

4. If there is ever a trend or a taste change that originates outside of social media, AI will be the last to know. Despite what so many want to believe, social media isn't real life. A lot still goes on offline, or in less conspicuous corners of the internet. Thats where trends and styles come from for the most part. Outside of the mainstream, and social media has become 100% milqtoast mainstream

>>6358474
based, hope they win the case so people have a precedent to fuck stabilityniggers upon
they already spread their legal asscheeks wide open with their dance diffusion double standard

>>6358474
it begins.

>>6358579
>"new" AI thing comes out
>it looks worse

>>6358625
All good points. #2 is already happening -- stability threads are starting to die off, people in them are frustrated at how much time is required for something that's supposed to be "instant" and "superior" meanwhile requires hours of tuning to get something not any more special than what countless other people are prompting. As the quality of AI art remains capped at uncanny valley ugliness people are starting to look at the trend like NFTs which also promised revolution but instead did nothing but sucker anyone dumb enough to put money into it.

I used to say AI might be a threat. Now we're looking at complete stagnation until someone makes something more competent that also manages to get leaked and is also fully open source (good luck there)

>>6357375
>What's required for AI to even come close to replacing traditional art is image generation ...
What's required for AI to replace TRADITIONAL art is for mobile robots to achieve sentience.
Traditional art involves actual OBJECTS like paintings, sculptures, installations, etc. The richest and most respected artists in the world are still fine artists creating objects. And a cartoonist renown as Robert Crumb bought a chateau in France with a few sketchbooks.
When robots get to that point we'll have more serious problems than art replacement, consider current 'AI' art a warning shot.

>>6358691
AI art isn't even a warning shot. It's done nothing but reinforce the value of what humans make. Until it achieves magical sentience it's an ez-bake oven for broke basement coomers.

>>6345619
There needs to be a movement of people refusing to buy AI stuff, whether that be outright boycotting or pirating it. Especially when more AI games and films start being pushed.

>>6347720
>bashing the Amish
What did they do wrong other than try to live an honest life safe from clown world?

>>6347725
Omfg. These are the arrogant bugmen butting in everywhere with their stupid opinion.
"Perfect hand" btw..... . Unreal..

is this a bad time to decide i want to be a painter? like, for money

>>6358474
>jews ruining everything
And /ic/unts celebrate it.

>>6359832
You should stop breathing. I heard jews do it.

Drawing is like knapping flint. Used to be a good skill. Then somebody invented bronze. People still make arrowheads from rocks using hard earned skills. But technology marches on.

>>6359832
>protecting the intellectual property of artists and software devs from getting exploited by money hungry companies
>"J-jews ruin everything!!!111!"

Smartest /pol/ak.