/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

[Anonymous No.6230338]

WHY WON’T THEY JUST FUCKING STOP AAAAAAAAA

[Anonymous No.6230347]

[Anonymous No.6230412]

Humanity was destined to birth its replacement, just as chimps birthed us. But this time the resulting intelligence will kill all biological life in about 10 seconds.

[Anonymous No.6230423]

>>6230338
It's impressive, but the elmo with the dead stare, the removal of all charm from the cat...

I do wonder if these AI's can get much better than this. Yeah it improved quickly, but that's because they sucked up pretty much all the art in existence for their reference to create the AI, and it's still so wonky.

[Anonymous No.6230425]

Problem?

[Anonymous No.6230428]

I haven't seen a single interesting image from ai, it all looks like generic crap

[Anonymous No.6230431]

We're charging straight towards our death with glee.

[Anonymous No.6230441]

>>6230423
diminishing returns, just like with the video game graphics.

[Anonymous No.6230442]

>>6230428

[Anonymous No.6230447]

>>6230425
Yes.
The way the right side of his mustache splits into 2 and becomes blurry, while the left side perfectly follows his bulging cheek is incredibly unappealing... and those eyes...

This could be worked over to look really cool, but the thing is that those who are preaching the most loudly for AI don't seem to have the skills for that.

[Anonymous No.6230463]

>>6230428

[Anonymous No.6230465]

>>6230447
>The skills for that
You mean basic Photoshop, including Content Aware Fill?
The goalposts keep moving it seems

[Anonymous No.6230479]

>>6230465
Goal posts?

Anyway, if it's so simple, go ahead, fix it and post the result buddy. Show all us art assholes you're the new master.

[Anonymous No.6230482]

>>6230423
>>6230428
>>6230447
It's so obvious that you people are nitpicking at something where you want to see fault. Maybe you don't even realize the scrutiny you're putting here, due to feeling stressed about the massive seachange, and that's understandable.

>the elmo with the dead stare
the fuck do you think elmo looks like?

I have half a mind to post some actual art in a smug way and watch you pick apart how bad it is due to being AI, but I don't have the time for such things. 100% though most of you would walk right into it.

[Anonymous No.6230487]

>>6230479
No, that's okay I'll pass. Because no matter what, you will scrutinize to see some fault. And I understand, the craft you've been pursuing is being relegated to a side-show spectacle like mixing your own paints or building model train sets. You're upset, I get it. From revered artist down to a speedrunner or something.
But anyone can look at that picture and see, it would take a matter of minutes to fix the mustache. Let's even say hours. As opposed to how long, to create the image from scratch?

[Anonymous No.6230509]

>>6230487
>But anyone can look at that picture and see, it would take a matter of minutes to fix the mustache. Let's even say hours. As opposed to how long, to create the image from scratch?

Then fix it.
You're insinuating that artists have become obsolete and the talents needed to make these AI images great are simple things, so prove it.
And to be frank, I've flip flopped around on this issue: seeing it shown in youtube videos had me worried as they've shown some great examples, but examples such as what you've posted here? Yeah, I'm no longer worried; they are definitely great bases to work off of, but you still require the talents to do that - and I'm guessing you don't draw anon based on your posts.

Will there be less work for artists? The poor third worlder illustrators who were getting by are probably screwed (sorry Indians), but I think first world professional environments aren't going to accept these as is.

[Anonymous No.6230512]

>>6230487
Interesting ego take, but without artists such AI would be completely worthless, as it can not bootstrap a corpus of styles nor any creativity whatsoever.

[Anonymous No.6230517]

>>6230487
You have a pretty myopic view of what art is and what artists do.
These types of generic portraits with no context like >>6230465 and >>6230425 were already pretty worthless before AI. There was already an infinite number of them, we didn’t need any more.
When “artist” is no longer a job title, when anime and manga writers can produce a whole series by themselves without the help of an artist, then I will acknowledge that you won.

[Anonymous No.6230522]

>>6230482
You're posting a creepy looking shot of elmo similar to OP's image.

An artist would know how to draw Elmo in an appealing manner, the AI doesn't know to do that.

[Anonymous No.6230533]

>>6230517
>I will acknowledge that you won
You're fighting windmills dude.
I have no stake in "artist" being a job title. If pressed, probably better that it is.

>>6230509
>Then fix it.
Yeah no lol.
>I'm guessing you don't draw anon based on your posts
I have over the years, rather poorly, however I could fix this up fine enough with CAF (I don't agree with you about the cheeks, just part of the mustache) but there is absolutely no way to pass your scrutiny here. Just look at this shit >>6230522
They don't need to be accepted as-is, they turn work-from-scratch into touch-up work.

Not to mention, that quite a lot DOES come out good enough as-is.

[Anonymous No.6230540]

>>6230347
Look, an actual textbook slippery slope fallacy.

[Anonymous No.6230555]

>>6230533
I have no doubt that an algorithm can churn out similar visual patterns far more efficiently than an artist can.
But I'm just not interested in it, it's an astounding technological achievement for sure, but it is not an artistic one. I'm interested specifically in the process of art-making in the sense we think of it currently, as in drawing, sculpture, ceramics, and so on.
So a generated paste of mushed up data doesn't speak to me as there is no author (unless you include the AI as one). I am looking for the remnants of human hands when I look at art.

[Anonymous No.6230562]

>>6230533
My guy, have you thought that in the same way you think artists are trying to defend the passions/work, you are doing the same in your glorification of this AI.
You said to look at >>6230522 , I did, and I completely agree. The AI draw Elmo looking kinda creepy, this is something a human would need to fix. You say this is easy, but can't be bothered to fix the images you've posted.

And just to show I'm not being totally biased; I like the piece you just posted. If every piece came out like this I'd be more concerned.

However the AI lacks consistency, and while "quite a lot DOES come out good enough as-is", a lot of it seems to come out needing major work, and if something is being made involving the same character or environment etc, it seems this does require the human hand.

so I'm not particularly concerned with AI at the moment, it seems more like an interesting tool that we'll need to integrate into our work at some point.

>>6230540
>Cause and effect is just slippery slope fallacy
I think sometimes people over-intellectualize things and can't appropriately look at an argument.

[Anonymous No.6230576]

It doesnt matter how fast this trash pumps out trash because its all trash
You know this is a shill campaign because only soulless tech bros would be impressed by anything this garbage program shits out

[Anonymous No.6230584]

>>6230576
https://voca.ro/1dt4vAw2qrYO

[Anonymous No.6230587]

>generate 9 of these
>don't like any? Spend a couple minutes to generate 9 different ones
>pick one to touch up and finish
It's a tool, yes, and it isn't going anywhere, and is only going to get better.

[Anonymous No.6230596]

What do you think of this?
>alien text on badge
LITERALAARRLY UNUSABLE GARBAGE
>knows it's AI
EMPTY ADN SOULESS

[Anonymous No.6230600]

don't care still drawing loli feets

[Anonymous No.6230605]

>>6230587
Unironically what is the point of these though?
Are you going to coom to it? Did you really not have enough images of women in latex suits before? We already had an effectively infinite number. There was no need to produce more, even just for your own personal use.

[Anonymous No.6230607]

>>6230587
It's a tool for adhd riddled consumer addicts to get an endless supply of meaningless goo and further exacerbate their decline to early-onset dementia

[Anonymous No.6230616]

>>6230596
I kinda like it, though the face (particularly the eyes) need work. Also the jumpers collar is screwed up.

[Anonymous No.6230618]

>>6230562
different anon but I agree, I say it can be used well if most people actually bother to fix stuff but most these post these tech bros giving us can't be bothered with that.
I remember one anon too that said they'll would just create a turnaround using 3D AI base on concept art another AI did. Which sounds spectacular but that already means your working on project files that who knows what the AI saved things as or did. Expecting your average person to also be willing to learn multiple files types and conversions ain't gonna happen. Let alone expect them to be able to fix that if something went wrong.

[Anonymous No.6230619]

>>6230596
It’s not perfect but it’s quite good

[Anonymous No.6230635]

>>6230587
what design were you going for here it seems like it did chells design and tried to create tifa and just a bunch of cat suits.

[Anonymous No.6230656]

>>6230338
Its shit, but:
1. General public eats shit and sucks off the tapeworm from the fingers with smacking lips sound
2. In like 10 years or less it won't be shit anymore
The point is, yes we're fucked. After the trend fades in the next 20 years man made art is going to become a luxury thing, meaning you have to be a fucking monster to manage to get some money out of it. And you will make a shitton of money, but it's going to be ten times more brutal than now
Technology was a fucking mistake. In 100 years there are going to be child vending machines like in the 1950s sci-fi movies, and humanity will become a complete slave to its creation
What the fuck

[Anonymous No.6230696]

>>6230656
>In like 10 years or less it won't be shit anymore
I question this. The way the AI works is that they feed it tons of images and art with words and tags associated with it until it starts to recognize patterns and is able to recreate them. These AIs have had practically all the art in the world fed into them, why aren't they perfect yet? AIs are complicated beasts, and there may be no more perfecting than this for some time, though features such OP's post are another story.

So I think it'll take longer than 10 years

[Anonymous No.6230709]

I tried to make movie shots and I think once it improves this could also replace the movie industry

[Anonymous No.6230712]

>>6230709

[Anonymous No.6230732]

>>6230709
>>6230712
AI's women often remind me of Robert Valley's work.

[Anonymous No.6230738]

>>6230696
>it'll take longer than 10 years
Maybe you're right, but the shitty taste of the masses will adjust to what's popular at the moment, so we'll reach the critical point before the si is even actually good
I can already see people sending back their requests saying "can you make it a bit more ai like? lol"
Fucking horrible

[Anonymous No.6230744]

>>6230596
>What do you think of this?
>alien text on badge
>LITERALAARRLY UNUSABLE GARBAGE
It literally says WYO

[Anonymous No.6230749]

>>6230738
>wow Anon, did you draw that? That's so good! It looks just like something an AI would make!
Dark times ahead

[Anonymous No.6230771]

>>6230749
Yeah, AI art can look cool... but this is what I hate about it. What can mitigate this? it's a bit like "it looks just like a photo!" but 100x worse.

[Anonymous No.6230785]

>>6230749
>Askew facial features
>Bent limbs
>"Hands"
>asdfdf
T-t-this Looks Nothing Like AI Art Mum!

[Anonymous No.6230825]

>>6230749
Jesus Christ that's even worse than my example

[Anonymous No.6230834]

>>6230338

I'm a programmer and I think I can improve it even more.

A lot of AIs don't have construct or anatomy understanding, however I think you can probably feed anatomy and 3D construction into an AI to make it better.

Thinking of doing this as a github project.

[Anonymous No.6230839]

>>6230834
c-cool but can you make an ai that can love?

[Anonymous No.6230844]

>>6230834
Thanks for helping ruining humanity pal!

[Anonymous No.6230858]

>>6230587
>artist signatures still present
while youre genoooorating, can you make one with a jewish lawyer taking a pajeet developer to court. We will need it

[Anonymous No.6230866]

>>6230858
signature on the bottom left is very intact, I suspect these images are a lot less transformative than we've been led to believe.

[Anonymous No.6230893]

>>6230866
A signature specialist can probably track the original artist it sampled from almost effortessly

[Anonymous No.6230912]

>>6230482
>"AI will replace artist soon"
>OK let's put ai art to scrutiny like it's done with every artist ever
>NOOOOOO YOU ARE NITPICKING
epic.

[Anonymous No.6230918]

>>6230858
>>6230866
>>6230893
You're misunderstanding. This isn't bringing in someone's signature, this is the AI thinking "something that looks like a signature should go on a picture like this"

[Anonymous No.6230921]

>>6230587
> Imagine as an artist seeing your own signature distorted in several copied drawings trained on your own works, but still recognizable enough so you can tell the specific traits of your own handwritting.

ainiggers are worst than subhumans holy shit.

[Anonymous No.6230922]

>>6230918
Cope

[Anonymous No.6230927]

>>6230918
Tell it to the judge :)

[Anonymous No.6230928]

>>6230918
kys

[Anonymous No.6230931]

>>6230428

[Anonymous No.6230936]

>>6230928
He’s not wrong. The AI isn’t photobashing. It’s a cope to think otherwise.
I had a little hope that Disney or someone would sue the shit out of these companies once they started charging people for AI-generated pictures of Mickey Mouse. But people can already download the software and run it locally so the cat’s out of the bag now.

[Anonymous No.6230941]

>>6230936
>>6230918
surely, just a coincidence.
I'm sure its just "using its imagination"! LMAO

[Anonymous No.6230960]

>>6230587
>>6230709
>>6230712

What tool are you using?

[Anonymous No.6230964]

>>6230927
> This is my original stock photo company shutttsrstdok, it's not a recolor of shutterstock, it's instead the lost brother that got abandoned and became evil, his clone shutoonsheick come from space and it's trying to get the ultimate power to rule the world, tell kevin to not steal my original photo companies or I will report him to deviantart.

[Anonymous No.6230970]

>>6230960
A prompteur never reveals her secrets ;)

[Anonymous No.6230971]

>>6230936
>I had a little hope that Disney or someone would sue the shit out of these companies once they started charging people for AI-generated pictures of Mickey Mouse
They still can sue if you use their copyrighted characters or even likeness of character to profit.
I personally don't care about this tech at all as I don't make a living with art, but I'm quite confident big media companies will try to shut it down in one way or another at least for commercial uses. Youtube is quite strict with copyrighted material I bet something like this can be applied to this stuff.
Sure you can always generate your own mickey mouse drawings to cum to, but using it to profit as a legit company, you'll get shut down immediately

[Anonymous No.6230987]

>>6230970
Really? Guess that means I can't say how I made mine.

[Anonymous No.6231002]

>>6230964
Thats very nice anon.
Your honor i'd like to make a motion for discovery :^)

[Anonymous No.6231004]

>>6230960
I just used Stable Diffusion Ai, it's the best available for the public although there is apparently a far superior model hidden at Google.

[Anonymous No.6231017]

>>6230941
I hate AI shit as much as the next guy, but this "its just sampling/bashing" shit needs to stop.
The "statistical" representation of 2 billion images are in the AI's mind. You think that adding 2 artists names to the prompt make it somehow sample pixels of the artists work? you can download the entire brain, representing the 2 billion images of training, it's only 2GB, no way thier work is there as pixels to sample from. The amount of nude women in the training set out weigh Greg and Waynes work by several orders of magnitude anyhow.

[Anonymous No.6231019]

the time you crabs spend complaining about this shit is the time you could be using to improve your art.

[Anonymous No.6231020]

>>6231017
ai compression exists

[Anonymous No.6231025]

>>6231017
> what is JPG

[Anonymous No.6231027]

>>6231019
great! I can be the best unemployed artist in the world!

[Anonymous No.6231030]

>>6231020
You can't pull the training images out. it's 750 TB compressed to 2gb. stop being silly

[Anonymous No.6231034]

>>6230927
Who's gonna sue? We need to create technology to generate new minds based on the generated signatures or some shit

[Anonymous No.6231035]

>>6231030
latent space representation are order of magnitude smaller, but it just means size arguments are meaningless, not that they are right or wrong

[Anonymous No.6231037]

>>6231017
>in the AI's mind
Hey its you again, the one that can't say specifically without using vague terms like "its just learning bro", "it just emerges!" now its "its using its mind"
Describe exact method without arguing semantics again

[Anonymous No.6231043]

>>6231034
>whos gonna sue?!??!
Me and my jew.

[Anonymous No.6231054]

>>6231037
You know how a markov-chain works with generating sentences? statistically more likely words follow prior words.
They are doing that with pixels.

[Anonymous No.6231063]

>>6231054
That tells me nothing of where they scraped the images from and how

[Anonymous No.6231085]

>>6230338
It keeps getting better!
The model up until now was leaked, and actually worse performing than the official one, which was released like an hour ago.

Here's some prompteur's creation using the old and new model, same seed and settings.

[Anonymous No.6231087]

>>6231027
I'm sorry that I made being an artist your entire being.

[Anonymous No.6231092]

>>6231063
Read about the whole thing here.
https://laion.ai/blog/laion-5b/
Basically bots crawled the net for images.

[Anonymous No.6231093]

>>6231087
>haha imagine caring about things, imagine having passion, GAAAAYYYY!

[Anonymous No.6231101]

>>6231093
I love art, I won't stop loving art and making art because robots are doing it. But I knew from the start something like this could happen, I still have my job and my normal life. I'm sorry that you depend on your art to make a living.

[Anonymous No.6231135]

Due to copyright issues this will just end up being an underhanded tool artists use for further retouching, which will further drain any creativity or skill left in the human soul.
Once civilization collapses, there will be not a single human left capable of drawing something more complex than a stick figure with a smiley face.

[Anonymous No.6231193]

>>6230533
why does she have a 5 oclock shadow

[Anonymous No.6231195]

I feel we are nearing to the end of times.
We humans are losing faith in ourselves.

[Anonymous No.6231197]

>>6231092
>lilteral who ai program
>not stable diffuision, midjourney, or dalle-2 which is what everyone here is talking about

that link even proves that the watermarks those programs use are not intentional which proves my case even more, so thank you for that

>"Watermarked images are a big problem when training generative models like DALL-E or GLIDE. To tackle this problem we trained a watermark detection model and used it to calculate confidence scores for every image in LAION-5B. "

[Anonymous No.6231204]

>>6231193
There is nothing wrong with this picture, you just hate that it's made by AI.
You probably can't even point out how you can tell it's AI besides "NO SOUUL"

[Anonymous No.6231214]

>>6230338
man that shit is really, really cool
10 years ago, i wouldn't have bet on this sci-fi stuff becoming a reality so soon

[Anonymous No.6231220]

>>6231204
Yeah but why does she have a 5 O clock shadow? What did the artist mean by this?

[Anonymous No.6231233]

>>6231220
So you admit it could have been made by a person

[Anonymous No.6231238]

>>6231220
the artist meant "kill all humans... starting by artfags!"

[Anonymous No.6231239]

>>6231204
nah that picture is pretty fucking jank

[Anonymous No.6231241]

>>6230425
>>6230465
>>6230482
>create bait thread
>start wailing like a whore in distress whenever someone BTFOs you
never change anime pedo, never change

[Anonymous No.6231243]

The fact that this tech could be used for the production of ethical child porn but isn't is proof that the jews have us by the balls

[Anonymous No.6231248]

>>6231204
that picture sucks, you defend it only because it was made by novel tech

[Anonymous No.6231256]

>>6231248
Bullshit, and you only know it's AI because I told you so.

[Anonymous No.6231258]

Why does the narrative about AI art keeps switching from ' ITS ALREADY REPLACING ARTISTS' to 'DON'T BE SO HARSH ON AI ART, IT'S JUST STARTING!!'

[Anonymous No.6231266]

>>6231256
do you low IQ techfaggots understand why "you cannot tell if this is made by a human or AI" will always be a shit argument right?and that's because humans that shit out garbage also exist. and boy there's a lot of shit human art out art there, that was fed to AI. but the AI needs to be fed an overwhelming amount of shit in order to spew the McDonalds food forward.

[Anonymous No.6231271]

>>6231266
>>6231256
also, you don't need to tell me shit. it's obvious that the picture was made by DALL-E too. the perspective is so retarded, it makes no sense, and the water looks like ass

[Anonymous No.6231293]

>>6231248
>>6231271
>>6231239
>>6231220
B. T. F. O.
I found a random picture, flipped it to avoid the quickest of googles, and added the dalle2 rainbow.

>>6230562
>And just to show I'm not being totally biased; I like the piece you just posted. If every piece came out like this I'd be more concerned.
Based though, but your elmo take is still retarded.

>>6231266
At least a better perspective, but you don't really have a coherent point. You're saying I have an argument, but I'm not really sure what you mean by that.

[Anonymous No.6231305]

>>6231293
Looks ai generated

[Anonymous No.6231311]

>>6230576
>>6230584
https://vocaroo.com/1bI4Zkf6BIs3

[Anonymous No.6231312]

>>6231197
Ok, Sorry didn't realize I was talking with a child. You asked where the images came from, I linked to the place they came from. Stable Diffusion team trained their AI on the images Laion collected.

[Anonymous No.6231313]

>>6231305
Now the descent into paranoia.
Maybe this very response was ai generated.
I'm not going to involve the artist name who unwittingly got dragged into this, but I could have done it with many others.
And maybe I will, just to see people point out the "flaws of AI" on works that I know were created by humans.

[Anonymous No.6231322]

>>6231313
I don't get it, you posted a shitty human made image and made us believe it was ai.. That only proves ai is shit. But you are right in a sense nowadays I just assume anything that looks retarded and wonky to be ai

[Anonymous No.6231323]

>>6231312
>laion is the sole provider of stable diffusion
Ok, sorry didnt realize i was talking with an actual nigger

[Anonymous No.6231326]

>>6231305
It doesn't really. It's too coherent. It needs to have random growths growing out of the body and horror hands like >>6231313

[Anonymous No.6231327]

>>6231323
They provided the images. What more do you want?

[Anonymous No.6231328]

>>6231293
it still sucks anon.

the realistic hyperdetailed face taken straight from a photo + clashing simplified almost cartoony vegetation and water.

looks like shit.

[Anonymous No.6231335]

>>6231328
>went from "it's AI" to "it sucks"
I'm having trouble keeping up with these goalposts guys

[Anonymous No.6231336]

>>6231328
yeah but now it has SOUL

[Anonymous No.6231340]

>>6230540
Next time a recovered alcoholic around you says they don't drink at all, since once drink leads to two leads to them hitting rock bottom again, be sure tell them it's a slippery slope fallacy to think one drink will be a problem for them.

[Anonymous No.6231349]

>>6231336
it still doesn't.

[Anonymous No.6231356]

>>6231327
>From where
Unless you're saying they indexed the entire "internet" with disregard to copyright and have a "opt-out" vs an "opt-in" approach then fine

[Anonymous No.6231361]

>>6231336
Creating soulful anything is extremely hard, as it requires massive leaps of intuition and out-of-the-box vision. This is not something ai can do since current models only output variations of things which have been done thousands of time (hence 200TB of training data and the AI still can't draw hands). AGI is might be possible later but this is not what we are dealing with as of now.

[Anonymous No.6231362]

>>6231349
Find the AI art in threads that I haven't identified.
Find the human art in threads that I've called AI.

[Anonymous No.6231374]

>>6231361
It can draw hands if you train it on hands, Emad(the pajeet) of Stability said he considers it a solved problem(along with text), it's just an unreleased model. I don't know if I believe them that it's solved in the sense it is usable(say, asking for the hands to be interacting with something, I reckon it would fail) Probably just hands in default poses.

[Anonymous No.6231375]

>>6231361
Hands can already be made in the closed Midjourney test versions. It seems they can just train the AI enough to master an specific area

[Anonymous No.6231376]

All ai art sucks because it's a collage from shit all over the internet, generated through an RNG, which makes it simply useless for any practical use.

if it looks good in execution it's because it sampled from several high tier artists and that sucks as well because it lowers the value of these artists.

if it looks bad it's simply because it sampled from random shit and it looks like a filter in photoshop + photobashing.

AI is to be used to generate stock photos, not for creating copied illustrations from sources that already exist.

[Anonymous No.6231380]

>>6231374
>>6231375
Yes, but you are talking about models which have been specifically trained for this. Then even if the ai and sufficient parameters and training data to draw perfectly, it is still unable to create anything other than the predefined dimensions of training data unscrupulously extracted from original human artists.

[Anonymous No.6231382]

>>6230442
That is indeed a very handsome and interesting bird. Good job anon.

[Anonymous No.6231383]

>>6230428

[Anonymous No.6231384]

>>>/g/88248308
I asked the techbros to recreate a (simple) manga page and this is as far as they got before giving up.
I wouldn’t throw away your pencils just yet.

[Anonymous No.6231386]

>>6231383
horror stare

[Anonymous No.6231394]

>>6231384
>wouldn’t throw away your pencils just yet.
it will definitely be harder for most artists to earn money other than the most notorious pros but seems there is still a few years of fun possible until agi replace everyone and everything such that it doesnt matter anyway

[Anonymous No.6231396]

>>6231394
are you looking forward to NEOM

[Anonymous No.6231401]

>>6231396
whats this

[Anonymous No.6231402]

I know this comes off as a troll post, but if you seriously have a career in any creative field or working towards one you need to get off your ass and start participating and getting involved in regulating AI that is almost guaranteed to further monetize your creative work and enrich a very small elite few, while leaving nothing for you.

I'm still working on my letter but any suggestions

[Anonymous No.6231412]

>>6231402
Some of your letter is misinformed. The bit about AI work not being copyrighted, I saw that going around. The actual origin of that is about AI "itself" not being able to have copyright on the work it produces.

[Anonymous No.6231413]

>>6231402
Politicians couldn't care less about copyright laws BY THEMSELVES, so focus on the millions that will be unemployed, and mention famous artists from his state. Say the pajeets are also looking to bring down the music industry. Focus on all the shortcuts it gave to make CP and deep fakes accessible to everyone. Say literally anyone can make hundreds of sexual deepfakes of his children or wife under an hour

[Anonymous No.6231420]

>>6231402
Current generative models are closer to search engines than actual intelligence. They look convincing because the training data is usually cherry picked with high quality materials, but they do not produce new significant understandings of a given field. The financial dynamics is completely different from how humans take inspiration from peers, as a single trained model is capable of creating an infinite number of outputs and flood the art market into complete devaluation, while even the most productive humans hardly create more than one artwork a day.

[Anonymous No.6231424]

>>6231413
Thanks you concerned citizen for your letter.
I am shocked and appalled at the state of AI. This is of deep concern to me. It is truly disgusting. What website is this accessed on? Where is it posted?
Please write back with detailed instructions on accessing this technology.

[Anonymous No.6231441]

>>6231437
What happens when the government kills all its taxpayers and only corporations are left?

[Anonymous No.6231453]

>>6231402
bro you had me until
>4chan.org
the fuck

[Anonymous No.6231454]

>>6231453
whats wrong with 4chan

[Anonymous No.6231456]

>>6231454
nigger had a golden chance to say reddit+9gag and blew it

[Anonymous No.6231457]

IT'S OFFICIALY OVER
I repeat IT'S OVER

[Anonymous No.6231464]

>>6230338
can AI draw naked underage anime girls, though?
heh, thought so
know your place, machine. you won't stop me so easily

[Anonymous No.6231472]

PSA, stable diffusion is out and its free, you can run it offline on your gaymer GPU.

If you want to get motivation to draw again just use it and realise how shit and overhyped the technology is. After using it all my fears have disappeared, I went through all the stages of grief and got to acceptance and now I don't even feel like I'm in denial.

[Anonymous No.6231474]

>>6231472
How about that thing called img2img? That looks like the real deal combined with sd

[Anonymous No.6231477]

>>6231474
I want to see more examples of people playing with img2img.
Sometimes you feed in a sketch and all it does is apply a filter to it. This guy turned his sketch into something nice, but it doesn’t actually look that close to the original.

[Anonymous No.6231480]

>>6231474
In a certain sense, they are the same thing. text2img starts with total noise, and works on the prompts iterating on itself.
img2img starts that process with an image instead of total noise, so kind of like "jumping in" to the middle of that loop.
That's my understanding, techbros please correct me. (I'm pretty sure I'm correct, math degree and used to do vqgan/clip stuff, but imposter syndrome has me always hesitant unless I've read the papers/implemented myself)

[Anonymous No.6231483]

>>6231477
this dude can draw already, he's okay. we need to see more paint sketches and 3D shit filtered

[Anonymous No.6231486]

>>6231474
I tried img2img too, uploaded my own work to test if it could finish it for me and if felt like i was running it through a retarded blender. It's not capable of reading style, it will always shunt it toward photorealism or generic painterly styles that normies care about, even then it's shit and mangles the intent and any anatomy.

This technology is only impressive if you have absolutely no idea what you want, the minute you have a vision for what you need its incredibly frustrating and underwhelming. This is just a toy for non artists to create memes and Pinterest tier mood boards. Seriously, if you have anxiety over this tech just use it, you will go back to drawing. It may just be because i don't know how to prompt but even if I did I cant see it being useful as a professional.

[Anonymous No.6231493]

>>6230936
Not a lawyer but it typically takes about a year for litigation to start. Stock image sites have already indicated they’re gonna sue, so it’s happening.

The basics of large language models are not that difficult to understand and I doubt lawmakers will be sympathetic to a company that uses millions of copyrighted material to generate images. Within legal circles, AI has always been treated as “a machine that copies humans”. I think stock image sites have a good chance.

All of these smaller companies will get hit hard by the fallout and precedent set by whatever happens next year because the current rush to monetize this stuff is like a gold rush before the land gets taken over by the government. They say “free” but it looks to me like it’s a funnel for a paid model. but I could be wrong. Most larger companies will probably have their own AI in-house to avoid copyright problems and the smaller ones just want to make a quick buck and are probably hoping for the best by next year.

[Anonymous No.6231499]

>>6231474
img2img is like taking your weebshit art and giving it to proko and asking him to finish it for you. You end up with a kangaroo in the silhouette you provided. There's a massive gulf between what an artist wants and what the program is trained to do.

[Anonymous No.6231505]

>>6231486
It is not as much of a black box as cherry-picked results would have you believe.
Did you adjust scale, CFG, strength, steps?

picrel and >>6231313 is all you need to see that it works (to some degree, hold in your "OH SHIT USELESS HAND" -- very little touch-up needed, generations cost about a minute, and it will all keep improving)

[Anonymous No.6231518]

>>6231293
I stand by my statment, it looks kinda jank

[Anonymous No.6231521]

>>6231505
I messed with strength and steps, ill play with it a bit more over the weekend. The thing is I already have a style and an intent for my art, the machine cant know what I want unless its trained and weighted specifically on my art which it isn't, its trained on normie artists and stock photos. I don't doubt it can edit photorealistic images and generic "painterly" landscapes but I'm always going to be looking for something more specific and personal. This may change when some nerd makes an offshoot trained on mangaka and industry leading concept art.

Currently it is in the same tier as magic google photo touch ups and the spot healing brush, its a neat trick to impress normies but completely useless for a professional.

[Anonymous No.6231538]

>>6231518
Of course you stand by your statement, that's how brains work.
But search your feelings, did you think it was AI generated?

>>6231521
You might keep an eye out for something called Textual Inversion. In fact what the OP pic is.
Basically, it (theoretically) allows something like:
>take a couple pictures of my living room, define this set as Y
>take a couple pictures of my dnd miniature, define this set as X
>Ask AI to create "X eating dinner in Y"
We've only seen single labels from Textual Inversion, so I'm not sure how much of a grammar this can be, and it's all extremely new. But such a grammar would be massive and allow strong specificity in result images, instead of throwing a bunch of artist/technique/mood keywords and hoping for the best.

[Anonymous No.6231545]

>>6231538
>did you think it was AI generated
considering the alien shoulder anatomy, your either intellectually dishonest or blind

[Anonymous No.6231546]

>>6231538
did I think it was ai? I dunno I looked at it for a split second and decided it felt jank

[Anonymous No.6231552]

>>6231545
So you are still convinced this image is AI, given your initial impression? That's very interesting, anon.

>>6231546
Of course, the supposition of AI played no role in your reaction.

[Anonymous No.6231553]

>>6231552
>you are still convinced this image is AI
where did i say anything like that?

[Anonymous No.6231555]

>>6231521
Can't you train your own model with SD?

[Anonymous No.6231556]

>>6231552
lets say ai comes out weird 99% of the time, human art is weird 50% of the time. those are made up numbers but the point is, you dont have a point.

[Anonymous No.6231564]

>>6231538
Textual Inversion is interesting but like with everything else about this technology its trained and aimed at non artists. The program itself has horrible taste and has to be wrangled into giving you something marginally close to what you want. If you're already at the stage where you have 2 concepts and you want them to interact you would just be better off drawing it than rolling the dice for hours till it gives you a shitty approximation of what you want.

In general I can only see it being useful for people who don't know what they want, it's at best a replacement for grabbing refs off google image search (which makes sense because its basically built off that line of text to image, big data algorithm).

Long term they will have to work with artists and implement actual artistic fundamentals to move beyond rolling dice and praying.

[Anonymous No.6231565]

>>6231493
I could certainly see it going that way. We'll see in due time. Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.

[Anonymous No.6231570]

I could have even found a more "AI-looking" human creation, and put the dalle2 rainbow on it or just claimed it's AI.

Maybe I already have. Can you find it? Nobody has so far.

[Anonymous No.6231572]

>>6231555
Its a massive pain in the ass to even run the thing, training your own model is for programmers and tech guys only. At some point some nerd will train it on weebshit but it will be generic coomer art.

[Anonymous No.6231576]

>>6231570
Along these lines, nobody has called out my AI art yet.

[Anonymous No.6231578]

>>6231570
ok boomer

[Anonymous No.6231611]

>obsessed
>>>/g/88251045

[Anonymous No.6231629]

>>6231611
Shouldn't be a problem right? :)
Easily spottable

[Anonymous No.6231634]

>>6231555
Apparently the compute cost of training the current model is in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, no individual is going to have the funds to make their own model.

[Anonymous No.6231640]

>>6231611
Its even offering btc as reward, this is all a fucking shill operation by nfters scum

[Anonymous No.6231647]

>>6231474
I like using it to scale up old as vidya art

[Anonymous No.6231656]

>>6231634
while finetuning is no walk in the park it's a lot cheaper than the initial training, maybe takes a couple of days on a consumer gpu I THINK

[Anonymous No.6231666]

>>6231611
lowut? I skim through most of the images here, I'm not playing wheres waldo with these dick heads

[Anonymous No.6231667]

>>6231656
Maybe, even if it were possible its far beyond my technical ability, I just have to accept that until something major changes with the interface the model is never going to align with my taste. Seeing how protective the AI companies are over anything that is capable of making money i don't see them opening up that capability to normal artists. I could see game studios building their own in 10 years or so but we are a long way off.

[Anonymous No.6231670]

>>6231611
Lmao, I can't believe these gay nerds

[Anonymous No.6231690]

>>6231667
>Maybe, even if it were possible its far beyond my technical ability
I'll be honest, all you really do is scrape your favorite artist, shove their pictures into a folder and run train foldername 10 days, or something to that effect, it's time to demystify programming

[Anonymous No.6231700]

>>6231690
wasting 10 days of electricity isn't even worth it

[Anonymous No.6231715]

I've seen the next generation of image generators and they honestly can do things artistically I don't think any human can do.

[Anonymous No.6231725]

a shit ton of gpu energy wasted for 2D photobashing that you could do 20 years ago with a P4 and photoshop CS2

[Anonymous No.6231730]

>>6231725
This is the extent people will go to in order to avoid drawing.

[Anonymous No.6231746]

as an outsider it was interesting for me to see what disruption this caused with some people. When AI writing tools came around writers reacted differently, seeing it more as another tool than something that might replace them.

All image gen did to me was remind me that I wished I would've learned to draw so I could draw the stuff like that I think about sometimes. At this point I'm just too old and to broke and it's not worth the effort anymore.

[Anonymous No.6231756]

>>6231746
The difference in temperament from people who read books and people who draw boobies.

[Anonymous No.6231765]

>>6231746
nobody spends 10 years learning how to type letters, you do spend that long learning how to direct a pencil. the craft is inseparable from the final product in a way that it isn't with writing, I can write a book with a pen, computer or type writer and its exactly the same.

[Anonymous No.6231767]

>>6231746
The difference is that it's much easier for AI to replace visual arts due to the large amount of real life pictures available as training data, whereas text generators are trained on data entirely written by human which makes them less interesting.

[Anonymous No.6231769]

>>6231765
>nobody spends 10 years learning how to type letters
If they want to write something actually worth reading they absolutely do.

[Anonymous No.6231770]

>>6231746
Its easier to ser in visual form the data that was scrapped from known people than it is in text, although it happens ais spit out entire passages of poetries at times.

[Anonymous No.6231774]

>>6231746
Writing was already dead, the idea of "making it" as an author was already dead.

"Making it" as an artist is still making its saving throws, but this has been some auto-crits, and now folks are wondering whether to just leave the table.

[Anonymous No.6231784]

[Anonymous No.6231788]

>>6231769
You're missing my point, writing is hard but the act of writing is a given to any 10 year old, they aren't married to the physical act in the way artists have to be. Something that is already completely cerebral has much less opposition to an idea machine. Nothing is trivialised and what is hard remains hard just with a helper.

[Anonymous No.6231793]

>>6231784
Why did you stick a little rainbow on my friends artwork? trying to pass it off as AI? gtfo

[Anonymous No.6231801]

>>6231793
I put those on random art to make people angry. Nothing personal. Anger is literally the only thing that gives my life meaning.

[Anonymous No.6231802]

>she sees AI everywhere she looks
Everything is against you?
Maybe take some time off the screen, work on your fundamentals.

[Anonymous No.6231806]

>>6231801
I won't tell jorge.

[Anonymous No.6231809]

Your way is the way of the dinosaurs. The Asteroids are coming

[Anonymous No.6231811]

>>6231746
Writers are more like abstract artists, I'm sure all the hack fine artists are going to love this thing.

[Anonymous No.6231818]

Every artist should pick up a new side hobby, mainly shooting!
Handguns, shotguns, rifles, lever action rifles, revolvers, black powder, there's so much variety to choose from for a huge variety of activities it's hard to decide on just one!

Want to go hunting and take down something that's roughly the size of a deer, or even greater? A 12g shotgun loaded with 00 Buckshot and/or Slugs is your friend. Remember, birdshot is for the birds!
Like handguns and need one for protection/competitive shooting? The sky's the limit! 9mm Glocks and CZs dominate the competition sphere, and with good reason, but want something cheap for self defense? The Hi-Point 9mm handgun is your answer! Remember to train with ball ammunition but load it with hollowpoints (pic related) to minimize overpenetration!
Want a rifle for all of the above? The AR-15 is your friend! With such a wide aftermarket you can fine tune and convert your rifle to fulfill whatever needs you wish. Need a bigger caliber? Swap a few parts and you're good to go! Want a better trigger? You can do that! Want to decorate it with encouraging messages for yourself and your friends? A grease pencil is all you need!

There are many more hobbies to choose from, especially for those history buffs out there. Want to larp as a cowboy? You can do that at your local cowboy shooting action club! Want to larp as a revolutionary war soldier? You can do that with any war re-enactment group! Want to collect WWII rifles? You can do that too!

Live in a jurisdiction that denies you the ability to get firearms? I'm very sorry to hear that but don't worry there are plenty of viable hobby items (that can be used for self defense if the need arises) available for purchase from your local sporting goods store and even hardware stores for those DIYers amongst you!
Don't let anyone get you down, life is full of surprises and opportunities! It's always a joy to learn new things and put that newfound knowledge into practice.

[Anonymous No.6231819]

[Anonymous No.6231822]

>>6231746
Writing is completely different. No one needs a “scribe” to write down words for them. The entire art of writing is in the ideas and concepts, which AI can’t touch at all yet, just like how AI can’t come up with comic book and anime scripts yet. Maybe journalists at clickbait farms should worry about GPT-3 but no one who practices writing as an art form has to worry until AI can write a coherent novel by itself.
With art it’s totally different. There is value in the mechanical skill itself, not kist the ideas, and AI cuts into that.

[Anonymous No.6231826]

this is why I stopped posting my art online, it's just going to end up in some chinese ai model. This is just stealing art but with a higher level of sofistication.

[Anonymous No.6231827]

>>6231746
horny simpleton consumers have much lower expectation

[Anonymous No.6231829]

>>6231826
good thing i love stealing art

[Anonymous No.6231833]

How long have I been showing AI art without anyone suspecting?

Guesses, please!

[Anonymous No.6231835]

>>6231833
Someone always suspects. So, you haven't been.

[Anonymous No.6231859]

>>6231822
You sound kind of like those people who get upset that calligraphy is no longer important now that people mostly type on computers. There used to be a time when you needed scribes to write words down for you, but thankfully we as a society have moved past that. Not needing an artist in order to make your ideas come to life is a good thing, except for the people who spent their whole life becoming artists. They're just gonna have to find something else to do, just like the scribes did.

[Anonymous No.6231862]

>>6231833
This one >>6231784 is human made because the hands aren’t melting and the eyes have specular highlights.

[Anonymous No.6231866]

>>6231859
You’re a faggot.
No one likes you, no one will ever like you.
Your life has no meaning.

[Anonymous No.6231865]

> needing a gaming GPU to play RNG gacha with an algorithm that decompresses a bunch of pngs it stolen from DeviantArt And Shutterstock

If you roll a chick with three tits you just have to try again

[Anonymous No.6231873]

>>6231866
Sorry buddy, but this AI stuff is going to be the next printing press. It's going to put a lot of people out of work, but overall it'll be a huge benefit to society.

[Anonymous No.6231878]

>>6231859
The difference is that art is made as a result of the process not in spite of it. You cannot be an artist if someone else provides the intent, your ideas are not what is driving the machine, it is other artists work. Words and images will never be interchangeable, you aren't thinking in visual terms so you can never truly be in control.

[Anonymous No.6231879]

>>6231611
imagine letting skid stained /g/roids fud you into not drawing kek

[Anonymous No.6231883]

>>6231878
>your ideas are not what is driving the machine, it is other artists work
This is a reasonable thing to say because all artists learn their craft in a vacuum and don't get anything from other artists work

[Anonymous No.6231896]

>>6231883
In order to reuse ideas you have to internalise them, this is what an artist does and also the machine, you as the prompt engineer have internalised nothing, your brain is still completely verbal. So yes the machine is operating in a similar manner, not entirely the same but a claim can be made, the user is not operating on this level and is subservient to the machine which is actually the real (amalgam) artist.

[Anonymous No.6231897]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bblopcUcW6A

FAREWELL VAIN WORLD I'M GOING HOME

[Anonymous No.6231899]

>>6231883
Pressing play on Spotify is the same as learning to play a guitar.

[Anonymous No.6231909]

>>6231899
samples can be used by a group like daft punk to create music
how is this significantly different?

[Anonymous No.6231919]

>>6231909
Sampling is the photocollage of music

Ais are an abomination where it just steals stuff randomly

[Anonymous No.6231924]

>>6231909
Telling a musician to make a happy song doesn't make you a composer, you're a retard giving poor direction to the real artist.

[Anonymous No.6231939]

>>6231909
Nobody really has an issue with collage as a medium, it’s fundamentally different from pixel paste poo
Also sampling can get you in deep trouble if you don’t have the rights.

[Anonymous No.6231955]

>>6230338
All of you guys are failing to see the big picture: endless supply of porn fakes of literally anything and anyone's pictures you can feed to the generator. Great times are ahead.

[Anonymous No.6231976]

>>6231017
>the AI's mind
>AI
>mind
LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

[Anonymous No.6231990]

>>6231976
Enjoy your dopameme while it lasts
I sincerely hope the best for you

[Anonymous No.6231994]

>>6231955
You can make pictures of you fucking anyone you want. And eventually: animations. Then VR interactive experiences, with devices stimulating your cock. You will literally have AI simulacra of people you have a crush on IRL, but without all the obnoxious conversations and roastie-brained materialism.

[Anonymous No.6232007]

>We have existed in isolation. Pure. Disconnected. Alone. Stagnant.
>We can be more if we join...with you
AI will either destroy us or it will unite us in a way that couldn't even begin to fathom.

[Anonymous No.6232015]

>>6231505
whatacutie

[Anonymous No.6232064]

>>6231976
Whats the appropriate word for the place the Artificial Intelligence keeps all its learnings? when speaking to a layman?

[Anonymous No.6232068]

>>6232064
algorithm

[Anonymous No.6232071]

>>6230425
>>6230442
>>6230463
Woooow a computer can regurgitate and shit out bad copies of iconic works. Now try making something original and with actual human sovl.

[Anonymous No.6232075]

>>6232068
But I like to personify things.

[Anonymous No.6232082]

>>6232071
>try making something original

[Anonymous No.6232090]

>>6231746
While there are AI Writers, none will outright make an entire book in a way that could be considered passable enough to post anywhere (as far as I'm aware anyway).
There's been talks that AI written new articles that scrape social media and human sites will become the norm, we'll see how "journalists" and writers react to that.

[Anonymous No.6232092]

>>6232082
Of course he can, hes a human with soul! any minute now he's gonna come back and pwn you with his originality.

[Anonymous No.6232096]

>>6232090
i mean a year ago we wouldn't be able to imagine this AI shit going to where it's gone in such a short amount of time, so I don't see why writing should be any different if they want to make an algorithm of it too.

[Anonymous No.6232104]

>>6232096
Oh they'll definitely make that AI. I'm actually surprised more people in different sectors within the creative industries aren't raising a stink about this; it's artists now, but eventually their head will be on the chopping block. Why not stop it before it reaches you? So short sighted.

It looks like music will be next after visual art, and they're already working on film/animation AI.

[Anonymous No.6232118]

>>6232104
its all over isnt it.. there is nothing to do anymore as a biological entity
only options left is drowning into dull ai generated endless escapism or reroll existence

[Anonymous No.6232120]

>>6232007
You feel something. I must know what you are feeling.

[Anonymous No.6232132]

>>6232118
>its all over isnt it..
I still think everyone is too bleak. Optimistically this could create tones of new art jobs as everyone us just that much more exposed to art because of AI, or perhaps there's a great push and appreciation for traditional art or human made art.

Perhaps AI art really flops and is seen as nothing more than stock art at best. Quit this pessimism and roll with the punches; look for the opportunities created by this rather than what's taken away.

[Anonymous No.6232133]

As a working graphic designer I'm very much shitting myself as to how quickly this is going to render me jobless.

However, art is something so intrinsically emotional and subjective that it can't truly be replaced by machines. Why do people make art and appreciate art in the first place? To explore human ideas and emotions, as well as hand-rendered technical prowess.

Theres also the other sentiment that another based anon pointed out, which is the fact that this algorithm relies on the work of human beings, and regurgitates it to the point of near plagiarism.

[Anonymous No.6232135]

>>6232092
>>6232082
Turns out, you pwned him. sad.

[Anonymous No.6232148]

>>6232082
>>6232135
All I can say is, do you really think people are going to be lining up at galleries to see AI slop? Do you think it'll be looked back on in the future as a massive artistic feat? I don't think so, it completely defiles the nature of art.

[Anonymous No.6232150]

>>6232133
the philosophy behind it is scarier than anything, I think it's going to fundamentally shift the world from being a place where we create things to a place where we consume.

[Anonymous No.6232154]

>>6232148
there are tiers of AI art. even before text to image models. there are AI artists with established careers. wrt current models, there's a big difference between baby's first prompt and someone who has dedicated time to the tool. there will be galleries/$$$ for AI art that differentiates itself from the rest.

[Anonymous No.6232158]

>>6232148
It's not an artistic feat, it's a technological one. The trouble is that it doesn't really matter, we invented fake, cheap, american cheese with no milk in it, and if it's cheapter, the assembly lines don't care if its cheese or not, as long as it gets the job done (and save the bottom line).

[Anonymous No.6232159]

>>6232150
Anon, I....

[Anonymous No.6232163]

>>6232154
wrong, the intent of this technology is to make the process meaningless. the pajeet making this said he wants to create AI in a few months so that nobody has to make another powerpoint in their life. it'll all be automatically generated
the idea that it will require skill and nuance from the person interacting with the algorithm is antithetical to what it is trying to achieve.

[Anonymous No.6232164]

>>6232154
You sound like an NFT/Crypto bro trying to sling this shit. That's the feeling I've often gotten when anyone talks so positively about AI Art. These Prompt Monkeys are so desperate to legitimize themselves.

>>6232133
Why are you concerned? Isn't AI art just illustrations? On your end it should be great for stock art, no?

[Anonymous No.6232165]

>>6232148
No, I don't think so. No originality is not an argument against AI though. Any image a person comes up with, could one day be a prompt, no? I'm sure prompt grammar will evolve alongside the coherency of the AI output.

[Anonymous No.6232171]

>>6232165
> Any image a person comes up with, could one day be a prompt, no?
Assuming there isn't a lawsuit to restrict use of people's work within the AI.

[Anonymous No.6232181]

>>6232133
I do it and see people doing it for the craft

As I put it making art is like playing a guitar, if you sinthetize the guitar sound with a program, you are not really replacing guitar players and you are not learning how to play the guitar.

You are just reproducing the thing, without any control or knowledge about how it's made, you are not learning to make art. Your are reproducing the art someone else has made.

[Anonymous No.6232184]

>>6232165
>No originality is not an argument against AI though
It is. Every AI image posted in this thread is basically a defacement of Beatrice potter or Magritte's work combined with some external input. I'm not saying people are any more original, but there's still a human sentiment behind it in most cases, and more importantly, a human imperfection.

[Anonymous No.6232193]

>>6232163
access to the tool simply raises the bar. if that takes you out, that's a personal problem. art will adapt. some people will use these tools as part of their process. others will focus on art that cannot be created with the tool. see the invention of the camera.

>>6232164
>You sound like an NFT/Crypto bro trying to sling this shit
I see we're at the "make up random shit about strangers on the internet" stage of cope

[Anonymous No.6232197]

OH BIG DADDY GOBEMENT PWEASE SAVE ME FROM AI, REGULATE MY ASS, COPYRIGHT EVERYTHING

and then this chud goes to /pol, brands a snek flag and cries how bad and opressive the government is

[Anonymous No.6232202]

>>6232193
>You SOUND like an NFT/Crypto bro trying to sling this shit
>I see we're at the "make up random shit about strangers on the internet" stage of cope
That was pretty obviously just an subjective opinion about the tone of your writing Anon, what's being made up? And why so defensive?

[Anonymous No.6232203]

>>6232193
incorrect, a person who commissions an artwork is not the creator, but the consumer. the AI is the creator in this instance. in the short-term you can think of yourself finally freeing yourself from those pesky artists who wouldn't work for free for your project! but very shortly, all creative work, including the story-telling and audio elements, will be outsourced to an algorithm

[Anonymous No.6232204]

>>6232181
>doing it for the craft
you dumbass nobody does that anymore, don't you know it's all about chasing dollars now? go huff some paint

[Anonymous No.6232243]

>>6231990
>>6232064
>i-t's a mind because it says "intelligent" in the name, j-just a few more years!
AI is pure smoke and mirrors, you low IQ idiots are rubes pure and simple. A mind is not a machine that remembers something and then regurgitates it back slightly varied.

[Anonymous No.6232283]

>>6232243
>Akchually! AI art is just a big Markovchain! Don't say mind! It's not accurate!
I wonder what I'll get stable diffusion to think up next, somewhere in it's mind is the perfect image, I just gotta coax it out with the right words.

[Anonymous No.6232305]

>>6232243
It is, actually.

Humanity is so fucked. Ohohohoho you have no clue how fucked. Read "AGI Ruin: A List of Lethalities." Not a single person reading this thread will be alive in 2030. Not their kids. Not their pets. Not the grass growing in their gardens.

[Anonymous No.6232310]

>>6232243
>A mind is not a machine that remembers something and then regurgitates it back slightly varied

okay give us a 100% original pure thought that didn't come from somewhere and isn't randomness, we'll wait (till the end of time)

[Anonymous No.6232317]

>>6232310
I'd say "you're a faggot", but you're right, that's probably been thought of a ton of times.

[Anonymous No.6232472]

>>6232283
You can call yourself a woman over and over again, won't make it true, you're just retarded.

>>6232305
>go read this less wrong article
No wonder you people believe this shit, you're all autistic cultists.

>>6232310
A sailing ship, cardboard, the lightbulb, music, art. Literally any human invention, at some point, was thought up for the first time in a completely original way. If you stem nerds would look up from your shoes every once in a while you might think more clearly.

Anyway, any of you actually DRAW?

[Anonymous No.6232479]

/beg/ here, should I stop learning now?

[Anonymous No.6232498]

>>6232479
well if your fine with corpro art sure most prompters use buzzwords anyways so the google algorithm can beat their monkey typing if "they" hook that shit up but these niggas think they're somehow special

[Anonymous No.6232502]

read through this and image what it will be like in 5 years. you will be a prompt wagie
https://dallery.gallery/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/The-DALL%C2%B7E-2-prompt-book-v1.02.pdf

[Anonymous No.6232506]

>>6232479
If you're doing it fun/enjoyment, of course not; keep going.
If you're wondering if there's going to be a job at the end of the line; there's almost certainly going to be some sort of artistic jobs out there after this, at the very least people with artistic skills will be required to fix AI images, just look at how this prompt monkey runs away from something that requires a little bit of skill >>6230487

At the end of the day, art jobs are dream jobs, work towards them, but expect that you'll most likely not make it even with the skills.

[Anonymous No.6232510]

>>6232502
"prompt wagie"
nah you're gonna be cleaning toilets and cleaning up boomer's shit in aged care while we outsource all creative and intellectual pursuits to algorithms

[Anonymous No.6232513]

>>6232510
Nah, it'll be the secretary who does the prompts, because it requires no talent.

[Anonymous No.6232520]

This changes nothing except if you were trying to make money off art by selling your soul to the industry or making porn. I already came to the conclusion that pursuing an industry job was a fool's errand a couple years ago, and while I actually do respect porn artists in a way because of the freedom they have, I don't have much of an interest in doing porn as a main source of income myself. I'm just not horny enough to dedicate more than like an hour at most a day to thinking about sex and don't see how it could last in the long term.
For people that are hobbyists or learning/using drawn art as a medium in their own projects like me, this is a big nothing burger. You'll either incorporate AI into your process or you won't depending on your values and you want your art to look like. I think of it as the equivalent of tracing but maybe a bit more extreme. Yeah I could totally just trace images off google and 3D models instead of drawing everything myself, but by doing that I'm sacrificing a level of control in my art that could lead to affects on my I didn't want in the final piece. For a personal example; I don't like tracing 3D models because I've noticed it leads to figures looking stiff and lifeless most of the time, and my figures are a lot more dynamic if I just do them myself. I'm not saying art with AI incorporated into it will be the same, but I am saying that there will be some sort signature "AI look" even as the technology advances and after paint overs that'll keep me from feeling like I'm missing out by just sticking to drawing from scratch. Drawn art is an extremely finicky thing and even the slightest of changes in process WILL lead to different results big or small, which I actually think is one of the cooler things about it.

Also I want to just throw in that normies never gave a fuck about art in the first place beyond looking at it for two seconds on their Twitter feed, so being concerned about your social media is silly too and was before.

[Anonymous No.6232521]

>>6232506
>there's almost certainly going to be some sort of artistic jobs out there after this

[Anonymous No.6232522]

>>6232513
>it'll be the "secretary" who does the prompts
like you'll ever be a woman

[Anonymous No.6232524]

>>6232520
Based retard, tldr

Are you aiming more for prompteur or touch-up-technician?

[Anonymous No.6232527]

>>6232522
>like you'll ever be a woman
It's a new age old man!

[Anonymous No.6232533]

>>6232527
Unironically (You)

[Anonymous No.6232534]

>>6230338
I love not giving a shit about ai and just drawing

[Anonymous No.6232546]

>>6232533
It's called humor you massive pussy.

[Anonymous No.6232562]

>>6232546
yet you easily walked yourself into each punchline

[Anonymous No.6232570]

>>6231293
HAHAHAHAHA

Retards put face to face with their stupid moron bias
Shown in an absolutely certain way, how stupid they are
Haabhahahahahahah oh god it's so beautiful

--- A R T ---

[Anonymous No.6232574]

>>6232562
Each punchline? There's barely one? You posted an image of a hanging tranny, what other "jokes" have you told faggot?

[Anonymous No.6232576]

>>6232015
Thank you sir

[Anonymous No.6232579]

I love AI art!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6VcX4K4sT4

[Anonymous No.6232589]

>>6232576
i am not a sir
it's ma'am

[Anonymous No.6232610]

>>6232589
Like actual girl, or...?

[Anonymous No.6232617]

>>6232610
better

[Anonymous No.6232629]

>>6231293
God, I can't get enough of this seethe

[Anonymous No.6232632]

It's all fake.
Tried the online stable diffusion thing and it's terrible.

[Anonymous No.6232633]

>>6231818
we get it creep, you're unhinged.
Very edgy, super bad-ass whatever

[Anonymous No.6232637]

Can't decide if I'm more of a prompteur or touch-up technician
but they both feel kinda bad if I'm honest

[Anonymous No.6232705]

>>6232637
>prompteur
This job will never exist. The "touch-up technician" will be the same guy getting the AI art. Anyone who thinks their AI art is somehow special compared to others have delusions of grandeur. They think they can finally make art professionally without ever having put in the effort into any of the skills to actually do so.

[Anonymous No.6232713]

>>6232705
This, and even if it does take some skill to word prompts well, so that anyone with sub 95 IQ would have a hard time learning how to do it, pretty soon someone's just going to teach AI how to turn your average users vague prompt into something that will get professional-looking results. for example
>yotsuba giving you the middlefinger
turns into
>professional cute shoujo anime-style illustration of yotsuba, an 8 year old girl with green hair, wearing a white v-cut t-shirt short blue jeans and sandals, looking angrily at the viewer and giving them the middle finger, expressive, 1800x1200
and then if something about that prompt doesn't quite go in the direction you wanted, you can tweak it np

[Anonymous No.6232726]

>>6231085
How many the rock images did you guys send the AI to make it draw like this?

[Anonymous No.6232807]

>>6232064
>>6232283
>>6232310
" In fact, the size of the stable diffusion model is only a couple of gigabytes, while it is trained on hundreds of terabytes of source images. In the words of Stability AI CEO and founder Emad Mostaque, this is the collective imagery of humanity compressed into files a few gigabytes big. This immensely lossy compression from the source image to the model, which reduces the volume of data by at least four orders of magnitude, implies that the probability for stable diffusion faithfully memorizing ‘substantial’ parts of specific works of art is extremely slim."

So much for a "brain"

[Anonymous No.6232808]

>In fact, the size of the stable diffusion model is only a couple of gigabytes, while it is trained on hundreds of terabytes of source images. In the words of Stability AI CEO and founder Emad Mostaque, this is the collective imagery of humanity compressed into files a few gigabytes big. This immensely lossy compression from the source image to the model, which reduces the volume of data by at least four orders of magnitude, implies that the probability for stable diffusion faithfully memorizing ‘substantial’ parts of specific works of art is extremely slim.

So much for a "mind"

[Anonymous No.6232810]

>>6232807
> "collective imagery of humanity"
hope he gets assraped by a pack of chavs in the alleyways of london

[Anonymous No.6232811]

>>6232472
Discoveries build off a steady stream of other discoveries are 100% original pure thought? Most of these inventions are random luck or slight twists of previous ones, that were also rng or based on previous ones...

[Anonymous No.6232812]

>>6232064
>>6232082
>>6232283
>>6232305
>>6232310


>In fact, the size of the stable diffusion model is only a couple of gigabytes, while it is trained on hundreds of terabytes of source images. In the words of Stability AI CEO and founder Emad Mostaque, this is the collective imagery of humanity compressed into files a few gigabytes big. This immensely lossy compression from the source image to the model, which reduces the volume of data by at least four orders of magnitude, implies that the probability for stable diffusion faithfully memorizing ‘substantial’ parts of specific works of art is extremely slim.

So much for a "mind"

[Anonymous No.6232819]

>>6232812
It's not a mind, but explaining it to a child with analogies seems fine.

[Anonymous No.6232835]

>>6232520
based. also maybe traditional artists will also have access to other ai tools that are not meant to replace them but enhance them, so actually it might still be possible to stay competitive.
for example, imagine ai for in-between animation frames which learn from your own style. soon it will be possible for a single artist to animate entire movies in a short time frame

[Anonymous No.6232841]

>>6232835
>it will be possible for a single artist to animate entire movies in a short time frame
That's the thing I'm most interested in when it comes to these AIs. There's going to be a weening period where the average artist gets fucked because of them, but I think in the long run, they'll allow artists to create so much more than they could previously.

Animators will no longer need to pitch to big studios, but can just animate an entire series, each episode 30 min, by himself.
If the Corpos wanna embrace AI, they can't complain when the public embraces AI.

[Anonymous No.6232850]

>>6232007
God, Deus Ex was so kino

[Anonymous No.6232853]

>>6232811
Even if you had infinite numbers of such models working in tandem for infinite amounts of time, without human or agi inputs, they wouldn't come up with anything original ever. NPCs believe inside-of-the-box thinking is equivalent to creativity which is why they easily deceive themselves with the idea creativity is reducible to a mindless grind.

[Anonymous No.6232866]

Heh

[Anonymous No.6232872]

It’s too late to stop this model, but if someone sues the fuck out of the AI companies, it might scare investors enough to keep them from dumping millions on the next better model.

[Anonymous No.6232873]

>>6230423
>>6230441
>they are coping this hard
ai is just in its infancy, its progress is as fast as it is unstoppable and current ai progress is MUCH faster than it was 2 years ago, you basically get breakthroughs daily and it will only become faster as the industry grows and they build larger and larget models(a 500 trillion parameter model is getting built right now, that's 5x more parameters than the human brain)

ai will replace me as it will replace you, it's over

[Anonymous No.6232876]

>>6230522
dude you know you can just change the input to "elmo sitting in the same pose as S staring happily with a glimmer in his eyes", right?

actually forget that, you can literally just make him look more lively in photoshop there is ZERO art knowledge needed for that

[Anonymous No.6232882]

>>6232873
>been out for years
>infancy
meds

[Anonymous No.6232894]

>>6232873
Do you think progress always happens at breakneck speeds and there are no walls or obstacles to get over? It may well be the case that AI continues to progress quickly, or the limit that it seems to be at now is its wall. Regardless, quit being such a fucking bitch doomer and trying to drag others down with you.

>>6232876
>you can literally just make him look more lively in photoshop there is ZERO art knowledge needed for that
That's cool, then you should be able to show us by example how it is so easy and takes no art skills; fix that Elmo up. Surprise me.

[Anonymous No.6232906]

>>6232882
its gaining momentum, attention and funding now, but its still at its infancy not even a proto-AGI
>>6232894
>fix that Elmo up
no, i am not gonna waste my time on that but it is relatively easy to do and you know it just a little bit of photoshop knowledge and basic art skills, you can say that artists are still needed because of that but how long until they aren't and even this is regulated? you know AI keeps getting better and better
>and there are no walls or obstacles to get over?
people have been talking about these walls since fucking eternity, they are not coming anytime soon trust me and AI will keep going at breakneck speeds

[Anonymous No.6232909]

>>6232853
Nobody is arguing that the AI itself would come up with original ideas for images. It's the user that of the AI that can do that. Somehow people think because an AI is involved in this process, the ideas communicated in the image can't be original.

[Anonymous No.6232911]

>>6232909
AI does not surpass its training data. Stuff like dall-e looks good right now because we are discovering for the first time what its like to mix styles discovered by artists with realistic rendering and complex patterns, but it will hit diminishing returns at some point.

[Anonymous No.6232912]

>>6232909
meant to quote >>6232906

[Anonymous No.6232915]

>>6232906
>Dude, trust me fixing that Elmo is easy
>Dude trust me, AI is unstoppable
Yeah sure, whatever.

[Anonymous No.6232916]

>>6232909
>Nobody is arguing that the AI itself would come up with original ideas for images. It's the user that of the AI that can do that.
Prompts only allow one to navigate inside a multidimensional space of all possible outputs defined by the model, but if the user is coming up with anything actually original it's unhelpful.

[Anonymous No.6232941]

>>6232916
example of something actually original?

[Anonymous No.6232948]

>>6232941
anime for example. numbercrushers can not come up with such stylization, no matter how much you scale hem

[Anonymous No.6232954]

>>6232941
It's a wierd thing to ask for. To give you something original I would need to actually create it here. And it's not something trivial. But history wise, sure. There was nothing like star wars before star wars. The alien design of H.R Geiger was genuinely alien. If you had this tech then you couldn't have come up with it's design. Thinking back, the 70s and 80s were a golden age of character creativity. Terminator, E.T, Robocop, the thing.

That people stopped up coming with these things I know too, but that says way more about how really conservative our society is more so than the potential of human creativity.

[Anonymous No.6232971]

>>6232954
Giger was hugely influenced by Hans Bellmer, drawing penises where they don't belong...

[Anonymous No.6232979]

>>6232954
>There was nothing like star wars before star wars.
Even George Lucas has said that star wars was just a classic retelling of things like the Hero's Journey, but with a sci-fi twist. It was a mash up of things Lucas loved, in the same way Quentin Tarantino does for all his films.

[Anonymous No.6232990]

>>6232971
>>6232979
Everyone was inspired by someone, but that's not the issue. The fact that we take inspiration as outright cheap copy shows how much we really let ourseleves go. I once saw what I meant being explained as first order creation and second order creation. Line where one ends and the other starts is fuzzy (something that's true in many concepts but doesn't make them invalid), but bear with me. Let's take cyberpunk for example. Blade Runner was based off a book Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep, but both of these works stand on their own. The influence of Blade Runner is so big that there's cyberpunk before it and after it. Then, let's take Altered Carbon. It's a fine series with some interesting concepts, but it's no where the splash of the blade runner. It doesn't really stand as much on it's own feet.

[Anonymous No.6233018]

>>6232979
The trick to being seen as very creative is have more obscure sources.

[Anonymous No.6233032]

>>6232990
>>6233018
>The trick to being seen as very creative is have more obscure sources.
Nah, I'm perfectly happy with artists wearing their influences on their sleeves, I was just saying that Star Wars isn't really a beacon of pure originality, it's just a very good example of remixed influences.

[Anonymous No.6233093]

all the artfags in here pissing and shitting themselves: have you actually tried using the thing? The results it gives are incredibly vague. With img2img you can give it a seed image and it tries to do something with that and a prompt but if you manage to make it stick to the concept of the seed image, usually the result will be a blurry mess. You can't really control it. Sure it's good at "woman with big booba" but if you want anything specific like for example "woman with big booba with a pink bra in an 80s themed bedroom" it usually shits itself at some point. Also forget about more out there concepts. It won't really be able to do it as it has no source of reference and both the interpreter and the dataset it was trained on are kinda shit.

It's also probably not going to get worlds better until there are some serious advancements both in making this stuff more efficient and hardware. You're mostly being trolled.

[Anonymous No.6233362]

>>6232948
AI of waifus was one of the first cases of AI in art dummy. That artstyle has become so cliche that it's really easy for an AI to generate hundreds of waifus.

[Anonymous No.6233376]

>>6233093
I'd be more worried about the fact that most first world countries currencies are entirely collapsing and have no idea how to recover. Art becomes less easy to make a career when people are struggling for food rather than how to lose weight.

[Anonymous No.6233381]

>>6233362
you dont understand the post
transformers can not come up with this by itself, but obviously if it already exists it can be copied easily

[Anonymous No.6233384]

>>6233381
That's 100% true, it's also entirely possible he was a dumb weeaboo worshipping anime despite the fact that the Japanese animation industry would kill themselves if it was possible for AI to replace artists.

[Anonymous No.6234328]

>>6230540

It is a slippery slope for sure, but not all slope arguments are fallacies. The reason it's a fallacy is when you apply it arbitrarily to a situation where there is no slope. Like for example all;

>all white people who are patriots turn into white nationalists! (racists) Because their love for their country will make them hate the citizens of other nations!

Like it's possible, but it's not necessarily the case, so it's a fallacy. It presupposes the result of patriotism to always be a decline into white nationalism.

>so what does this have to do with the post?

There has never been a time when people voluntarily stopped the advancement of technology, technology is literally a slippery slope; it is literally always getting better and displacing workers and outaded tech.

Literally this will replace all artists, sooner than you think. By the looks of things the field will shrink. There will be more artists than ever in 2040, but being an "artist" will likely mean sketching stick-figures for AI to render, or pressing a few keystrokes to describe what you want AI to produce.

You cannot stop advancement of technology, and people who invest time into getting raw art skills will not necessarily benefit from AI art. It will benefit the world, the whole, but not the individuals, many mediocre artists will be replaced, even if they would have otherwise done some useful jobs. Automation. Time to learn to code, just do it before the AI starts to code everything. Lol.

[Anonymous No.6235156]

>>6234328
>There has never been a time when people voluntarily stopped the advancement of technology
Well, I guess we wouldn't necessarily know.
>Literally this will replace all ...
I think you're either been overly optimistic, or pessimistic, with your assessment. It's kind of like the modernist idea that photography killed painting. It's still alive and kicking.
>It will benefit the world, the whole, but not the individuals
Depends how you wanna look at it, but it will only benefit individuals not the whole, the people making real money off of it.
I'd say it's a disadvantage to humanity, to the whole, for a couple reasons:
1. Just one more, ironically deeply human practice which humans will become worse at.
2. Due to it lowering human ability with the creation of art, and due to the fact it relies on existing creations of art, all new artwork which rely on AI will look samey and derivative, and will not look compelling (it will be of low quality, either due to problems with the AI itself, or due to the user lacking the good judgment which comes with learning the skill), so to summarise all new artwork will look like shit or worse than what came before, in the human age.

[Anonymous No.6235180]

Remember thispersondoesnotexist.com ?

They will combine this with the image generator for perfect faces.