/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

[Anonymous No.6377411]

I think I have found a solution to the AI problem, or at least a potentially beneficial application of AI to protect artists that are unwilling to have their intellectual property abused for AI training.
AI proponents usually argue that "styles can't be copywritten!", and that gives them every right to train your art style with AI models. This is true, but it is incredibly subjective for a human to determine where one person's style ends and where another person's style begins. Legally, this murkiness makes it difficult to properly defend an artist's artstyle.
But as we have seen, AIs have no trouble understanding what an artist's distinctive 'style' is. An AI can clearly differentiate between two different styles, and can mathematically determine the difference between them. Since AI doesn't actually create its own unique art styles, but just meshes them together, an AI could also determine what percentage of an image is generated using copywritten material.
With this logic, why shouldn't we push for AI-assisted copyright protections on artstyles to defend artistic copyright from AI scrapers?

[Anonymous No.6377414]

>>6377411
Fuck no, copyright is shit.

[Anonymous No.6377415]

>>6377411
Because AI doesn't work like that. AI use the same things we use for learning how to create an image, it doesn't mash together pictures and styles until something pops up, but rather learns what an image means and creates iterstions based on all the knowledge gathered from every piece you've shown to it. AI isn't stealing your art, it's doing exactly the same thing you are doing but being a computer.

[Anonymous No.6377417]

AI is your friend

[Anonymous No.6377456]

>>6377415
>AI use the same things we use for learning how to create an image,
First of all, kill yourself ESL shitter.
Second, brains are not computers you transhumanist tranny.

[Anonymous No.6377470]

>>6377411
Please do sue blastbeat first, since he basically copied ishikeis artstyle, and he's not even an AI

[Anonymous No.6377471]

>>6377415
Bruh it's literally an automated photobashing software. See all the garbled signatures or Bloodborne as a prompt giving samey images 90% of the time.
The way it learns to tag and categorize elements is similar to humans but the actual art making is 100% mechanic pixel by pixel merging of existing visual content. There is zero measuring or just fucking drawing like a human artist would.

[Anonymous No.6377475]

I like Ai because I hate people
Nothing better than art not created by a person or watching a vtuber without a bitch behind it

[Anonymous No.6377478]

>>6377471
it's not a photobashing software, it's an advanced denoising autoencoder in a way

[Anonymous No.6377482]

>>6377471
If you observed the process step by step, starting with the random noise patter, you would immediately see that it isn't photobashing at all.
But of course you wont and you wont care, since you just want to shitpost like an ignorant fuckwit.

[Anonymous No.6377484]

See this? I have warned you guys for a month kike will try to copyright art style to monopolize art. Here their shill started to appear

[Anonymous No.6377486]

>>6377482
Where does it source the elements it connects together and applies on the noise then, hm wiseguy? You yourself don't disagree it doesn't draw but morphs random noise.

[Anonymous No.6377490]

>>6377482
NTA but yea, its not a photobasher.
Its a probabilistic photobasher.

https://nitter.it/GSNotArt/status/1588439657641291777#m

[Anonymous No.6377494]

>>6377484
if it gives individual artists the ability to protect themselves from art thieves like AIfags, then so be it

[Anonymous No.6377495]

>>6377486
It's not drawing, it is using noise several times to generate an image, however, you won't find any artworks inside of the model files, or any image data, so you cannot prove that any artist was used to train these

[Anonymous No.6377641]

>>6377495
You can let it be known of the art that was melted down to produce the model files by pointing at elements that manage to slip through on the generated images, however.

[Anonymous No.6377648]

>>6377411
I would use that reverse searching style tech to train bots to crawl the internet and harass anyone stealing my style/identity.

[Anonymous No.6377655]

>>6377648
It mosty looks after poses and I know a lot of artists who draw VERY similar to their inspiration

[Anonymous No.6377659]

can AI make images bigger? that waifu thing shit makes everything blurry and I need this one to be at least 3 times as big so I can fap to it properly.

[Anonymous No.6377663]

>>6377494
It will give more power to AI. They can copystrike any artist and claimed they use "AI style".
AI existent is already a thief, no need to give them more power with copyright bullshit and limit people's artistic creations.

[Anonymous No.6377665]

>>6377655
There would be a disclaimer that the harassment is not aimed at real artists. though that softens it a bit. I would instead make the bot pretend to be me, interested in a colab with the AI artist. Once they email me, I have them...

[Anonymous No.6377672]

>>6377659
callao lacra

[Anonymous No.6377680]

>>6377663
The moment artstyle can be copyright, in a matter of milisecond, kikes will use their power to copyright "AI style" and send million of copystrike to every artist who post their arts in the internet and forbid them to draw and paint in their own styles.

[Anonymous No.6377745]

>>6377680
good
anything to make aifags suffer

[Anonymous No.6377750]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_Bqq09Kaxk
Well, looks like we're all fucked.

[Anonymous No.6377761]

>>6377750
>clickbait youtube videos
Do AItards really?

[Anonymous No.6377765]

>>6377761
The guy who actually uploaded the video doesn't come off as particularly pro AI.

[Anonymous No.6377776]

>>6377750
>a techbro
Why would you have an interview with a cultist?

[Anonymous No.6377788]

>>6377750
I was thinking this. It happened on accident. Even AIbros know art is not profitable at all, and they dont hate artists, it all just happened. All it shows is that artists were bunch of hacks hiding behind magic words like creativity and so on. Every creative person is a hack anc scammer. Humans are not creative, creativity was never something hard to accomplish. Just a program that looks at noise and identifies objects in it is able to replace artists, then artists never EVER deserved even a crumb of respect.

If teaching robot what apple is is able to make all apple drawers obsolete, then so be it. All of you faggots on this board are just retarded monkeys with good hand-eye coordination that allows you to paint apple you have seen million times, then just blend it with other stuff and you are done with paintings. The digital fags are even worse, they dont even need hand-eye coordination, just practice making lines with mouse and all the million shortcuts. No wonder artists were all poor losers and the famous 0.1% barely make above plumber paycheck.

[Anonymous No.6377792]

>>6377788
>omg we're just like, bad machines, and stuff!
god i cant wait for all you niggers to upload your mind to a computer or whatever the fuck so i can spill some water over it

[Anonymous No.6377795]

>>6377792
Bro, the problem is that we are all forced to join them in their matrix
After all, transhumanism is a religion and technocrats WILL be our gods

[Anonymous No.6377801]

>>6377788
>blogpost
>crying
>y..you're all just monkeys
>thinking creativity is magic
>hand eye coordination
Esl poojeet who has never touched a pencil and thinks artists are image wizards holding onto the dark secret that everyone can learn to be creative and draw if you apply yourself if art makes you so mad why are you here?
Inb4
>for luls
>I love seeing artists upset
You are seething if you actually thought it was funny you wouldn't be so openly in shambles

[Anonymous No.6377802]

>>6377776
Cope more, most techbros dont hate artists, they dont want artists to go away and lot of them also do art on the side. They just work on AI and its a thing they cant stop. If they wont develop it, somebody else will, this is the phylosopy behind the tech. Most people are justifiably scared of AI and it has very high chance of killing humanity, but at the same time you cant just choose not to research it if all you need is just bunch of computers and people who learn about this stuff. Its not like research on humans where you could prevent human traficing by making it difficult to move people unwillingly around, any nerd with computer can do this. It is also really powerful in every way, so governments that hinder the AI development will get steamrolled over. All AI researchers can do is just try to steer the boulder as they said in the video.

This is why people despise Emad. OpenAI and Midjurney kept it away from people's hands because they thought it was kinda unethical. Both were closed source and be accountable for their training, as well as with every new model they would have to update the training, meaning it was potentially possible to opt out. Then Emad released this tech open source and for free so that all the neets of the internet with 0 morals to screw up the world. This is when the seething started to happen, and when the other tech companies gave up on closed source and browser only.

>How could you expect companies and corpos to have any morals
I guarantee you that if you put the average 4channer in postion of power, the world would fucking burn. People get corrupted by power since there becomes less and less people above them who they need to please to stay in power, but neets and people not working in industry they are fiddling with have noone above them, they are the freest and also most jealous and mindbroken people. Also they are not susceptible to corporate law.

[Anonymous No.6377807]

>>6377415
>>6377482
>>6377495
Absolute fucking retard.

[Anonymous No.6377810]

I was thinking this. It happened on accident. Even fa/g/gots know being a code monkey isn't profitable at all, and they don't hate cocks, it all just happened. All it shows is that programmers were a bunch of hacks hiding behind magic words like "Artificial Intelligence" and so on. All techbros are virgin hacks and scammers, I mean look at me I can't spell for shit, and repeat the same words ad nauseum because my arguments are so frail my only way to have people listen to me is by saying the big boy insults despite being a nigger.

I mean look at Github copilot, just a program that makes it's own code. Techbros are obsolete, they never deserved even a crumb of respect. All they do is write a bunch of words and and have their computer do the work for them, like throwing shit on a wall and hoping it sticks.

If teaching a robot how writing code makes all techbros obsolete, then so be it. All of you faggots on this board are just retarded monkeys with wives getting fucked behind your back by another nigger. No wonder they're all losers who get cucked over and already replaced by the industry due to circumstances they've themselves created.

something something cope harder

[Anonymous No.6377811]

>>6377807
>img2img exists and is commonly used

[Anonymous No.6377823]

>>6377811
Except, you unbelievable faggot, that the AIfag literally listed in which were img2img so that people could remove them, picture in question not included, and then went confronted about it went
>m-my friend sent me that one and I accidentally added it!

[Anonymous No.6377829]

>>6377807
>image2image
If you want to make an argument, post the prompt and seed and settings that generates this specific image

[Anonymous No.6377832]

>>6377411
By all means please waste the rest of your life trying to find simple percentages from the latent space

[Anonymous No.6377853]

>>6377750
Gtp4gtp5gtp6. This cultist is so excited about agi I feel embarrassed for him.
>We just need more compute!
Some ai researchers say agi is not on our horizon without some new way of doing ai we have not even thought of yet. We might never think of it.

[Anonymous No.6377860]

>>6377750
If the stuff that madman is saying is true, then we are very safe lads. AI taking over in 10-15 years EVERYTHING means we only have to last 10-15 years, and we will last. People dont like AI art, the current models can alsready do good hands, natural faces, desirable proportions and nice backgrounds, and yet I dont see artists losing their followers or losing commissions at large. Just go to any /sdg/ on /g/, look at the current pictures and tell me most of them dont look pretty good. And yet again, nobody is losing jobs so far from Stable Diffusion. The worst thing that happened was protpers spamming all the art sites with generic shit.

And after 15 years if we survive what would we do in fully automated society where there is no need for artists, but also for money? Just get AGI bots as your fans, they would be developed enough to make decisions, judge if you art is trash, and probably even have consciousness. If it would still be demoralising, they might do something like "Real artist refuge site" where artists post their stuff to share with other people, bots check in some unimaginable way if you truly did it, and then share it with other, and behind the doors most fans would be bots since most people wont care enough to even enter that site. Literally just automating the fans and consumers.

[Anonymous No.6377866]

>>6377750
Lol 100million dollar films will be fully generated in a couple years he says
What.

[Anonymous No.6377880]

>>6377750
>Proko
LMAO what the hell happened to this guy?

[Anonymous No.6377883]

>>6377866
Maybe he is correct. He might be an insider, remember that Dall-E 1 was never fully released to public and showed really really promising results a whole year ago that also look pretty photorealistic in some cases and shows really really good results. Dont buy into the Dall-E mini where every result was miscoloured mess of random blobs and shapes that very very vaguely resembles actual pictures. This tech existed for longer then shills want to admit it and it is not moving nearly as fast as it can, but at the same time since this guy is an insider, he might know far more then we know and there might be already unreleased models that are very capable.

https://openai.com/blog/dall-e/

[Anonymous No.6377893]

>>6377883
>tourist doesn't even know who Proko is

[Anonymous No.6377905]

>>6377893
I was not talking about Proko. I know Proko is Draftsmen podcaster and tutorial maker, I was talking about the techbro he interviewed,

[Anonymous No.6377909]

>>6377866
Also said "no one woke up and thought to use AI to replace artists" mustve forgot about king street shitter Emad

[Anonymous No.6377913]

>>6377866

Also said "no one woke up and thought to use AI to replace artists" mustve forgot about king street shitter Emad
So im taking everything he says with a grain of salt

[Anonymous No.6377914]

>>6377750
>the labor costs of everything would go to 0
>and if the labor costs of everything were 0, you're paying for nothing
My fucking sides. Are AIfags really this fucking stupid? Are they not aware that this already happened with production automation?

[Anonymous No.6377918]

>>6377750
>we have artists' best interests in mind and want what's best for them, I agree that it's unethical to use their intellectual property like this without their consent
>so do you think we should stop doing it?
>lol no

[Anonymous No.6377922]

>>6377918
pls link timestamp I dont want to watch a whole hour of this adderall junkie talk

[Anonymous No.6377924]

>>6377918
holy shit chad

[Anonymous No.6377926]

>>6377883
he is a retard. even normies in the youtube comments are shitting on him.

[Anonymous No.6377928]

>>6377883
Nah, he refered to meta. We've seen their video tech. It has no real sense for what is actually there. Nothing is grounded. There are no forces.

[Anonymous No.6377947]

>>6377922
Here's where he calls it unethical
https://youtu.be/K_Bqq09Kaxk?t=1147
Then he says
https://youtu.be/K_Bqq09Kaxk?t=2671
Here's a little more context if you want but it basically amounts to the same thing
https://youtu.be/K_Bqq09Kaxk?t=2600

[Anonymous No.6378031]

>>6377411
No. Styles should never be copyrighted.

The solution you want is already possible because the AI already know how much of somebody else's artwork it used.

[Anonymous No.6378273]

>>6377947
>>6377750
Actually we should listen to this tech cultist and try to make AIs that can turn drawings into stuff. There still is time since most of these models struggle making anything exact. There is AI model that can turn image into text and sort of reverse prompt it. If we somehow managed to make something like what he describes, we would win. However, I dont know how possible it is to develop. This might be difficult considering that lot of the Digital Art programs, and especially 3D became more accessible thus allowing tech illiterate artists to use them well.

Maybe make something like what he described where the AI fixes and polishes the work, but that is pretty much what prompters are already doing with hiding the artifacts.

But either way, there is no stopping of AI.

[Anonymous No.6378294]

Your best bet is to become like kim jung gi and make a spectacle out of the process of you making a picture. Because eventually an ai will be able to make any finished piece of art imaginable. Your art will have to become a video of you putting down lines in a cool way rather than the final product.

[Anonymous No.6378300]

>FAS-face
>severely balding
>sagging lids
Yikes

[Anonymous No.6378715]

>>6378294
Then someone will just make a txt2video of someone making an amazing drawing in an unusual way.
The only real avenue will be traditional.

[Anonymous No.6378717]

>>6378715
What about the people who use 3D printers to replicate the texture of brush strokes or pencil marks on paper?

[Anonymous No.6378741]

>>6378715
You could do it in a way AI would never. Like visual jokes as you are drawing.
https://youtu.be/lI5BfdPR1Mg?t=8244

[Anonymous No.6378745]

>>6377411
>AI-assisted copyright protections on artstyles
The amount of backfire on artists would be absolutely psychotic. Like terminal velocity straight vertical down to Hell
>to defend artistic copyright from AI scrapers?
… is paved with good intentions.

I think this could be workshopped into something more targeted though. Not to protect muh style per se, but to detect what images in particular an AI was trained on in order to generate the generated image.
You can’t copyright a style or enforce action against people for mimicking a style(AI aside, you wouldn’t want to live in a world like that as an artist anyway), but just by putting your artwork out there you have copyright to your artwork. That is, particular works of art made in a “tangible” form. Digitally made still counts last I checked.
And just by being able to detect it, it opens the doorway to actually enforcing it, by giving mathematical certainty to prove it. Class action lawsuits might actually go somewhere.

[Anonymous No.6378746]

>>6378741
watching him draw will always be mesmerising
I can only dream of getting as good as this faggot, he died too soon

[Anonymous No.6378750]

>>6377415
Can you explain why it makes decisions and errors that almost no human being would make?

[Anonymous No.6378751]

>>6377415

>learns what an image means

>AI use the same things we use for learning how to create an image

I've seen ai brainlet keeps spouting the same bullshit over and over again.

[Anonymous No.6378752]

>>6377802
Emad is one guy in one company. The fact there was no discussion to be had within Stability AI on the dangers of open sourcing this technology, and the fact no techbros outside Stability expressed concern implies the lot of you either don't care or support the AIpocalypse.

And why wouldn't you? This technology changes the whole field of digital media. You're doing away with artists, musicians, actors but making new jobs in the form of data collectors, model trainers and prompt engineers.
Those people who spent their whole lives trying to master their craft are suckers and victims to progress. Your own AI jobs will be safe from automation because you yourself are in charge of automation, you will never make yourself jobless. Those other guys? Fuck em, they need to learn to code.
Who cares that the mass flood of AI media produced by anyone with a strong GPU will commodify and devalue the worth of media. Your job is to make tech that shits out media, not media itself.
AI producing illegal material and infringing copyright? Just make AI that combats illegal and infringing media content. More work and money for you.

It didn't occur to me but you techbros are literally kikes on steroids. Even all this time you'be been playing the holy saint card and saying you're helping the good men in their struggle... by literally stealing their raison d'etre. Despicable is too small a word to describe you ni/g/ers.

[Anonymous No.6378753]

>>6377482

It's a filter... a very advance one.

[Anonymous No.6378754]

>>6377494
>if it gives individual artists the ability to protect themselves from art thieves like AIfags, then so be it
Imagine getting your artwork nuked off the Internet or having legal action against you because you draw anything resembling anime or cartoons.
>but I’m the special main character protag and my art style is 100% original
Not if there’s a financial incentive to fuck you.

[Anonymous No.6378755]

>>6378752
So your point is, we gotta protect the endangered species that artists are just because of pity towards them, and while doing that, either entirely halt technological change, or de-opensource it, and by doing that leave it entirely in hands of megacorporations?

[Anonymous No.6378757]

>>6377411
The amount of this shit flooding r34 is already starting to be annoying

[Anonymous No.6378758]

>>6378755
We need to kill all ni/g/ers.

[Anonymous No.6378760]

>>6378751
do they actually believe this or are they just trying to cope? It's the dumbest fucking thing. Human brains learn so vastly different to machine learning.
https://www.kdnuggets.com/2022/04/machine-learning-like-brain-part-one-neurons-slow-slow-slow.html

[Anonymous No.6378762]

>>6378755

>entirely halt technological change

What technological change that is so important to humanity that you need an automatic art generator.

He did it to raise his company value.

Guess what his previous work was?

Emad Mostaque - Co-Chief Investment Officer at award-winning Emerging Markers hedge fund

[Anonymous No.6378765]

>>6378762
Good for him that he managed to raise his company value by developing it, I'd have done the same, but the key part is open sourcing it. A lot of technologies that get created are derived from existing technologies, especially open source ones, so even if there's no cancer cure tier use for image generators, I do believe that it existing will spawn other projects off it

[Anonymous No.6378770]

>>6377750
>>6377761
>>6377776
>>6377788
>>6377792
>>6377795
>>6377801
>>6377802
>>6377853
>>6377860
>>6377866
>>6377880
>>6377883
>>6377914
>>6377918
>>6378273
We’re being infiltrated by failed artists. Pic related.

[Anonymous No.6378775]

>>6377411
the solution right now is easy.
take artists names and artist websites (and photographers for the heck of it.) out of the datasets.
without the names of good artists and sites its production quality is gets significantly reduced.
reduce it to public domain only.

[Anonymous No.6378777]

>>6378755
I've never seen someone use this argument for guns or nukes, just because you can make guns doesn't mean they shouldn't be banned (unless you're an American), and just because cloning became a thing doesn't it's legal to clone humans (again, unless you live in America (although even they still don't do it)).

[Anonymous No.6378781]

>>6378765
What if he open sourced it to
1) divert hate on this tech towards the masses of internet dwellers that would use it
2) have other people do the training of the models for him (embeddings)
Maybe a conspiracy level theory, but it wouldnt be the first time a rich person does this stuff
Plus, like all other rich people, every action he does has a long term profit incentive. Why would he give you this ai for free? He must have a plan to turn this into a monopoly somehow. Hes not a hecking linux contribuitor, hes was a hedge fund manager ffs

[Anonymous No.6378783]

>>6378765
He open sourced the tech to put a bullet in the idea that there could be regulation of this technology, not because he's some philanthropist. He is a psychopath who doesn't give a shit about whoever gets hurt by this tech, and only wants to make as much money as possible off of it.

[Anonymous No.6378786]

>>6378781
Why wouldn't he have a profit incentive? He's not running a non-profit organization. If you take a look at github, there's a lot of open source repos by corporations like facebook and whatever, and I don't mind myself if they somehow profit off them, if others also get to benefit off it, it's pretty much a win win situation for as long as this is open source. Also, as for training embeddings, a retard with a 3060 can do it in 6 hours, so pretty sure mutli million dollar company could do it anytime

[Anonymous No.6378790]

>>6378783
Isn't the most sane thing to do, with a thing you put your resources in, to profit off it? I don't think it's good to have anyone hurt by introducing a new technology, however that did happen, and will keep happening with various technologies, like how cars BTFOd people doing any services related to horses and carriages, email drastically reducing usage of paper mail and so on, so it's just an unfortunate byproduct of technology growing, that I don't think we'll ever get rid of

[Anonymous No.6378792]

copyright naturallyshouldn't exist, with AI, if you study basic ecnomics what you created was simply the machine who produces school pens, that boring plastic piece, so you created another market, with the plastic pens being the AI art, and the customizable pens market being normal drawn art

[Anonymous No.6378806]

>>6378790
No, because it's ethically wrong to profit off of other people's hard work. If we didn't have to worry about putting food on the table, the story would be different, but even then the lack of acknowledgement of credit is also wrong.
I think the techfag idea that all technology should be free and open to everyone, no matter what, is one of the most horribly dangerous and potentially actually world-ending ideas out there. You think this tech isn't going to be used for incredibly damaging purposes? For propaganda? For art theft on an level we've never seen before?
The fact that we're not paying more attention to extremely heavy regulation of tech is astonishing. AIs are already able to create things in the real world, but how long before it can create particularly dangerous things? Look at >>6378777 for example.
What happens if, one day, some psychopath can easily decide to create an incredibly infectious virus with a 100% mortality rate and a 2 year incubation period, and release it out in the world?

[Anonymous No.6378814]

>>6378806
>No, because it's ethically wrong to profit off of other people's hard work.
Thing is, as far as I know, his company only developed the tech, and cofounded the realistic model with runwayml, the one that isn't suitable for anime artworks, as it wasn't trained on them, rather on photos. The people truly profiting off hard work are people from NovelAI, who developed model specifically for anime artworks, based on existing artworks, and charged monthly to use it. The only reason it got public is because someone supposedly used a zero day exploit on their github and downloaded the model.
As for technology being open source, sure, it can be potentially dangerous, but do you think it's better to have it only in hands of some billionare with nothing to lose? If someone developed a virus off open source samples, it's also be incredibly easier to develop a vaccine for it, rather than if it was closed source.

[Anonymous No.6379108]

>>6378715
The appeal will be seeing a human that has incredible skill. Nobody would care to see the process of how a robot makes an image. Plus I would imagine that would be much harder to do than just outputting a final image.

[Anonymous No.6380378]

>>6377765
>these tourists don’t know who Proko is
Get out GET OUT.

[Anonymous No.6380432]

>>6380378

golden age of /ic/

[Anonymous No.6380693]

Nothing gets me harder than watching people who built careers off of monetizing other people's IPs lose their absolute shit off of something taking their IP for once. If your style is generic enough to be copied by a robot, you should be replaced.

[Anonymous No.6380724]

>>6380693
pyw. ik you wont because you are a permabeg but pyw

[Anonymous No.6380746]

lmao at the AI shitters in this thread thinking their AI isn't more than just a glorified photobasher

go get a real job