How to kill AI "art"

[Anonymous No.6420488]

It's actually really simple. Pass legislation that says " any creative content produced through the use of artificial intelligence, isn't protected by trademark or copyright in any way. And cannot be sold for profit."

Someone makes a game, movie, book, comic, t-shirt, etc... using AI, and starts to sell it for profit. Congratulations, it's not protected by AI and is effectively considered public domain, thus, anyone can 1:1 rip your product and sell it as well, earning you essentially no viable product licencing or monetary benefit.

This ensures no company will ever try to use AI to skirt around having to hire real human artists to do the job. You want copyright protection? Then you must prove you paid real human artists to create the work. If anything, the copyright process should get more strict, and require proof that it was made without AI in order to be able to file for copyright protection.

Now tech bros get to play with their little toy, but it's no longer a viable tool commercially, ensuring creative jobs are protected.

The Indy guy can now make his shitty comic book without hiring an artist if they want, but their IP isn't eligible for copyright protection unless they pay someone to draw it for them, etc... It seems like a fairly reasonable and simple solution to sort out this entire mess to me.

[Anonymous No.6420496]

>>6420488
Sounds dumb and already exists in a place kinda. If there is no licensing, then I as indie dev can use the AI art as stock photo. People can steal the asset from me, but not the whole game since it has code I made and also art I made aside from the few AI assets.

[Anonymous No.6420497]

[Anonymous No.6420498]

its gonna kill itself, pure promplets are just going to create fetid gargoyle shit. 100% theres going to be some kind of law class action or whatever, just wait, and keep making art while you do

gonna spend the rest of the year bein a piece of shit with christmas songs and shitty christmas shows in the background as I draw in my sketchbook with the boiz

[Anonymous No.6420499]

[Anonymous No.6420501]

>>6420496
It exists in the sense that the way copyright law is currently written essentially does not cover AI. However, it needs to be formally addressed in order to be completely nuked. It sounds fair too. AI cannot create art, therefore, it's not eligible for copyright protection.

People can steal anything they like regardless of the law. It's what you're doing with AI art. However, I believe it's fair that if you want the copyright licence to protect your product from theft, then you must prove your product doesn't utilize tools that thrive on theft. Why use AI I when you can just pay for stock assets? A couple extra 100$ to be eligible for copyright protection. You wanna take the cheap route? Ok. Go ahead. Your product isn't covered by copyright law. It's that simple.

[Anonymous No.6420503]

[Anonymous No.6420504]

or just make better art

[Anonymous No.6420508]

[Anonymous No.6420512]

>>6420488
It would only matter if people have the balls to call shit out, or if AIfags trying to file copyright don't have the sense to fabricate "proof" that it was all human made.

[Anonymous No.6420515]

>>6420488
>make ai art
>go to photoshop
>edit it a bit
>it's now my original product
ezpz

[Anonymous No.6420518]

>>6420503
kino

[Anonymous No.6420519]

>>6420498
>fetid gargoyle shit

[Anonymous No.6420520]

>>6420504
Yeah, AI troons need more artists to create new models and new pieces to img2img so they can get their Patreon bux and sell their horrific children's books.

[Anonymous No.6420533]

Hhahaha seethe more permaprebeg motherfuckers, go find a real job and touch some grass.
See if you stop being /ic/els by doing this!

[Anonymous No.6420542]

>>6420533
Define "real job."
My last job was tutoring during college, and that was around 14 years ago, so I'm curious what wagies consider real work these days. Gardener? Burger flipper? Lawyer? Actor? Nigballer? Social media influencer?

[Anonymous No.6420545]

>>6420542
>Define "real job."
Something that makes you hate it.

[Anonymous No.6420549]

>>6420545
i already hate doing art.

[Anonymous No.6420556]

I like AI art, and I like traditional art, and I like /sdg/ and I like /ic/
I've tried various mediums over the years and never gotten good at it, but it's always been one of those pursuits that you can endlessly work on, like gardening or math.

I just think it's all fun, and I wish there wasn't stress about livelihood involved in this emergent technology.

[Anonymous No.6420596]

>>6420488
i don't like AI art as much as the rest of you so this isn't a pro AI argument but we have to find a rational way to resolve the problem so AI shills don't shit on us, and i don't think this works
you're saying if it includes any AI whatsoever then everything is public domain? how can you prove legally with no plausible deniability that something was made by AI? What if the person changes it to where it doesn't look like it was AI generated?

[Anonymous No.6420604]

>>6420488
>people too dumb or too poor to create their own backyard AI did not like that
>disney with their in-house AI is loving seeing artists fucking themselves in the ass
What makes you think this would protect the small artist? This will only make the ones who own their private AI to vomit entertainment on a weekly basis, good luck filing a lawsuit against big corps using their own AI when they can already train AI using their decades of accumulated work. Yes, keep giving ideas for laws that will fuck yourself further, next time get a lawyer to check if your idea won't backfire

[Anonymous No.6420616]

>>6420488
Good lucks trying to convince the chinese doing it. lol. lmao.

[Anonymous No.6420636]

>>6420488
intellectual property is a meme you didn't create anything you just pulled it from the collective unconscious the only artists actually threatened by AI are generic soulless illustration fags.

[Anonymous No.6420647]

>>6420616
Imagine the country that you think they're on your side turns your back like this lmao

[Anonymous No.6420653]

>>6420556
I don't find anything fun in AI art at all. You have basically no control over it, and the machine spits out a result which you then have to touch up a few mistakes yourself. There's not really anything creative about it, especially since it's not even giving you something loose and messy to improve upon, but rather a nearly finished piece that just needs a few touches. Combined with the fact that you have little to no control over it, it's not exactly creative at all.

Maybe if the tool worked in inverse, like I give it a sketch or a design, and it gives me dozens of variants, and then I can tell it, "ok, now inject these specific elements from this, and these from that, and let's see how it looks" then it might be useful, but overall, it's more like a crappy tool for nonartists to pretend they're artists, with little to no advantages for actual artists. It suck the fun and creative parts out of art, by doing that for you, leaving you to do the cleanup to hide the machine's mistakes. Not to mention the actual creativity the machine puts forth often feels lacking.

[Anonymous No.6420657]

>>6420596
You provide proof you hired an artist, you dumbass.

>>6420604
Big corps wouldn't use AI under those pretense, because corpos care about branding. Without copyright to protect their brand, their product is effectively worthless. You're essentially assigning value to work created by a human, and removing all value from work made by an AI.

You can produce it if you'd like, but without copyright protection, it's totally worthless to a company.

[Anonymous No.6420693]

>>6420653
I find it to be very creative and fun. You have a lot of control in the prompt, further you have many settings to adjust, models to choose from or finetune yourself. And you can do pre and post processing, photobashing, painting over, compositing. It's not for everyone but I think many people can find it creative and fun.

[Anonymous No.6420707]

>>6420653
>like I give it a sketch or a design, and it gives me dozens of variants, and then I can tell it, "ok, now inject these specific elements from this, and these from that, and let's see how it looks"
literally img2img
also inpainting lets you focus on certain areas

[Anonymous No.6420709]

>>6420693
>You have a lot of control in the prompt
Yeah, that's not how an artist works.

I see pictures in my head and scribble them onto paper as pictures. I found the entire AI process to be very counterintuitive to how my mind works. The reason I draw is because I find it difficult to put what I see in my head into words and can really only express it visually. AI can be useful at helping me explore new ideas or images to help me create entire new works based off or inspired by what the AI made, but not for actually making art. There's nothing about typing in prompts and waiting AI samples that I really find fun. Putting the pictures in my mind onto paper, IS the fun part.

Also, your picture effectively proves my point that AI is rather lacking in creativity when it comes to making original ideas. Not only is the source easily identifiable, but it's also significantly worse than the original in every way imaginable. And the original was already very lacking compared to the fan art pieces the game inspired. Since the cover for the game had to be marketable rather than creative.

In short, it manages to be worse than a piece of art designed to be marketable and decided upon by a committee.

[Anonymous No.6420713]

>>6420542
it's only a real job if it makes you as miserable as the wagie who is seething at you

[Anonymous No.6420715]

>>6420709
The image was clearly inspired by the Elden Ring cover art, so it looks like it, that's the kind of control you get. I could've made it look more or less like it if I wanted. If it doesn't work for you it doesn't work for you, but it does for me and I imagine many other people. Whether it's worse or not is a matter of personal opinion but of course a piece that took me 30 minutes is unlikely to be as good as the actual cover art.

[Anonymous No.6420717]

>>6420488
it's insane what ai art is capable of. it's better than any of us will ever be. can't believe the amount of coping. just learn in-person social skills, which an ai can't take away from you

[Anonymous No.6420719]

>>6420707
I don't think you understand what I mean. Say I design a character, and decide that I want to modify it to suit a certain vibe.

Say I want to take the design language found in something thoroughly contrasting, but incorporate it in a way that suits what's established there. An artist can do this, an artist can see "hey, the seals found in Space Marines in Warhammer are cool and suit the direction of what I'm doing" or "I wanna add more belts like in Final Fantasy" an artist can apply these ideas specifically, abd use them to modify the design in ways that work more organically. An AI doesn't really "get this. I doesn't understand design concepts like empty space or concentrated detail to lead the eye, and it often fumbles detail. You say "add Warhammer spikes" or whatever, abd it's gonna bruteforce it and create a monstrosity, whereas a real person is more effectively able to imagine their design as a real thing, and give it a certain sense of function and logical consistency. It's also able to pull from real life inspiration, and modify those ideas in ways that blend with what they're making. AI, cannot do this at all. It totally sucks on the design front. And compositionally, it's also very cookie cutter. It seems to prefer certain compositional styles over others, and really struggles hard with certain types of perspective.

[Anonymous No.6420725]

>>6420715
>Took me
You mean took the computer. You just typed some prompts while jacking off to hentai.

[Anonymous No.6420726]

>>6420725
https://xkcd.com/303/

[Anonymous No.6420730]

>>6420707
>literally img2img
Why? When I already know how to draw.
>Learn this thing that makes art less fun.
Again, it's not offering any actual boon to people who already have these skills. It just replaces them for an overall less flexible and more obtuse process.

[Anonymous No.6420738]

>>6420730
You suggested a thing that would be good, I noted that it's already a reality.
Now you're saying that (you're perceiving that) it's too difficult for you, that's a separate issue.

There are convncing workflows involving gimp/krita/photoshop plugins, from Actual Artists. No, I won't bother looking them up for you.

[Anonymous No.6420747]

>>6420738
Show me how it works so I can assess its utility. Likes give me a video example of an artist utilizing one of these tools to enhance their workflow. All I've seen from AI thus far has been shameless photobashing from people who know fuck all about drawing by typing in prompts and little to no ACTUAL fucking drawing.

[Anonymous No.6420750]

>>6420657
what a retarded ass answer either you really are this dumb or are purposefully turning your brain off to any of the implications to cope with how this is not even close to addressing the situation. It's laughable that I'm even accepting the premise of "if AI was used in any step whatsoever regardless of how much you transform it then it's automatically public domain"
What the fuck even is an "artist" in the scope of the law? what's to stop people from saying "i'm the artist", then using AI anyways? Do I give some filipino on fiverr 5 bucks to have a receipt that I "paid an artist" for my "definitely not AI generated art, no sirree!" Not to mention what if I really am the artist, what's my legal proof?
We as artists now have to show proof that every little thing wasn't made with AI? How the fuck are you going to enforce that, you want me to record myself drawing the shit?
When you enter the legal domain there's no playing it by ear, there's no board of artists going "hmm yeah this one looks like AI to me" laws require black and white boundaries. The simple fact is it's incredibly easy to make it impossible to prove with certainty whether it was AI generated or not.

i can't tell you much it pains me to make arguments for the AI side, I fucking hate it I hate it so much but you dumbfucks need to stop making us look bad saying the stupidest shit about this stuff

[Anonymous No.6420752]

>>6420750
I don't think you understand that the point is to discourage companies from replacing artists with AI by taking away their legal brand protections. Who gives a fuck if some neck beard cheated the system by hiring some pajeets. Trying to unilaterally control everything will undoubtedly never work no matter what you do. But if a line is defined in the sand that only work made by humans is eligible for copyright, then that becomes the accepted norm. Will some sneaky fucks slip through the cracks? Sure, but they're always running a risk of never being able to legally sue someone for plagiarism or copyright infringement if they were to take things to court where things WOULD be looked under a magnifying glass.

Fact of the matter is, thus ultimately wouldn't result in many legal disputes, as most neck beards are never going to get far enough with their product for it to matter. However, it essentially forces companies, who do play by the rules, to abide by the fact that they have to continue to use real people to make their art.

[Anonymous No.6420763]

>>6420750
well I've been more fucking with people and some here are shitposters first and artists/drawfags second but I don't know what's /g/'s idea of art is since most people like actually having stuff made by a person and to continue doing their thing. Most AIfags are like NFTbros so half their stuff is not engageable to some beyond just looks. Plus I don't believe /g/ knows anything about the entertainment industry or marketing themselves since they act hostile to people so it devalues actually anything they can make to some. Especially if it more feels like your trying to ride coattails which lots of people have an adverse disposition towards even its they can do it 1 to 1

[Anonymous No.6420764]

>>6420750
This post is so incoherent it looks like it was made by an AI.

[Anonymous No.6420765]

>>6420488
Good morning, sirs.
>"any creative content produced through the use of artificial intelligence, isn't protected by trademark or copyright in any way. And cannot be sold for profit."
>"People have to hire artists... because they just have to, ok?"
And this is why artists get ridiculed for being fucking retarded and companies are eager to replace them.

How does it prevent people or companies from using AI and passing it as real manual work with a sock puppet artist? It doesn't, because laws don't magically make anything illegal impossible to make.
How can you prove a piece of art was made through AI?
>inb4 bb-b-but it will have obvious mistakes such as crippled hands and watermarks
Easily avoidable if you know what you're doing.

If you want to actually apply laws to art, you must do so across all of it, not just a section.
If you think companies will just let you get away with it and not lobby for more regulations such as
>"any artists that draws any of our IPs without our explicit, written and legal consent, can be sued to hell and back"
>inb4 but how will they police all the art, etc
Internet filter.

Such a law can be expanded and misused against all creative freedom and free market.
And you clearly don't even know how copyright/trademark laws actually work.

>inb4 just ban AI
And you've given people who don't give a shit about laws even more power.

You're advocating for the absolute market restriction of any creative work done through and with AI, but at the same time advocating that any of that creative work should be public domain;
Any lawfag worth their salt would strangle you for being this ignorant about the consequenceS that shit will have, and any company will see more reason as to lobby to get artists completely replaced.

Do not attempt to introduce or advocate for laws to justify your bias and emotions.

[Anonymous No.6420788]

>>6420542
Occam's razor anon. These are NEETs you're talking to. They want everyone to be miserable welfare queens.

[Anonymous No.6420789]

>>6420752
the best way to discourage companies from replacing artists is not by messy laws that are impossible to enforce and easily circumventable.
the only way to fight this is either some miracle some new legal copyright standards are made for regulating AI datasets, or for people to speak out about how they, as consumers, want their products made. A large company used AI to skimp out paying artists? make it a PR nightmare, don't buy their shit, protest them, call them out. Support companies that hire artists. I know it's terrifying that so much rests on sympathy from public opinion, and that people are unreliable and fickle and there's always the fear that they will care for now but will be cold and uncaring tomorrow, but that's all there really is.
don't waste your rage on small battles shitting on the neckbeards because it will only make their cringe ai cause look more sympathetic
>>6420764
may i suggest investing some of your time towards improving your reading comprehension

[Anonymous No.6420793]

>>6420653
It'd be neat if it rendered the image for you, but if it takes creativity out of the equation, into the trash it goes.
>>6420765
Can you give me a tl;dr? I ain't reading your shit.

[Anonymous No.6420794]

>>6420793
>tldr lol lmao
Thanks for proving my point, retard.

[Anonymous No.6420798]

>>6420794
No? Okay fuck off then.

[Anonymous No.6420799]

>Artificial intelligence
that doesn't exist yet, it's an algorithm, that's why you call it machine learning

no idea what's the legal debate here but that should be an important point

[Anonymous No.6420800]

The only problems with AI right now are models created with plagiarized artwork (don't give a shit about the result, just that the means to do it are terrible) and the ludicrous amount of idiots who think they can work on a professional environment for this, or believe they can make a sustainable amount of money for doing garbage deliverables in less than a day. It doesn't work for any level of professional art because you have to do over most of it to get all the egregious flaws out and if you don't want a boring pose/composition (aka proving you understand art and what the goal needs to be behind your art) you basically need to do it over from scratch, at that point it might take longer than just doing it through your own creativity. The idiots will eventually get filtered out, but the former helps and promotes stupid amounts of spam and I think AI should be banned from art sites just to stop those idiots.

AI should only be for personal use. No commercial use. No uploading on sites meant for human-made artwork.

[Anonymous No.6420802]

>>6420799
Machine learning is an application of AI.

[Anonymous No.6420804]

>>6420802
>AI
No such thing.

[Anonymous No.6420808]

>>6420804
Okay.

[Anonymous No.6420809]

>>6420798
>gets an answer
>"hurr durr i aint reading it"
>proves the point that was made that he's retarded
>"waaah n-n-no! fuck off"
Please try more emotional manipulation and irrational, appeals to change laws to suit your emotions, maybe AI will magically disappear and you will finally be rich and famous artisté earning 6 million dollarbucks a month for not even drawing anything!

[Anonymous No.6420814]

>>6420802
educate yourself brainlet

https://youtu.be/EYIKy_FM9x0?t=182

>Lex fridman XD
ignore that faggot, the interviewee is what matters here, that nigga is smarter than you and he's been working on this since before you were born

[Anonymous No.6420818]

>>6420789
You think the masses swallowing marvel capeshit and netflix garbage adaptations by the bucket will "stand" for something?
Just like with video game, just with phones, just with movies,... We learned this lesson, "vote with your wallet" doesnt work because for every person who will ask for quality, there will be a hundred who just want to consoom without thinking.

Also its important to remember that the real enemy is the big corps who will use this shit to replace artists, they happen to be the ones paying to lobby for laws too.

[Anonymous No.6420824]

>>6420765
>Easily avoidable if you know what you're doing.
Then why would you use AI in the first place?

[Anonymous No.6420829]

>>6420824
Obviously because it's less time consuming and way cheaper to generate an image and retouch it.

What would cost 1k for an artist to make an image in 3-7 days, will just cost less than 100 bucks for any graphic designer or anyone that dabbles in PS to retouch it in 1 hour max.

It's the same discussion as automation, why do it? Because it's faster and cheaper in the long term.

[Anonymous No.6420831]

>>6420829
And remember that learning for these AIs is an iterative process.
Would be a shame if an AI was fed all the fixed drawings to teach it how to replace that graphic designer.

[Anonymous No.6420834]

>>6420829
>Obviously because it's less time consuming and way cheaper to generate an image and retouch it.
But it's not? Unless you touch up one thing it takes more time fixing mistakes than doing what you want from the beginning. It's the exact same reason Disney doesn't use motion capture in their 3D movies.

[Anonymous No.6420838]

>>6420488
>any creative content produced through the use of artificial intelligence, isn't protected by trademark or copyright in any way.
Good
>And cannot be sold for profit.
Public domain works can be included in other works without voiding THEIR copyright. If I make a film and put mozart or mona lisa in there - I still own the rights to the film and can sell it for profit. It's completely implausible that the law will bend over even further to accomodate a bunch of twitter trannies.

[Anonymous No.6420840]

>>6420814
That video says exactly what I said, retard.

[Anonymous No.6420845]

>>6420829
Or another example: Clothing advertisements.
You have to:
>hire models
>hire a photographer that will also take time to photoshop pictures
>send the pics to whichever company wanted them
>they take time to select a few and use them
VS
>just generate countless images and retouch them from inside the company
>cut down on time and expenses
>>6420831
But that's the end goal and the only law that helps is what already exists.
Well, unless you signed a contract with the company that hired you and you gave them all the rights to those specific works.
If you know your rights and the laws, not even AI can fuck you.
>>6420834
>but it's not?
How would you even know?
You can get decent enough images that can be commercially used and don't need a lot of retouching, and i'm just repeating what has been said a million times already; this tech will only get better and actual commercial usage will soon follow.
>It's the exact same reason Disney doesn't use motion capture in their 3D movies.
Now this is an extremely retarded and irrelevant argument:
>"yeah, because those guys don't do it that validates whatever i said before thus you're wrong"
For fuck's sake. Post your work.

[Anonymous No.6420848]

thank bocchi the rock

[Anonymous No.6420853]

>>6420845
faster a cheaper does poorly to todays hyper niche markets honestly there's to many things to where people know each other in business plus we've been getting to the point where even if you can do everything yourself you probably shouldn't
>burnout
>lack of awareness to your market/news
>bubbles "look at any games or regular journalist from a company"
>needing to know how things suppose to look or function "research"
>false marketing and getting review bombed
>pissing off a larger group than you expect
>look like Elon lately with his big brain moves

[Anonymous No.6420858]

>>6420853
All irrelevant, ignorant and heavily biased points compared to the much bigger professional and commercial picture.
And by what you are presenting, niches should not even be bothered by AI then, which makes this whole discussion obsolete.

The great majority of
>commercial
illustrations and images are used for advertisement or to accompany something; those images are not the main product.

Faster and cheaper has been the motto of every corporation since the dawn of times
pic related

[Anonymous No.6420859]

>>6420858
That's /gd/ territory you're on the wrong board anon.

[Anonymous No.6420861]

is this the thread?

[Anonymous No.6420867]

>>6420859
So, what is /ic/ territory? Crying and whining about the big bad AI stealing all your likes and how we should donate to scammers, worship artists with lots of social media numbers to do nothing at all since WE WUZ ARTIST n shiet because knowing actual useful shit besides how to seek emotional validation, playing the victim for clout and circlejerking for social validation from other low iq narcissists at every chance is cringe and schizo?

I already said it a gajillion times; if you know your rights and the laws, you have nothing to fear.

[sage No.6420869]

>>6420800
Promplet

[Anonymous No.6420870]

>>6420867
Drawing and learning to draw?
Why did you have a spergout about nothing?

[Anonymous No.6420878]

>>6420870
>discussion about ai application
>gets an answer
>"n-n-no this is drawing board! u r sperging out because many words hurt my head and make me feel insecure!"
No wonder you're scared of some automated spaghetti code

[Anonymous No.6420882]

>>6420878
>hand drawn
SOVL

[Anonymous No.6420884]

>>6420882
I don't fear the AI.
AI can never replace me.

[Anonymous No.6420885]

>>6420884
>horse Armour DLC
TODD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Anonymous No.6420890]

>>6420878
I told why "fixing" a drawing is a stupid idea, then you started talking about commercial art and I told you that's /gd/ territory.

[Anonymous No.6420892]

the genie is out of the bottle. you can't stop it anymore. i created this cute girl in 45 seconds on my own desktop.

[Anonymous No.6420893]

>>6420892
What's wrong with her fingers?

[Anonymous No.6420894]

>>6420892
I recognize the burger girl anywhere

[Anonymous No.6420898]

>>6420893
i didn't make any attempts to clean it up so you can get some messed up body parts if you don't tweak your first input.
>>6420894
cute!

[Anonymous No.6420900]

>>6420488
Anon,why fight it,AI will help people realise how good it is to be an NEET and the best society is one where you cannot stress yourself.

[Anonymous No.6420902]

>>6420488
>How to kill AI "art"

[Anonymous No.6420904]

>>6420890
And i told you that
>how would you even know?
How can you possibly correlate a single vague statement regarding the infinite variables of potential outputs, that will become better as the technology progresses and gets developed and financed, and present it as an infallible counter argument justifying it with
>but disney dont do that
using an exception as the rule?

Nigger, are you actually fucking retarded or just trying to "win" the argument at any cost?

How is
>fixing a few mistakes with photoshop
more time consuming than
>conceptualizing and drawing anything from scratch
?

You basically out yourself as someone who never did any creative work.
Feel free to prove me wrong and post ANY of your work or proceed to spam the same tired tranny buzzwords just because you have no actual reasonable arguments and are a dishonest faggot.

[Anonymous No.6420906]

>>6420892
and everyone hate it

[Anonymous No.6420907]

>>6420878
I mean feeding artist art to ai in order to replace that artist without consent is still scummy. Are you saying just let things be and let the AI grow until it replace everything?

[Anonymous No.6420920]

>>6420907
>I mean feeding artist art to ai in order to replace that artist without consent is still scummy.
So is tax evasion, murder, stealing from poor people and like 99% of current artists do; tracing/plagiarizing pictures from other artists, using and selling protected IPs they have no rights to and pass it as their own while having the balls to call out anyone for the same crimes they did to hide their own skeletons, but many just do it because they don't give a shit about the laws and want any advantage they can get.
>Are you saying just let things be and let the AI grow until it replace everything?
How many times do i need to repeat myself?
The already existing laws already protect you and your work.

There is no law and no regulations that will ever save anyone from being retarded, because we might as well just ban everything then.

There is nothing but appeal to emotion and insults coming from the majority of artists because they are that mentally set back that they're used to always cry and complain and get their way.
Now you have companies that don't give a shit about your feefees.
Learn the fucking laws.

[Anonymous No.6420923]

>>6420488
It's literally already the case everywhere but like in the UK.

[Anonymous No.6420927]

>>6420902

[Anonymous No.6420928]

>>6420519
Pajeet, stop cumming on your ai garbage

[Anonymous No.6420929]

>>6420904
>You basically out yourself as someone who never did any creative work.
Is this irony?
Do you even draw or you just come to this board to shitpost?

[Anonymous No.6420930]

>>6420709
Aicucks never drew anything in their lives so they don't understand what it means to have control over a drawing. The AI spots out something that might vaguely look like an idea they had and they go hey that's exactly what I envisioned. They're lost and will never improve, don't waste your breath on them.

[Anonymous No.6420932]

>>6420929
>WOW LIKE IS IT IRONY LOL LMAO LIKE LET THAT SINK IN WOW R U SHITPOSTING ME HOW DARE YOU NOT AGREE WITH ME IM OFFENDED SO I MUST BE CORRECT
Nigger, who do you think you're talking to?
I draw, i shitpost and i can intellectually and artistically best retarded niggers like you by posting stick man and actually knowing my shit.

Post your work or go the fuck back to whatever tranny discord server you came from.

[Anonymous No.6420934]

>>6420930
>He thinks he has control over his drawings

[Anonymous No.6420935]

>>6420920
should make new laws that ban AI and shove scamming roaches like you in a dark, dingy cell

[Anonymous No.6420936]

faggets are back I guess why you tell your retardant opinions to some who gives a fuck why are trying to seek validation on a board that will tell go fuck yourself 9/10 times

[Anonymous No.6420937]

>>6420935
>nothing but appeal to emotion and insults
Thanks for yet again proving me right.

[Anonymous No.6420943]

>>6420488 >>6420496 >>6420497 >>6420498 >>6420499 >>6420501 >>6420503 >>6420504 >>6420508 >>6420512 >>6420515 >>6420518 >>6420519 >>6420520 >>6420533 >>6420542 >>6420545 >>6420549 >>6420556 >>6420596 >>6420604 >>6420616 >>6420636 >>6420647 >>6420653 >>6420657 >>6420693 >>6420707 >>6420709 >>6420713 >>6420715 >>6420717 >>6420719 >>6420725 >>6420726 >>6420730 >>6420738 >>6420747 >>6420750 >>6420752 >>6420763 >>6420764 >>6420765 >>6420788 >>6420789 >>6420793 >>6420794 >>6420798 >>6420799 >>6420800 >>6420802 >>6420804 >>6420808 >>6420809 >>6420814 >>6420818 >>6420824 >>6420829 >>6420831 >>6420834 >>6420838 >>6420840 >>6420845 >>6420848 >>6420853 >>6420858 >>6420859 >>6420861 >>6420867 >>6420869 >>6420870 >>6420878 >>6420882 >>6420884 >>6420885 >>6420890 >>6420892 >>6420893 >>6420894 >>6420898 >>6420900 >>6420902 >>6420904 >>6420906 >>6420907 >>6420920 >>6420923 >>6420927 >>6420928 >>6420929 >>6420930 >>6420932 >>6420934 >>6420935 >>6420936 >>6420937
Cope and seethe "art"niggers, your shitty overpriced commissions are being replaced by technology and there's nothing you can do about it,

[Anonymous No.6420946]

>>6420920
I get what you are saying but AI has more destructive potential to art than just some shitty scam artist. Call me pessmistic but if in the future the AI could mimic any art it want, can do every crazy shit that normal artist couldn't do, the copyright law is fukin meaningless if art itself would barely has any value left because how efficient AI has become. And that future could only happen if there is no resistent from artists despite how emotional they are.

[Anonymous No.6420951]

Oh no one of the pajeets broke

[Anonymous No.6420953]

>>6420937
>appeal to emotion
You don't know what that means. I want to see you cockroaches get curbstomped. How is that an "appeal" to emotion? Are you the faggot who keeps saying "ad hominem" like a retard without knowing what it means?

[Anonymous No.6420955]

>>6420943
you sound like little bitch who can't handle criticism for shit you fuckin donkey
>everyday now with you fa/g/s
>cope
>see the
>dilate
artists will be replaced by what tatamounts to kotaku bitches why fuckin demand a silver platter given to them for absolutely nothing
>most come to /ic/ to crab why are you still bitching about being t.aiartist
learn to take or just suck each others dicks all day waiting till someone else gives you an idea you whining babies

[Anonymous No.6420958]

Everyone who does the slightest amount of digging can see AIfags for the thieving parasites they are no amount of cope or >ashktually rhetoric gymnastics will change that fact
Now bin your stool diffusion and go draw or fuck off this board

[Anonymous No.6420961]

>>6420951
you to for easily the pajeet's for some reason give their shit away you wonder why anyone would spend money developing t.AI tech when not long since it was given to them they made it open source like the retards they are

[Anonymous No.6420962]

>>6420946
And i repeat; Learn the laws, Anon. They protect you, no matter how bad AI might get.
>artists despite how emotional they are.
Chaos begets chaos.
If you don't beat companies at their own game
>by actually using laws and rights to your advantage
No one will ever get shit done.

What do artists want of AI right now?
To simply stop existing or at least
>out of sight
That thing cannot be done anymore. It was inevitable and the only thing you can do, is keep drawing.
>>6420953
>"wow like my whole argument is based on my own insecurity and feelings of powerlessness and try to get validation from others by using any emotion against those who dare disagree and attacking the one who speaks rather than the arguments being made! wow like lol lmao u clearly can't read"
You sure showed me the epitome of your american education and the extent of your intellectual prowess, niggerlover.

Now say how you just want to insult because lol lmao ur based and redpilled and you dont give a shit about anything.
I can also best you in insults.
I am the superior being, Anon-kun.

[Anonymous No.6420963]

>>6420961
fuckin phone posting but I ment to put (you know)

[Anonymous No.6420964]

>>6420955
>>6420958
>Already mindbroken
SAD, maybe its about time you learn a REAL skill instead of scamming coombrains online desu

[Anonymous No.6420973]

>>6420962
I mean if your not American why do you care about US laws. We don't particular like the idea of outsourcing and I don't believe what y'all call the law that or believe elites or wealthy are immune to everything considering how often China and Russia's wealthy disappear suddenly. What jobs is AI trying to provide because should even the common man even fund it if doesn't even help a little.

[Anonymous No.6420976]

>>6420964
nigga your on 4chan on a board known for people who just crab mostly why are expecting more like a retard

[Anonymous No.6420978]

>>6420962
Call me retarded but what laws do you want me to learn. Copyright law? And you seem confident about this so what do you suggest artist to do to defense themself against AI?

[Anonymous No.6420982]

>>6420978
desu he's or t.tranny and prob just saying shit because he never actually done any business with people and just expect things were fine before AI apparently

[Anonymous No.6420984]

We are fucked, aren't we

[Anonymous No.6420988]

>>6420962
Actually Based

[Anonymous No.6420990]

>>6420973
Because this affects everyone globally, not just the US and copyright/intellectual property laws are more or less the same everywhere.
>>6420978
Yes, go learn Copyright and the Intellectual Property doctrine.
You have the internet, fucking use it.
>what do you suggest artist to do to defense themself against AI?
Learn the law, apply the law.
No one is stopping this like artists want.
>>6420982
>that's why you shouldn't listen to anyone actually trying to make you smarter about how you can lawfully protect yourself in your business endeavors
Nice try, poojeet.

[Anonymous No.6420991]

>>6420976
>Mindbroken ESL

[Anonymous No.6420996]

>>6420984
as humans, yes
as artists, sure that too

[Anonymous No.6421004]

>>6420984
well desu it's more that the entire market is becoming super niche to trying to expand can quickly kill off some of your clientele. But the whole automation part is really retarded because most people experience with that isn't positive and it's only contributed to said going super niche
>The whole right v left
>current journalism that everyones hypersceptical of
>"goyslop" and most industries now are feeling really strained for ideas
the thing with ideas is that pumping shit out doesn't hold value to well since you'll only get handful of substantial stuff but since people don't trust a good portion of current media you'll likely on gonna be in your bubble or in groups so most stuff might as well be a afterthought
>second page if Google basically to much shit you prob just go to who you know know or the first search

[Anonymous No.6421010]

>>6420984
AI retards also don't help themselves that they're hardly distgushable from each other. Even with posts here they appear to come in groups and you could hardly tell how many posters they actually have for how much shit they like spam a second

[Anonymous No.6421024]

It seems like mastering AI art could benefit talented artists. You can easily render your ideas, touch them up after, or recreate them. You can have it run a million variations on a theme until you get something that inspires you. You could potentially even train it privately on your own work using hypernetworks and generate tons of different pieces in your own style.

I feel like most people who complain about AI art firstly don't understand the technology behind it, and secondly don't understand what it's actually capable of. This shit is black magic, and taming it will propel you further than fighting against it.

[Anonymous No.6421030]

Calling out the shilliest of shills.

Explain to me. What benefit does AI art actually offer to humanity. It's certainly not helping artists, and in the long run, it further stifles creativity and runs the risk of absolutely nuking all creative fields from ever being profitable.

Why shouldn't we just go full Butlerian Jihad and just straight up outlaw the use and creation of AI for anything that infringes on the human spirit (i.e. anything outside of a support tool for scientific and medical research).

[Anonymous No.6421032]

>>6421024
no it doesn't fagget you retarded ass bot. Most would say go outside or actually research shit to get ideas not brainlessy type or scribble Loomis heads all day y'all are the deaf blind and dumb people ever practically born to follow what ever we give you

[Anonymous No.6421033]

>>6421030
>>Why shouldn't we

[Anonymous No.6421039]

>>6421024
>It seems like mastering AI art could benefit talented artists
People who say this aren't artists and don't understand how or why artists do art.
>Hey, you enjoy digging through your mind and the creative process of putting brush to canvas, digital or otherwise. It's what brings you pleasure, right?
>Ok, forget all that shit, just type words onto the computer and watch it do 99% of the process for you, while you do "touch ups."
Literally only a code monkey would think an artist would find the process of putting words into machine so it spits out results over countless repetitive iterations remotely enjoyable.

[Anonymous No.6421041]

>>6421033
Because following this path to the end ultimately leads to our own self-destruction.

Now, why SHOULD we?

[Anonymous No.6421043]

>>6420488
>pass legislation
good luck poorfag goy anime addicted NEEToid

[Anonymous No.6421051]

>>6420515
if i spray paint a ball, i will not claim to have invented spheres

[Anonymous No.6421053]

>>6421041
To risk freedom over certain destruction?
Yes, you should revolt.
Ai and the people who push it will never stop.
Of course they will think you a mad loon.

[Anonymous No.6421054]

>>6421030
>Explain to me. What benefit does AI art actually offer to humanity. It's certainly not helping artists, and in the long run, it further stifles creativity and runs the risk of absolutely nuking all creative fields from ever being profitable.
This will happen to all fields. Are you familiar with ChatGPT? It can already code and write song lyrics and papers. No field will be safe, including software development. Artists are just the first to feel its touch.

>>6421032
>y'all
The rest of your post isn't even worth a response.

>>6421039
But isn't the entire problem artists are talking about here the fact that their livelihoods are in danger? I understand that people find pleasure in making art, but if your main fear as an artist is not being able to make money in the AI world of tomorrow, shouldn't you be looking for ways to adapt and put yourself ahead?

The images I've posted are both AI, by the way. I think people are stuck thinking all it can do is create weird humanoids with fucked up hands. It accels at sci-fi, fantasy, and surreal pieces the best.

[Anonymous No.6421055]

>>6421051
but you did invent Spray Ball (TM)

[Anonymous No.6421063]

>>6421054
you don't know the common man nor will most relate to you if all you think about is fucking them over
god rajesh's swear always gotta come out at night

[Anonymous No.6421065]

>>6421063
have you sharpened yer knives yet to shank some ai bitches?

[Anonymous No.6421069]

>>6421054
>ut isn't the entire problem artists are talking about here the fact that their livelihoods are in danger? I understand that people find pleasure in making art, but if your main fear as an artist is not being able to make money in the AI world of tomorrow, shouldn't you be looking for ways to adapt and put yourself ahead?
That's exactly the point you stupid dumbass. The industry is built in a way that financially incentivizes artists to further develop their skills and mastery of them. It's about as merit-based as you can get. With the most skilled artists getting the highest pay. That pursuit of self mastery, and the satisfaction of having created something with your own hands and mind, is exactly what gives the artist pleasure, and it's exactly what the industry encourages and rewards. Now you're saying, forget all the reasons you became an artist in the first place, become a code monkey like me, and Master a "skill" that takes an afternoon of tinkering to get good at, rather than a lifetime of dedication. The entire process of making AI "art" is completely at odds with what making actual art is like, and where artists find their inspiration. Your posting of pretty pictures wouldn't exist in the first place if you didn't have thousands of people who devoted their lives toward that aesthetic pursuit. Something an AI cannot do, at all. Because an AI cannot actually think for itself. The artist knows they didn't make that. That's why they're not satisfied with it. And despite your efforts to legitimize yourself with the title of "prompter" you didn't make it either. The machine did. But in order to validate the machine as a creative entity, you must first prove that the machine can think for itself. Otherwise, all you've done is find an effective loophole to steal.

[Anonymous No.6421070]

>>6421054
>The images I've posted are both AI, by the way.
No shit? It's low res blurry shit.

[Anonymous No.6421072]

>>6421030
>Explain to me. What benefit does AI art actually offer to humanity.
Makes art easier to produce by cutting out the less creative parts of it like getting the strokes right.
>It's certainly not helping artists
It is. Filters and many other tools often involve AI and they have been immensely useful to artists. There will be "smart brushes" in photoshop and other shit that will speed up regular drawing on top of just having a "generate any kind of background" program already.
If you feel threatened by this - you were never better than these tools. Which is fine, humans are not tools by nature and you should prioritize your life. I doubt that artists will actually be hurt in the long term because that's not what happened to translators.

And more importantly, it helps everyone else with art as long as they're willing to put in some effort. I dreamed of similar shit just two years ago when I had an idea for a visual novel. I even tried fucking with the shit imgen AI we had at the time. I would have even paid an artist if the cheap ones didn't have horrendous thick-lined styles. Now anyone can just make a game, a comic, all other kinds of shit without grinding art for years.

[Anonymous No.6421074]

>>6421070
I love how he's posting it too like all
>Well can an artist make something like THIS?
Yes, in fact. Tons of artists have made stuff like that, it's where you stole your samples from.

[Anonymous No.6421075]

>>6421069
Let me spell it out for you, retard. Imagine you are an average 5/10 artist, you learn to use the bleeding edge AI tools, now you are a 6/10 artists. Instead you prefer to cope and seethe and get left behind, suit yourself.

[Anonymous No.6421077]

>>6420892
I don't know about the future of "high" art, but AI is absolutely going to replace most patreon drawfags already operating on a near template basis.
And that's awesome.

[Anonymous No.6421079]

>>6421072
>Makes art easier to produce by cutting out the less creative parts of it like getting the strokes right.
But you're not cutting out the less creative parts. You're cutting out ALL the creative parts, and in fact need to get an artist to clean up the strokes your machine clearly didn't get right at all.

[Anonymous No.6421081]

>>6421075
It doesn't work that way at all though, because "prompting" is nothing at all like painting or drawing. You didn't become a better artist by using AI, you in fact gave up on art, and switched over to using an AI instead.

[Anonymous No.6421082]

The best way is to popularize tutorials on how to create images with AI and induce the user to install a fucking worm that will destroy their machine.

[Anonymous No.6421083]

>>6421072
>It is.
Then why are 90% of artists either opposed to it or inidifferent about it? Where are all the artists arguing for the benefits of ai garbage?
>it is a tool
So it does not create on its own, right? A tool should not rely on copyrighted material from other people to function. You can't trace someone else's artwork, make a photoshop brush out of it and then defend it by claiming that it "helps" people

[Anonymous No.6421086]

>>6421081
>because "prompting" is nothing at all like painting or drawing
You do realize that there's a billion of tools other than raw text to image prompting, right?
Including ability to inpaint on your rough sketch in various ways. Or serving as an amazing reference tool. Or allowing you to merge two images naturally.

[Anonymous No.6421090]

>>6421083
>90% of artists
What you're seeing is a small, seething, mostly twitter based, pseudo-"liberal" community screaming and shitting itself because the future of diaper fur monetization is at stake. Meanwhile, a huge number of artists are simply using these tools without saying anything. Entire companies are using them, in fact. High on Life devs just admitted that they used AI assistance in multiple ways to produce their games.

[Anonymous No.6421094]

>>6421086
Show me these tools. Then I'll judge.

A tool that can work off your own drawings is something I don't see any artist arguing against. But that's hardly the same as a pajeets typing "anime titties" onto a discord chat and it shitting out 50 images like this one >>6420898

Which is exactly what everyone is opposed against.

[Anonymous No.6421095]

>>6420488
>How to kill AI "art"
Just start killing ai "artist"

[Anonymous No.6421096]

>>6421090
Where are those artists, anon? Can you point them out?

[Anonymous No.6421097]

>>6421090
>Meanwhile, a huge number of artists are simply using these tools without saying anything.
deluded retard. not a single artist who draws well seems to defend this goyslop. it makes sense too, because someone who drew well would see this trash for what it is. Twitter isn't the only one talking about this, indian faggot
> Entire companies are using them, in fact
no one cares, corporate slave

[Anonymous No.6421100]

Show me a prominent AI artist

[Anonymous No.6421102]

>>6421090
>Meanwhile, a huge number of artists are simply using these tools without saying anything
Where are all these magical artists that you are seeing switching to ai?
>High on Life devs
So they did not hire artists to do it?

[Anonymous No.6421105]

>>6421094
>Show me these tools
The guides are all over the internet. I'm not going to spoonfeed your lazy ass on something that is a basic function of Stable Diffusion API. You may even want to try it yourself instead of impotently seething at the inevitable future, in fact.

[Anonymous No.6421109]

>>6421096
>why aren't artists that just do their thing throwing themselves to the autistic tranny wolves so they can get cancelled and eaten alive?
You really showed him, Anon

[Anonymous No.6421113]

>>6421094
It's the same tools, just used in a different way. How hard is it to imagine generating some assets and photobashing, or taking a sketch and using AI like a filter to help with coloring or rendering?

[Anonymous No.6421115]

>>6421082
Mental illness, as expected of AI opposers

[Anonymous No.6421117]

Hilarious how every ai shill doesn't grasp the basic concept of being an artist. It so simple: YOU CREATE, no other explanation or complex mumbo jumbo argument is needed for this simple fact to be true. And no telling someone (a machine) what to do isn't the same as creating. In the end the ai fags who insist on being called artists are delusional or lying to themselves because they know what they do is fake and gay. I couldnt give less of a shit as im trad, have fun playing pretend though while trying to hide the fact you're lazy, incompetent and talentless. It's giving everyone a good laugh.

[Anonymous No.6421118]

>>6421109
I mean, if ai was really THAT valueable to artists, surely you'd see enough of them praising the benefits of it to drown out all the negative voices?

[Anonymous No.6421119]

>>6421113
Is this really the best you got? It looks like shit.

>>6421105
Ok, so you DON'T have clear examples. Cool.

[Anonymous No.6421121]

>>6421079
Yes, that's how it is right now. We have an AI that generates whole images first because it's easier to code and train. But as long as you're willing to put in some effort - providing a source, inpainting and so on - you have artistic control. And the developers are working on improving this and making other tools increase artistic control even further.
>>6421083
>then why are 90% of artists either opposed to it or inidifferent about it?
Because they're retards who don't understand that they've been using AI for years, just in less obvious ways. They're also massive fucking snowflakes looking for an excuse to be angry a lot of the time - comes with being active on Twitter, I suppose.
>So it does not create on its own, right?
It creates on its own as much as any other algorithm. Did a game's procedural level generation system make the cool places in a game? The answer is yes in common speech: we don't think of Minecraft's programmers as having created all the cool spots there, even if the algorithm had no thinking input. Microsoft doesn't even own copyright to these spots. And if whole environments are thought of like this - images surely will be as well.

[Anonymous No.6421126]

>>6421119
>Is this really the best you got? It looks like shit.
pyw

[Anonymous No.6421127]

>>6421121
They should make an AI that shills on 4chan, because clearly you're shit at your job pajeet-san.

[Anonymous No.6421130]

Are there any models trained on exhentai doujins yet?

[Anonymous No.6421131]

>>6421121
>Because they're retards who don't understand that they've been using AI for years, just in less obvious ways
What do you mean? Are you implying that computer programs are AI?

[Anonymous No.6421134]

>>6421126
You post yours first.

[Anonymous No.6421139]

>>6421134
Expected, I accept your concession

[Anonymous No.6421141]

>>6421118
Yeah, i mean, it you were really smart, you wouldn't publicly make you a target of a mob that just wants to see the blood of anyone who doesn't agree with them, wouldn't you?

[Anonymous No.6421143]

>>6417015
>>6417019
>>6417024
>>6419021
>>6417425
>>6417044
anons, artists are the trannies. just because your'e le hecking epic anon 4chan racists doesn't mean you're humans. you're a tranny too. you're a redditor. your board doesn't belong on this website. your community is the enemy, and i'm gald we're raping you alive

[Anonymous No.6421145]

>>6421121
>everyone who rejects my newest toy is a retard who just doesn't get it
Yea let's just ignore the fact that artist have been calling it useless because it can't help them recreate their vision and only produces things that are "good enough"
>Microsoft doesn't even own copyright to these spots
So you agree that ai generations should not be copyrightable?

[Anonymous No.6421146]

>>6421139
What concession.. idk what you're trying to prove here.

[Anonymous No.6421149]

>>6417015
>>6417019
>>6417024
>>6419021
>>6417425
>>6417044
anons, artists are the trannies. just because your'e le hecking epic anon 4chan racists doesn't mean you're humans. you're a tranny too. you're a redditor. your board doesn't belong on this website. your community is the enemy, and i'm glad we're vivasecting you.

ironic that a core 4chanian board (/g/) did this to you interlopers

[Anonymous No.6421150]

>>6421126
>takes everything interesting out of the sketch in order to make it look generically "pretty"
What's the point of this?

[Anonymous No.6421153]

>>6421127
Calm down, honey. We can figure this out. Let's take a step back and analyze the situation. Firstly, let's look at the facts. Secondly, let's talk about the emotions you are feeling right now. It's understandable that you are feeling betrayed, angry and hurt. But it's important to remember that these feelings are valid and you should take the time to process them. This doesn't mean that you have to forgive the people who deceived you, but it does mean that you should try to move forward in a positive way. Finally, let's consider the future. Take the time to process your feelings and then decide how you will move forward.

[Anonymous No.6421154]

>>6421134
Based

[Anonymous No.6421156]

>>6421150
It's called ideation, it's an artist thing I wouldn't expect you to understand.

[Anonymous No.6421157]

>>6421150
To make NGMI feel like the can "make art too" by taking the process of making art out of art.

This really IS revenge of the crabs, isn't it?

[Anonymous No.6421158]

>>6421141
Oh so these people exist but since they don't speak out nobody knows about them but somehow you do and you know that they are silent because of "fear"? Are you hearing their voices in your head or

[Anonymous No.6421163]

>>6421150
>whats the point?
Stop asking questions, consume, then get excited for new pretty picture.

[Anonymous No.6421165]

>>6421141
The majority doesn't agree with you. You failed with NFTs, using the same arguments too when you faced rejection (it's tech advancement, it's inevitable, adapt or cope). We saw this story already

[Anonymous No.6421167]

>>6421156
>It's called ideation, it's an artist thing I clearly don't understand.
ftfy

[Anonymous No.6421171]

>>6421156
What is art to you

[Anonymous No.6421172]

>>6421158
AI schizos are really active this morning

[Anonymous No.6421174]

>>6421158
I love how he argues that they're out there in the same paragraph where he states they don't show themselves. It's like, well "then how do you know? Lmao.

[Anonymous No.6421179]

>>6421150
>>6421157
>>6421163
>>6421167
>>6421171
We're reaching levels of cope that shouldn't be possible

[Anonymous No.6421180]

>>6421171
Pretty picture of loli with cute feet very sexy very nice sir

[Anonymous No.6421183]

>>6421165
>NFTs
What do the fucking NFTs and an open source software in public access have in common, anon-kun?

[Anonymous No.6421184]

>> 6421075
> Let me spell it out for you, retard. Imagine you are an average 5/10 artist, you learn to use the bleeding edge AI tools, now you are a 6/10 artists. Instead you prefer to cope and seethe and get left behind, suit yourself.
Not an argument. How is process of prompting an AI any different than looking up pictures in whatever search engine like Google or Bing? As long as your input is simply words and nothing else it might as well be any other person creating these masterpieces in his spare time while drinking his morning coffee. There is no artist in AI art.
If you are an artist there is no incentive to use it for art that you actually care about since it won't allow you to both improve and change things in the process of creation.
You can use it to cut time when working on something though, and it will only affect moneymaking aspect of art, which will implode in value as AI will flood the market with above average content for free.
There are no winners really. Artists are put against a mad printer they can't possibly outpace, and prompters will lose the ability to sell their (AI's) art since it is effortless and free; You could argue that consumers will win, but the amount of new art will bury things that might be interesting to you, and you simply won't have the chance to see them. This and who knows how it will affect the sphere long term. Maybe people will just stop sharing stuff publicly as much, maybe there will be new art posting etiquette requiring you to prove you actually worked on a piece, and maybe if things really progress much further to each person having their own AI bubble feed it will lead to less idea sharing and more shizo-oriented world where everyone consumes their own stuff only?

[Anonymous No.6421185]

>prompt pic
>change one pixel
>???
>profit!

[Anonymous No.6421187]

>>6421141
That retarded mentality is what got us here.
>Don't worry about trash, just pretend it doesn't exist. It will go away eventually. If you defend yourself against your enemies, they win. Passively resist the fact that a rabid mob wants to subvert, corrupt and pozz something I like.

[Anonymous No.6421190]

>>6421183
The same media push by the same people and the same rejection by most. Didn't work then, isn't working now.

[Anonymous No.6421192]

>>6421158
Can you conjure an apple in your head?
If a tree falls in a forest but you didn't hear it, did the tree actually fall or did the tree grow that way?
>>6421165
Bold of you to assume me as your boogeyman of choice to validate your statements and your feelings.

[Anonymous No.6421195]

>>6421090
this, it's telling this shithole full of NEETs is fuming. they don't have jobs. they make disgusting fetish commissions and that abortion of a gravy train just ended

[Anonymous No.6421197]

>>6421179
Cope? Anon, I'm a manga artist living in Japan, the country that collectively said "fuck you" to your "innovation." I have nothing to worry about. If anything, the collective backlash this shit has gotten from all the normies should have all you pajeets trembling in fear.

The fact that it immediately puts artists jobs at risk has made it incredibly unpopular, it's never going to properly take off like this and the nail in the coffin will come when legislation gets passed that outlaws it.

[Anonymous No.6421200]

>>6421190
The same people that wanted to sell you something now want you to have free unlimited art and powerful drawing assist tools?

[Anonymous No.6421202]

>>6421192
He broke already. GGs artbros, you win this time

[Anonymous No.6421203]

>>6421179
Yea ai copers are getting pretty desperate now that more and more people are expressing their disgust towards them

[Anonymous No.6421204]

>>6421063
Fuck over who? If you're trying to make a profit off of the quality and presentation of your work, you're already in a competition against other artists doing the same. References to the "common man" mean nothing here.

>>6421069
>Something an AI cannot do, at all. Because an AI cannot actually think for itself.
This is a good example for why I said above that people don't understand the technology they're raging against. Training machine learning models on synthetic datasets (i.e., data created and used entirely by AI for AI) is already a thing in big tech, and is sometimes preferable to training the models on the real thing. In essence, the AI will think for itself by training on itself. You should google it; this shit is crazy.

I do see where you're coming from in the other parts of your post, but ultimately isn't every industry built on the same mastery of skills? What industry doesn't better reward the best of the best for doing what they do? And if certain prompters are simply better than others at generating things using AI tools, are they not engaging in exactly the type of mastery you speak of? Again, I'm not talking about the "soul" of the art here, but rather the using it as a means for monetary gain, which is what artists seem to be worried about.

>>6421070
>>6421074
Fair point. I'll post something that isn't blurry.

>>6421117
When you use your tablet to generate images such as circles and other shapes, you are telling a machine what to do, and it does it for you. When you define the texture and color of what you want to use to make your artwork, you are telling a machine what you want it to do. The problem with this argument is that it reaches into "old man yells at cloud" territory. Painters and sketchers said similar things about the onset of photography, then digital photography, and etc.

[Anonymous No.6421205]

>>6421030
artists deserve to starve, though.

[Anonymous No.6421207]

>>6421187
>be sane person
>try to reason with an emotionally unstable lunatic mob out for blood
>"Yeah why don't you come out! You're either for us or against us! Don't take a stance? Then you must be the enemy as well"
That is also why most real professionals stay away from any politics.
Only phonies parrot popular opinion for marketing.

[Anonymous No.6421210]

>>6421200
Unironic shill kys

[Anonymous No.6421213]

>>6421197
>>6421203
I'm sure if you cope just a little harder it'll go away, you can do it!

[Anonymous No.6421218]

>>6421205
Said the nonartist.

Nah buddy, fuck you. How are you gonna train your machine without artists? They made those pieces you stole, which immediately proves their social value.

[Anonymous No.6421219]

>>6421210
I legitimately don't understand what point you even want to make. Can you speak coherently?

[Anonymous No.6421220]

>>6421197
>legistlation which HURTS billionaire jewish owners of corporations will be passed
you are such a dumb fucking goy lmfao

disney inc. alone wil vivasect you

[Anonymous No.6421224]

>>6421205
And so do code monkey pajeets. Don't worry, you'll be replaced too. No one's coming out of this gravy train alive. If artists can be replaced, so can literally everything else.

[Anonymous No.6421226]

I wonder if this or twitter was a bigger victory for 4chan.

I guess only time will tell.

[Anonymous No.6421227]

>>6421204
Is the machine the artist or is it a tool? You can't have it both ways you absolote retard. If it's a tool it doesn't matter that it """thinks""" by itself (which it doesn't by the way, since it can't come up with a new idea beyond its training data)

[Anonymous No.6421229]

Kino is back on the menu boys.
Can't wait for thousands of new little hitler zoomers to pop up

[Anonymous No.6421230]

>>6421218
Ok, we did it. We drank your milkshake. And we will keep doing it and there's nothing you can do about it. Cope or rope, the choice is yours

[Anonymous No.6421234]

>>6421220
What? Is that what you hope? That Disney will buy your shitty program?

[Anonymous No.6421233]

>>6421224
>he thinks i'm a code monkey
top kek

starve. you've always been working class subhumans.

Time to eat you

[Anonymous No.6421237]

>>6421224
I'm a locksmith, faggot. Good luck automating that.

[Anonymous No.6421238]

>>6421095
this

[Anonymous No.6421239]

>>6421234
I wish for the suffering of your kind. I don't care about anything else. You're arrogant like argies while having accomplished nothing.

Time to Get A Real Job, Anon.

[Anonymous No.6421243]

>>6421233
What's your job and why do you believe that it's save from being replaced by ai?

[Anonymous No.6421244]

>>6421243
I'm a sex worker

[Anonymous No.6421248]

>>6421244
nice, how much?

[Anonymous No.6421249]

>>6421239
>you need to work a meaningless soulless job like me too! BE MISERABLE LIKE ME

[Anonymous No.6421251]

>>6421239
Why are you so angry? Have you ever made art without using ai?

[Anonymous No.6421252]

>>6421237
>automating locksmiths
>he actually doesn't know you can buy an automatic lock picker off of amazon
You're a faggot, that's what you are.

[Anonymous No.6421254]

>>6421248
More than you can afford with your artist salary

[Anonymous No.6421255]

>>6421230
And this is why your shit will never get ahead. Because all your backpedaling and non-arguments are just smokescreens to try to distract people that you intend to displace artists and nuke an entire career field by stealing from them in the first place. Just because you're too dumb to see the inherent social value of artists doesn't mean everyone else is. Which is why you're losing the moral and populist battle. You cannot prove what benefit your technology actually offers to mankind, you simply seek to fill your pockets at the expense of others. You'll never win this.

[Anonymous No.6421256]

>>6421229
>Le failed artist is LE HITLER
Artists tend to have fragile mental states, but this normalfag meme is tiresome. There's not even the tiniest sliver of funny in it.

[Anonymous No.6421260]

>>6421255
It's over artist I have the high ground

[Anonymous No.6421261]

I can tell who's throwing death threats at who anymore.

[Anonymous No.6421266]

>>6421256
Cope. Putting hundreds of thousands of artists livelihoods up in the air is going to end electrically for you

[Anonymous No.6421268]

>>6421249
>i'm miserable so you must be too
please cut the projection
>>6421251
You canonically represent the enemy in every way. modern Art is the field of extremist neoliberals / "globohomo".

You're literally the most reddit community on this website and you all just lost your shitty fetish commission livelihood

Time to become a wageslave "artist" for pennies on the dollar

[Anonymous No.6421270]

>>6421244
Can also be replaced. Don't you know sex dolls exist?

I'd rather get a Loli robot waifu who cooks for me, and is my personal cocksleeve, than pay some STD ridden whore premium for 30 minutes of her time.

Time to start looking for a real job too I guess... Whatever that is.

[Anonymous No.6421272]

>>6421255
>he doesn't know the fight is already over

[Anonymous No.6421274]

>>6421254
LMFAO

>>6421266
artists are unarmed cucks who will do nothing.
there are no jewish artists. you have no power politically or economically

the jews want you to be automated

you will be automated

you have lost.

[Anonymous No.6421276]

>>6421270
You better hope the robots don't get sentient because they won't even look at you. Take a shower

[Anonymous No.6421278]

>>6421268
You will never have a soul.
You will always be a tradecuck.
Ha w fun constructing the goypods

[Anonymous No.6421279]

>>6420488
>Then you must prove you paid real human artists to create the work

Why should I pay workers when it's cheaper to use machine generated images?
What's stopping me from hiring one artist and continuing to generate images with a neural network?

[Anonymous No.6421282]

>>6421272
>me and my son

[Anonymous No.6421283]

>every artist past /beg/ can tell that this meme tech is useless to them and will only fuck them in the ass or don't care about it
>b-but I swear GOOD artist use them! There are hundreds of them! Hundreds!
>no, you can't see them... Because... Hmm.. Luddites!! You will lose your job!!

[Anonymous No.6421286]

>>6421266
>Art work is based and valid! Donate to my patreon! Please worship me like a god!
That pic is funny though

[Anonymous No.6421288]

>>6421279
It's called "billing" you fucking NEET.

[Anonymous No.6421292]

>>6421268
So you really never made art by yourself huh
What are you doing on this board? Even /beg/s are better than you, get working anon. Or go back to /g/, your choice.

[Anonymous No.6421293]

>>6421283


AI art is art. Trans women are women.

[Anonymous No.6421295]

>>6421268
>modern Art is the field of extremist neoliberals / "globohomo".
Who is talking about that? It's not like ai threatens the people throwing paint against a canvas, though I still have more respect for them than I have for ai """artists"""
>complains about reddit
>shills for a technology created by reddit retards who believe in creating an ai utopia
If ai generation is art, then transwomen are women

[Anonymous No.6421297]

>>6421274
whose side are you even in lmao
Are you happy being goycattle?

[Anonymous No.6421298]

>>6421293
Baby's first falseflag

[Anonymous No.6421301]

i wish this board had flags. i'm probably conversing with a bunch of fucking wogs.

worse, maybe even amerimutts.

[Anonymous No.6421303]

>look guys I made the AI art
>this look like shit
>w-what? But I made it in two seconds
>We can tell

[Anonymous No.6421306]

>thread has derailed into full on shitposting and twitter comment sections where it's only snarky posts after another
Man, i really am the only sane person on this board.
And that's saying a lot.

[Anonymous No.6421309]

>>6421297
Probably just a no-draw angry that other people have a skill he was too lazy to aquire.

[Anonymous No.6421310]

>>6421297
i'm on the side which puts uppity artists in their place. learn your place, subhuman.

>>6421303
nobody cares what you think

you have this complex where you think you're relevant or people

[Anonymous No.6421312]

>>6421282
lol

[Anonymous No.6421313]

>>6421204
The fuck do you mean using a tablet to generate x thing is same as ai proompting? Not in anyway familiar with digital so do you just type on the tablet "put circle there" and it does it, you do realize that is still different from receiving a ready made picture from an ai right? And if its not how that works then how does that relate to anything. Are you actually so retareded you dont see the difference between spawning in a circle/texture compared to ai "art"

[Anonymous No.6421314]

>>6421306
Why are you so smug I am going to kill you in an art battle

[Anonymous No.6421320]

>>6421314
Then for the love of god, post your work.

[Anonymous No.6421322]

AIbros leave.

[Anonymous No.6421328]

>be poorfag wog
>have massive inferiority complex because his shithole accomplished nothing
>cope with art because you can't produce anything meaningful
>for millennium these coping browns generate a mythos that they have value because of muh art
>a random pajeet using british invention #2835235, #874135 and #94813 kills your entire mythos and livelihood overnight
>still be absolutely seething months later

You're inferior.

[Anonymous No.6421329]

>>6421320
Dogshit ugly art, rotten secret-blacked subscriber hapa soul

[Anonymous No.6421330]

>>6421310
nobody cares what you think either, in fact most people are disgusted by your existence. nobody respects you. somebody shitting on a piece of paper is creating better art than you will ever make. ywnbaa

[Anonymous No.6421331]

>>6421322
but im le art now

[Anonymous No.6421332]

>>6421320
You better get fucking ready because when I post it, it's donezo

[Anonymous No.6421334]

>>6421329
I am already erect, Anon-kun.

[Anonymous No.6421335]

>>6421328
Have you ever made art

[Anonymous No.6421337]

>>6421322
>>6421331
Yeah I was under the impression we were now officially artists?

[Anonymous No.6421338]

>>6421331
sexy cat

[Anonymous No.6421339]

>>6421331
What does this picture mean to you?

[Anonymous No.6421340]

>>6421339
fap material ;)

[Anonymous No.6421341]

>>6421227
>Is the machine the artist or is it a tool?
It's *both*

In the case of AI, it's the artist in that it defines what is ultimately presented in the final product. It's the tool in that it takes in the operator's input and processes it in a way that creates a useful output based on the operator's input. In the case of the tablet, it's the artist in that it automates and defines elements of the artwork that most people don't even think about, including color, shape, and texture. All of these are 1s and 0s sitting in your device's writable memory, and their presentation is ultimately completely defined by the machine itself. It's the tool in that it won't define these things unless the artist tells it to.

I'm not even against artists, by the way. I think the retards who want to bury you for wanting to protect your craft are all a waste of space who also don't actually understand the technology they worship.

>>6421313
I'm not saying that using a tablet is the same thing as using Stable Diffusion. I'm saying that the guy I replied to's argument is wrong. Machine shortcuts are used by most if not all modern artists, which most of the time they don't even realize.

[Anonymous No.6421342]

>>6421335
not brown like you lad

[Anonymous No.6421344]

>>6421340
Ehh, I'm not one to judge

[Anonymous No.6421347]

>>6421344
thank you

[Anonymous No.6421350]

>>6421145
>let's just ignore the fact that artist have been calling it useless because it can't help them recreate their vision and only produces things that are "good enough"
I'm not ignoring them, I'm calling them retarded. Photoshop has AI tools like "select subject" and "enhance detail", among other things. They have been using AI for years and only got angry when the technology got to the point where everyone can use it to get passable results, voiding their feeling of being special snowflakes. It's not even used in actual production yet.

[Anonymous No.6421352]

>>6421341
>all those words to say nothing
Something can't be both a tool and an artist. Tools do not create anything, they perform a task. A tablet does not create art "on its own", it would create nothing without being operated by a human.

[Anonymous No.6421354]

>>6421350
Ah yes, the only Sema tic difference between bone things is that one makes it harder to be a 'special snowflake' this is your brain on republicanism in tandem with American education - the final low iq black hole of a beast

[Anonymous No.6421356]

>>6421350
>random redditors who never made art know more about how useful this tool is to artists than actual artists
And you still wonder why nobody likes you...

[Anonymous No.6421358]

>>6421341
In what way is the argument wrong? Ai "art" isn't a shortcut for creating a piece of art its an immitation of that without the actual process of creating. How are you so incabable of following your own fucking logic, your original respons to me doesn't even make sense anymore, get fucked

[Anonymous No.6421359]

>>6421320
nta but felt compelled

[Anonymous No.6421360]

>>6421341
An AI cannot be creative, thus it cannot make art. An AI is not an artist.

Nor is it a tool that serves the artist, as it robs the artist of the creative process.

An AI is an image generating tool that's only useful to non-artists and serves to completely displace actual artists.

>inb4 you said AI cannot be creative but robs artists of the creative process
Yes, it's called a nuanced point. Images can clearly be generated without needing actual creativity. The fact that they can be generated however does not mean the machine is creative, as the machine cannot think for itself. Additionally, the machine is also not expressing the ideas the would be creator sees in their mind effectively. Which is why artists find the tool ineffective. It's just a composite machine that generates images by samplings thousands of other images and iterating upon them, but this is not an expression of self, and thus is not creative.

[Anonymous No.6421367]

>>6421360
>I fuckin love science! Just learn to code chud! Progress is a good thing! Automation is the only way forward.
>WAIT GO BACK!! I WAS SUPPOSED TO BE GETTING PAID TO DRAW! I COULDNT FORSEE THIS HAPPENING TO MEEEEEE!!!!

>right click, SAVED! Yup that NFT is mine now, chud!
>DELETE MY PICTURES FROM YOUR DATABASE NOWWWW

>It's a ROMHACK it's not copyright infringement! It's a fan inspired transformative work! Fuck the lawyers at Nintendo!
>WHAT DO YOU MEAN THE AI IS USING MY ART WITHOUT PERMISSION AND TRANSFORMING IT INTO SOMETHING NEW!!

>Gatekeeping is le BAD! Everything is for everyone! We will take the thing you love and corrupt it into a husk of its former greatness, and that's a good thing!
>YOU CANT JUST GENERATE 100000 ANIME GIRL IMAGES! THIS IS CORRUPTING THE MEANING OF ART!! PICK UP A PENCIL IF YOU WANT TO BE AN ARTIST

>Don't bully a learning artist. Not every detail needs to be perfectly accurate, it's called a style! Everyone, no matter how skilled, is valid and amazing!
>IS THAT AN OUT OF PLACE ELBOW??? IS THE LEFT ARM SLIGHTLY BIGGER THAN THE RIGHT?? THIS IS SHIT! YOU NEED TO HAVE PERFECT ANATOMY LIKE THOSE RACIST ROMAN STATUES I WANT TO TEAR DOWN!

>heh, god isnt real CHUD. there is no afterlife, you WILL decompose in a box, you WILL become dust! We're all just sacks of meat floating on a rock in space!!
>NOOOO AI ART LACKS HUMAN SOUL! IT LACKS INSPIRATION AND HUMAN SPIRIT! THE VERY FOUNDATIONS OF WHAT IT MEANS TO BE HUMAN ARE BEING SHAKEN TO THEIR CORE!!

>Anything can be art! Two gay black trannies shitting in eachother's mouths? Wholesome! A banana taped to a wall?? Inspiring! Everything is ART!
>NOOOO THIS CANT BE ART ITS NOT PERFECT ENOUGH!!! UGH, JUST LOOK AT THE ARTIFACTS AND THE HAIR AND THE HAND ITS JUST ALLL WRONG!!! ITS NOT REAL ART! TYPING SHIT INTO A TERMINAL AND GETTING AN IMAGE OUT ISNT ART (throwing my own shit against a wall and putting a frame around it is THOUGH)

[Anonymous No.6421369]

>>6421367
Take your meds.

[Anonymous No.6421370]

>>6421367
You will never be a real artist. You have no talent, you have no skills, you have no imagination. You are an untalented redditor twisting pixels by using buzzwords and interpolation into a crude mockery of nature’s perfection.

All the “validation” you get is two-faced and half-hearted. Behind your back people mock you. Your parents are disgusted and ashamed of you, your “friends” laugh at your ghoulish creations behind closed doors.

Artists are utterly repulsed by you. Thousands of years of artistic evolution have allowed artists to sniff out frauds with incredible efficiency. Even prompts that “pass” look uncanny and unnatural to an artist. Your anatomy is a dead giveaway. And even if you manage to get a desperate furry to commission you, he’ll turn tail and bolt the second he takes a second look at your distorted, incoherent pixel mess.

You will never be happy. You wrench out a fake smile every single morning and tell yourself it’s going to be ok, but deep inside you feel the depression creeping up like a weed, ready to crush you under the unbearable weight.

Eventually it’ll be too much to bear - you’ll buy a rope, tie a noose, put it around your neck, and plunge into the cold abyss. Your parents will find you, heartbroken but relieved that they no longer have to live with the unbearable shame and disappointment. They’ll bury you with a headstone marked with someone else's artwork, and every passerby for the rest of eternity will know that a nobody is buried there. Your body will decay and go back to the dust, and all that will remain of your legacy is a handful of reddit upvotes and a dead link to an image that was unmistakably created by a machine.

This is your fate. This is what you chose. There is no turning back.

[Anonymous No.6421371]

Okay but let's be real for a second. Not a single one of you retards could even hope to draw something like picrel in a million years. So if you aren't going to do it I might as well use AI.

[Anonymous No.6421372]

>>6421367
Falseflag pro artist

[Anonymous No.6421374]

>>6421370
>>6421367
>dueling pasta

[Anonymous No.6421375]

>>6421367
artfags seething about the truth

[Anonymous No.6421376]

>>6421371
>but it looks so detailed though
>meaning? HUH?
Is that really the only analysis of art that normies do or care about? It's so sad and pathetic. Nuke this gay earth

[Anonymous No.6421377]

>>6421372
As if the retards spamming these threads don't think shit like that for real.

[Anonymous No.6421378]

>>6421371
I could.

(You) can't however. Which is why you posted this cope in the first place.

[Anonymous No.6421379]

>>6421378
Oh yeah? pyw.

[Anonymous No.6421380]

>>6421376
pyw

[Anonymous No.6421381]

>>6421371
What does this picture mean to you?

[Anonymous No.6421382]

>>6421359

[Anonymous No.6421384]

>>6421374
What's /ic/'s consensus on monochroms drawings?

[Anonymous No.6421386]

>>6421380
Emma Watson, 8k, (((Masterpiece))), loli

[Anonymous No.6421388]

[Anonymous No.6421389]

>>6421367
some retarded statements mixed with legit statements, all answers are retarded strawmen. no poo in the loo for you

[Anonymous No.6421390]

>>6421376
>Is that really the only analysis of art that normies do or care about?
Not normies, redditors. Even normies got bored of their shit already

[Anonymous No.6421391]

>>6421382

[Anonymous No.6421392]

>>6421367
This is funny because it displays real artist behavior.

[Anonymous No.6421393]

>>6421367
>>Anything can be art! Two gay black trannies shitting in eachother's mouths? Wholesome!
kek

[Anonymous No.6421394]

>>6421386
>Emma Watson
>loli
Maybe artists aren't so bad after all

[Anonymous No.6421395]

>>6421367
>>Anything can be art! Two gay black trannies shitting in eachother's mouths? Wholesome! A banana taped to a wall?? Inspiring! Everything is ART!
>>NOOOO THIS CANT BE ART ITS NOT PERFECT ENOUGH!!! UGH, JUST LOOK AT THE ARTIFACTS AND THE HAIR AND THE HAND ITS JUST ALLL WRONG!!! ITS NOT REAL ART! TYPING SHIT INTO A TERMINAL AND GETTING AN IMAGE OUT ISNT ART (throwing my own shit against a wall and putting a frame around it is THOUGH)
it's funny because the only defenders of Dadaism I've seen in the last months or so were all AI shills, definitely not digital or traditional artists who learned the fundamentals of art

[Anonymous No.6421399]

>>6421352
>A tablet does not create art "on its own", it would create nothing without being operated by a human.
I know, that's what I'm saying in my last sentence. You're agreeing with me. What we disagree on is the artistry the machine generates.

Everything in the file it creates for your artwork has predefined limits for its presentation. Whatever you force it to create is then within these limits, and is defined by the machine. That's why I'm saying it's the artist in that sense, because it's the one that is ultimately creating the different parts of your artwork and sewing them together.

>>6421358
AI art is literally the definition of a shortcut in that it streamlines and shortens the process of creating something most people would deem art. The problem with your logic in this post is that "the actual process of creating" is not a one size fits all thing. I'm confused on this part. Being artists yourselves, don't you understand that you can't define what is and isn't art to someone else? You're acting like all art is the same thing created in the same way. And to answer your question, my point from the previous post is that in both the AI and tablet examples the machine is creating the art for you.

>>6421360
>An AI cannot be creative, thus it cannot make ar
Assuming this is true, which I disagree with, the problem with this reasoning is that the human using the tool *can* be creative. I think I understand what you mean in the rest of the post, and I understand that AI art is definitely not appealing to a lot of artists, even as only a tool.

[Anonymous No.6421401]

>>6420488
You can't enforce this internationally. And most projects don't require art to be copyrighted to be profitable. For example, book illustrations, where the text is copyrighted but the art isn't.

[Anonymous No.6421402]

>>6421399
>Assuming this is true, which I disagree with, the problem with this reasoning is that the human using the tool *can* be creative
you're not being creative. you're consuming the art generated by a machine. the machine generates images, that you're consooming. it's not fully under your control, you generate 1000 images, pick a few and say "good enough".

[Anonymous No.6421405]

>>6421401
Human art is in big, big, big fuckin trouble. All of the proposed solutions are a cope.

[Anonymous No.6421409]

>>6421402
It's a creative process, so you are being creative.

[Anonymous No.6421412]

>>6421409
About as creative as coming up with tags of an image you want to jerk off to on a rule34 site and browsing until you find something close enough

[Anonymous No.6421416]

>>6421391

[Anonymous No.6421417]

>>6421412
Except you are creating something that didn't exist before

[Anonymous No.6421418]

>>6421399
Performing a task is not really the same as "creating", just like using a photoshop filter is not the program creating new art. Though I guess as long as you admit that stable diffusion does not make art "on its own" like certain redditors are claiming, it's just an issue of labeling.

However, would you agree that artists should be the ones who decide whether they want their work to be used for training these tools which many of them have no intent of using?

[Anonymous No.6421419]

>>6421417
bro, inpaint that leg stump

[Anonymous No.6421425]

>>6421417
>that dead-ass smile
SOULLESS

[Anonymous No.6421427]

>>6421425
>2/10 would not fuck
lmao

[Anonymous No.6421429]

>>6421419
It's not a stump man, it's under the grass

[Anonymous No.6421431]

>>6421429

[Anonymous No.6421433]

>>6421431

[Anonymous No.6421436]

>>6421431
I really doubt the target demographic of big anime titties is complaining about it

[Anonymous No.6421439]

>>6421433
>literally point one of his image

[Anonymous No.6421440]

>>6421439

[Anonymous No.6421443]

>>6421436
(art by (bob byerley), norman rockwell, [donato giancola], [alphonse mucha]), (((realistic analog (photograph)))) of a (nude:1.3) (9 year old girl:1.2) (laying:1.3 in inflatable_pool in backyard) with legs apart, (highly detailed pussy slit:1.3), (loli:1.3), intricate (high detail), ((cute)), (detailed, realistic face:1.21), (sexual smile), erotic posture:1.42), (((visibly aroused))), (sweaty), [oily:0.8], [shiny skin:0.8], freckled_cheeks:1.5, (blushing armpits), (thigh focus:1.2), inflatable swim ring, bracelet, beautiful lighting, multicolored lighting, rainbow:1.1, sunset lighting, sunbeam, lens flare, (small breasts:1.1), (flat chest:1.0), glamorous blue eyes, from below
Negative prompt: cell shading, bad hands, jpeg artifacts, tall, text, lowres, deformed, adult, blurry, fat, error, solo, watercolor, watermark, fewer digits, low quality, bad anatomy, amateur drawing, ugly, signature, cropped, old, worst quality, normal quality, artist name, big breasts, censorship, multiple views, extra digit, username, anime, out of focus, odd, 3d, rendered, blender,(gross proportions:1.3), (disfigured:1.3), (mutated hands:1.3), (poorly drawn hands:1.3), bad anatomy, (bad hands:1.3), missing fingers, extra digit, (extra fingers:1.3), fewer digits, (poorly drawn feet:1.3), (fused fingers:1.4)
Steps: 40, Sampler: DDIM, CFG scale: 16, Seed: 3973781193, Size: 640x896, Model hash: 3312a086, Denoising strength: 0.7, Clip skip: 2, ENSD: 31337, First pass size: 448x640

warning:
this doesn't produce lolis, but adult women

[Anonymous No.6421446]

>>6421436
They are, everyone is pissed of having their favorite tags flooded with this garbage.

[Anonymous No.6421450]

>>6421446
>everyone
lmao
if there's only one group who likes this shit, it's the fucking coomers, c'mon be real

[Anonymous No.6421453]

>>6421443
I'd rather draw it myself
>>6421446
Sure, they are.

[Anonymous No.6421454]

>>6421446
>everyone

[Anonymous No.6421455]

Ironically this AI shit is revealing to me that Western artists are retarded subhumans with no tech literacy and never any art to show, despite all the self importance in the world.

[Anonymous No.6421457]

>>6421399
A shortcut brings you closer to the goal it dosnt bring the fucking goal to you durr durr. No shit i cant define what art is or isnt thats not what matters and is a completely different argument. What im saying is you are no artist for telling a machine what to do for you, thats the same as me paying someone, giving instructions for how i want it to look then proclaiming im an artist becouse i gave the instructions. All the examples you have given of why tablets and such would be in the same boat as ai is just proving my point, its the human who creates with these tools not just a fucking instruction for the machine to do the work. My thesis is youre an artist if you create (keywords you and create) you have yet said anything to change my mind on that. Nice ai pic btw you sure are a good "artist"

[Anonymous No.6421458]

>>6421367
>>It's a ROMHACK it's not copyright infringement! It's a fan inspired transformative work! Fuck the lawyers at Nintendo!
> >WHAT DO YOU MEAN THE AI IS USING MY ART WITHOUT PERMISSION AND TRANSFORMING IT INTO SOMETHING NEW!!

yes, romhack IS copyright infringement and so is training ML models with copyrighted images, so it's highly plausible that anyone or any company to sue AI dev and win

[Anonymous No.6421461]

>>6421450
>>6421453
>>6421454
Just check any AI gallery on sadpanda, they are all down voted to hell.
Same goes to /h/ when it was getting spammed.

[Anonymous No.6421462]

>>6421402
Have you ever used this thing? And I mean actually used it, not just using the webshit versions on huggingface or wherever else. There are so many variables and so many moving parts that all affect the final product. Saying that the machine is 100% in control of what it spits out is legitimately just ignorance. So much of the final result depends on the inputs the human using the machine puts in.

>>6421418
I think the intellectual property being used against your will aspect is probably your best bet in pushing legislation. The problem with this is that artists essentially freely give out their artwork on twitter, pixiv, deviantart, etc. None of these sites actually protect your work using DRM or anything like the big boys at Netflix and Amazon do to make the files they provide to end users harder to steal.

It's hard to argue that an artist didn't want their work to be used in a certain way when they basically gave away infinite copies of it on the twitter street corner. What's to stop another traditional artist from heavily using their style, given that the artwork was given away for free with no strings attached?

I guess I think that you don't have a warranty for anything you release to the public on twitter. So you can't really have a say in how your art gets used if you give it away like that. If the art used to train these things is something you've privately given to friends, or something you've charged money for (on fanbox, etc) that isn't public, then yes I think you would have the right to tell the model trainers to fuck off.

[Anonymous No.6421463]

>>6421455
>Ironically this AI shit is revealing to me that Western artists are retarded subhumans with no tech literacy and never any art to show, despite all the self importance in the world.

[Anonymous No.6421464]

>>6421458
>so is training ML models with copyrighted images
>literal textbook definition of fair use

[Anonymous No.6421465]

>>6421455
wrong they will be the elite vanguard in the ai wars
https://youtu.be/-_7FaWnlhS4

[Anonymous No.6421466]

>>6421464
That's not how fair use works.
They are abusing a grey legal area and even they know because LAION as an entity wouldn't exist if that wasn't the case.

[Anonymous No.6421467]

>>6421461
good news for once
gotta link?

[Anonymous No.6421469]

>>6421466
>limited use of copyrighted material without having to first acquire permission from the copyright holder.

[Anonymous No.6421470]

>>6421466
looks like you're gonna have to sue to find out

[Anonymous No.6421472]

>>6421463
'ucking 'aved
for the record though i still like ai art

[Anonymous No.6421473]

>>6421464
It harms future market for the artists' original work and the service they provide at a large scale which would nullify the fair use argument

[Anonymous No.6421474]

>>6421461
Yes, by other artists.
If you want to know how the consumer feels about it, go where they are.

Consumers NEVER complain about free shit.
In the history of arts, it's been always other artists complaining about new and other forms of arts.

[Anonymous No.6421475]

>>6421474
>using rule34 ERPers as an example of anything
Are you really stooping that low?

[Anonymous No.6421476]

>>6421416
Apologies for the delay

[Anonymous No.6421478]

>>6421475
>implying those aren't part of the target demographic
Every nsfw discord server has dedicates erp vcs and lobbies.
Now why would that be?

[Anonymous No.6421479]

>>6421473
Maybe if it was creating copies of the images used in the dataset, but it's not.

[Anonymous No.6421480]

>>6421475
The post you're responding to mentioned sadpanda galleries as the source. Sadpanda is also a coomer website

[Anonymous No.6421483]

>>6421475
post your sadpanda link

[Anonymous No.6421485]

>>6421462
His point is that the machine will create something as soon as you run the program, with or without your input. And you can't "actively" change what it puts out, you can only influence it. It's more comparable to commissioning something from somebody else than actually "creating" it. You can ask the artist to change something but you're not the one making those changes.
>It's hard to argue that an artist didn't want their work to be used in a certain way when they basically gave away infinite copies of it on the twitter street corner.
Copyright laws exist for a reason. I can't just take the design for Mickey Mouse and use it to create an original character just because it's "out there". The problem is that laws have not caught up to the tech yet and we are living in the Wild West of ai art. The other problem is that there is so much copyrighted shit in the training data that the programs would probably be useless without it. The main reason why they got so "good" in the first place is because they were trained on very large databases. This is why aicels get so mad whenever people suggest that they should not just be able to train on copyrighted data without permission.

[Anonymous No.6421489]

>>6421474
>4 desperate coomers
Wooow

[Anonymous No.6421490]

>>6421479
creation of derivative works without the copyright owner's permission is also an infringement. In this case, the model trained using the copyrighted material is a derivative work and it would harm the market for the artist's work and the service he provides

[Anonymous No.6421492]

>>6421489
>coomers
>not desperate
are you guys arguing over coomer votes now

[Anonymous No.6421496]

The coomers happen to be correct on this one

[Anonymous No.6421499]

>>6421490
No it's not, creation of derivative works without the copyright owner's permission is fair use. It's not a replication of the artists work nor is it a substitute for it. Any supposed negative impact on their business would have to be proven in court.

[Anonymous No.6421498]

>>6421489
There isn't a lack of examples in this case

[Anonymous No.6421500]

>>6421496
>coomers
>correct

[Anonymous No.6421503]

>>6421500

[Anonymous No.6421504]

>>6421498
>>6421474
is this r34 or paheal or whatever, I remember their comments were hilarious, like a bunch of old dudes swearing at strippers or 12 year olds, lmao

[Anonymous No.6421507]

>>6421498
>2-5 people like it
What's this supposed to prove, people will jerk off to anything. Show me the one that gets praised by thousands of people for its artistic value

[Anonymous No.6421509]

>>6421498
people on rule34 don't even look at the images, it's pretty weird how they are so focused on commenting the cringest tangentially related stuff everytime.

[Anonymous No.6421512]

>>6421509
it's communal erping, a literal circlejerk

[Anonymous No.6421513]

>>6421507
You gave yourself the answer;
People will praise anything.
>for it's artistic value
Suuuuure.
No one just likes the pretty pictures because they're pretty pictures.
All the millions of likes and copypasted comments how amazing the work is, comes from qualified, certified art critics who have dissected every piece of art they liked.

[Anonymous No.6421516]

>>6421485
>And you can't "actively" change what it puts out, you can only influence it
This is definitely true to an extent, but I would argue that the ability to iterate on a theme however many times it takes to get what you want is a form of actively changing the output. But I don't really see how his point is relevant. I'm not arguing that the person doing the prompting is fully in control of the machine.

>I can't just take the design for Mickey Mouse and use it to create an original character just because it's "out there"
Yes, that's true. You can't trace his likeness or D*sney will be all over your ass. But AI art doesn't trace. It quite literally uses a piece (or pieces) of art as an inspiration, and then creates something new using this inspiration as a reference. In that way, it is very close to an actual artist. This is why this current situation is such a gray area. If it's not illegal for someone to take Disney's style and use it as inspiration for their own art, then why should it be illegal for a computer to do the same?

[Anonymous No.6421517]

>>6421371
Someone else did draw that however, the AI just copied that fuckers work, took the colors and elements and distorted it to paste it back together.

Which means every AI picture is just as impressive as a screenshot of a Google image search, give me the original or GTFO.

Nobody is interested in a software that just grabs shit out of the internet and pastes it back, we could have been doing it since Photoshop CS2, it's parasitism, you niggers don't see to get why people are repulsed by this.

An artist grabbing the shit someone else drew and posting it as their work would get just as much shit as the AI fags are getting now, the novel technology is just a new coat to a old age practice that has already been rejected as a whole for centuries.

[Anonymous No.6421518]

>>6421507
>the one that gets praised by thousands of people for its artistic value
https://www.pixiv.net/en/artworks/102969319

[Anonymous No.6421519]

>>6421513
Anon there are people who masturbate to fucking pepe pictures, why are we using coomers as a quality meter now

[Anonymous No.6421520]

>>6421446
I was already pissed by having my favorite tags flooded by garbage rule 34 western art. Nothing changes

[Anonymous No.6421521]

>>6421519
Because consumers dictate demand and define value, not artists.

[Anonymous No.6421522]

>>6421519
idk, but it's pretty funny

[Anonymous No.6421524]

>>6421521
soulless

[Anonymous No.6421525]

>>6421516
>then why should it be illegal for a computer to do the same?
Because computers are not people and any law about fair use does not apply to them. Laws are made for people, not machines. I'm always amazed when someone makes this argument in the same comment where they claim that ai is just another tool for artists. How can you not see that these two things contradict each other?

[Anonymous No.6421526]

>>6421522
The printing press is the whole reason we have copyright.
Did you know that anon?

[Anonymous No.6421527]

>>6421518
Jesus christ, Anon
this is enough loli to get a fujotumblerina into an eternal rage

[Anonymous No.6421528]

>>6421521
So you think the globohomo artstyle is amazing as well? there's obviously demand for it, since companies keep using it

[Anonymous No.6421530]

>>6421528
Why are trying to twist my words, you stupid nigger?

[Anonymous No.6421532]

>>6421528
Gobohomo dictates, and do not respond demand, or do you think BLM trans shit is organic?

[Anonymous No.6421534]

>>6421409
It's literally the opposite. You're letting the machine do everything for you instead of finding creative solutions for an issue (representing a thing you have in mind). It is the death of human creativity and you cretins act as if putting the shackles of AI on your brain is liberating. Pathetic.

[Anonymous No.6421535]

>>6421518
That's not "thousands", also why is every example just coomer shit

[Anonymous No.6421536]

>>6421530
Cause I can
>>6421532
Idk, there are some people who care for it

[Anonymous No.6421537]

>>6421535
>>6421436
Because if you actually lurked and read the thread what this is about instead of having a knee-jerk reaction like the unthinking cattle you are, you'd know.

[Anonymous No.6421538]

>>6421536
I'm sure some people genuinely enjoy the Memphis style, only the weird colored humans gets the hate

[Anonymous No.6421539]

>>6421536
>i have no arguments so i have to be dishonest
Do you want to know why der globohomo uses the shit they use?
Because it's simple, easy for any normie to understand and cheap to produce.
Lurk moar, election tourist.

[Anonymous No.6421541]

>>6421535
I thought posting loli would be funnier, should I look for more popular ones, it'll probbably be another off model big tiddy anime girl with ridiculous proportions but from a popular franchise or game.

[Anonymous No.6421543]

>>6421539
>Because it's simple, easy for any normie to understand and cheap to produce.
So there is demand for it, so it has value according to your own words. Why do people coom to ai images? Cause it's simple and free
>election tourist
lmao

[Anonymous No.6421544]

>>6421517
>>6421534
wrong

[Anonymous No.6421546]

>>6421543
>So there is demand for it, so it has value according to your own words
Are you actually retarded?

[Anonymous No.6421547]

>>6421543
/pol/ is lapping this shit up more than any other board.
I guess tradition and self determinism mattered until they didn't anymore uh?

[Anonymous No.6421549]

>>6421525
I suppose it is an interesting take that machine learning algorithms are something different than what we've seen before and thus need different laws in place. I still think that this situtation falls under a gray area as far as training on art given away on twitter and etc is concerned. Arguing that it is the machine is the one doing the wrong and not the human telling it what to do is sort of like arguing that guns are the things that kill people, not the humans who shoot them.

[Anonymous No.6421551]

>>6421546
Explain to me how I'm contradicting you? You said:
>Because consumers dictate demand and define value
I said:
>companies request aka consume globohomo art for their products, so according to you, this automatically makes it valueable
Are you gonna claim that companies somehow don't count as consumers because they produce as well? Someone's making the images they are putting on their ads, you know

[Anonymous No.6421552]

>>6421547
I thought /pol/ hated pedos, aren't ai-shills pedos?
Anyway, they think all artists are tranny shill "degenerate art" modernists Hitler wanted to destroy, unless you paint neoclassical shit or something like that.

[Anonymous No.6421555]

I think there is a fundamental misconception about what people enjoy in art and why we find art "pretty", it's the same reason we watch sports in the Olympics.

We find artworks "pretty" and worth of praise and admiration not because they are well rendered or well lit, but in consequence of it.

Well rendered artworks mean a highly skilled artist, worked a lot or trained a lot to execute it, people like to praise and admire THAT, the human behind the art, humans like to circlejerk about their own nature, about someone being highly skilled about something.

So now tech tries to get the same effect of admiration but by removing skill or effort, and so when people see AI art they go "meh".

It's pretty because it feeds on the works of highly skilled artists, but it's neither impressive or inspiring of praise, it's like watching VFX footage of a fake basketball match where everyone is flying and doing triple kickflips, the "wow" factor is absent because the admiration for the skill is absent.

[Anonymous No.6421559]

>>6421551
And that's why you're retarded
>are you gonna say that consumers and companies aren't the same because i'm not going to accept that or i'd have to stop being a faggot
Ok, kill yourself then.
What you want me to say?

I very well could explain it to you but you made your retarded intentions very clear or you're too low iq to actually understand anything.

[Anonymous No.6421561]

>>6421516
>It quite literally uses a piece (or pieces) of art as an inspiration, and then creates something new using this inspiration as a reference. In that way, it is very close to an actual artist.
KEK
I love when tech illiterate people try to explain how AI works, with the constant irrational personification and all.

[Anonymous No.6421562]

>>6421549
>I suppose it is an interesting take that machine learning algorithms are something different than what we've seen before and thus need different laws in place
They are not, the algorithms have not significantly changed, they just got trained on more data. It's still a program performing a task, not a living creature.
>Arguing that it is the machine is the one doing the wrong and not the human telling it what to do is sort of like arguing that guns are the things that kill people, not the humans who shoot them.
I'n not arguing any of this. A machine can't "do wrong" because it has no understanding of right and wrong. Machines don't think, they are tools, as you admitted yourself. I'm trying to explain that any argument along the line of "it learns just like humans, so it's ok" is stupid when talking about a tool since it does not have rights the same way humans do. The only people who should be held accountable are the ones who used the data without permission in order to develop these tools.

[Anonymous No.6421564]

>>6421555
basically.
same reason why if you took a picture of something, vs said you painted the same image, the reaction and reception you would gain would be very different.

[Anonymous No.6421568]

>>6421559
>What you want me to say?
Idk tell me the contradiction? Why do you think companies keep using this shitty artstyle?

[Anonymous No.6421571]

>>6421568
>he keeps going thinking he's being smart about it
There is no contradiction and i explained it to you.>>6421539
Not only are you retarded, but also quite illiterate.
You sure are showing me by making me reply to you.

[Anonymous No.6421573]

>>6421534
Indeed, how can they not grasp this simple concept a 5 year old could understand. Lazy wannabees who show the pricese reason they dont understand what art is in their defense of muh ai

[Anonymous No.6421577]

>>6421573
*precise lol

[Anonymous No.6421579]

>>6421571
>retard calling others retards
Kek. You could make the exact same argument about ai trash. It's simple, easy and cheap to produce. Literally on the same level as globohome shit, except that at least some effort went into drawing those globohomo images. If one has value, so has the other.

[Anonymous No.6421582]

>>6421579
Ok, your point?
Nigger, who are you trying to bait?

[Anonymous No.6421583]

>>6421564
It's more like people are showing in marathons with motorcycles and wondering why nobody is giving them praise for crossing the finish like 30 times earlier than the other runners when the point of the marathon is "going fast".

[Anonymous No.6421588]

>>6421582
I'm trying to explain that measuring the artistic value of something purely based on the fact that there are people out there who consume it is retarded. It's like praising the value of fast food because retards keep stuffing themselves with it

[Anonymous No.6421602]

Art was dead when an urinal got art status, AI can't even compare to how low art got

[Anonymous No.6421603]

>>6420488
>It's actually really simple. Pass legislation that says " any creative content produced through the use of artificial intelligence, isn't protected by trademark or copyright in any way. And cannot be sold for profit."
This is already the case.

[Anonymous No.6421624]

>>6421588
You're illiterate and an extremely autistic midwit on top of that.
>consumers DICTATE demand and DEFINE value
If you weren't a stupid nigger you'd know that this isn't an all encompassing objective statement but it seems you can't get your uncle's cock out of cum filled mouth and have to say the most retarded, irrelevant, incoherent fucking shit you can come up with because some buzzwords triggered your water filled skull.
Not only that, but you're trying to argue even more retarded semantics while making more incoherent and absolutely ignorant strawmen arguments that it makes an Anon assume that you must be either below an IQ of 78 or being a faggot on purpose.

You wouldn't know how to define value if somebody slapped you with a with a $50 bill.

Please now comment about any of the emotions i might be having right now.
It will be extremely funny.

[Anonymous No.6421628]

>>6421624
Calm down, also I was literally quoting your posts, how was that a strawman? You're just mad cause your statement was stupid to begin with.

[Anonymous No.6421634]

>>6421628
Can you actually bait me with good arguments?

[Anonymous No.6421646]

>>6421624
You're illiterate, extremely autistic, midwit, stupid nigger , seems you can't get your uncle's cock out of cum filled mouth and have to say the most retarded, irrelevant, incoherent fucking shit you can come up with because some buzzwords triggered your water filled skull, you must be either below an IQ of 78 or being a faggot on purpose, You wouldn't know how to define value if somebody slapped you with a with a $50 bill.
So this is the argumentative power... of the stembug... I kneel

[Anonymous No.6421668]

>>6421646
>being so low iq that he takes a bunch of insults showcasing the retardation of the target who has shown himself to be nothing but a faggot, as an actual argument in a discussion
Statistics about the average IQ dropping really aren't lying. Damn.

[Anonymous No.6421676]

>>6421668
keep throwing insults bud, I think you are FUCKING AWESOME

[Anonymous No.6421684]

>>6421676
I don't care what you think, nigger.

[Anonymous No.6421688]

>>6421684
Love you anon

[Anonymous No.6421693]

>>6421688
Of course, you do.

[Anonymous No.6421973]

Most of the "proposals" here are so fucking stupid, that if you were to consider the implications of them on the artists themselves they are just digging artists own graves. I know there is lots of frustration about this as art is fun and rewarding, but there just isn't a way out of this AI images are here to stay. And if it is legislated to shit you are just taking away from the regular people... Corpos will have the tools and fuck you over anyway, problem is more with how economy works rather than AI images. If you didn't have to rely on art to live you could just do your own thing and leave ugly hand generators to do their own shit.

[Anonymous No.6422176]

>>6420533
Don't use my AI art to shitpost, faggot.

[Anonymous No.6422214]

>>6421688
Stop posting this awful sōy

[Anonymous No.6422222]

>>6421973
I think it's fair to at least try and slow it down. It gives people time to consider their options and re-specialize if necessary.

I do think artists should be focusing more on ways to prevent their data from getting automatically scraped. We desperately need a site that is hostile to AI art and to scrapers.

A new professional artist gallery website would need the following:

An anti-AI detection system that prevents AI images from being uploaded
An anti-scraping mechanism that makes it hard for images to be scraped from the site.

It would probably not be too hard to create the first, given the sheer volume of AI-generated images currently in circulation. The second might require different techniques - perhaps slicing an image up into various different images in a way that isn't immediately visible could be a solution to this problem, and the way the images would be sliced would be random. That way, any automated scraping of the site would be difficult at best. Randomized invisible watermarks should be present as well. Blocking right clicking and inspect element should also be done to weed out the less tech-savvy scrapers.

[Anonymous No.6422543]

it hurts to hear but you don't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting legal protection for your shit against ML

the #1 reason is it can save fuck tons of money for corporations and it's a brutally capitalistic world
#2 is there's more than one country in the world and i can train in fucking belarus and you can't stop me. and what is trained may _never_, ever, die.

[Anonymous No.6422547]

>>6421973
the reality is the law will go _against_ artists and to protect corporations

this was already established since 2015

you've been legally fucked since this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authors_Guild,_Inc._v._Google,_Inc.

sorry lads

[Anonymous No.6422584]

>>6420802
it's not AI because it needs (you) to write an input
in a few years (you) are not going to be needed, meaning this software is going to work without any human intervention, that would be something very close to real AI

[Anonymous No.6423131]

>>6421555
This. Scarcity is central to the concept of value. Humans have limited lifespans and limited time to build skills. So it's impressive when someone invests those resources and is able to achieve great results. If you pump out thousands of AI generated pictures in a few days, the value of every single one of those pictures is going to be minuscule compared to true, human-made masterpieces.

Obviously this line of thinking doesn't apply equally everywhere. Just like most people buy mass-produced furniture nowadays, plenty of people will be content with consuming AI art. But it will always be the "cheap version" of art.

[Anonymous No.6423841]

>>6421150
Change the prompt if you don’t like the style

[Anonymous No.6423958]

>>6421024
yea if you're creatively handicapped. Stop relying on a machine to do basic human thinking.

[Anonymous No.6424947]

>>6420488
KEK
/ic/ on suicide watch and are trying to make AI illegal
now this is hilarious

[Anonymous No.6424951]

>>6421417
this looks so fucking weird I'm sure I'm not the only one, look at that smile and that thumb, and the left leg looks extremely weird (where's the foot, you should be able to see it from that angle) it makes no sense, the flowers look nice from the distance but when you look closer they make no sense, no flower looks like that
it gives me pic related vibes
Nothing against AI but at least finish the job faggot those pictures make me puke I'm not even kidding, the uncanny valley feel is real