A way to prevent artists' work from getting included in future AI models?

[Anonymous No.6422647]

The success of these AI tools seem to be driven by their ability to view/collection millions, billions of light-weight images. Mostly with Common Crawl currently.
If it's made much more complicated/intensive to obtain the image via a script at scale, I wonder if that could successfully counter these tools?

On someone's own site they could maybe provide a robots.txt file. But if artists want to use popular social media sites that aren't using that, would uploading their work as videos with some sort of canned intro to prevent thumbnailing be a good deterrent? People could maybe train models off shitty screen-captures in the video, but maybe it could still help prevent scraping at scale.

I wonder if artists should stop posting their art in popular image formats. Maybe a new image format could be made that can't be read easily by these third-party tools.

[Anonymous No.6422887]

>>6422647
There is a lot of money to be made for however makes an app or extension capable of protecting your artwork from AI that's for sure

[Anonymous No.6422891]

>>6422647
robots.txt works off the honor system
If a human can see your art then a crawler can see your art, that's how this works

[Anonymous No.6422897]

>>6422647
Just change the laws and keep pressuring companies through public outrage in order to make it economically unfeasible to use ai crap. Nobody profits from it long term anyway, since even large coorporations like Disney risk getting replaced by it.

[Anonymous No.6422903]

>>6422647
If you're at a level where people have commissioned you, or have tried to commission you, you're at a point where all your work should be behind a paywall. At least that way if some AIjeet tries to use your work for his gain, you'll have received some compensation for it.

[Anonymous No.6422910]

>>6422647
Just play the game and go full jew. Register your trademark (not copyright) and have your attorney manage any infringements.

[Anonymous No.6422913]

this anon >>6422903 is just a crab trying to limit others' reach

The value of an online artist is based on how often their work is reposted. If you want to die in irrelevance and dwindling art-income then you can paywall all your stuff lol

[Anonymous No.6422924]

>>6422913
That doesn't apply to coom artists.

[Anonymous No.6422930]

>>6422913
As somebody who has had his art reposted many times, to far more attention than it had on my gallery (and one popular piece in particular is not infrequently reposted with my signature cropped out), I can say that no, raw exposure didn't help me to a meaningful degree, and seeing my username show up in a faggot's """"training set""" didn't help either.
To be fair, I don't have the desire or motivation to take on all the commissions that people have wanted from me over the years, so I'm not the best to ask when it comes to meaningfully monetizing your art. I'm just pointing out that in Current Year you have to be extra tight with your art to avoid excessive faggotry.

[Anonymous No.6422935]

Terrorism probably, a radical idealogy against all ai technologies would work too. Try to get the kids to go along with it by saying "this is silencing bipoc artists! This is racist!" Etc. People say there's no way to put the genie back in the bottle, but with an authoritarian government that's oppressive enough with a cult like religiosity to it, anything is possible!

[Anonymous No.6422939]

>>6422935
In minecraft

[Anonymous No.6422943]

>>6422935
this but unironically

[Anonymous No.6422950]

>>6422939
I only post on 4chan using my 40k tech priest fansona, none of the words I speak are my own!

[Anonymous No.6422966]

>>6422930
NGMI
Reach is the #1 way you expand your audience.
<1% of your customer base will want to pay you, the more people are in demand of your services the more you can charge and the fewer comms you have to actually do to keep your income stable.

It doesn't matter if someone else benefits (How? lmao) off your art, it's free advertising you didn't have to pay a PR firm to do. And if you're like most of the other "NOOO REPOSTING REEE" shitheads then I doubt your signature is legible anyway, so it's not like people would be driven back to your gallery by it even if was still there.

The goal is to get your art viewed by the people who would like it. If they don't bother to ask for sauce, they weren't gonna bother to pay you anyway.

[Anonymous No.6425267]

>>6422935
>people say there's no way to put the genie back in the bottle
why do people keep saying this? Algorithmic disgorgement exists

[Anonymous No.6425276]

>>6425267
It's just a shill tactic to discourage people from speaking out against ai. The truth is, even if it was impossible to do anything about the algorithms, you could still regulate their usage. Just because it's possible for people to murder others, it does not mean that laws can't keep them in line.

[Anonymous No.6425297]

>>6422897
you dumb fuck, Disney loves AI art and contributes a significant amount of research into various ML techniques

[Anonymous No.6425308]

>>6425276
So explain how you're going to
1) stop or even notice me from generating images, when I could do so with the entire internet deleted and turned off
2) detect and PROVE that an image I made was generated using a SPECIFIC copyright image

It's so beautiful seeing this kind of desperate thinking, and that NFT grifter is genius for starting the gofundme knowing well that there's absolutely nothing to be done.
Almost overnight, an entire whole field of human endeavor was significantly devalued, and the fallout from it is truly remarkable.

[Anonymous No.6425315]

>>6422647
Make all your art compositions look like pic related

[Anonymous No.6425322]

literally impossible since it's open source and anyone can make its own models
>but le law
said the nigga how pirated every software that uses

[Anonymous No.6425325]

>>6425308
1 is a non aregument because this applies to everything illegal.
2, realistically you can do that with a widget that a few people are already working on. But for now, there are a few surefire ways you can tell an image is generated even without being able to tell just from looking at it. Any reputable company would not dabble in AI until the copyright issue is sorted out either way.

[Anonymous No.6425331]

>>6425325
The "copyright issue" is a fantasy made up by a handful of whiny concept artists who don't understand copyright law and intentionally spread disinformation for their own personal gain on the regular..

[Anonymous No.6425446]

>>6422647
>A way to prevent artists' work from getting included in future AI models?
Never ever ever put your art online, never let you art be photographed, in fact just never show anybody your art (lest the recreate it from memory)
Because if you ever let it be seen it will be available to add to AI training data.

Or you could stop being such a little whiny bitch and learn to love the bot

[Anonymous No.6425468]

>>6425315
This is true. If you like drawing characters, dress them in anti ai prints, anti ai makeup. Anti ai hats. You might get trained on so aifags can generate ironic anti ai art while jerking each other off.

[Anonymous No.6425477]

>>6425446
I will collaborate with ai users, fix hands for free, get to know them through friendly discord chats. Go to an ai art meetup in Minecraft with TNT.

[Anonymous No.6425959]

>>6425308
only one AI company made an open source program. All the other ones are still prone to disgorgement. And when it comes to stable diffusion, I wont be surprised if they make an AI able to detect if someone made it with 1.5 and prevent you from posting it or DMCA it the way the music industry enjoys. So in other words there wont be a need to put the genie back in the bottle, it will just die a slow death

[Anonymous No.6425967]

>>6425308
>how can you stop me from murdering somebody and later prove I murdered that person?
Criminal investigations exist for a reason. Also, it's not as much about "you" as the end user of the ai program, it's about the people who created them in the first place. Since the entire thing depends on copyrighted data in order to function

[Anonymous No.6425981]

I'm beginning to wonder if it's even needed. Like yeah, it's impressive and it will continue to improve, but once you get past the initial "wow" it's not all that interesting from an art standpoint. You see it all the time in threads on this board now, aifags put people's sketches through the wonder machine and go "look look, I was able to make something prettier than you in like five seconds!" So what? After the fourth or fifth time, you just don't care anymore.

[Anonymous No.6425987]

>>6425981
It's mostly for companies creating ads and stuff, not anyone who actually cares about art as something beyond just pretty pictures

[Anonymous No.6425989]

>>6422647
there's only one way - sue the ever living fuck out of ai companies, give them such a financial kick in the teeth that no one ever tries that shit again.

[Anonymous No.6425990]

>>6422647
Honestly, I think it's pointless. If someone wants to scrape an artist, they can do it. Nothing is preventing someone from screenshotting an Artist's work, cropping it and running it through Stable Diffusion.

The only real compromise that I think could work is if gallery sites can offer models that are trained on its own artists' works. Artists would be paid a certain amount per image generated with their names in it. It would absolutely not be perfect, but at least you can still compensate some of the artists for their works that way. You would have to figure out a way to prevent abuse, though.

Future's grim.

[Anonymous No.6425995]

>>6425987
Most of the online discussion seems to revolve around "industry" work, so I figured. It's hard to gauge how big the impact will be. The two scenarios "all industry artists instantly lose their jobs" and "everything continues as if nothing happened and AI art is just a passing fad" seem equally unlikely. There will probably some regulation eventually, but the tech is here to stay so people will eventually have to acclimate to the new environment

[Anonymous No.6426010]

>>6422897
Disney Research exist, they’re investing a lot on new AI models, look at their video on jewtube
just yesterday I watched one where they use AI to re-age with video input, that thing is going to put makeup artists out of job, comments and dislikes closed lol

[Anonymous No.6426013]

>>6425989
This will never happen
All the big tech companies (and their subcontracted companies) have glowie backing
It will be constant media bombardment of AI doomposting while they work on something much worse behind the scenes

[Anonymous No.6426015]

>>6426010
dislike counts had been hidden in all of youtube for a while already...

[Anonymous No.6426035]

>>6426010
Tbh not all ai research is equally bad, it's hard to deny that it can be a useful tool in certain circumstances. Eg you can only do so much with make-up so in this case, it simply tries to perform a task that a human would not be able to do, no matter how skilled they were and how much time it would take them. (Also it's not like the only thing make-up artists do in film is re-age actors)

It's the way ai tools like SD are developed and marketed as the ultimate solution to any human job in existence right now that is bad, for both individuals and entire industries.

[Anonymous No.6426049]

>>6422647
The only way would be to not draw at all.

[Anonymous No.6426077]

>>6422647
yeah dont draw

[Anonymous No.6426082]

>>6425959
Its not the models that are the concern it's the database which for all of them is open-source LAION5b

[Anonymous No.6426086]

>>6426035
of course AI could be used to achieve great things, but having Disney behind it I would be very careful and think why they invest so much on that

production ready re-aging is just the beggining, combine SD with this model and you have your production ready orc with just a promt

[Anonymous No.6426103]

>>6422897
>replaced
Until copyright get abolished, No company with lawyers will use it. People who love art won't buy it. AI customers are either naive indie developers subscribe for a lawsuit bait or Pajeets and niggers who get off with dopamine hit from the title "AI artists"

[Anonymous No.6426113]

>>6426015
i meant they disabled dislikes and comments, not just hidden

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZP1ApcdyAjk

[Anonymous No.6426117]

>>6422647
It seems to me like you are proposing something akin to a digital museum with limited access. I think that would be ideal but how would anyone keep a clever coder from creating a bot that could enter the "museum" and scan the images.

[Anonymous No.6426130]

>>6425989
for what? there was no violation. Your consent was not needed, and the AI produces novel images.

[Anonymous No.6426163]

>>6426103
>Nate.jpg
Mein Got

[Anonymous No.6426171]

>>6422647
If you don't want ai trained on your art then your art can't appear on search engines

[Anonymous No.6426177]

>>6425967
>Criminal investigations
>for fucking art
Anon, explain to me how Intellectual Property and Copyright laws work or stop saying retarded shit.

[Anonymous No.6426187]

I have discovered that the image generation requires something called "seeds"

If there was a way to stop the production of these seeds, I suspect that would be the end of AI art

[Anonymous No.6426568]

>>6426171

If search engines won't reform to make artwork harder for IP to use in AI, then perhaps it'd be an acceptable trade-off. I'm not sure how many artists would really be harmed by their work not showing up on google images for example. As long as the site or blog they're using has good SEO, then they could probably still be found.

>>6425981

I think you're underestimating this tech. There's already a lot of proven use cases for it, and non-artists aren't super picky taste-wise.

>>6422891

I guess by this logic:
If I can make the image difficult for people to download, then it will be difficult for the scraper to use or download as well?

>>6426117

By not using images possibly. I tried seeing if I could convert an image into pure css and displaying it. It (kind of) works, but the thing is massive and the browser hates me for it. Probably a dumb idea but I'll keep messing around with it for a bit anyway. I want to see if it'd be possible to hide the css, but probably not.
Then maybe some sort of overlay could be put on top that makes it difficult to accurately screencapture.

[Anonymous No.6426578]

>>6422935
you people don't realize that you're just going to motivate the engineers even more to make it more indistinguishable from actual art

[Anonymous No.6426581]

>>6425331
cool it with the anti-semetic remarks

[Anonymous No.6426583]

>>6426177
artists have a pretty big ego
they believe that some SWAT team is going to barge into an AI engineer's house to stop them from putting all /ic/ artists out of business
in reality, it will be the same as pirating
SURE, some people might go to jail for it but besides a slap on the wrist, no law enforcer is going to give a shit
you do realize there are real world problems that we are facing, right?

[Anonymous No.6426584]

>>6426171

If search engines won't reform to make it harder for artists' IP to be used in AI, then perhaps it'd be an acceptable trade-off. I'm not sure how many artists would really be harmed by their work not showing up on google images for example. As long as the site or blog they're using has good SEO, then they could probably still be found.

>>6425981

I think you're underestimating this tech. There's already a lot of proven use cases for it, and non-artists aren't super picky taste-wise.

>>6422891

I guess by this logic:
If I can make the image difficult for people to download, then it will be difficult for the scraper to use or download as well?

>>6426117

By not using images possibly. I tried seeing if I could convert an image into pure css and displaying it. It (kind of) works, but the thing is massive and the browser hates me for it. Probably a dumb idea but I'll keep messing around with it for a bit anyway. I want to see if it'd be possible to hide the css, but probably not.
Then maybe some sort of overlay could be put on top that makes it difficult to accurately screencapture.

[Anonymous No.6426632]

>>6425308
Old enough to remember this? I am. It was the most downloaded app in existence around Y2K, everyone had it. Most don't even know what the fuck it is now.
Sure, people still pirate music, but Napster was litigated out of existence, and most normies listen to their music through Spotify.

[Anonymous No.6426647]

A lot of the solutions posted here boil down to
>I won't do anything about it and I expect someone else to do it for me.
Propagandize against AI. It's the least and in some ways the best you could do.
AI is being trained on real people and being done in real time now. How long do you think it will take for it to be able to draw hands, faces, and feet properly?

[Anonymous No.6426661]

>>6422647
The best thing to do right now is to not post your art online at all. Pests like misquitos will die if they don't get blood. If you have a gallery, participate by quietly replacing all your tagged art with the anti-AI symbol. It really fucks with the AI generators.

Until laws catch up, they're just going to gleam this stuff with huge image scrapers from every artist available, then claim it's our job to opt out or our job to sue. Almost all of them go out of their way to not tag the artist.
What they're doing is illegal and the onus is on them to get permission from photographers, artists, and especially people for their faces. It's also the responsibility of websites like dA, artstation and pixiv to protect their artist, not participate in this get rich quick scheme. I think after a class action lawsuit or two, the courts are going to rule they must get rid of the stolen art and must get the explicit permission of the artist instead or they will face legal action.

[Anonymous No.6426662]

>>6426187
Seed is just random noise the AI starts with when you prompt xyz.
That seed number corresponds to that that "random" noise.

[Anonymous No.6426668]

>>6426661
>It really fucks with the AI generators.
You are 100% fucking retarded if you believe this.
All generators use an opensource database called LAION5b. Once the AI is trained, it's "trained". It doesn't collect or train on data in real time.
Sure for future datasets it will not use fucked up databases but really in effect you are just biasing and pruning the chaff from your own work that already has been trained.

The only way to stop crawling is to paywall your work or post only in unindexable services like discord. But even discord is getting crawled. No image formats may work but also keep in mind scrapers don't use the raw image to train on and by default scraping is indifferent to image formats.

[Anonymous No.6426669]

> ...technology is developing at such a rapid rate that automation will progress to cybernation, and cybernation probably to technocracy. If the ruling circle remains in power it seems to me that capitalists will continue to develop their technological machinery because they are not interested in the people. Therefore, I expect from them the logic that they have always followed: to make as much money as possible, and pay the people as little as possible - until the people demand more, and finally demand their heads.

>If revolution does not occur almost immediately, and I say almost immediately because technology is making leaps (it made a leap all the way to the moon), and if the ruling circle remains in power the proletarian working class will definitely be on the decline because they will be unemployables and therefore swell the ranks of the lumpens, who are the present unemployables. Every worker is in jeopardy because of the ruling circle, which is why we say that the lumpenproletarians have the potential for revolution, will probably carry out the revolution, and in the near future will be the popular majority. Of course, I would not like to see more of my people unemployed or become unemployables, but being objective, because we're dialectical materialists, we must acknowledge the facts.

>Today's capitalist has developed machinery to such a point that he can hire a group of specialized people called technocrats. In the near future he will certainly do more of this, and the technocrat will be too specialized to be identified as a proletarian.

t. Huey P. Newton (November 18 1970)

Do not make the mistake of thinking this is static technology.

Do not make the assumption that litigation will save you from corporate interest.

[Anonymous No.6426693]

>>6426669
>prophetic Huey P. quote
based

[Anonymous No.6426694]

>>6426632
Old enough to remember this? I am. It was the most used transportation in existence around the 1800s, everyone had it. Most don't even know what the fuck it is now.
Sure, people still ride horseback, but horses were litigated out of existence, and most normies get to work through motor vehicles.

[Anonymous No.6426696]

>>6426693
spread the word anon. just a copy paste in AI shill threads will do more than telling a crabhand to draw more.

[Anonymous No.6426702]

>>6426669
>>6426693
>>6426696
>mention the elites
>doesn't say anything about the jews
and people wonder why history repeats itself

[Anonymous No.6426704]

>>6426702
jews are a rubber mask adorned by old man jenkins. it is up to the meddling kids in their mystery machine to do away with his terror.
glow more cianigger.

[Anonymous No.6426705]

>>6426704
sure

[Anonymous No.6426712]

>>6426669
>>6426702
>>6426705
>>6426704

>Sometimes when people meet they argue and misunderstand each other because they think they are having a contradiction when they are only being contrary. For example, I can say the wall is ten feet tall and you can say the wall is red, and we can argue all day thinking we are having a contradiction when actually we are only being contrary. When people argue, when one offers a thesis and the other offers and antithesis, we say there is a contradiction and hope that if we argue long enough, provided that we agree on one premise, we can have some kind of synthesis.

t. Huey P. Newton (November 18 1970)

[Anonymous No.6426733]

>>6426668
lol it already is fucking with your generators. It does train in real time and there's proof of it. You can't do "Artstation daily" anymore because there's no art to grift from.
>b-b-but muh database
Okay, the database is stored full of illegally scraped images from japanese fanart to real childrens faces. It's illegal and that database, no matter how hard you fags try to hide it behind private companies, is not exempt from the law. Nobody opted in and it was purposefully rolled out this way, therefore nobody's image can be held hostage like you claim.

Also, let's say you do have a database of thousands of images from the modern internet. Okay. Now that artists are aware of what you're doing, there's no one to steal from anymore. All the art you've stolen is only going to be from this decade. You've effectively destroyed digital art for the next decade. Artists are going to hide it in cloistered little communities or not post it at all. No more new data = a stagnant art database. But hey, you can keep generating the same Genshin Impact characters for decades to come. I'm sure that won't get stale for you subscribers.

[Anonymous No.6426745]

>>6426584
>If I can make the image difficult for people to download, then it will be difficult for the scraper to use or download as well?
You have to make it difficult to be looked at.
It doesn't need to download anything.
If it shows up in a google search, it can be learned.

[Anonymous No.6426750]

>>6422647
Good morning sirs. I am going to add toilets to all my paintings of anime girls floating in voids and there is nothing you can poo to stop me.

[Anonymous No.6426752]

>>6426694
The analogies of art to old technologies is legit retarded and are made by people that have no understanding of art. Innovation in art occurs in the realm of form and content, not the means of production.

[Anonymous No.6426754]

>>6426733
>lol it already is fucking with your generators. It does train in real time and there's proof of it.
>Proof of it
I refuse to believe this isn't a troll or maybe people are really this retarded. You do realize that any AI model that's out their is already "trained", you can literally run it locally offline on your machine if you wish.

The actual "models" themselves are not attached to any real time database. LAION is just a source to train on. Fucking with the datasets will just make future AI models more biased to the stuff they already previously trained on.

[Anonymous No.6426759]

>>6426733
>Private companies
LAION5b is an opensource research organization.

https://rom1504.github.io/clip-retrieval/?back=https%3A%2F%2Fknn5.laion.ai&index=laion5B&useMclip=false

[Anonymous No.6426763]

>>6426669
>>6426693
>>6426712
huh, could it really be... a based Marxist?

[Anonymous No.6426769]

>>6426662
Right, so no seed, no AI. Correct?

[Anonymous No.6426775]

>>6426769
I'm pretty sure the seed can be anything... it's like a minecraft world seed.

[Anonymous No.6426778]

>>6426769
yes? or can just input gibberish and it would do pretty much the same thing. When use the img2img function you basically replace that random noise with an existing image.

[Anonymous No.6426785]

>>6426778
Can you do it for free?

[Anonymous No.6426793]

>>6426785
Yes...

[Anonymous No.6426831]

>>6422647
Never post your stuff online ever again, not even on patreon or other services.

[Anonymous No.6426854]

>>6426759
It's an "open source" that harvest then puts them into private companies, chud. They then charge subs and profit off the backs of artists who they refuse to pay. Who do you think you're fooling on /ic/.

[Anonymous No.6426865]

>>6426831
Put everything behind a paywall, at least if you already have some amount of followers/prior commissioners, because that way you get some compensation before Rajeet tries to profit from it. If you're trying to build a fanbase, then I really don't know what to suggest.

[Anonymous No.6426879]

>>6426754
>I refuse to believe this isn't a troll or maybe people are really this retarded.
different anon here, admittedly a retard when it comes to tech.
So this means the data is "set" once a version of Stable Diffusion is released? And whenever the next version is released, it has an updated dataset? So if you stay with an earlier version, you're stuck with an old set of images?
Just legitimately curious.

[Anonymous No.6426887]

>>6426879
>a is "set" once a version of Stable Diffusion is released? And whenever the next version is released, it has an updated dataset? So if you stay with an earlier version, you're stuck with an old set of images?
>Just legitimately curious.
Yes basically, there was a whole nothing burger controversy with the new stable diffusion model being lobotomized for NSFW which didn't really work because it still had the older weights.
Also it doesn't use a set of images to reference generations, it may have an "essence" of little coherence to an existing work but it doesn't contain any image data. Part of one reason why artists who repeat this lie are retards and have little to no idea how AI works. The actual model literally like 7gbs with all that training weight.
So shit happening right now in the present like the Artstation asshurt has no bearing on anything you generate.

[Anonymous No.6426888]

>>6426887
>So shit happening right now in the present like the Artstation asshurt has no bearing on anything you generate.
But if artists continue to flood platforms with protest images and take their work off it will effect future models, correct?

[Anonymous No.6426895]

Started watermarking my stuff, just to be safe.

[Anonymous No.6426897]

>>6426888
Even less.
It doesn't store copies of images, just the information it learns.
It will discard duplicate information.
Here's what the A.I. sees when you feed it the image.
It's just information rather than a copy of a picture.
Once you learn how stuff works, you'll see why that kickstarter for lobbying is just actually stealing money from artists.
They have no actual clue what's going on, they're just angry.

[Anonymous No.6426901]

>>6426888
If the scrapers actually use garbage data, but we are talking exabytes amounts of data here. In reality this pissyfest should it be scraped and not decimated by LAION5b it just means typing in "ANTI AI" or "AI" might have a bias to the "no" symbol.
Also it has no relation to any models trained on data scraped from other sources or manually curated.

tl;dr it won't do jack shit other than possibly backfiring as a valid parameter.
Also I don't give a fuck about the AI fag vs Artfag drama this is a new technolgy that is the closest we have to literal techno magic sorcery (go read a paper on the CFG, the "imagination" setting on AI its near fucking eldritch sorcery. If people are being faggot with the tech they need to be dealt with at an individual level.

[Anonymous No.6426904]

>>6422647
Why contain it?

[Anonymous No.6426905]

>>6426897
>>6426901
So.... It's all useless, isn't it?

[Anonymous No.6426911]

>>6426905
the protest images weren't posted with the intention of poisoning the data set

[Anonymous No.6426912]

>>6426905
Pretty much. A lot of the newer models aren't even being trained on generalized data any more, people want models that are more specific, like certain styles, artists, or subjects. There's a popular furry model that is trained off of art pulled from e621.net (a popular furry booru), which doesn't use any art from ArtStation at all.

[Anonymous No.6426913]

>>6426911
Well at this rate none of my real art has a chance of showing up on the front page.
And it's not because A.I. shitters keep flooding it.
It just seems like people are pissing in their own cereal to spite egg-eaters.

[Anonymous No.6426919]

>>6426897
Yes, but if enough artists take their work off of Artstation and other platforms then surely it will effect future versions. Stylistically it would stagnate within a few years.

[Anonymous No.6426921]

>>6426919
It doesn't need your art to learn.
Just styles.
It can then combine those styles into something new, which it will learn off of.
I don't think you understand how little artstation affects the whole model compared to -the entirety of all art created-
You will need a few hundred years of more protesting.

[Anonymous No.6426923]

>>6426897
>round four
>talking to the AI
this is some top shelf schizo behavior

[Anonymous No.6426925]

>>6426905
also I suspect this post is false flag demoralization

[Anonymous No.6426928]

>>6426913
it'll last a few days, a few weeks max

[Anonymous No.6426930]

>>6426925
>>6426905
>>6426912
>>6426921

>So Let This Be Heard:

>Because of the St. Valentine's Day Massacre of February 14, 1929, in which outlaws donned the uniforms of policemen, posed as such, and thereby gained entrance to locked doors controlled by rival outlaws with whom they were contending for control of the bootlegging industry in Chicago; and because these gangsters, gaining entry through their disguise as policemen, proceeded to exterminate their rivals with machine-gun fire, we believe that prudence would dictate that one should be alert when opening one's doors to strangers, late at night, in the wee hours of the morning - even when these strangers wear the uniform of policemen. History teaches us that a man in uniform may or may not be a policeman authorized to enter the homes of the people.

t. Huey P. Newton, Executive Mandate No. 3 (March 1 1968)

[Anonymous No.6426931]

>>6426904

To protect artists' IP.
IMO training on peoples' style or technique is less of an issue. The real problem is it's ability to learn their concepts as well. For example specific settings, objects, characters, themes.

However I think ultimately an individual should be able to opt out of being used in models, regardless of the reason they choose.

>>6426897
>>6426901

Isn't it still relevant that it's training against images though? For example if someone designs a new character a lot of people like, without it being included in any dataset that specific model won't have the information it needs to generate that character.

The impact of the original training is always there. But I think it can still be prevented from learning any new or emergent concepts (by the scraper). Individuals' ability to train with things like dreambooth would have to be dealt with somehow too though.

It looks like LAION5B works by storing links to images and the alt text for them, instead of downloading them somewhere. So protecting from LAION could maybe be as simple as displaying images in iframes that people can't link to? Or displaying them without using links (at least ones that can't be accessed easily).

[Anonymous No.6426932]

>>6426921
>Just styles.
Where does it get the styles from?

[Anonymous No.6426935]

>>6426931
>It looks like LAION5B works by storing links to images and the alt text for them, instead of downloading them somewhere. So protecting from LAION could maybe be as simple as displaying images in iframes that people can't link to? Or displaying them without using links (at least ones that can't be accessed easily).
That's how the haveibeentrained.com works
It reverses the image you have into data, and then compares that data to the LAION database which contains images it creates itself based on what it's learned.
It doesn't actually store images.

[Anonymous No.6426936]

>>6426932
google searches and pre-fed images.
If it can be seen, it can be learned from.
It does not have to be downloaded.

[Anonymous No.6426938]

>>6426921
lmai

[Anonymous No.6426940]

>>6426901
>the closest to techno magic sorcery
Holy fucking shit you AI chuds are so transparent. This is not artificial intelligence. It's called an image scraper and an image grafter. The tech has been around for a while now. Do you unironically think your thoughts are being absorbed into paintings or a robot is painting these? Hollywood education. Pajeet IQ.

[Anonymous No.6426941]

>>6426936
Okay, it’s a semantics shell game now. See you next thread.

[Anonymous No.6426942]

>>6426925
There is a lot of them. They're unironically coming from some tranny subreddit. Notice the mods are being paid off to keep these threads off, but try to make an ArtStation uprising thread and you will get banned.

[Anonymous No.6426944]

>>6426936
>google searches and pre-fed images.
So the art then.
"Trending on Artstation" has been one of the prominent prompts in both SD and MJ. The Artstation aesthetic has been one of the biggest influences on AI (besides anime).
But from what you're telling me, the model becomes independent of the source material. Fair enough, if this is the case, AI art and human art may take quite different trajectories.

[Anonymous No.6426950]

>>6426897
Techfags believe artists are somehow excluded from understanding how the tech works and can't fathom that people in fact do understand it and still take issue

[Anonymous No.6426952]

>>6426944
>"Trending on Artstation" has been one of the prominent prompts in both SD and MJ. The Artstation aesthetic has been one of the biggest influences on AI (besides anime).
This was because in the beginning we had no idea how it worked and were throwing the least common denominator at the wall.
We then learned that "trending on artstation" was literally just the corners of the picture for whatever reason. Like the 1% of each corner. That's why it's use has dropped hard in the past month.

[Anonymous No.6426958]

>>6426950
When artists say stupid shit like "AI is just a lossy compression algorithm" yeah I think they do. If you could compress all of LAION5b into 7gb of data you would be a billionaire.

[Anonymous No.6426968]

>>6426958
Even if the model was entirely images, it'd only be able to fit 500,000 or so. the LAION5B has been trained on billions.
>>6426950
So can you nut up?
Or will you shut up?

[Anonymous No.6427017]

>>6426958
>>6426968
You fags take random shitters on /ic/ to be all artists so theres no fucking point lmao nor does it really matter what I say we'll see what the courts have to say but thinking that just because the tech doesn't literally store data isn't the sheild you hope it is

[Anonymous No.6427029]

>>6427017

[Anonymous No.6427041]

>>6427029
>peaking
That is so sad bro

[Anonymous No.6427064]

>>6427017
>we'll see what the courts have to say
They'll say "this has already been settled, sorry. Your consent was not needed. If a human can see it, a bot can scrape it."

[Anonymous No.6427074]

>>6427064
Imo thats short sided af pro or anti its ridiculous to assume current law and precedent will be the be all end all but companies like openai have already shot themselves in the foot

[Anonymous No.6427088]

>>6427074
It's completely absurd to think that artists are going to get a payout.
Per generation?
Per use?
On sale?
On contribution to model?
Who will collect the money?
How will it be distributed?
Is it even worth to deal with that?

[Anonymous No.6427090]

>>6427088
How to tell what model is used?
How to tell how much your image was used in each model?
You can't just go to DC and be angry and expect the government to come up with a technical solution for you

[Anonymous No.6427121]

>>6426578
isn't that what they are doing anyway?

[Anonymous No.6427124]

>>6427088
I didn't say shit about a payout tf are you on about fucking schizo nor are the legal issues simply over who gets to profit like I know pajeets are only motivated by money but the problems artist have with ai are clearly more than monetary

[Anonymous No.6427147]

nobody wants to use your shitty deviantart scribbles anon, relax.

[Anonymous No.6427151]

>>6422647
I honestly don't care. I'm a talentless /beg/ who, for years, has seen big artists on twatter jerk each other off. Seeing fags here brag. I may not ever reach their skill (I'd have to play decades worth of "catch up" for that if lucky) but I can watch their hard work, their grinding, and their careers/commissions go up in flames.
Yes this is extremely petty.
No, I do not care.

[Anonymous No.6427209]

>>6427151
I also don't care, I didn't start doing art to make money and ai doesn't stop me doing anything except making money from coomers. Good riddance.

[Anonymous No.6427210]

How is a bot scraping images on the internet different from humans scraping reality with their eyes? If an image is free to look at, it's equally easy for a bot and a human to draw inspiration from it. The solution to me seems to be setting up a paywall.

[Anonymous No.6427215]

>>6427147
>red
>AI gives you green

mein seids

[Anonymous No.6427220]

>>6427151
>>6427209
Based chad ngmi crabs

[Anonymous No.6427230]

>>6427215
easy fix :)

[Anonymous No.6427240]

>>6427210
It's a matter of scale and method. A bot scraping an artist's portfolio and emulating his style is different from another artist gaining inspiration and working it into his work. But you know this already.

[Anonymous No.6427243]

>>6427220
Emma Watson looks like THAT?

[Anonymous No.6427249]

>>6427240
Most AI fags don't even remember what they dump around internet. I made an account and repost their posts, they don't even know and retweet them back.
For pajeet, art is nothing more than shit they dump around

[Anonymous No.6427253]

>>6427249
i remember all 8000 of the keepers ive saved

[Anonymous No.6427256]

>>6427209
I don't care for the money either but aifags are all annoying so i'm siding with artists.

[Anonymous No.6427257]

>>6427256
this but the opposite

[Anonymous No.6427258]

>>6427249
They probably assumed you used the same or similar prompts they did.
To be fair, when you can render ~100 per hour, it becomes too much at a certain point, you should be glad, most of them will get tired of ai and move on to other novelties.

[Anonymous No.6427260]

>>6427257
this but also the opposite

[Anonymous No.6427299]

>>6426958
>"AI is just a lossy compression algorithm"
to be fair, Emad called it that, you know, the founder and CEO of stabilityAI?

[Anonymous No.6427303]

>>6427299
https://youtu.be/YQ2QtKcK2dA?t=616

[Anonymous No.6427412]

>>6425995
My opinion is that it'll be used either for quick prototyping (e.g. early stage concept art for games, movies, etc, followed by more tailored hand-drawn concept art), for beautifying rudimentary art (for, e.g., indie game devs who aren't artists and don't have the budget for one), or for texture generation / upscaling / variation / etc. I do think most of its use will be in the game development industry.

As far as pure art for art's sake... I don't think it'll actually have a big impact. Might cut off the income for a lot of mid-quality coomer artists though. Probably no effect on "high art."

[Anonymous No.6427422]

>>6427412
The demoralizing effect on youngsters is something I wonder about. Not able to get income from art until you are as good/better than AI, which can take 10+ years of practice. Without art being your job, getting that 10+ years in could take 25...

[Anonymous No.6427425]

>>6427260
man.. I love this. Will use it in the future for sure

[Anonymous No.6427436]

>>6427422
Skill level has nothing to do with getting an income with art, 100% irrelevant.

[Anonymous No.6427446]

>>6427412
I can see that. It will probably lead to some jobs being lost, because companies will now need fewer artists to basically do the same work. I think reputable companies (or publishing houses etc.) will still want to work with "real artists" though, so it won't be a complete exodus. I want to say that the fallout will be not as bad as many expect it to be.

And yeah, "high art" will be fine. Sure, some non-industry artists will incorporate AI stuff in their work. But current AI art is basically just a "make pretty" button, and modern art has long moved on from the assumption that good art just has to look pretty or be rendered well.

[Anonymous No.6427460]

I can't wait to see the new art movements that come out of a reaction/rebellion against AI. Styles that emphasise doing the things that AI can't. Unfortunately it seems like I'll be waiting a while until the coping and seething stage ends.

Also I think eventually when people get bored of making big booba victorian anime girls and tedious pop culture ephemera, promptists will start to discover actual new and interesting artworks in the latent space of these models.

[Anonymous No.6427466]

>>6427460
>Also I think eventually when people get bored of making big booba victorian anime girls and tedious pop culture ephemera, promptists will start to discover actual new and interesting artworks in the latent space of these models.

Personally I feel like while Ai art isn't going anywhere I also doubt we'll be seeing any sort of "experimentation" with it
We will most likely be seeing more disjointed anime girls and hyper realism instead of anything "groundbreaking" for the foreseeable future. Maybe some more Kid's Books made with Ai using a more child friendly art style but I don't see Ai art being used for anything more than for where the easy money is

It's kind of like an artist who specifically only draws FotM coom shit, except lazier

[Anonymous No.6427472]

>>6427466
If you went back in time to the peak of the surrealist painters, excised the bits of their brains that enabled them them to physically paint, but gave them a copy of stable diffusion instead, do you not think they'd be able to create interesting artworks with it? Its basically the collective unconscious of humanity's entire visual output.

I think the tackiness of AI art is more to do with the paucity of creativity of the people operating it than the models themselves.

[Anonymous No.6427473]

You will very quickly notice that the only people who are complaining about AI art generators are the worthless hacks who've wasted decades 'practicing' art instead of making it; the kind of people who only make art to get money, get famous, get attention, get whatever it is that they want. They're the people who make art because they expect something in exchange, and never make art because they truly want to make art.
Seriously. Keep mental tabs of who's doing it.

[Anonymous No.6427491]

>6427473
How is a person spending their life like currency in exchange for learning and improving a skill ever going to be considered more of a hack then some techfag typing words like masterpiece and trending on X or the literal names of those you're calling hacks? This is beyond cope do you smell burnt toast? You need to see a doctor the new techfag tactic is acting as though there is some equivalence between a human being and a machine learning model which is ridiculous on its face imagine trying to convince a judge of that lmao ai doesn't learn like a human and no we shouldn't give ai the same consideration as a human its pathetic the lengths you fags go for a porn toy and thats all its good for if anything

[Anonymous No.6427500]

>>6427473
I fully agree.
>Keep mental tabs
I already keep tabs on artists i should avoid working with or give work to.
AI is just another red flag on their name.

[Anonymous No.6427510]

>>6427029
I mean, in the top example, the person is arguing for automation to remove the necessity of labor and thereby give people more time to work on art (which is currently only viable as labor). however, in the bottom, automation has stifled the use of art as labor but did not do anything to remove the necessity of labor

[Anonymous No.6427514]

You will be trained on and you'll be happy

[Anonymous No.6427515]

>>6427258
>~100 per hou
lmao anon I can render an image in 2 seconds.
100 is rookie numbers.
Try 1800 an hour.

[Anonymous No.6427520]

>>6427510
You can still work on art. AI is not stopping you.
But now you have to put actual effort and thought into your work, which makes a lot of artists angry because they thought they could get easy money and clout with art.
AI is removing grifters.

[Anonymous No.6427534]

>>6427473
>tfw you only had to scrape 5 billion images from the internet to learn how to draw

[Anonymous No.6427536]

it's just rolling random gachas.
Outside of studios generating random ideas to study later, there's simply nothing serious able to be made out of this.
>>6427520
all AItards are shameless grifters. Every single one.

[Anonymous No.6427537]

>>6427520
copypasting prompts is considered effort now??
LOL

[Anonymous No.6427551]

>>6427537
He's not saying prompting is effort, he's saying artists now have to compete on other things instead of just relying on technique. Supply of (digital) technique has just gone post-scarcity, supply of subject and composition, not so much.

[Anonymous No.6427553]

>>6427551
Call me when someone loses his job or commissions

[Anonymous No.6427557]

>>6427473
>ai studies works
I needed a good laugh ty anon

[Anonymous No.6427561]

>>6426130
>for what? there was no violation. Your consent was not needed,
What about copyright in the models? Let's not forget technically speaking the only reason there aren't more lawsuits over copyright is because the lawsuits aren't worth the squeeze. But these are big multimillion companies, thy are definitely worth targeting, lesser companies have been taken to court for less.

[Anonymous No.6427562]

>>6426694
>and most normies get to work through motor vehicles
Worst mistake of the industrial revolution. The train was supposed to be the dominant for of transport, not cars and now the environment has to pay for human hubris.

[Anonymous No.6427563]

>>6427561
>What about copyright in the models?
The models are just big matrices of seemingly random numbers.

[Anonymous No.6427571]

>>6427151
undeniably based
fuck artists
make art

[Anonymous No.6427578]

>>6427500
>I already keep tabs on artists i should avoid working with or give work to.
whatever will they do

[Anonymous No.6427697]

>>6422647
i mean, the obvious way to get around AI shit is to post your progress—at least for digital art. speedpaints/streaming art think will make a big comeback. which will also expose which artists are straight up tracing others etc
people actually enjoying watching someone create something more than the creation itself

[Anonymous No.6427712]

>>6427697
Its all fun and games until the AI lads screenshot your work in progress and feed it to img2img before you've finished

[Anonymous No.6427727]

>>6427712
? but whatever the AI produces is still not what will come out when the drawing is finished—nor will it ever be within the video/stream of the artist

[Anonymous No.6427737]

>>6427727
I know but what I said literally happened to some anime artist dude and he unsurprisingly wasn't happy about it

[Anonymous No.6427751]

>>6427727
If you knew what each step is supposed to look like you could pretty easily img2img from a shitty mspaint sketch to finished product to the point it would convince most normies. Eg. Img2img shitty sketch in some pro sketch style, fill colours in mspaint, img2img rough concept art style or whatever, img2img great memetowski masterpiece, done.

[Anonymous No.6427798]

>>6427751
yeah…. no

[Anonymous No.6427803]

>>6427798
Obviously never used the software. Most ai art is obvious because the people making it aren't trained artists, or they just don't care, it still manages to fool normies though. Someone with an eye for what things are supposed to look like could easily do this.

[Anonymous No.6427805]

>>6427803
ok but the process of drawing fundamentally cannot be replicated by AI.

[Anonymous No.6427806]

>>6427803
Whatever you say

[Anonymous No.6427828]

>>6427805
No, but you could produce convincing enough step by step pictures to convince most people

[Anonymous No.6427842]

Two more weeks
AI Chuds will bend the knee

[Anonymous No.6427845]

>>6427842
unironically what is this supposed to accomplish? Except giving aitards more ammunition to meme on artists?

[Anonymous No.6427848]

>>6427845
I don't even know but it's hilarious at this point as they start fragmenting.

[Anonymous No.6427850]

>>6427848
I'm predicting these anti ai pics will be banned before actual ai pics

[Anonymous No.6427851]

>>6427848
The teeth one at the bottom is fucking good

[Anonymous No.6427852]

>>6427850
Is low effort art a bannable offense?

[Anonymous No.6427854]

>>6427852
Considering they are keeping AI art on the website?
No.

[Anonymous No.6427856]

>>6427845
Just pisses jeets off and further accelerates the situation. Also constantly re-uploading their goyslop as your own, it makes them seethe and puts stress on the servers.

[Anonymous No.6427857]

No really super related to AI training on existing art work. What do you think of take existing art work and improving or transforming it to a real photo vai img2img?
I found out /i/Oekaki needs help at improving their work since they have a limited function drawing tool. So I'm going around to the best of the AIs abilities and fixing as much work as I can.

[Anonymous No.6427864]

>>6427857
You're shitting up /i/ too now?
That's fucking pathetic.

[Anonymous No.6427867]

>>6427856
but theyre just having fun with it and making their own meme anti ai pics? I haven't seen any of them seething

[Anonymous No.6427870]

>>6427857
Left cartoon network show right R34 doujin of said show

[Anonymous No.6427871]

>>6427842

[Anonymous No.6427872]

>>6427460
check out jon raffman, hes the only one creating interesting looking work with it, he leans into the uncanny, which i think is AI's strongest suit

[Anonymous No.6427885]

I have an idea on how you could get AI to back off, will make a thread on it later after I wake up.

[Anonymous No.6427887]

>>6427864
shitting it up? im improving their work. why would I want to shit up the most inoccent board on 4chan?

[Anonymous No.6427893]

>>6427887
The whole point of /i/ is to join in doodling for fun, it's like bringing a mobility scooter when your friend asks you out for a jog.

[Anonymous No.6427894]

>>6427893
Don't bother replying to obvious shitposters.

[Anonymous No.6427898]

>>6427885
The best way ironically enough to fuck with AI is to backfeed AI generating images into the database and removing the watermarks before hand.
It won't completely fuck AI but it can Greatly increase bias into the AI parameters. That's also dependent on how they train the AI too, becuase it is possible somewhat now to put shit in and not get shit out at cost of efficiency.

[Anonymous No.6427899]

>>6427893
There's no point replying to this underage retard.
They been shitting up the website all week and the jannies are doing jackshit.

[Anonymous No.6427904]

>>6427893
I just wanted to help m8.

[Anonymous No.6427905]

>>6422647
>artists getting into an arms race against programmers
I know you want to have some hope to cling to but the only way to avoid it is to not post art on the internet at all. Form highly secretive artist guilds and share work only at physical locations without allowing people to scan or photograph anything.

[Anonymous No.6427906]

>>6427894
>>6427899
I'm a CS student so maybe I understand why this autist is doing this, my art sucks too, this is probably the best piece I've drawn in my life. If I were to use an AI to improve it the soul of it would be gone instantly.

[Anonymous No.6427909]

>>6427893
Or you could let AI art have threads for critique and discussion instead of only allowing threads for strategy on how to stop it. Or do you think you get to define what art is?

[Anonymous No.6427910]

>>6427904
It's not about helping others, or even improooving, or about making money. Art is something done for its own sake in its most purest form: doodling.

Why else did our ancestors draw on the walls? To express themselves and to entertain. You should have fun on /i/. Your allowed to have fun on it.

[Anonymous No.6427916]

>>6427909
Those belong on /g/ frankly, the creation of art with AI more resembles the commands im learning now for my Oscp than anything else, ie: python -c 'import pty:pty.spawn("/bin/bash")'

[Anonymous No.6427917]

>>6427906
>I understand why this autist is doing this
He's just shitposting.
There's nothing more to it.

[Anonymous No.6427919]

>>6427909
Making ai art is an entirely different set of skills than drawing it. Kind of like photography, which has its own dedicated board.

[Anonymous No.6427920]

>>6427472
I don't know. Surrealists lived at a time where the exploration of painting styles was in it's infancy. There were many frontiers to be discovered. But now everything has been done. Even the weird distortion stuff has been done. Just wasn't done with AI specifically. I think after a brief experimental period the contemporary art world will push back from representational imagery even harder in response to AI. The school I went to hated any kind of skilled drawing and painting because they said "anyone can do it" so in that regard I don't see AI making waves in the conceptual world. It will push the divide between illustration and art even further until we have nothing left but crappy performance art in museums.

[Anonymous No.6427921]

>>6427904
well in a way you are helping by accelerating the tech getting banned, thanks I guess

[Anonymous No.6427922]

>>6427916
But its about creating a work of art. So maybe it belongs on both? Otherwise digital art belongs on /g/ too

[Anonymous No.6427923]

>>6427919
Yeah maybe we need a board for AI created media

[Anonymous No.6427925]

>>6427920
It's interesting that you suggest that the contemporary art world may push back from representational imagery in response to AI. While it's true that some artists and art movements have historically rejected traditional modes of representation in favor of more abstract or conceptual approaches, it's also worth considering that many artists continue to find value in representational imagery and may continue to explore it using AI as a tool.
It's also worth noting that the use of AI in art is still a relatively new development, and it's difficult to predict how it will be received or integrated into the art world in the long term. Some artists have already begun using AI to create unique and thought-provoking works, and it's possible that AI could open up new creative possibilities for artists working in a variety of media.
As for the divide between illustration and art, it's worth noting that this has been a longstanding debate within the art world. Some people believe that illustration is a distinct form of art, while others believe that it is less prestigious or valuable than fine art.

[Anonymous No.6427927]

>>6427910
>Grug want to be stone painter tribe
>Grug paint bear on cave
>Stone painter tribe tell Grug they no like bear tell Grug go loomis.
>Grug get chisel from Dung tribe.
>Grug make chisel make many better bear and bird on cave
>Stone painter tribe mad say Grug take Bear and Bird from cave
>Grug no like Stone painter tribe.

[Anonymous No.6427928]

>>6427923
That's the only way. The drawing people and proompting people need their own separate place to go. You don't see photography fags whining that they have a separate board. Proompters are only coming here to stir shit.

[Anonymous No.6427931]

>>6427922
Digital art still involves traditional drawing skills, AI is just figuring out prompts. It's like comparing Linux rices on /g/

[Anonymous No.6427934]

>>6427925
Nice attempt Pajeet.

No sane artist is accepting AI with any legitimacy outside of NFT grifting which is already ostracized from the community. You copyright theft widget is working on borrowed time.

[Anonymous No.6427935]

>>6427927
Using chisels to make art is another layer of difficulty and can be harder than chalk on walls, see: roman sculptures.

[Anonymous No.6427937]

>>6427927
Is being unable to make metaphor required to shill AI garbage?

[Anonymous No.6427939]

>>6427934
I was just in an art gallery in NYC last Saturday that had AI generated art by Stable Diffusion.

[Anonymous No.6427940]

>>6427939

[Anonymous No.6427942]

>>6427939
>>6427940
based

[Anonymous No.6427943]

>>6427931
Its definitely a more direct link to the imagination than traditional art which is gatekept by tedious skills. Anyone with the right vocabulary can now manifest incredible art, and I'm all for that. Traditional skills are cool still and should be kept around for historical reasons if nothing else. Much like crocheting and stuff like that.

[Anonymous No.6427946]

>>6427943
>Its definitely a more direct link to the imagination than traditional art which is gatekept by tedious skills.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[Anonymous No.6427948]

>>6427943

[Anonymous No.6427949]

>>6427925
>Some artists have already begun using AI to create unique and thought-provoking works
That's subjective. The only reactions I've seen so far from AI is comments like "oh wow so cool!" and people fearing for a future when tech takes over everything and makes us completely irrelevant. It's all more of the same imagery just generated with AI instead of a tablet or paintbrush.
If you're talking about contemporary kitsch trash like HiFructose and Juxtapose magazine then yeah there's a lot of artists working with representational imagery. A lot of art schools and museums would consider those to not be real art and gatekeep those artists from their circles. I'm sure a lot of conceptual fags are laughing right now because the art they hate is getting btfo.

[Anonymous No.6427953]

>>6427943
Nah there's a difference between 'I actually created something half decent' vs 'I prompted something that still isn't exactly what I want but I'll accept it cus it's free'. At least to me.

Using Github Copilot is cool but runs the risk of making one too reliant on it, which can be potentially dangerous if your using it for a mission critical system and you don't understand what the AI is generating since you just roughly assume it'll work.

[Anonymous No.6427957]

>>6427943
This is your mind on reddit

[Anonymous No.6427958]

>>6427943
Gatekeeping is a good thing

[Anonymous No.6427962]

>>6427939
>no sane artist
>"art gallery in NYC"

[Anonymous No.6427970]

Plus without drawfags how will Internet culture surrvive? Even basedjak edits require a degree of art skills

[Anonymous No.6427971]

>>6427962
Is a pretty popular showing MSCHF gallery.
Don't be mad at me at coming paradigm shift.

[Anonymous No.6427979]

>>6427970
It only takes a single drawfag doing it for money to create a model to produce it for free.
There's already a basedjack and gigachad model btw.

[Anonymous No.6427981]

>>6427970
Welcome to the main motivator behind AI tech. Between textbots, phony articles and now accessible imagen all that'll be left of the internet as we know it will basically be a digital mall without the benefit of hanging out with your friends or cheap mall court food.

>>6427971
Oh there will be a paradigm shift all right, thanks to you techfags we're about to get fucked up the ass with ip law changes. Hope you commies are ready for capitalism 2.0.

[Anonymous No.6427982]

It's kinda sad that there are so many modern tools to help you get good at art with your own hands, to be proud of your own creation, but instead people would rather cope using AI

Ie: camera lucida

[Anonymous No.6427984]

>>6427920
I choose the surrealists because I think their genius was more in what they chose to depict rather than how they chose to depict it. Seems like if someone can come up with the idea of melting clocks and spindly legged elephants etc that will be interesting regardless of the means of creating the image while semi-realistic big boobed anime girl will be trite even if its beautifully painted.

>But now everything has been done
I find this really hard to believe. I'm not an artist but I am a musican and I can think of so many musical ideas that haven't been explored yet that I feel it must also be true for painting.

In traditional art there are elements that simply can't be replicated with AI, you can play with the scale of paintings, the texture of the paint, use that paint that cars use that changes colour or embed other reflective or textured material etc. Its harder for digital art but there are still plenty of artifacts in AI generated art (hands and lettering etc) that I could see a movement based on subject matter and styles that AI fails on.

[Anonymous No.6427985]

>>6427979
Yeah but nothing those AI prompts will generate comes close to this in creativity. Especially since the human error adds to it.

>>6427981
It is a grim future indeed

[Anonymous No.6427987]

>>6427971
Theyre jumping on the bandwagon to milk it while it's new.

[Anonymous No.6427988]

>>6427981
IP like what? You already cannot copyright, ideas, styles or methods so what the fuckin disconnect? Are you saying style should be copyrightable?
Are you going have clauses that art work is for human eyes only (which would kill all art on the internet and digitally)?

[Anonymous No.6427989]

>>6427971
https://nbktimes.com/en/art-culture/perrotin-mschf
So you shat on "modern art" and "dadaism" till yesterday and now that it fits your narrative it's based?

[Anonymous No.6427992]

>>6427982
Literally combine this with easy pose and you could be your own mangaka

[Anonymous No.6428002]

>>6427943
Pretty good bait, I appreciate it

[Anonymous No.6428001]

>>6427988
Fuck around and find out. I don't like aggressive copyright laws any more than you fags but you overplayed your hand, now corpos are getting involved and they're using this opportunity to extend their reach because why the fuck wouldn't they?

[Anonymous No.6428004]

>>6427984
>I'm not an artist but I am a musican
That's why you don't get it. The music field is more rigid than visual arts when it comes to experimentation. Visual arts is so open that they will give awards to sound art that has no visual elements, you don't see that happening the other way around. Visual arts has been so overdone in every way that this is how desperate they are to find new things. This is the conclusion I have come to after years of studying art history and contemporary art. There is nothing left but more of the same with new technology.

[Anonymous No.6428008]

>>6427971
Quentin Tarantino's favorite gallery

[Anonymous No.6428012]

>>6428001
>now corpos are getting involved and they're using this opportunity to extend their reach because why the fuck wouldn't they?
Yeah I'm worried this is going to accelerate a new content control and internet control era that will be shitty for drawfags and proomptfags alike. Not just with IP and copyright but also surveillance. SD is basically a weapon thanks to its deepfake capabilities and now the feds are paranoid about everyone having it.

[Anonymous No.6428013]

>>6428012
Deepfakes are a billion times more accurate than SD could ever dream to be and guess what? Nothing happened and it's has been 5 years.

[Anonymous No.6428015]

>>6428008
No respectable footfag would accept those monstrosities.

[Anonymous No.6428017]

>>6428004
I guess we'll see, maybe I'm being too optimistic. I just see every other era of art history coinciding with a big technological change, and think this is the next one. Post modern/contempory era is done (good), we in the generative era now.

>you don't see that happening the other way around
You'd be surprised. La Monte Young has a piece which is just the performer trying to push a piano through a wall, and another where they're instructed to build a fire.

[Anonymous No.6428018]

>>6428013
Sounds like you haven't explored SD very much.

[Anonymous No.6428021]

>>6428018
Sounds like you never picked up a pencil, used photoshop or did any video editing in your life.

[Anonymous No.6428023]

>>6428017
I can't coom to AI art, I always see something that makes me think an artist would've fixed that imperfectly.

[Anonymous No.6428025]

>>6428012
At least techies will get fucked harder than artists, since all artists will have to do is establish their property(or "brand") as early as possible. Poor artists will suffer too unfortunately.

>>6428013
The fuck are you talking about? Deepfakes are already illegal in California.

[Anonymous No.6428026]

>>6428017
>La Monte Young has a piece which is just the performer trying to push a piano through a wall, and another where they're instructed to build a fire.
Maybe they're catching up to the Visual art fags. I'm still not optimistic but we will see how the coming years play out.

[Anonymous No.6428033]

>>6427939
>>6427940
so what? art galleries and the modern art market is all about nepotism and money-laundering.

[Anonymous No.6428038]

>>6428023
Same except I can't coom to still images. It has to be animated.

[Anonymous No.6428041]

>>6428033
But this is OUR money laundering.

[Anonymous No.6428043]

>>6428033
Stop. All you AI art people are starting to act pretty antisemitic

[Anonymous No.6428266]

>>6427473
>AI wants to draw like Junji Ito
wrong from the very start. The AI doesn't want to do anything, the lazy fuck who's typing the promt is. An AI also can't be "inspired," it just comes up with an interpolation of all the images fed to it that match the prompt.

[Anonymous No.6428275]

>>6427857
In this example, you didn't actually fix it, you just generated a more detailed looking image. Also I don't know about oekaki, but going to someone who is going out of their way to use a limited drawing tool and saying to them "here's what you could do if you used another tool" is like going to a landscape painter and showing them a photograph.

[Anonymous No.6428278]

>>6428266
that's what inspiration is, smolbrain

[Anonymous No.6428282]

>>6427943
>he thinks that when he's thinking about a picture in his head, he really is imagining the whole finished piece and just needs the AI to execute it for him
that's now how it works

[Anonymous No.6428285]

>>6428278
No. Just like the AI doesn't "want" anything, it also can't be inspired, only the human using it can. A lot of people use "inspired by" to mean "looking like," but that's only a fraction of its meaning. An art piece can be inspired by another artist's work and still look very distinct, almost nothing like it really. Responses like this really expose a shallow understanding of the artistic process

[Anonymous No.6428296]

>>6428285
romanticized drivel

[Anonymous No.6428301]

>>6428296
have fun generating random images and getting no fulfillment out of it.

[Anonymous No.6428309]

>>6428301
>projection

[Anonymous No.6428326]

Since AI just autistically remembers details without knowing what they are, and simply reproduces the most common patterns it finds, could there be a way to layer something onto every illustration that any average user won't see but AI might pick up? I've seen that for example AI is absolutely retarded with things like flat white colors, pretty much picking whites from all over the color wheel. So you know those watermarks or meme messages sometimes people hide by making them like, 1-2 value higher where no one without a magic wand/levels editing would notice?

So, if suddenly everyone started layering an image of a huge penis at like 1% opacity on everything they make, maybe AI would pick up on it, notice every single image is doing that, amplify the effect, and just start printing giant dongs nonstop.

[Anonymous No.6428350]

>>6422647
They already stole enough art to make this work, Until that's dealt with new format wont matter, but it would be nice if someone made it.

[Anonymous No.6428352]

>>6427943
This man singlehandedly cured my depression. I haven't laughed so hard in a while.