Honest thoughts on AI art /ic/?

[Anonymous No.6423903]

in less than 18 months it went from just a "meme" with Dalle and DalleMini, but now here we are

scary times we live in, and scary times for human artists overall with how better the tech will get in another decade

[Anonymous No.6423907]

>>6423903
Who

[Anonymous No.6423908]

>>6423903
oh look! YET ANOTHER AI THREAD

[Sage No.6423909]

>>6423903
Check the literal 20 other threads about ai, please go away

[Anonymous No.6423911]

>>6423903
I like it. Some /Beg/s like it. Most pros have expressed their disdain against AI on social media. It ain't gonna replace me. I just like to draw.

[Anonymous No.6423915]

>>6423908
>>6423909
relax I had a very specific question

[Anonymous No.6423917]

>>6423915
it could have been answered in the 20 other threads going on right now.

a thread (most likely another ai thread given how many there are on here at any given time now) died for this.

[Anonymous No.6423918]

I say spamming flooding

[Anonymous No.6423922]

>>6423908
Every new AI thread I see, I purchase another 50kg of fertilizer in minecraft.

[Anonymous No.6423924]

>>6423903
couldn't care less
saged, hidden and reported

[Anonymous No.6423927]

>>6423903
Insulting and repulsive. Imagine the astronomically low level of self-esteem you must have to entrust to a machine the one thing we never automatization for since the dawn of humanity.
If you support this in any way you're a literal subhuman. Cavemen doing finger paintings did better than you 70000 years ago.

[Anonymous No.6423930]

>>6423924
>>6423918
fucking what? It was a very specific and honest question

just look at some of these images, they look beyond lifelike
https://imgur.com/user/kns201

[Anonymous No.6423931]

>>6423903
I like it

[Anonymous No.6423934]

>>6423907
Elsa from Frozen
filter: Disney, large breasts X3, thin waist, could be wrong though

[Anonymous No.6423937]

>>6423917
an important point, the archives have been down the past few days because of DDoss attack
>>>/pol/408526790

wish that wasn't the case so that people could search there instead of making repeat breads but is what it is I guess

[Anonymous No.6423940]

>>6423903
>here we are
where is here?
there has been no major adoption of AI art for any actual major commercial endeavors and all of the early AI works like comics and books have been fucking terrible and only turning more people away
no games have been made with the help of AI art in the sense of creating full standard assets because they're inconsistent as hell, time consuming to generate and repair, and most devs who are so small and poor that they need to use AI art are either too lazy, too stupid, or too busy with real work to actually finish something, just as they've always been before AI art.
the way AI art makes money is completely dependent on the customer not knowing how AI works because the moment they know they can just prompt their own pictures, they won't need a "prompt engineer"
small artists haven't lost any customers because the large share of proompters have to make up fantasy scenarios to justify their hatred for artists and would have never bothered to pay an artist for something anyway
professional artists are still important because even if a project used AI, an artist would be needed to fix the most egregious errors, especially the lack of continuity which is important as the average person needs consistent imagery and concepts to grasp throughout media

and to top it all off, due the ridiculous amount of irresponsible usage, more and more people are moving to destroy or push out AI art from as many spaces as possible (with some having options to hide them completely under the guise of only hiding a limited amount since they know proompters will just stop tagging their art as AI) long before your future scenario of AI becoming perfect. it's about to become kneecapped due to the hubris of some talentless, blind pajeets.

[Anonymous No.6423942]

AI will hit the plateau. Soon they will run out of data and processing power to train the models. The bruteforce approach they're using right now won't improve anymore unless they can come up with a new paradigm.

Expect another decade or two of stagnation.

[Anonymous No.6423944]

>>6423930
>they look beyond lifelike
Look at the hands lol.

[Anonymous No.6423945]

>>6423940
>>6423942
>>6423944
is this false flagging or are /ic/ people really overdosing on cope

[Anonymous No.6423946]

>>6423940
>there has been no major adoption of AI art for any actual major commercial endeavors
and you don't beleive it will eventually happen? you sound like many people in the past who thought
>the home computer will never take off
>the internet will never take off
>CDs? why use those we have floppy disks!
and so on

[Anonymous No.6423951]

>>6423940
no major adoption, YET

that's the key point here, but it's getting there
https://www.vice.com/en/article/bvmvqm/an-ai-generated-artwork-won-first-place-at-a-state-fair-fine-arts-competition-and-artists-are-pissed
https://old.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsinteresting/comments/wosg6v/using_ai_generated_art_to_show_the_history_of_the/

[Anonymous No.6423955]

>>6423940
>AI art makes money is completely dependent on the customer not knowing how AI works because the moment they know they can just prompt their own pictures, they won't need a "prompt engineer"
and that's a problem? people learning the technology leads to independence
also a "prompt engineer" literally means how creative your prompt can be

[Anonymous No.6423956]

I like AI art because it can be a universal reference program. Doing a World War 2 story and need a picture of a tank from a certain angle? You can conjure up what you need. As the artist, you should interpret the image and make it your own style.

[Anonymous No.6423960]

>>6423903
Have you noticed how cartoonists, animators, portrait artists, background artists, scientific illustrators, concept artists, and the other types of graphic artists all have their own lanes? AI prompting is just another lane.

[Anonymous No.6423963]

>>6423915
"What do you think about AI" doesn't sound very specific to me.

[Anonymous No.6423964]

>>6423956
>and need a picture of a tank from a certain angle?
This is one of the worst use cases for AI at the moment. Not only it's hard to get it to understand the exact angle and perspective you want, mechanical devices drawn by AI tend to have fucked up perspective and melt all over the place.
You'd be better off downloading a 3D model.

[Anonymous No.6423965]

>>6423946
all of those introduced something brand new or solved an existing problem
Art already exists, and the only thing AI art can currently solve with its capabilities is personal use cases such as for placeholders or unique tabletop tokens but stealing whole art for that is still faster since a google search takes a few seconds. it doesn't have the flexibility for concept art, but the apologists wouldn't know that since they've never actually worked in that kind of position before, since they assume it's all just low effort and easy as pie just because some concept art for videogames is a little scribbly
>and you don't beleive it will eventually happen?
No, since it doesn't solve any issues and is currently being sent to pound town by everyone in the industries you claim it will penetrate, and the SD devs continue to shit themselves as they keep making it worse for what faggots like you use it for. your current, unfucked version of SD is not going to get better
>>6423951
neither of those are commercial uses, the state fair was in some minor backwater shithole judged by people who don't use the internet and the second one is just neat but doesn't provide an actual use case for a bigger project
>>6423955
a prompt is just telling a machine how to make your idea, but people have convinced themselves they are engineers because they need to force the AI to act in a certain way with modifiers and additions without actually affecting what the idea actually is, and it still provides an unpredictable result.
>>6423956
I think getting a picture of an actual tank would be a more accurate reference, since to be able to generate that angle, it would need to have learned how to do so in the model

[Anonymous No.6423968]

>>6423903
Please report these threads holy shit do they spam us here.

[Anonymous No.6423969]

>>6423965
Adding to the prompt engineer bit, I think if you are willing to spend hours fine-tuning a prompt to get a perfect result, you should be perfectly capable of making a shitty doodle or a photobash to send through img2img since that gives you a more creatively liberating expression of what you're trying to make but proompters aren't artists so even that is an impossible task

[Anonymous No.6423984]

>>6423945

[Anonymous No.6423993]

>>6423984
Why did that thread get deleted but not all the other actual AI shill threads? Wtf.

[Anonymous No.6423994]

>>6423993
I think the people behind AI are actually paying off mods here. I get banned for posting even vaguely anti-AI threads here.

[Anonymous No.6424007]

>>6423903
I think those who make art out of passion won't be stopped by AI. It might be easier and more commercially viable to create artwork using machines, but I'm not bothered by someone else making money. Other people can use these programs as they please. All it does for me is make human-made art stand out more in a sea of smooth anime girls with big boobs in low-cut dresses and surrounded by strange light sources. All I'm bothered by is when people lie about using AI.
There are different reasons people like art. For me, knowing an unconscious machine put together an image from a few words makes it instantly boring, because there is no sense that prompters use a laborous, skillful technique to create anything, let alone communicate or interpret an experience. Literally some kid's Minecraft castle he built in survival mode has more of an effect on me. It's always been the case that machines could copy anything you show them, so there's zero wonder in any of it. All we have now is a better copy machine that can mix and match pieces and effects on command. The pictures themselves are worth nothing.

If this "AI" develops to a point where prompters could accurately control the whole image to the most minute detail, effectively choosing exactly what to include in it, then the process would become very delicate, laborous, and a great level of skill (as opposed to trying again until it looks okay) would again be needed to create a piece. This would erase the problem.
If actual AI develops to a point at which a machine could create original art for and by itself, for whatever reason it wanted, it would again make the pieces mean something. This would also erase the problem.

[Anonymous No.6424014]

I like AI but hate AIniggers. If you niggers stopped spamming nearly every thread people probably wouldn't shut down all of your claims.

[Anonymous No.6424023]

>>6423984
Who cares, even the worst example of replication would still be considered transformative.

[Anonymous No.6424033]

GO FUCKING DRAW

[Anonymous No.6424034]

>>6424023
*forgery

[Anonymous No.6424036]

>>6423903
It's illegal. Not even kidding. These image generators could not produce these images we see today without a database that consist of what we know to be artwork and images from all sorts of private databases they use without consent. Some of the databases they found their images on were clearly private.

I don't have a problem with the tech itself, it is just the way the developers have gone out of their way to undermine artist's businesses in a way they could not had done had they not used their artwork as a base for the algorithm.

They need to purge their database and only build it up from art they have acquire legally.

[Anonymous No.6424052]

>>6424036
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authors_Guild,_Inc._v._Google,_Inc.
Your ilk lost back in 2015 already
You will continue sucking shit for the rest of eternity
Even if some retarded euro country tries to outlaw it, the rest of the world will not, and it's absolutely impossible to uphold for an open source software so good luck

[Anonymous No.6424057]

>>6423903
AI ''artists'' are enemies of humanity. It's simple as that.

[Anonymous No.6424058]

>>6424052

[Anonymous No.6424059]

>>6424023
>Who care
aifags care

[Anonymous No.6424060]

>>6424052
>settlement with authors guild
>somehow related to this
you have no clue what you are talking about and stop projecting

[Anonymous No.6424064]

>>6424058
eh I've only received a raise and a promotion since I started using SD at work
and they gave the AI to me for free kek

[Anonymous No.6424068]

>>6424060
It is absolutely related to this since what you're observing is just another case of a fair use.
But explain to me. How do you expect ANYONE to even attempt driving this djinn back into a bottle at this point? Do you understand that the process can be done locally by anyone? Do you realise how many models exist at this point, 4 months after this tech became widespread?

[Anonymous No.6424070]

>>6424064
sirs: trust me bro

[Anonymous No.6424071]

>>6424064
lol

[Anonymous No.6424077]

>>6424068
Do you even understand what a settlement is? It means the court didn't get to make a verdict. The authors guild didn't want to be stuck in an endless lawsuit against google itself of all things. That is not this situation.

>How do you expect ANYONE to even attempt driving this djinn back into a bottle at this point?
That's the thing you and many other AI fags don't get. With the internet today that would be hard but there are many who are aiming for a lot more regulation on the internet. You think China can't prevent this shit from spreading on their Internet? They can. This technology that you praise (machine learning) is the same tech they use to turn their internet into a dystopian nightmare.

Isn't that ironic?

[Anonymous No.6424079]

>>6423931
>>6423903
when AI master hands will be truly ogre

[Anonymous No.6424083]

>>6424077
>That is not this situation.
That's right, it's going to be even worse for anyone going against corporations backing up this tech. You've lost.
>This technology that you praise (machine learning) is the same tech they use to turn their internet into a dystopian nightmare.
It's amusing when tech illiterates are trying to judge about the future.
And no, china, a forefront of piracy and bootlegs, won't be able to prevent this shit from spreading. In fact some of the best models for anime art like Anything are chinese made. Enjoy flipping burgers.

[Anonymous No.6424084]

>>6424083
You are clueless and are just arguing for the sake of arguing.

[Anonymous No.6424085]

>>6424084
Back to flipping burgers, i said.

[Anonymous No.6424087]

>>6424077
The difficulty is getting ALL the governments, not just some of them, to unilaterally ban a technology that will give a huge economical advantage to those who keep using it.
The same ALL governments that can't all agree that russians are the bad guys for invading another country and annexing their territories.
You need to get all of them to ban it or there will be the loophole of just outsourcing to those countries that don't ban it.

[Anonymous No.6424088]

>>6424085
>projecting

[Anonymous No.6424090]

>>6424087
>outsourcing
I can literally generate models on my own pc. Anyone thinking that any sort of governmental ban (which will never happen) is going to impact anything is delusional to begin with.
It's possible to use a movie or a cartoon to train a fucking neural network in its style. Good luck banning that in any shape or form.

[Anonymous No.6424091]

>>6424052
Do AI shills even read their own arguments? Maybe they really do have just a neural network in their heads.

[Anonymous No.6424092]

>>6424091
> have a neural network in their heads

we do but seems that you don't

[Anonymous No.6424094]

>>6424091
>Maybe they really do have just a neural network in their heads.
This statement is truly ironic

[Anonymous No.6424096]

>>6424091
lmao imagine being this retarded

[Anonymous No.6424099]

>>6424087
>You need to get all of them to ban it
They don't need that though. The biggest danger we face today on the western Internet is tendencies to go towards a localize the Internet. In the future North America could have its own Internet. Europe could have its own. The UK would have its private dystopian Internet. etc.

[Anonymous No.6424102]

>>6424090
I agree, a ban is unlikely. Technically, if the ban was as harsh as the outlawing of cheesepizza it could scare people from even storing it on their computers but it's not gonna happen like that.
Something that might happen realistically in some countries in europe at least, is requiring companies to employ a quota of local artists. They already spend tax money to support local culture in different ways. On the other hand they might just support the artists directly without corporate involvement as they already do in many cases. But I guess systems like this aren't common outside europe and not likely to be instated in places like the land of the free.

[Anonymous No.6424106]

>>6424092
Sorry to hear that, pal.

[Anonymous No.6424110]

>>6424099
Unlikely to happen outside dictatorships like China. You really do need massive surveillance and enforcement if you don't want people just tunnel traffic between global and local internet.

[Anonymous No.6424111]

>>6423940
I can't help but think the retarded animosity towards artists is some 3d chess guerilla warfare trying to get AI banned.

[Anonymous No.6424117]

>>6424102
I think artists with a strong "brand" and close-knit community are are likely to survive, because for their supporters they themselves as people are almost of equal importance (if not more so) than their output.
So far AI can only do "in the style of." So if you have a unique style, you're still the original, even if the AI is able to copy you.

[Anonymous No.6424122]

>>6424117
there will be no new artsits if everething go in this way

[Anonymous No.6424123]

>>6423903
Lazy faggot

[Anonymous No.6424124]

>>6424110
>You really do need massive surveillance and enforcement if you don't want people just tunnel traffic between global and local internet.
That's where the wonders of machine learning, its pattern recognition and modern hardware comes in.

Don't believe for a second that future surveillance options wont far surpass what we got today. Something like a VPN may not be a good solution in the future. All it takes is for machine learning to recognize an unusual high amount of traffic towards a private unidentified source and then throttle it or shut it down.

[Anonymous No.6424126]

>>6424123
Of course it's written by an NFTtard that also an AItard kek

[Anonymous No.6424127]

>>6424122
Nah

[Anonymous No.6424130]

>>6424127

[Anonymous No.6424137]

>>6424052
Google Books had a good case for being a public service, scanning mostly books already in public domain and offering only summaries or excerpts of those that were not, making them easily searchable online. While Google did do it for commercial profit, a large part of their argument was that it was in neither a replacement nor substitute for the original copyrighted material and the added search functionality was great enough to constitute transformative use.
An equivalent to AI generation would have been Google taking copyrighted material and selling it off as their own after running it through AI algorithms, on bookshelves next to the actual books they 'referenced'. AI generated artworks being displayed and sold on the same websites they scrape from - in the exact same style - at low prices and great amounts due to the huge difference in production time needed.
TLDR; AI 'artists' don't have a case as good as Google's.
Not that it matters though. The Pandora's Box IS open. AI being capable of stealing the style of the best artists in the world, for significantly less experience, time and effort required, will definitely negatively impact the value of digital artists - what we don't know is how much. How much further can AI improve? Will it ever fix those fucking hands?

[Anonymous No.6424150]

>>6424122
that picture on the right seems to be pretty old, I looked at her website and her recent stuff is much better. Anyway, my point is that if I was a fan of her style I would rather support her than type in some keywords.

Also, this shows the limitation that I talked about: AI can only do "in the style of." Sure, humans get influenced by the thing they learn from, but most still develop distinct styles. Until AI learns to develop its own consistent personalities with clearly defined styles, it will always be just a way to make cheap derivatives of the original human work.

[Anonymous No.6424151]

>>6424052
>banning cheese pizza is pointless because anyone can post it

[Anonymous No.6424154]

>>6423903
i would scroll past every single one of these images, be they made by human or machine learning...

[Anonymous No.6424156]

>>6424117
It can also mix different styles and effects to create new things that don't directly resemble any one artist. Although I don't really use artists names much in my own prompts. I do feel it's a bit in bad taste to use AI just to synthesize other people's individual styles. It has so much potential to create never seen things that couldn't be easily replicated by a human artist.
My personal interest lately has been using it to make these nearly photorealistic images that have a weird uncanny valley effect when you look closely. A form of hyperrealism I guess. Bstaber is a pretty good model for it. You could probably recreate this sort of style with a combination of photos and image manipulation and CG but those are just other technologies. No human artist paints like this.

[Anonymous No.6424157]

>>6424122
>by Kelly McWhatever
lol nope.
>by Image Generator
fixed

[Anonymous No.6424158]

REEEEEEEE WHY ARE YOU STILL DRAWING YOU'RE MAKING MY JOB HARDER FOR ME

[Anonymous No.6424172]

>>6423945
Two right feet

[Anonymous No.6424176]

>>6423915
You had a question that's asked (literally) every fucking day.

[Anonymous No.6424177]

>>6423903
I saw a comparison between our current situation with AI art and what happened to dressmakers or carpenters during the industrial revolution. Alternatively, there is the comparison of portrait artists arguably getting shafted by the invention of the camera. Mass production beats artistic value and effort, unfortunately, but it seems like it's another job soon to be claimed by technology advancing

[Anonymous No.6424180]

>>6424177
Kill yourself redditor

[Anonymous No.6424181]

>>6424150
>fan of her style I would rather support her
bc she is already here, has time to become artist
i say that there will be no new artists, this generation is last
every new will be copied by machine, and bullied like this one>>6424130

[Anonymous No.6424187]

>>6424177
It's not comparable at all to any situation you mentioned. Ai isn't the automation of quality art. The art equivalent of automated furniture or clothing making would be prints over handpainted.

[Anonymous No.6424188]

>>6424180
You are like a dog which barks because it does not know how to speak

[Anonymous No.6424189]

>>6424181
honestly prob draw more for causes since AI faggets tend to be self absorbed bitches for the most part

[Anonymous No.6424192]

>>6424172
and 6 toes on one foot.

[Anonymous No.6424200]

>>6424181
Nah there will be still more than enough people who enjoy the process of drawing and painting, even if it's not the most optimized and most inefficient way to do things. AI will copy their styles, but they will still be their styles.

[Anonymous No.6424206]

>other ai spam threads got deleted before 10 posts
>this one somehow didn't
???

[Anonymous No.6424216]

I never realized until a few months ago how much the normies hate artists. There are countless posters on /pol/ and reddit relishing over our situation, and who take great pleasure in the suffering of poorfag artists. The hate from /pol/ and other conservatives surprised me most of all. Ted Kaczynski was right about them. For 25 years I’ve been drawing for the fun of it, and never made a dollar off of my work, and I’ll continue doing so, let everyone be damned.

[Anonymous No.6424222]

>>6424216
>The hate from /pol/ and other conservatives
I always assumed these were the people who jacked off to classical art because "muh effort and skill." I guess they just enjoyed the aesthetic and not the actual mastery

[Anonymous No.6424225]

>>6424222
Possibly something to do with left-leaning artists being very prominent in media, especially in recent years. /pol/tards see all the wokeist shit and blame it on artists in general I guess.
They think AI is going to make the corporations produce less woke material. They're mistaken.

[Anonymous No.6424226]

>>6424216
>normies hate artists
They dont hate artists, they are envious of people that dont hate their jobs and work 9 to 5

[Anonymous No.6424236]

>>6424216
>The hate from /pol/ and other conservatives surprised me most of all.
These 'conservatives' don't want to conserve anything at all. They don't really care about tradition either. They're throwing the entire canon of European art into a meat grinder for some anime tiddies. Then they have the nerve to bitch about globohomo when they're the NPC consoomers sucking globohomo off.

[Anonymous No.6424248]

>>6424226
>meanwhile 95% of /ic/ complaining about having to draw
>twitter artists crying about how difficult it is
I don't think people perceive artists as people with successful jobs

[Anonymous No.6424249]

>>6423903
Probably the biggest and the most massive theft in the entire art history

[Anonymous No.6424252]

>>6424156
Is the missing leg intended or just something that'll be edited in?

[Anonymous No.6424254]

>>6423903
I'd say spamming/flooding

[Anonymous No.6424256]

>>6424036
The issue is the ai weights don't really have a database, sure they train on a database of images but they have not data that could be extracted as such. If that was the case that would 100% be photobashing and theft. At that point it really would be AI just a fancy image search that photobashes.

[Anonymous No.6424258]

>>6424216
/pol/tards and redditors aren't normies, they don't even deserve human rights

[Anonymous No.6424259]

>>6423915
>>6423930
This looks like trained on Hollywood movies, how long before they take care of this and sue mj into oblivion?

[Anonymous No.6424261]

>>6424248

[Anonymous No.6424263]

>>6424156
Sure it can do mix of different existing styles, but can it keep that mix of styles consistent and incorporate things that go beyond aesthetic?

> I don't really use artists names much in my own prompts. I do feel it's a bit in bad taste to use AI just to synthesize other people's individual styles.
Based. It would be nice if more people thought like this. I do think that AI art can be interesting, it's the "I'm (technically not) ripping you off" part that's really aggravating.

[Anonymous No.6424264]

>>6424216
Stop being a fucking crybaby, as of now not a single artist has lost out to AI or been fired from a commercial job because of it.
You act like the art holocaust is already happening and yet the ovens haven't even been fired up.
I'm so glad I'm a Trad artist.

[Anonymous No.6424269]

>>6424256
Of course they have databases or the programs couldn't work. It's just that you as the user don't have access to them. You would need developer access to unpack those types of files. There are a horde of hidden image files sorted into categories that users might prompt for.

The image generator doesn't have an algorithm for how to draw anything. All it can do is merge sources.

[Anonymous No.6424284]

>>6424264
>Stop being a fucking crybaby
true

[Anonymous No.6424286]

>>6424269
What the hell ate you talking about the database that image generation AI incuding Imagen, Stable-D and Dalle use is called a LAION 5b. >https://laion.ai/
It was a join project between Google and some krauts.
What I mean is for example Dalle or stable diffusion the actual AI files themselves have no image data within them. Like you can't extract a bitmap image from AI of the moral Lisa for example. It's trained on real art don't get me wrong but that doesn't carry over to the actually model.
A good argument is to ask is AI training fairuse?

[Anonymous No.6424298]

>>6424286
>A good argument is to ask is AI training fairuse?
I believe according to current laws it is, at least in the US. Depending on how far-reaching the effects of the tech are, there is a chance of the interpretation being changed though I guess.

[Anonymous No.6424300]

>>6424252
I'd been debating whether to img2img that part or not.
>>6424263
>Sure it can do mix of different existing styles, but can it keep that mix of styles consistent and incorporate things that go beyond aesthetic?
There's something called hypernetworks that can be trained on styles, but like most things about AI I find it a bit unreliable and inconsistent and haven't gotten really good results with it.
On the other hand the speed of generation is so fast you can sort of just brute force through the randomness to get what you want.

[Anonymous No.6424303]

>>6423903
its a meme because its a novelty that normies got bored of until the next weird thing

to people who care about art, they'll never care about what a robot has to say

only indians and nft retards think its worth a damn beyond novelty

[Anonymous No.6424309]

>>6424286
There have been examples of people asking it to draw an Afghan girl where it copied the famous photo of the Afghan girl with the green eyes down to the correct angle of the pose even if you as the user didn't load that image into it. It did that because it got that photo as a part of its default database.

There are examples of not only the art style being copied but signatures of that artist being added on the image as well matching where they are on a real image that looks remarkably like the on the image generator made.

Now you tell me. Are those just freak accidents that defy the odds or are they using those images without the permission of the owner.

[Anonymous No.6424311]

>110 replies
I don't understand why /ic/ hasn't collectively decided to ignore these threads.

It's the same fucking arguments back and forth. Don't you get tired? Imagine if you spent that time drawing and making art instead of seething and replying to ai losers trying to rile you up. Even twitter artists are unironically doing more to "stop ai" than you lot.

[Anonymous No.6424312]

>>6423903
>how better the tech will get in another decade

>decade

>2 more weeks bros...

>“Present-day AI is still not truly intelligent, not because it is made of materials and building blocks that are different from those of the human brain, but because it is designed to solve the problems chosen by humans.”

>https://bdtechtalks.com/2021/11/15/birth-of-intelligence-book-review/#:~:text=%E2%80%9CPresent%2Dday%20AI%20is%20still,by%20humans%2C%E2%80%9D%20Lee%20writes.

I'm so sorry anons, but AI will never replace human artists, a freaking dog is smarter than AI.

[Anonymous No.6424321]

>>6424309
No they aren't freak accidents it a result of bias in the database which by no surprised made by humans.
The AI doesn't know what a signature is other than "painting, traditional" = look like this.
It's why bias in AI is a big deal.

[Anonymous No.6424324]

>>6424309
It's interesting because the model file is literally not large enough to store all those images. At least using any known image compression algorithm.
Unless the AI itself somehow works as an incredibly efficient lossy compression algorithm that uses procedural generation to recreate the images that it was trained with.
I mean I'm not saying that this is or isn't the case. I'm saying it's interesting.
Procedural generation has been used since the 80s to store massive worlds for video games like the galaxy in Frontier: Elite 2 simply in the form of a seed that is a couple of bytes large. But that's just generated data that comes purely from math.
For a long time I've been wondering if it would be possible to make an algorithm that reverses this process and stores existing data from outside the program as a seed. Stable diffusion sounds awfully close to something like that.

[Anonymous No.6424329]

>>6424321
So those images are a part of the database the image generator can source from.

>>6424324
It could be using cloud services to expand it beyond what the users download.

[Anonymous No.6424334]

>>6424329
>It could be using cloud services to expand it beyond what the users download.
It doesn't. You can use it on an air gapped computer and get the exact same results.

[Anonymous No.6424336]

>>6423903
If ai "art" is art, then transwomen are women.

Now go draw, you autist

[Anonymous No.6424338]

>>6423903
don't care, I mostly work in traditional and draw in a raw underground cartoon style. I hated that over-rendered Photoshop style way before AI came along.
Still, I support any artist working to fuck over the AI companies.

[Anonymous No.6424340]

>>6424334
Well. Compressed you can store a shitton of jpg images with modern tech. Especially if they degrade the quality. Who knows

[Anonymous No.6424346]

>>6424340
Basically what I said, yeah

[Anonymous No.6424358]

>>6424346
No you said they couldn't. I'm challenging that. Small jpg files compressed. You could probably store all the images you would need on a single gigabyte.

[Anonymous No.6424373]

>>6424358
LAION-5B is literally a dataset of five billion images. Five BILLION.
The SD v1.4 checkpoint is little over 4GB. That would be less than one byte per image.
Yeah I don't think jpg does that.

[Anonymous No.6424374]

>>6424311
Totally agree. Tried to argue with them but it just leads into the same dialoque trees everytime. And the worst part is anti AI threads are getting deleted for no reason within 40 replies. Meanwhile AI shill threads, AI critique baiting threads, psyop and demoralization threads, concern trolling threads - they all get a pass and stay up to 200-300 replies. Waste of time here.

The stone is already moving. Lawsuits are in the making. Support the gofundme if you want. All you can do now is just wait for the results in court. (Which AI shills are going to most likely lose.) This might take months or a year or whatever so just go draw in the meantime and ignore all this shit. Think of all the art gains you will have by that time.

At least that is what I will do. Peace.

[Anonymous No.6424378]

>>6424373
why does literally any of this matter? if someone copies your shit and sells it commercially it doen't matter if it's jpg, "pixel noise" or just straight up copying it by eyeballing it.
a shitty flip phone recording of a movie is much smaller and doesn't contain every single frame, it may still not be sold for money and no one would argue it's now a different movie because you can see some seats beneath the image.

[Anonymous No.6424388]

the only people seething about this are the furry art commissioners and the sakimichans of the world.

[Anonymous No.6424393]

>>6424378
It matters because if it can be proven that the model itself stores the data, even in a lossy form, then the model itself could be a copyright violation.
It's hard to prove because an image compression algorithm with this level of efficiency would be an entirely new and revolutionary technology. Which SD of course is. But that's not how they're describing it.

[Anonymous No.6424400]

>>6424393
We know that it is storing some images because it is able to reproduce them, the bloodborne cover art, girl with a pearl earing, the afghan girl, there's probably a bunch of others

[Anonymous No.6424402]

>>6424373
Are you trying to say they are lying when they claim that 4GB database got 5bill images? Or is it just that you don't understand how they do it?

I'm trying to figure out what you are trying to say.

[Anonymous No.6424406]

WHY ARE YOU FAGS STILL DRAWING????

[Anonymous No.6424413]

>>6424406
mad?

[Anonymous No.6424418]

>>6424402
I'm saying that it might be possible that this is what they're doing, I'm saying that procedural generation could the explanation but I'm also saying that as far as I know no one has proven that in a scientific, mathematic way.
And I anticipate that this is going to be one of the linchpins for the success of any lawsuit regarding the matter.
You can point at the outputs and say they look like the original dataset images, then the lawyers and programmers on the other side will just say they're not exact copies and no such compression algorithm exists.

[Anonymous No.6424429]

>>6424418
They already have pretty solid proof that they are using those sources. A judge can personally see that they are doing it. In that regard it will be up to the developers to prove that they are not. Just saying "it's complicated" wont work.

[Anonymous No.6424436]

>>6424429
>They already have pretty solid proof
Paper?

[Anonymous No.6424439]

>>6424436
Is it because your main language isn't English and you didn't understand the use of the word "solid" or are you just trying to make a joke?

[Anonymous No.6424442]

>>6424439
Yes I understood the word solid to mean there is a scientific paper somewhere that proves the math for what you're claiming.

[Anonymous No.6424444]

>>6424442
>>6424442
>Yes I understood the word solid to mean there is a scientific paper somewhere that proves the math for what you're claiming.
So you didn't understand

[Anonymous No.6424448]

>>6423903
I think this loos like absolute shit, instagram tier
>>6423915
these look incredible, but is funny that the only reason I think that its because they look real, like a movie made in the 80s using just practical effects and no CGI at all. So making a AI movie that looks like that, even when it looks really cool, its a false reality, those costumes, models and dioramas doesn't exist. So fuck that too then

[Anonymous No.6424456]

>>6424444
I hope the guys spearheading the lawsuit hire some people who understand math and data science better than you do at least.
Because otherwise their argument will not amount to much more than "I think X looks a bit like Y, therefore I think Z is..."

[Anonymous No.6424458]

>>6424448
>So making a AI movie that looks like that, even when it looks really cool, its a false reality, those costumes, models and dioramas doesn't exist.
True. In fact, while fucking around with MJ before canceling the account, most of my best results were probably swiping old school shit like the Dark Crystal, Muppets, Ray Harryhausen, claymation, and pre-Y2K movies. All pipe dream memes, because a full CGI/AI movie of these concepts would look like any other contemporary consoomer garbage.

[Anonymous No.6424465]

>>6424456
Unlike you the lawyers will know common sense. What functional idiots like you don't understand is that the people they need to convince aren't math experts. They can however like common people clearly see that it is using copyrighted material when presented by some of all the results that have been floating around.

Good luck trying to "explain" your way out of that with your "math".

[Anonymous No.6424468]

>>6423940
>>6423965
many disagree with you, wholeheartedly
>>>/pol/408661407

[Anonymous No.6424477]

>>6424465
Well if you don't think the lawsuit that will decide the fate of art as a profession most likely for ever is not worth more than a half-assed effort, sure, whatever.

[Anonymous No.6424484]

>>6424477
>they got a solid proof
>u said solid u said they got paper

>This argument is a good one. They don't need to involve math to argue it.
>that means u said that is the only argument they got

Anon, I really meant it when I called you a functional idiot.

[Anonymous No.6424488]

>>6424468
shit doesn't even make sense, pure normie bait, enjoy
>>6424458
exactly, I mean look at this thing, looks like pure kino, but my brain tells me that because im tricked intro thinking genius craftsmanship was behind the production, not a faggot nerd typing promts

https://imgur.com/gallery/4S46qk2

[Anonymous No.6424490]

>>6424484
What if I gave you another (You) just to get the last word?

[Anonymous No.6424492]

>>6423903
the only thing ai is good for is uncensoring pussy

[Anonymous No.6424544]

>>6423903
>artists
attention seeking faggots
fuck 'em

[Anonymous No.6424576]

>>6424468
the more talented you are the less you fear AI. Of course poltards, being genetic wasteiods would cheer this on.

[Anonymous No.6424623]

>>6424468
many also agree with me, so your point is moot

[Anonymous No.6424700]

>>6424468
> linking to pol

> complaining about jews while unironically being excited for mass produced goyslop.

[Anonymous No.6424705]

>>6424172
Those are not feet those are some fish gills.

[Anonymous No.6424857]

>>6423903
tick tock, poopjeets

[Anonymous No.6424888]

>>6424700
bingo, I just can't wrap my head around pol shilling for AI, probably the biggest goyslop in history

[Anonymous No.6424906]

>>6424052
Absolutely brown colored.

[Anonymous No.6424908]

>>6424888
it seems like they've decided this will own libtards and degens somehow even though the exact kind of people they hate (aka annoying sanctimonious faggots with a large simpbase) are the ones who will be least affected.
in short the right is once again aiming to lose the culture war for the sixth consecutive decade.

[Anonymous No.6425328]

>>6424908
they think AI is “owning twitter trannies” when in reality the art of said trannies is most definitely not used on AI datasets. The most most used tags are from people that put a lot of work and effort in their craft, not trons

[Anonymous No.6425489]

>>6425328
I´ve seen some idiots on /v/ arguing that AI will finally put diversity hires out of a job.

the absolute retards don't get that the ones getting fired will be the competent people that do the coding and art, the diversity hires are not hired to fucking work to begin with.

[Anonymous No.6425836]

>>6423984
>what is overfitting

[Anonymous No.6425840]

>>6424484
Search what overfitting is on Google, you absolute retard.

[Anonymous No.6425947]

>>6425840
You still have no clue what we are talking about. Rambling on about math like some autist who try to dump knowledge in an attempt to impress but for whom the point went straight over your head.

[Anonymous No.6425952]

>>6425947
>noo not the math!
Absolutely get btfo. How the fuck do you have the gall to try to deduce wether or not the AI is “forging” something when you don’t have an ounce of knowledge on concepts like overfitting.

What this “study” here >>6423984 found is a clear and cut case of overfitted data. The “solid proof” >>6424429 you claim is nothing more of a nothingburger.
Get fucked bitch.

[Anonymous No.6425960]

>>6425952
So you think the AI just copies posters and famous photos without having those posters and photos as a source? It's like you are completely devoid of common sense. Like a functional idiot.

[Anonymous No.6425966]

>>6425960
Whatever source you use for your model doesn’t matter in the end if the end result is ultimately TRANSFORMATIVE, you fucking retard.
If you didn’t know, most of the digital art and editing industry is 90% photobashing. If it didn’t collapse, neither will AI art models.

[Anonymous No.6425968]

>>6425966
>math tells me they can't be using those sources!!11
>uuuh 'kay maybe they are but it's transformative
So you are moving the goal post now.

Functional idiot

[Anonymous No.6427152]

>>6423945
It's surreal isn't it? I like a good raging nerd to laugh at but the people against AI art are something else entirely. It's exhausting seeing how stupid they can get.

>>6424123
This is a based take. Even when AI is perfect(the fuck does that even mean) I'll still prompt weird shit or just use older tools. It's fun.

[Anonymous No.6427281]

>>6423903
the tech will never make an original thought, it will always need an artist backing, but it will also eliminate any reason for people to seek art as a career due far less need.

I don't think ai art will really be able to go artistless for a very long time, but i could see the tools getting really good.

[Anonymous No.6427326]

>>6424122
Faggot.

[Anonymous No.6427327]

>>6424130
Fucking scum. This generation truly lacks punches to the face.

[Anonymous No.6427337]

>>6423903
>User-created artwork is submitted for critique, and visual art is discussed. Do not claim authorship of works you did not create.
aifags shouldn't even be allowed on the board. it's not your work, you have no copyright because you didn't create anything, you just paid a google search to do fancy math. none of you faggots even come here for crits or have any intent to get better. literally all you do is make flamebait threads that push actual artwork discussion off the board so there is no reason for any of your shit to be posted on
>/ic/ - Artwork/Critique