/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

[Anonymous No.6662626]

>AI FAIR-USE DESTROYED
Supreme Court ruled that Andy Warhol Foundation was NOT allowed to use a famous photographer's [Goldsmith] creative work of Prince to make "new" pictures.

>THIS DECISION
is sending shockwaves throughout the AI world, and the comparative AI fair-use argument used by generative AI supporters has a new context and precedent. AI companies are claiming they can steal BILLIONS of creative works without consent or compensation to train their AI models to make "new" images, music, and media in output. NOPE...

>ORIGINAL COMPLAINT:
In the case "Andy Warhol Foundation for Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith", the artist Andy Warhol's foundation got into a disagreement with a photographer named Goldsmith. Goldsmith told the foundation that they were using her photograph of Prince (the musician) without her permission, which she believed was against the rules.

The foundation disagreed with her. They said that their artwork of Warhol, which was based on her photograph, either wasn't breaking the rules or was fair-use. So, they went to court to get a decision on who was right. And Goldsmith, the photographer and artist, won the dispute.

Here are the details and legal ramifications moving forward for AI:

>Training Data and Volume of Use: Generative AI models typically require vast amounts of data for training. If a substantial portion of this data is copyrighted material, it could potentially be seen as infringing, especially if the AI's output is commercially exploited. The cumulative use of copyrighted materials could be substantial, even if each individual instance might be seen as a small portion of the total data. This ruling may inspire stricter scrutiny of the sources of training data for AI models, highlighting the need for clearer permissions and rights for the use of copyrighted content.

[Anonymous No.6662631]

>>6662626

Trouble for AI Developers and Users: The decision in this case underscores the importance of copyright considerations in AI development and usage. Developers are now forced to exercise due diligence to ensure their training data doesn't infringe on copyrights of artists and creators. ALSO this may put further liability on USERS of AI technology who could be potentially held liable for AI model's copyright issues, even if the AI generates soc-called "new" or transformative content.

Accountability, Ethics, and the Need for Clear Legal Guidelines: This case raises ethical questions about the responsibility of AI developers to respect copyright and other legal and ethical guidelines in AI training, and regulation.

AI reckoning is mounting, sirs.
And if you wanna blame anyone, you'll have to dig up Andy Warhol's silver wigged corpse.

[Anonymous No.6662633]

Ai trannies on suicide watch

[Anonymous No.6662641]

Why does it feel like AIbros are losing so hard all of a sudden

https://twitter.com/stealcase/status/1659583557730287618/video/1


https://twitter.com/stealcase/status/1659584037571248130

[Anonymous No.6662650]

>>6662641
>that haircut
What the fuck. Looks like a failed attempt at a zoomer haircut, but on a middle aged man.

[Anonymous No.6662656]

>>6662626
Sounds good to me.

The more regulations, court cases and optimization, the more the AI tool will lean towards being used by artists instead of by randoms that keep spamming the market with boring stuff.

The ideal case - Artists feed their own work to the AI to produce stuff they'll edit themselves to increase workflow and produce more stuff in less time.

It's a tool that just needs to cease stealing other's works and call itself viable while blatantly passing fences and pooping on lawns.

[Anonymous No.6662660]

>>6662626
>>6662631
>>6662633
>>6662641
2023 is a good year. GREAT, in fact. It’s what we deserve after a shitty 2020-2022

[Anonymous No.6662661]

>>6662626
>words words words
tldr

[Anonymous No.6662662]

>>6662661
>tldr
Sure thing!
Long story short, it's over and you were better off flipping Bored Apes, Rajesh

[Anonymous No.6662663]

>>6662626
read the actual ruling you fucking retard
it's only about the warhol foundation's licensing of warhol's work as a magazine illustration decades after it was originally created

[Anonymous No.6662675]

>>6662663
Actual cope. Get fucked

[Anonymous No.6662677]

>>6662663
Even if you don't take this as "Precedent that AI isn't fair use", it's precedent that AI generation isn't AUTOMATICALLY fair use. Which means to legally use AI shit in your business or etc you have to be anal about making sure all your copyright shit is airtight and even then a careless model could fuck you out of money .

Making something obnoxious and potentially legally troublesome is a good way to hamstring it.

[Anonymous No.6662678]

>>6662631
>>6662626
Can someone use chat got to summarize what the fuck this faggot is writing

[Anonymous No.6662681]

>>6662678
>license image to be used for one time only
>company tried to use image for more than one time only
>got sued
>court rules in favor of image creator
>precedent is now set that even if a tiny piece of a work is used to make another thing, copyright still applies to that small piece

[Anonymous No.6662682]

its funny to see the smug fucks perish once and for all. Hope pixiv bans AI once and for all. For DA/Artstation, the CEO is going to have to dogeza to apologize to its users after such polarazing decision against its core userbase

[Anonymous No.6662696]

>>6662626
Isn't The House are making a rule to protect AI prompters and only 2 against it?

[Anonymous No.6662698]

HAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHAHA

Right after they got banned from monetized platforms

[Anonymous No.6662699]

aisisters.... i dont think i can take another punch....

[Anonymous No.6662701]

>>6662626
Anyway, it is only in American, the rest of the world don't care and will continue to use AI shit. Companies will move out of US and hire pajeets for their art project to lower the cost. There are nothing we can do other than find a real job.

[Anonymous No.6662704]

>>6662701
Art as a job is dead
Commission and patreon sub are almost there.
I'm glad I pick an engineer job and treat art as hobby.
I'm just sad there will be no real art made by human in the internet and entertainment anymore. Art will be limited to a small circle of hobbyists

[Anonymous No.6662705]

>>6662701
Cope and seethe, baby!
Cope and seethe

[Anonymous No.6662708]

>>6662641
>https://twitter.com/stealcase/status/1659583557730287618/video/1
I've been repeating myself to these dumb fucks over and over that this point was terrible and non applicable whenever they'd say 'that's how humans learn, so what's wrong with it being an AI?'... You dumb prick, it's BECAUSE it's an AI an not a human that's it a problem; we have different considerations for humans than we do for machines.

So glad someone other than me finally stated that, and used it to BTFO such a smug looking doofus.
I'm not even anti-AI, I can see many good use cases for it, but if you're so stupid as to try and morally okay EVERY SINGLE THING AI companies did, even when it's so glaringly wrong, you really shouldn't be trying to defend it (and try booking yourself in at your local doctors for a retard test).

[Anonymous No.6662709]

>>6662701
>Companies will move out of US and hire pajeets for their art project to lower the cost. There are nothing we can do other than find a real job.
>Companies
>hire pajeets for their art project
>hire

Holy fucking cope.
Don't you get it Suresh Modi? Even if companies adopt the technology (You) will make Zero (0) money from it. Pick up a fucking pencil or go back to /biz/ and keep trying to make your NFT project take off. At this point there's more chance of that happening than someone hiring (You) as a """syntographer""" or whatever you like to call yourself.

[Anonymous No.6662714]

more delicious AIjeets tears for me. Could this get any better?

[Anonymous No.6662715]

>>6662701
>>6662704
>Anyway, it is only in American
>I'm glad I pick an engineer job and treat art as hobby.
I can't wait for AI to die so all the Indians can stop flooding this board to defend it.

[Anonymous No.6662732]

>it's an AI an not a human.
but I'm a human using a machine, just like you are typing on one right now to express yourself.

[Anonymous No.6662733]

artbros... i think we won

[Anonymous No.6662735]

>>6662732
>but I'm a human
You’re a subhuman, jeet shitter

[Anonymous No.6662736]

>>6662701
The clock is ticking. It's already getting regulated in Europe and China too. It's just a matter of time until the rest of the world follows. Maybe not India, but that's a nation of greedy grifters with no known artists.

[Anonymous No.6662743]

>>6662708
Yeah, it was nice to hear somebody point out the fucking obvious in a setting outside of 4chan flamewars. A lot of their arguments hinge on accepting that image generators are effectively a thinking person as opposed to a computer program.

[Anonymous No.6662748]

PAiJEETs ON SUICIDE WATCH!!! :DDDDD

[Anonymous No.6662752]

>>6662626
Does this mean I get to sue the proompter faggots who has stolen my work?

[Anonymous No.6662753]

>>6662661
Learn to read, underage users arent allowed here goblin.

[Anonymous No.6662756]

>>6662752
You should try. We have to make an example out of these vermin.

[Anonymous No.6662758]

>>6662704
You just stupid.

[Anonymous No.6662760]

>>6662752
It’s free money

[Anonymous No.6662762]

>>6662735
Kek, he mogged himself. We need to push bullying further on this scum. Maga.
Clowns are fun at first but not when everyone turns into clown. Enough is enough.
Also there is a great quote- dont be so open minded that your brain falls out.

[Anonymous No.6662763]

>>6662752
Yeah, if they would copy it or be inspired by it- thats cool. But aiscum should be mogged out of art, we have more than enough crabs already.

[Anonymous No.6662767]

>>6662762
>keeping your brain safe inside your skull just so you can be a bigot
bro...

[Anonymous No.6662781]

>>6662760
Imagine being Greg Rutkowski rn

[Anonymous No.6662785]

>>6662736
You will be left behind.

[Anonymous No.6662788]

>>6662781
i hope he sues sdand gets a million dollars, would be pretty based

[Anonymous No.6662791]

>>6662788
Definitely deserves it for all he's suffered through.

[Anonymous No.6662793]

>>6662785
I thought chinks were supposed to be smart

[Anonymous No.6662802]

>>6662626
Tech illiterate here with some questions.
1) How do you really regulate this? Can't AI just take pictures at will from interwebs regardless if someone likes it or not?
2) How do you spot if copyrighted material has been used to train AI?
3) How does one stop this at all? Target gift cards are still being redeemed to this day. You take one call center down and two more spawn in its place.

[Anonymous No.6662809]

>>6662661
You will never be a concept artist rajesh/ivanovyjcajzk!

[Anonymous No.6662810]

>>6662802
you don't need to ban it, only to remove any an all economic incentives. another algorithm can easily detect if it's AI-generated.

[Anonymous No.6662812]

>>6662793
He is an American living in Japan

[Anonymous No.6662814]

>>6662802
AI is probably going to plague the artist community forever, one way or another. The important thing here is the law is now clearly on our side and AI trannies will have to get off their high horse and move their parasitic practices into the shadows where it belongs.

[Anonymous No.6662817]

>>6662812
Figures

[Anonymous No.6662818]

>>6662626
>The same copying may be fair when used for one purpose but not another. See Campbell, 510 U. S., at 585. Here, Goldsmith’s copyrighted photograph has been used in
multiple ways. The Court limits its analysis to the specific use alleged to be infringing in this case—AWF’s commercial licensing of Orange Prince to Condé Nast—and expresses no opinion as to the creation, display, or sale of the original Prince Series works. In the context of Condé Nast’s special edition magazine commemorating Prince, the purpose of the Orange Prince image is substantially the same as that of Goldsmith’s original photograph
>The same copying may be fair when used for one purpose but not another. See Campbell, 510 U. S., at 585. Here, Goldsmith’s copyrighted photograph has been used in
multiple ways. The Court limits its analysis to the specific use alleged to be infringing in this case—AWF’s commercial licensing of Orange Prince to Condé Nast—and expresses no opinion as to the creation, display, or sale of the original Prince Series works. In the context of Condé Nast’s special edition magazine commemorating Prince, the purpose of the Orange Prince image is substantially the same as that of Goldsmith’s original photograph
>The same copying may be fair when used for one purpose but not another. See Campbell, 510 U. S., at 585. Here, Goldsmith’s copyrighted photograph has been used in
multiple ways. The Court limits its analysis to the specific use alleged to be infringing in this case—AWF’s commercial licensing of Orange Prince to Condé Nast—and expresses no opinion as to the creation, display, or sale of the original Prince Series works. In the context of Condé Nast’s special edition magazine commemorating Prince, the purpose of the Orange Prince image is substantially the same as that of Goldsmith’s original photograph

[Anonymous No.6662819]

>>6662814
AI is here tobstay forever. India, ASEAN and Africa will be the center of entertaiment. Companies will move to those places without regulation

[Anonymous No.6662823]

>>6662802
It cripples any potential for monetization of AI art using the works of other people as training data.

[Anonymous No.6662824]

>>6662823
no it doesn't
>>6662818

[Anonymous No.6662826]

>>6662819
mhm. Ever notice how the rest of the world just happens mirror existing US copyright law for some reason?
You also fail to take into account your kind is not wanted anywhere on planet earth. All countries will follow suit and there will be international agreements made to stomp you out like the dirty little parasite you are.

[Anonymous No.6662829]

>>6662819
>tobstay
>ASEAN
i thought you guys were just memeing about pajeets raiding this board

[Anonymous No.6662832]

>>6662824
AI artists will have to do it for solely the love of the medium as a hobby, who says AI art needs to be profitable anyway?
It's just a hobby.

If you got into AI art for the money you already started wrong kek.

[Anonymous No.6662833]

>>6662626
itt: coping permabegs
Warhol literally took that picture and just painted into it
this has absolutely nothing to do with AI

[Anonymous No.6662835]

>>6662833
damage control is here

[Anonymous No.6662838]

>>6662833
refer to >>6662641

[Anonymous No.6662840]

>>6662833
Lmao it's over for AI

[Anonymous No.6662842]

>>6662833
wait? a photographer named (((Goldsmith))) too the picture. not warhol. whats this really about?

[Anonymous No.6662846]

>>6662626
TOTAL AI-NIGGER DEATH

[Anonymous No.6662849]

AI never had a fucking stand on Fair Use.

The idea that you can break all four legal pillars of it "because much machine did it" is so fucking retarded that you need some extreme bad faith to believe it.

[Anonymous No.6662856]

>>6662849
most of them think transformative means that you can move around a few objects in image and claim copyright, basically illiterate niggers.

[Anonymous No.6662857]

Still cannot fathom what type of severe degradation of the human soul AI-tard must have to have ever been in favor of ai art. Something incredibly inhuman about people devoid of creative passions. Is it really so hard to pick one of the thousands of skills that allow an outlet for genuine human expression that they feel they must turn to literal simulations? I hope ai restrictions can help to guide them away from their obsession with meaningless instant gratification.

[Anonymous No.6662858]

>>6662842
She "took the picture" as in "pressed a button on a camera"
He "took the picture" as in "acquired and used a physical copy of the photography in question"
Poor wording, I admit.

[Anonymous No.6662861]

>>6662858
so it does have to do with AI in the scenario where AI users can't claim fair use by taking pictures and making machines interpolate them.

[Anonymous No.6662862]

To the AI technigger that told me I was gonna end up flipping burgers: You can suck on my smelly fat penis now.

[Anonymous No.6662866]

The individual users are fine, /g/ won't notice a thing. But big professional company users of AI are bit in a sticky situation if they are in the US. So in a weird sense this will probably help small users but prevent the technology from being fully utilized unless a company is 100% legally careful (has a team of artists to make training materials for it.) Very interesting timeline.

[Anonymous No.6662870]

>>6662626
>>6662631
>>6662633
>>6662641
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
TECHBROS WE WERE SUPPOSED TO WIN
ARTISTS CAN'T KEEP GETTING AWAY WITH IT

[Anonymous No.6662871]

>>6662833
> itt: coping permabegs
You don’t know what that phrase means you retarded pajeet tourist.

[Anonymous No.6662877]

>>6662866
I know some of them were trying to do their little grift on fanbox/patreon. Gotta be a real artist now if you want artbux. :)

[Anonymous No.6662883]

>>6662802
>How do you really regulate this?
Force them to reveal their datasets.

[Anonymous No.6662884]

>>6662802
>1
You don't, you just limit how AI shit can make money, and it has been extremely limited right now seeing that major art websites like cintiq, pixiv, patreon, art station already banned or softbanned the use of AI shit. And since majority of AI prompter are totally in this for the hobby and passion and definitely not the money at all, they will be fine, lol. And that's just the freelance market, companies and the commercial market play by the rule of the copyright law, before all this regulations happen, companies were already iffy about using AI shit because that's begging for lawsuit and backlash hitting your front door, now with the regulations, they wouldn't even touch it with a 10 foot pole.
>2
Any original creative work created by a human individual are copyrighted by default, it doesnt matter if they are from kim jung gi or some anon doodles of penises, anyone with a proof to claim that it's their work can sue the AI niggers. Tracing has existed for years and there will always be people calling them out, no artist has ever been able to consistently traced without getting caught, AI shit is even easier to spot, they will always have that signature uncanny perfect and distort feeling to it that not even trained and experienced artists trying to scam their audiences can hide it, they all get called out after a few pics, and all you need to ask is a video of WIP, which is a common thing on most commision page. Now imagine no draw, no imagination, talentless AI shitter trying to hide it, they can't, and if you can't prove that your AI is trained only by your work, it is violating copyright law by default.

[Anonymous No.6662885]

>>6662870
Not even top tier artists can make past 20k/month. Instead of hating AI, adapt to it. Use the money to buy the expensive art supplies you always dream of.

[Anonymous No.6662890]

>>6662885
>pic related
obvious grift. why would they reveal their "trick" to anyone else? wouldn't that cut into their earnings?

[Anonymous No.6662892]

>>6662802
Cont
>3
See back to one, there is little to no profit in doing AI shit at all nowadays and it isn't hard to figure out that you are using AI shit either, you aint gonna fool the project manager at a studio with your amazing prompting skill whent they are interviewing you, you aint gonna fool average joe on commision websites without having the website itself banning you or multiple artists calling you out and the community ostracising you, and boomers only buy physical and traditional shits. It's not even 1/10 as viable as scam call center.

[Anonymous No.6662895]

>>6662833
>this has absolutely nothing to do with AI
not directly but opened huge implications about fair use...try to keep up

[Anonymous No.6662896]

>>6662885
Lmao, changing the word art with NFT and crypto and it wouldn't even make a difference, not even videos showing step by step by these grifters on how to get a gorrilion dollars a minute easily with just AI art can fool anyone.

[Anonymous No.6662897]

>>6662885
Bet you think all of those social media “influencers” courses/books will make you the big bucks.

[Anonymous No.6662898]

>human artist gets called out for applying a color filter on a photograph he didn't own
>retards: "okay, here's why this is bad for AI artists..."

[Anonymous No.6662903]

>>6662898
>i'm a nigger that can't read

[Anonymous No.6662904]

>>6662857
it's a byproduct of craving fame due to social media. we are all subject to it to some extent.

[Anonymous No.6662911]

>>6662857
it's literally pic related. combine bugman consoomer culture with grindset culture and what you end up with are the aijeets

[Anonymous No.6662917]

>>6662885
ok, so why aren't you making 100k a month? the fact you are not means you don't believe this strategy works, so why post it?

[Anonymous No.6662919]

>>6662903
I can and I did read. This was a classic copyright infringement case. If you overlay the photograph and the "painting", they are a perfect match. This has no implications for AI whatsoever.

[Anonymous No.6662921]

>>6662885
How naive and dumb one can be?

[Anonymous No.6662924]

>>6662884
I would add that even training a model solely on your art doesn't protect you, AI needs the billions of pictures it was fed for context, they are used even if they don't appear in the final picture.

[Anonymous No.6662925]

>>6662861
>>6662895
my point is, in this case it's obviously a 1:1 copy with some absolutely rudimentary colour manipulation
and even here it's still up to debate whether it's fair use or not
it's near impossible proving your picture specifically was even used in training that particular model in the first place

[Anonymous No.6662927]

>>6662919
>This has no implications for AI whatsoever.
delicious cope, the excused levied by AI users are getting torn down one by one.

[Anonymous No.6662929]

>>6662925
masaka...

[Anonymous No.6662933]

>>6662925
https://twitter.com/i/status/1659584037571248130
check this out my guy

[Anonymous No.6662934]

>>6662870
>ARTISTS CAN'T KEEP GETTING AWAY WITH IT

WTF are you complaining about even!?, go get a Computer science job, go enjoy your laboral stability, Unlike us artists depending on freelance and commisions. I will probably not be able to retire at this point.

[Anonymous No.6662939]

>>6662934
you are trying too hard

[Anonymous No.6662949]

WHY DID YOU REDEEM SIR!?

[Anonymous No.6662951]

The law rejects you
Videogames rejected you
Art rejected you
The very anime you steal your dataset from rejects you
The world see you for what you are. A grifter and a thief. You are no better than phonecall scammers
And even after all this and all your proclaimed "love" for art, you still reject to pick up the pencil.
You replaced nothing, you are useless.
You will not redeem.

[Anonymous No.6662954]

>>6662927
no one has provided a convincing legal argument as to why this case is relevant to ai

[Anonymous No.6662978]

>>6662954
it puts the fair use claims under scrutiny, your 1:1 argument is a feeble defense that never worked for human artists.

[Anonymous No.6662986]

>>6662626
Based.

[Anonymous No.6663109]

>>6662641
is this how american politics normally work? seems pretty grounded, always thought you guys were more crazy and unhinged.

[Anonymous No.6663118]

Pajeets trying to use AI generated pictures right out of the box without realizing there's thousands of other pajeets using the same AI generated pictures to the point that it became obvious they're mass produced soulless crap (except to the pajeets themselves, of course)

[Anonymous No.6663119]

>>6662626
AI SHILLS BTFO

BACK TO WAGEY CAGEY FAGGOTS

[Anonymous No.6663121]

>>6662626
*inhale* POOOOOF
*exhale*
I told you ai faggots, a death of a thousand cuts via litigation. There will be no need to put the genie back in the bottle, the poo back in the loo
This will be the first of many.

[Anonymous No.6663123]

>>6662626 (OP)
*inhale* POOOOOF
*exhale*
I told you ai faggots, a death of a thousand cuts via litigation. There will be no need to put the genie back in the bottle, the poo back in the loo
This will be the first of many.

[Anonymous No.6663132]

>>6662626
AI poos, leave the shilling, and take your rightful place working as my wage slaves

[Anonymous No.6663138]

There's such a relative lack of AI doomposters here. Whats wrong, pajeet? You stupid techbros actually thought you could take on the art world, which has some of the most entrenched old money in the history of mankind? People and later their estates who will NEVER let their golden goose die?

How cute. How naive. We all kept telling you it was a matter of time before the legal hammer swung downwards, but no, you had to keep smugly posting. Where's your smugness now? Go back to shilling crypto and NFTs.

[Anonymous No.6663157]

>>6662833
>>6662626
>its about some nigger tracing a photography
>schizos believe its AI related somehow
big yikes

[Anonymous No.6663158]

>>6663138
> Legal hammer
Not even that was needed lmao, they are getting banned in all platforms before law catches up

Nobody wants to put up with a thing capable of mass money laundering like selling "generated" art.

[Anonymous No.6663160]

>>6663157
>retards still can't understand the implications despite them being spelt out to them like they are 5 years old.

[Anonymous No.6663161]

>>6663157
Its not about the Andy Warhol drawings intrinsically, anon. Its about whether the law will recognize a work as derivative to the extent that it in turn can be protected as its own copyrightable source. This therefore has big ramifications as to the same law and caselaw's application to other fields such as AI generated works which necessarily require other people's works to train off first.

[Anonymous No.6663165]

>>6663157
stupid fucking retard, go pray for a toilet in your village curryfingers

[Anonymous No.6663171]

Don't care, still going to touch up Ai art to make illustrations based on popular artists. UGH, I know I'm just not going to give you anymore views or having to put up with your Patreon watermarks and cockteasing anymore. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[Anonymous No.6663173]

>>6662832
>If you got into AI art you already started wrong kek.
Fixed this for you.

[Anonymous No.6663175]

>>6663171
>you can't do that nooooo

[Anonymous No.6663177]

>>6662833
>this has absolutely nothing to do with AI
funny you ai niggers were championing that warhol would win, now that you lost "i-i-i-i-i-i-t had nothing to do with ai!" fucking kek

[Anonymous No.6663180]

>>6663161
nigga literally traced the photography while AL models use the data from pictures, do you really believe all art in the world can be stored in 4gb? besides to having some kind of impact on AI art they would had to regulate first google's web crawlers, only few train AI models manually
>>6663160
>>6663165
>impotent seethe
bigger yikes

[Anonymous No.6663182]

>>6663171
Touching up a bit is still not enough to constitute fair use.
UGH I KNOW!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Anonymous No.6663189]

>>6663180
>d-d-do you act-acktually think it can be stored in 4gig? L-lol
imagine resorting to old arguments
>"The latent space of Stable Diffusion model is 4x64x64, 48 times smaller than the image pixel space. All the forward and reverse diffusions we talked about are actually done in the latent space. "

[Anonymous No.6663196]

>>6663180
This is gonna blow your mind, anon, but caselaw is made while the court looks at SIMILAR cases. Not exact ones. Do you actually think they wait for an exact similar case before looking to it for potential support? Thats not how court cases work anywhere.

[Anonymous No.6663197]

>>6663171
and no one will care. meanwhile i'm making money and faggots like you are giving me free publicity. god is good.

[Anonymous No.6663205]

>>6662978
>it puts the fair use claims under scrutiny
how? how does it any way change the legal situation? were you under the impression that the courts never said something wasn't fair use before?
>>6663161
deriative works have always had copyright protection anon

[Anonymous No.6663207]

>>6663205
AI has been deemed not derivative and using copyrighted material in your model is not fair use.

[Anonymous No.6663210]

>>6663205
It has to satisfy the criteria of derivative work to begin with. And that is being further litigated now, assuming laws don't pass clarification first.

[Anonymous No.6663213]

AI trannies btfo

[Anonymous No.6663236]

now it's law: your AI art doesn't pass

[Anonymous No.6663239]

To claim fair use for an existing copyrighted work you need to prove that

1) you used the works without permission, you can't even begin without this.

2) there is no direct competition in an economic market between your parody and the original.

3) the availability of your parody is low in volume and does not shows risk of harm to the profitability of the original

4) the medium is transformative, which means you are not providing the same thing as the original, for example, digital art vs digital art.

Transformative would be to make a poem out of a song or a painting out of a movie.

[Anonymous No.6663242]

>>6663213
AI users are mostly Conservaties. Trannies are just a small part. If you marketing yourself as Rightwinger, tgey ưill buy your AI made art.

[Anonymous No.6663244]

>>6663242
thank you for your input, rajesh

[Anonymous No.6663247]

>>6663239
>2) there is no direct competition in an economic market between your parody and the original.

>3) the availability of your parody is low in volume and does not shows risk of harm to the profitability of the original

>4) the medium is transformative, which means you are not providing the same thing as the original, for example, digital art vs digital art.

Welp, they're dead in the water. They were screaming from every hole in the ground that they were intentionally going out of their way to drive actual artists into destruction, and they do nothing but spam ai slop constantly.

[Anonymous No.6663251]

>>6663180
You just demonstrated you can't grok it. Lol

[Anonymous No.6663252]

>>6662986
NO SIR DO NOT WAHOO

[Anonymous No.6663253]

>>6663239
The 5th one, which is up to the judge, is "are you evil" or an asshole. Which is the case for 100% of ai fags.

[Anonymous No.6663260]

>>6663207
not in this case it hasn't
>>6663210
no that isn't how works
illegal deriative works are still derivative works

[Anonymous No.6663267]

>>6663242
Yeah we know they're mostly the pol retard kind, but AI zealots act just like trannies do. It's easy to draw parallels when you see them trying so hard to pretend to be artists.

[Anonymous No.6663268]

>>6662626
>AIfags are banned everywhere
Based

[Anonymous No.6663274]

>>6663267
wait until you find out how many pol retards are trannies

[Anonymous No.6663277]

>>6663260
You are getting caught up on a definitional technicality. I am discussing whether or not the LAW considers a work to be a successful derivative in so far as it can be successfully commercialized without likely threat of lawsuit.

[Anonymous No.6663278]

>>6663260
have fun getting sued

[Anonymous No.6663279]

>>6663274
Wouldn't surprise me when they hate themselves so much. I guess it's no wonder human haters are attracted to AI so much.

[Anonymous No.6663286]

>>6663171
>don't care

Yeah you do, the whole AI art movement was built on spiting people who actually worked hard. You're such stupid cave people that you don't understand technology or limitations, you just needed to beleive that you're special and you were born in a special time for the arrival of a computer god.

You're not. You're also poor and you're not white. Cope.

[Anonymous No.6663287]

>>6662819
>INDIA GLOBAL SUPERPOWER BY 2020
>INDIA GLOBAL CENTER OF ENTERTAINMENT 2040
>TWO MORE DECADES

[Anonymous No.6663288]

>>6663278
the legality of ai under copyright law is still up in the air, i just don't think this specific case is relevant

[Anonymous No.6663290]

>>6663288
That's completely not true, anon. Even before this lawsuit finished it was already understood that almost all AI work was not copyrightable already. This lawsuit deals with Fair Use claims in a way that *may* be used against AI users in the future unless they generate everything in-house like Adobe is planning to do.

[Anonymous No.6663291]

>>6663290
>This lawsuit deals with Fair Use claims in a way that *may* be used against AI users in the future unless they generate everything in-house like Adobe is planning to do.
How does this lawsuit change the legal precedent on fair use in ways relevant to AI? Explain your reasoning.

[Anonymous No.6663292]

>>6663288
>i just don't think
This is your problem right here

[Anonymous No.6663296]

>>6662641
>benjamin blm
how long until he gets beaten to death by a some nigger

[Anonymous No.6663299]

>>6663291
The lawsuit provides concurrent supoirting opinions on similar artworks trying to claim fair use that have failed. This invites additional scrutiny once an AI case reaches enough clout to enter federal courts.

That said, AI was already on shaky grounds to begin with. See >>6663247

[Anonymous No.6663302]

>>6663299
except the opinion was limited to the much later use of the artwork, not the artwork itself

[Anonymous No.6663305]

>>6663287
A decade is 12 years muddy stupid

[Anonymous No.6663311]

>>6663302
Except it all stems back to the copyright the plaintiff owned when she pressed the button to take a picture of Prince in 1981. And that is why others are talking about its applicability to AI artworks, as at the end of the day you have artwork that is still ultimately based on the supplied data - other artists copyrighted works. I'm not sure how many more times I can try to explain this with differing language.

[Anonymous No.6663314]

>>6662925
>blocks your path
>>6662929
based

It's such a delicious irony that this image was introduced to this board BECAUSE of AI shills shilling AI. And I mean, what are the odds that the image generator would gacharoll KEANU FRIGGIN BIG CHUNGUS REDDIT 100 as King Arthur Bleeding On A Battlefield? It's nuts.

[Anonymous No.6663317]

You dumb fucking niggers, this only opens the Pandora's Box to other artists suing other artists for copying their reference work of any kind. You faggots just fucked yourselves in the ass without you knowing it. You should have left AI alone.
>You will reap what you sow. Mark my words.

[Anonymous No.6663318]

>>6663180
AIgger, educate thyself

[Anonymous No.6663319]

>>6663157
If you need something explicitly against AI, rather than tangentially, there's this post >>6662641

[Anonymous No.6663328]

>>6663317
>NOOOO YOU CAN'T LITIGATE AI THAT WILL LITERALLY DESTROY ALL ART DON'T YOU SEE THAT MY FELLOW ARTISTS, A GROUP THAT I AM MOST DEFINITELY A PART OF????
>YOU SHOULD NOT HAVE REDEEMED THE TARGET CARD

[Anonymous No.6663329]

>>6663260
>reusing the "no that isn't how works its just not ok!" line
Nice grammar Paj.
Im literally getting high off of all the cope this thread is providing

[Anonymous No.6663335]

>>6663317
No. What happened in this case is that Andy Warhol traced the picture the plaintiff took nearly exactly 1-to-1. What you are concern trolling about is not even remotely the same, and if there had been any chance of success these lawsuits would have already happened.

[Anonymous No.6663352]

>>6663317
This has always been the case.

Fair use is simply a defense you claim for have used someone's else work without their permission.

If your work can't exist without the original, you will want to claim fair use to not be sued.

[Anonymous No.6663363]

>>6663317
poo in the loo

[Anonymous No.6663381]

>>6662626
I don't care much for AI, but while conceptually this makes a point as you said, how could you prove a random picture was actually generated by an AI, and not created from scratch?

Assume either a good AI or a retouched generated image to hide obvious flaws like the hands.

You can still train a model using all the Internet, generate stuff, and nobody has to know you've been using a model.

[Anonymous No.6663395]

>>6663381
Hypothetically, if an AI user was brought to court, the discovery process would likely force into the light what model data the AI has been using. Destruction of the data upon receipt of notice (regardless of what the subject matter is) is generally held by the courts to be assumed to be EXACTLY what the other side is arguing for. So in this case, that the model data contained suing artist's artwork.

[Anonymous No.6663397]

>>6663381
1. It costs billions to train an ai model
2. Current ai models have very telltale signs of being ai
3. governments employ “algorithmic destruction” laws to dismantle current ai companies to prevent further developments and humanity
4. AI becomes hardstuck at where it is now
5. Humanity wins

[Anonymous No.6663407]

>>6663317
you will poo in the loo and i will redeem, mark my words

[Anonymous No.6663434]

>>6663381
>how could you prove a random picture was actually generated by an AI, and not created from scratch?
Aside from the obvious things like pointing out artifacts or odd unusual blurring and shapes melting into each other that is commonly seen with AI, you ask them how they created the image to begin with. They should have a raw file, they should be able to explain any artistic decisions which includes but is not limited to things like posing, color, lighting, composition as well as their work process. There is also a program that can actually lift the artists that were used in a prompt, I believe it's being developed by Harvard or some school.

[Anonymous No.6663454]

>>6663397
6. Protective technologies will further develop to make future training impossible along with technologies to detect if someone used AI work
7. Artists will now emphasize giving credit to the original artists instead of having to guess what artist "huehue_r34_123" posted on his Instagram that got 10k likes
8. Seeing as how valuable art is (always has been(pic related)) artists will now demand better compensation and will transform the narrative of it being just a hobby into something one can realistically etch a living from
9. Emad rots in a prison cell for gross negligence and abuse of copyright law
10. The world heals

[Anonymous No.6663483]

>>6663454
>9. Emad rots in a prison cell for gross negligence and abuse of copyright law
I have a slight boner now

[Anonymous No.6663491]

>>6662752
By doing so you're doing us all a service.

[Anonymous No.6663494]

>>6663454
>Emad rots in a prison cell for gross negligence and abuse of copyright law
if this were to happen I wouldn't let it go ever. i'm going to /g/ everyday to remind our resident pajeets where thieving rats belong to.

[Anonymous No.6663500]

>>6663454
I'm new to all this sorry, who is Emad and how did he fuck up?

[Anonymous No.6663502]

>>6663494
It will become routine with making breakfast and drinking coffee every morning

[Anonymous No.6663514]

>>6662885
>no one will ever pay for art again now that art is democratized!
>but you can also make hundreds of thousands by selling ai pictures! Subscribe to my channel!
You should adapt a rope into a noose and kys

[Anonymous No.6663521]

>>6663317
>oh no think of the tracers!

[Anonymous No.6663538]

(I'm playing devil's advocate here, but I don't think this is far-fetched for a motivated actor)

>>6663395
Yes, but the point is in the case you don't know if the user is an AI user. An established business, say Disney, that would be difficult to hide. But a small business/a few individuals, why not?

We could also imagine something like the AI user searching for close images of "his" production on the Internet, and regenerating until he gets something unique enough.

>>6663397
>1. It costs billions to train an ai model
Not exactly. It's a scale: the more you pay, the more the data, the more you compute, the better the model. You could still get decent results with cheaper means. Some small models can be trained on a laptop.

>>6663434
My point was precisely about an image retouched enough to hides obvious, well-known flaws. The AI could be used simply to get more work done in less time, by professional artists with decent skills. Or, assume the case of a small group, most are fake, you hire one real artist to handle all the edge cases.
> raw file
How about you train an AI model on learning processes instead of just results? You could then generate believable raw files.
> There is also a program that can actually lift the artists that were used in a prompt, I believe it's being developed by Harvard or some school.
That's a cat and mouse game: once there's a known way to detect if it's AI, you can teach your AI how to evade it. The new way is learnt by team A, and team B has to adapt again.

[Anonymous No.6663547]

>>6663538
So you're going to hide that you're using an illegal program? And you think any artist worth anything is willing to play ball? Not happening unless they're absolute morons.

Try harder shill.

[Anonymous No.6663561]

>>6663538
>That's a cat and mouse game: once there's a known way to detect if it's AI, you can teach your AI how to evade it. The new way is learnt by team A, and team B has to adapt again.
Trying to detect if it's Ai or not isn't the right way to go. Just make an Ai that's a better reverse Google image search so that artists can more easily find Ai faggots ripping their stuff. Makes it easier to call them out and send a hate mob.

[Anonymous No.6663569]

>>6663547
Anon, he literally caveated his entire post with him playing devil's advocate.

[Anonymous No.6663579]

>>6663569
>caveated his entire post with him playing devil's advocate
Alright, I caveat my post by having a family of lawyers. Have fun getting sued.

[Anonymous No.6663640]

>>6663547
>So you're going to hide that you're using an illegal program? And you think any artist worth anything is willing to play ball? Not happening unless they're absolute morons.
Well, perhaps in the US, but think of small groups of pajeets or chinks to which other businesses delegate creative issues.

Pretty sure in some areas like coom, suing might be more challenging.
> Mr. Judge Sir, I paint little girls having tentacle seggs with gay superheroes analing each other and that darn fellow stole my art

>>6663579
> family of lawyers
<insert some Jewish joke>

[Anonymous No.6663643]

>>6663242
>AI users are mostly Conservaties.
what are they trying to conserve?

[Anonymous No.6663647]

>>6663640
>Pretty sure in some areas like coom, suing might be more challenging.
how? your example makes no sense, subject matter is irrelevant, art is art.

[Anonymous No.6663651]

>>6663242
Reminder
AIfags tell people that ai will raise the standards for art and its gonna do away with degenerate work
but they mostly use it for porn
they tell rightwingers that AI is making leftists seethe
then turn around and tell leftists that its democratizing art
they tell artists that ai will help them
but are also telling corporations that they can fire artists
when corporations don't use AI they then get called out for getting in the way of "innovation"
AI shills talk about how easy making AI is
but then talk like prompting is something only a select people can do
they talk about how much they hate artists and how useless they are, but do everything to be included in artist circles

the ai shill has no loyalty, no beliefs, no toilets, only hatred and greed

[Anonymous No.6663659]

I cannot wait until mickey mouse, sony, and paramount are the only ones left with enough art they own to train the AI so we can all be forced to pay for software that becomes an industry standard while also funneling all creative towards only a handful of art styles! Just kidding, it'll be just replacing my job anyways.

You morons are so fucking desperate to make the spooky AI go away, that you're digging a deeper grave for all of us.

[Anonymous No.6663662]

>>6663659
obvious concern troll is obvious

[Anonymous No.6663671]

>>6663662
Boy that sure sounds like denial if I've ever heard it

[Anonymous No.6663672]

>>6663659
>so we can all be forced to pay for software
Nah, just AI niggers that can't draw. And don't pretend to be an artist. You aren't.

[Anonymous No.6663673]

>>6663640
How would suing be more difficult for porn? If anything, it would make it a lot easier because porn intrinsically has a more limited userbase than SFW art, even more so if you've got the fetishes you're describing here (tentacle sex with gay superheroes analing each other). Behind the scenes, the porn industry is very litigious and they DO exercise copyright/trademark/ip litigation when they see fit.

[Anonymous No.6663674]

>>6663659
two more weeks sirs!

[Anonymous No.6663675]

>>6663659
>so we can all be forced to pay for software that becomes an industry
That's what's going to happen anyway. You will never have a free movie generator that makes films of competing quality. Good luck training your own SD models when personal computers and hard drive storage becomes a thing of the past and all you're left with is a smart device and rented cloud storage.

[Anonymous No.6663682]

>>6662885
>that pic
Literally the same shit as the "You can make 20k a month with NFTs/cryto/metaverse! Trust me, bro!" videos and articles from 1-2 years ago. Swindler bullshit.

[Anonymous No.6663684]

>>6663675
I don't disagree, I didn't say people are digging their own graves, they're just digging a deeper one at this rate by handing things over faster

[Anonymous No.6663688]

>>6663671
Denial is you pretending that Jamal, the friendly mail delivery man, isn't bareback fucking your mom every day as your dad watches.

[Anonymous No.6663696]

>>6663671
AI is way more of an existential threath to us all than whatever limp dicked cope you just posted.

[Anonymous No.6663697]

>>6663647
>>6663673
Doesn't suing require exposing one's identity? (obviously not a lawyer) Some people clearly want to keep those things private.

>art is art
Using the same name to describe Michelangelo's Chapelle Sixtine and weird coom fetishes doesn't feel right.

[Anonymous No.6663702]

>>6663688
????????????

I don't even know what the fuck you're trying to say with that

[Anonymous No.6663715]

>>6663697
>muh privacy
Nigger you are literally going to get FREE money just for BTFO'ing a noodle armed technerd in court. Why are you even worried about stupid shit that doesn't even matter?

[Anonymous No.6663720]

>>6663696
But my point is AI is threat and this isn't moving us in any good direction you retard

[Anonymous No.6663744]

>>6663720
>us

[Anonymous No.6663752]

>>6663744
Got em

[Anonymous No.6663757]

>>6663659
why would I pay for AI lmao

[Anonymous No.6663759]

>>6663242
I'm not a conservative, I'm just a coomer.

[Anonymous No.6663800]

>>6663715
> FREE money
> hey granny yeah I haven't been totally honest with you about my job, but since I'm going to get a few thousand bucks I figure what the hell you know
Anyway.

[Anonymous No.6663823]

>>6663697
>>6663715
>>6663800
If you wanted to get real obfuscatory, you could form an entity and hire a lawyer to represent that entity. Then its not you, its XYZ corp/foundation/whatever fighting the fight. This would be overkill, but there's always an option for those who want to take on the pains.

[Anonymous No.6663838]

We AI chads simply dont care. We will keep prompting and making money of it. If you think this will stop us in any way then you are more delusional than i thought.

[Anonymous No.6663878]

>>6663838
Who is seriously paying for AI art?

[Anonymous No.6663885]

>>6663878
people who believes that a nigerian prince actually sent them that email

[Anonymous No.6663891]

>>6663838
Get a real job and stop scamming people, street shitter.

[Anonymous No.6663903]

>>6663838
>making money OF it
Ripping people off like the scamming vermin that you are, you mean. We haven't found out a way to completely wipe out mosquitoes, roaches, and other pests yet either. So go on ahead, skulk around, furtively grabbing crumbs in the dark and fleeing from the light, like the disgusting human roach that you are.

[Anonymous No.6663960]

>>6663838
he saved the thumbnail lol

[Anonymous No.6663978]

>>6663838
>making money of it.
no one's making any real money off this shit. the real money is in developing IP, and since AI can't be copyrighted it's useless.

[Anonymous No.6664088]

>>6663838
>We AI chads simply dont care.
And yet here you are desperately trying to convince other artists you're "art" is the future and actual artists need to accept it. You guys just want to be seen as the same as actual artists, it ain't happening.

[Anonymous No.6664144]

>>6663643

Good question! Any of you AI niggers gonna answer it? What are you conserving? AI is the end really for anything conservative

[Anonymous No.6664152]

>>6663878
Japanese people do. Have you seen DLSite? C00mbrains simply dont care.

[Anonymous No.6664168]

>>6663286
You are just projecting, the AI movement was built on wanting to make really pretty art with new rapid technology, it's all spiteful artists mad that their effort isn't appreciated or cared about that are coping.

[Anonymous No.6664175]

>>6662885
>Not even top tier artists can make past 20k/month. Instead of hating AI, adapt to it. Use the money to buy the expensive art supplies you always dream of.
>MONEY MONEY MONEY SUCCESS IT;S ALL ABOUT MONEY MONEY I NEED TO GET MORE MONEY MONEY
>GET RICH QUICK!!! MONEY!!!
this why AI-faggots will lose. It's just a poorfag scam. While normal artists just doing what they love and working and enjoying life.
>tfw i work as a freelance artist and live in an italian village
can't get any better than this and NFT/AI riches don't even interest me.
Also why NFT and AI is the same thing and gather the same type of people...hmmm...

[Anonymous No.6664176]

>>6664168
What a spiteful thing to say.

[Anonymous No.6664177]

>>6664144
I can be used to own the Left.

[Anonymous No.6664179]

>>6664177
>Blue checkmark
why it's always either the blue fucking checkmark or NFT avatar.

[Anonymous No.6664183]

>>6663838
You don't make money from prooompting.

[Anonymous No.6664186]

>>6664168
That's you AIfags lol. AIfags are just trannies. You will never be an artist. Just like a tranny will never be a woman.

[Anonymous No.6664188]

>>6664175
Then you go on /g/ or anywhere that doesnt attract grifters and you see people posting just gorgeous stuff for the love of it

[Anonymous No.6664192]

>>6664179
I will try to answer this as objectively as possible.

NFTs: AI is just the newest fad for techbros. You had crypto, you had NFTs, and now we are here. Blue checks: a lot of techbros are generally more likely than not tend to be right leaning and some of them want to support Musk. So the answer is techbros for the most part.

[Anonymous No.6664194]

>>6664179
tim pool is a political commentator who made this to show how dangerous AI can be

[Anonymous No.6664204]

>>6664188
No they're just dopamine deprived faggots looking for shit to jack off. This one poor pajeet can't handle it his goyslop isn't getting externally validated lmao.

[Anonymous No.6664208]

>>6664188
>posting just gorgeous stuff
You mean the same retarded animeshit prompt over and over because its a avatarfagging general? Sure thing buddy.

[Anonymous No.6664214]

>>6664204
>>6664208
Sure bro, whatever you say

also btw remember you're on /ic/ most of the threads of "how do I draw like this" are pointing at sakimichan/pixiv/range murata/cute sexy robots, not even Greg Rutkowski

[Anonymous No.6664222]

>>6664194

[Anonymous No.6664223]

>>6664214
>Perspective? object consistence? logic? whats that?
Thanks for proving the point by posting object vomit without intent.
Btw, also remember you are on /ic/ and go back to your circlejerk general tranny.

[Anonymous No.6664230]

>>6664214
i assume your "picture" (actually just a digital noise) is not an example of a "gorgeous stuff"?
cause it looks fucking messed up and dirty and noisy all over.

Just looke at it you eyeless faggot.

[Anonymous No.6664232]

>>6664223
The intent is to make something that looks pretty but here comes the "well actually, this pixel is 2 pixels off"

[Anonymous No.6664234]

>>6664232
>the intent was to make something pretty, but it looks like shit, people point out and I cope about it

[Anonymous No.6664238]

>>6664214
Do I need to send you an ointment cream now Irshad? You will never be a woman. Know your place.

[Anonymous No.6664247]

>>6664234
>Guy makes a genuinely awful unlikable drawing
>I love the soul and effort and upwards momentum and etc about it
>AI has 2 pixels off or you just don't like the theme
>RUINED

this is why AI haters will always lose, you have to have the most narrow and specific and impossibly high standards for art to hate ai art and then have no standards at all for human art

[Anonymous No.6664254]

>>6664247
>posting the most based drawing to prove his point
AItards are truly parasites. And remember
>>6663651
If you hate artists so much, why are you trying so hard to grift your way through? They didn't care about your retarded generate images on your general so you came to post shit here?

[Anonymous No.6664266]

>>6664152
DLSITE? That one that recently banned AI art from monetization?

You mean that one?

[Anonymous No.6664281]

>>6664254
aifriends dont hate artists, they hate weirdo grifters that pretend stick figures are actually peak art and nothing means anything and Greg Rutkowski's dragons and the poorly drawn sasuke picture are both equally valuable and worth putting in a museum

[Anonymous No.6664291]

>>6664232
Thank god ai faggots provide us with images that are ethical to trace over and call our own without giving anyone credit

[Anonymous No.6664298]

>>6664281
>aifriends dont hate artists
We have a whole archive of this pajeet. You are friend to no one but your wallet and your new tech scam. You literally come to this board to shit on artists and try to sell your snake oil.
You dont know what grifter means. We saw what happens when you let your "aifriends" in on artists circles and sites.

[Anonymous No.6664306]

>>6663171
just use kemono larper faggot

[Anonymous No.6664315]

haha
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Oh lawd I remember the pure *hatred* that AI shitters had against artist for the brief time they had the upper hand. Pure envy and anger directed towards artists who worked to get where they are now.
BYE! BYE BYE! BYE!!!
https://youtu.be/KwjJ-8cOk74

[Anonymous No.6664317]

>>6664298
Nah they're just here to showcase awesome art they've genned, because the bottom 30% of AI art is better than the top 30% of human art ESPECIALLY on pixiv, and tp see if they can make something better, faster, more stylistically or if they can integrate their own art into it.

It's just schizos like you that think this is some grand astroturf conspiracy to supplant artists when artists all shat themselves seeing the first results last december.

[Anonymous No.6664323]

>>6664317
What on earth are you talking about? We literally had posts shared where people were talking about hoping to supplant artists and drive them into "a real job." No conspiracy needed.

[Anonymous No.6664332]

>>6664323
So you saw a guy on Twitter who doesn't like artists and now you think all of /g/, everyone who posts anime generations, and everyone who uses civitai just does it out of spite?

And also all the people buying, upvoting, and browsing it(including a bunch of ai artworks being top rated for weeks) are all doing it to specifically spite the people that... created the original artwork that the ai uses and that they probably all still browse, even if they upload slower than ai?

It might just be you, bro, you're imagining the mentality of millions of people when the obvious answer is "lots of people like ai art cuz it generally looks good"

[Anonymous No.6664338]

>>6663381
>how could you prove a random picture was actually generated by an AI, and not created from scratch?
peak trainnie cope. People can tell when something is AI made, no one gets fooled by AIshit

[Anonymous No.6664340]

>>6664332
>we dindu nuffin
fuck off

[Anonymous No.6664343]

>>6664317
> see if they can make something better, faster, more stylistically

>or if they can integrate their own art into it.

The majority of Ai generated images falls into the first category which is the whole point of these models. If companies can get by cutting out the artists they will even at the expense of training on copyrighted data and works of artists. I don't see how you're saying its a conspiracy when that's the whole point of this.

[Anonymous No.6664345]

>>6663659
the
> "big corpros are disney and sony will have all the power! Openai and stability are the good big corpros! We swears it sirs!"
shill
two big problems with your pajeet level iq argument:
one, it wont be able to use the current models as they are based off copyrighted works
two, putting millions of dollars just to train their very own model from scratch wont grant them the most important part which is copyright protection.
It will be cheaper,quicker, and legally easier to just employ real artists as they have been than to waste chasing a trend with no legal protection

[Anonymous No.6664348]

>>6664338
> Either you're with me, or against me
Gosh how hard it is to think with nuance.

[Anonymous No.6664367]

>>6664348
says the person retarded enough to not realize how easy AI is to tell apart from art

[Anonymous No.6664368]

>>6664343
The guy above you is saying it's motivated by spite, not quality, aka everyone is buying ai art cuz they hate artists, not because they like the art and also saying nobody really likes the art

It's a dramatically different interpretation cuz the first one means there's nothing artists can do, it's just a hate campaign but the second one is that artists need to be appealing or pretty or just all around acceptable to succeed

[Anonymous No.6664369]

I notice there is an extreme drop in AI shills defending their position ITT and across the board ever since this supreme court ruling came out.
The tides have turned.
We're winning anons

[Anonymous No.6664370]

>>6664332
>literally all sites have AI filters
>banned from selling it on fanbox
>sees a drawing, can't contain himself from img2img it and posting
>spams the hell of it regardless.
>reddit hates it, met with resistance in literally every board, even /g/
Even now you refuse to go back to your circlejerk general. There is 4 ai threads right now here.
The only one imagining things here is you. Reads like a real cope and denial.

[Anonymous No.6664492]

>>6664188
>/g/
>doesnt attract grifters
PFHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHAHAHAHSSASASSHAHAH

[Anonymous No.6664527]

>>6664343
>"I-If big corpos can cut down on this-!"
Again, said by someone who has no idea what they're talking about.
I had the same line of thought about industrial automation until I worked in that industry.

See: soulless hentai puzzle garbage game on Steam using same generated AI garbage. Because at the heart of it it's still made by the same people who'd make lazy trash cashgrabs. Turns out you need competent people to make good products at the end of the day like every single industry out there.

[Anonymous No.6664597]

>>6664214
I just love the fish in a tray under the bed with a light(heating element?) on above them. I love ai he is so silly. Ill be sad when he grows up and becomes "normal"

[Anonymous No.6664907]

>>6662785
>innovation
Kek

[Anonymous No.6664919]

>>6664247
>can appreciate a humans effort at trying to make something
>sees a machine spit out soulless noise
Gee I wonder why one gets praise and the other doesn't

[Anonymous No.6664925]

>>6662678
paint pigs coping very hard

[Anonymous No.6664931]

>>6664340
he's not wrong you schizo, you are making strawman arguments

[Anonymous No.6664933]

>>6663278
>have fun getting sued
by who?

[Anonymous No.6664941]

>>6662678
basically.
artbros won

[Anonymous No.6664942]

>>6664941
Future models will have nothing to do with copyrights so no, artbros lost 10 months ago.

[Anonymous No.6664944]

>>6664942
cute cope. have fun with stable diffusion 1.5 for the rest of your life.

[Anonymous No.6664946]

>>6664944
I would if nothing changed so that was a really stupid thing to say. But AI will get better. text-2-3D and text-2-video are progressing fast.

[Anonymous No.6664950]

>>6664946
And you will never get to touch them, they will not be open source. The only use will be by companies with datasets licensed by artists.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1659584037571248130
The law is catching up, faggot.

[Anonymous No.6664959]

>>6664950
They will be open source because anyone can make them today, it just costs money to rent big GPUs. But it won't cost money in the future. It used to cost millions to train a LLM and now it costs next to nothing, you can do it on your laptop.

That video you're posting is just nonsense that is strictly relating to Jews trying to pinch pennies. This is completely irrelevant to creating art which you can freely buy and sell through whatever shady or legal methods you want. Even if your grasping dream comes true and fair use doesn't apply to using copyrighted works for training AIs, nothing will change. There will be copyright free models and people will still be "stealing" jpgs to train their own models and finetunes, and nothing will be done to stop that from happening because the flood gates are open. It's easier to crack down on piracy than something like this and look how well that's going. And eventually, especially when those models I mentioned are released and good enough to use like AI art models are today, people won't even be buying "traditional" media. They will be generating it themselves or looking at what other people have generated because it's good enough or better. And free.

Now calm down and touch grass. You will never EVER strike down the AI menace so just get over it already.

[Anonymous No.6664961]

>>6664959
Nice fanfic there. Prepare to pay up talentless AI tranny.

[Anonymous No.6664963]

>>6664961
Holy shit what a cop out lol.

[Anonymous No.6664967]

>>6664961
>>6664959
I also want to remind you that there are already copyright free models, currently existing or being built by Getty, Shutterstock, Adobe, Nvidia, Microsoft, Google, and others. The difference between these and the model you trannies hate the most is that you usually have to pay for these services and they're censored and cucked. But since you are leftist freaks you appreciate that apparently.

These models are not going anywhere and they will keep on improving. How are you coping with that?

[Anonymous No.6664972]

>>6664919
This is a really bad idea, I think the easiest way to make human art obscure and AI art dominant is to showcase and praise really low quality stuff , not very appealing stuff as being actually gigabased and shit on actually good looking stuff.

From everything I've seen whether it's what's getting sold on patreon or liked on twitter/pixiv or what's put in museums or even sold in comic book stores, the actual quality or appeal of the artwork immensely matters and 99% of people will choose to see AI art over stick figures.

[Anonymous No.6664973]

>>6664959
>it's the future
>AI training capabilities become inaccesible and illegal to consumer level GPUs due to security reasons (deep fakes)
>"b-but muh heckin unstoppable AI god! it's just like all my cyberpunk movies!"
Grow up.

[Anonymous No.6664978]

>>6664973
>>AI training capabilities become inaccesible
It's FOSS.

[Anonymous No.6664980]

>>6664967
of they only rely on approved material, which I doubt they do, they'll be barely worth it. the only thing that gave this illusion of exponential growth is the sheer amount of data that was fed to it. nive buzzwords tho, hope you enjoy your pod. the more you abuse the technology the more you beg for your actions to be shackled. the real redpill is that AI image generation do not improve the industry, they lower the quality threshold and invite predatory practices that go against the sustainability of said industry. I will also add that your posts reek of spite and you won't be amongst the winners

[Anonymous No.6664983]

>>6664963
Cop out of what? Your unhinged r/singularity ramblings? Cope and seethe, you've legally been determined a thief and that is all you can ever aspire to be. Keep being jealous of people with actual talent, who put in actual effort and actually has acheived shit in their lives.

[Anonymous No.6664984]

>>6664972
you've posted this before. and your comparison borders on parody. try to make a somewhat balanced argument. you also disregard the spamming that dilluted your so-called quality and pull out a number out of your ass.

[Anonymous No.6664987]

>>6664972
face it, AI is all about money and clout, the reason its despise is because of the harassments artist get from these prompters believing they're high above everyone for just typing letters on a keyboard

[Anonymous No.6664989]

>>6664987
>"b-but muh controlnet, training lora and infinitely pressing the randomize button"
>"acknowledge my efforts reeee"

[Anonymous No.6664994]

>>6664983
>literally posts a fanfic
Embarrassing. My post was completely and utterly logical and you copped out. You are an idiot with no shame.

>>6664980
>ESL sub-human attempting to parrot delusional tranny tweets
Your head is buried in sand. You can not draw better than Dall-E can. The quality threshold has skyrocketed thanks to AI, we now have MILLIONS of new artists making better art than you ever could. And this isn't me being spiteful, it's me being completely honest because I'm not a lying cunt like you seem to be. Stop lying to yourself and others, it's shameful.

[Anonymous No.6664998]

>>6664994
>Embarrassing. My post was completely and utterly logical and you copped out. You are an idiot with no shame.
Why don't you stop copping out of being a filthy thief and parasite?

[Anonymous No.6665000]

>>6664967
> copyright free models, currently existing
>google "copyright free ai art"
>0 results

[Anonymous No.6665002]

>>6664994
Such projection and concern trolling - this anon's going all out!

[Anonymous No.6665008]

>>6665000
>he didn't watch GTC 2023
https://the-decoder.com/nvidias-picasso-brings-generative-ai-to-adobe-getty-images-and-shutterstock/
>he doesn't know what Dall-E is
https://www.makeuseof.com/how-to-save-your-dall-e-images-without-watermark/#:~:text=You%20might%20be%20unaware%20that,creations%20if%20that's%20your%20goal.
Please try to understand the gravity of these giants backing AI. You're probably crying about anon posting an anime girl with 9 fingers without permission from some Japanese guy, while not realizing most artistic jobs are already destined to be doomed. Hollywood is training models too.

>>6664998
>>6665002
>cringey ad hominem

[Anonymous No.6665011]

>>6664984
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. If you're going to say that everyone really likes simple incomplete unfinished artworks like the muscleman in the pic you're replying to over a finished well rendered pic, I want to see any proof of it other than "it just is bro I swear", because I haven't seen it.

[Anonymous No.6665015]

>>6665008
>cringey ad hominem
It's literally there in the OP lol. Supreme court of the United States has determined - you're a thief. Stop it with the cop outs.

[Anonymous No.6665016]

>>6664994
>we now have MILLIONS of new artists making better art than you ever could.
Here are your true colors, envy. You will never be neither a woman nor an artist.

[Anonymous No.6665020]

>>6664972
They'll only post stickmen because that's all they can make. Most AI artists have more followers than most /ic/ posters so what you're saying is correct.

>>6665015
OP isn't even talking about AI.

>>6665016
Again, I'm only telling the truth. It's not envy it's a fact. You are angry at facts because you are more than likely a projecting tranny or some closeted fag. I'm not sure what other kind of person would be as delusional as you are but feel free to correct me with proof. Post your work that is better than all AI art. I'll wait.

[Anonymous No.6665021]

>>6665020
>OP isn't even talking about AI.
Ah so can't even read. No surprises here.

[Anonymous No.6665024]

>>6665021
I can read just fine.

[Anonymous No.6665026]

>>6665020
all excuses huh?

that's what you get for harassing artist who build their skills overtime while you rely on a machine to cope on your lack of effort and being lazy too

[Anonymous No.6665028]

>>6665026
>all excuses huh?
Excuses? What?
>that's what you get
What do I get? At least try to speak the language properly. You're talking about me being lazy when you speak as if you're mentally retarded lol.

[Anonymous No.6665030]

>>6664994
>we now have MILLIONS of new artists
what do they draw/paint with?

[Anonymous No.6665031]

>>6665028
aww he's getting upset

[Anonymous No.6665032]

>>6665011
I'm going to say your well (actually poorly but flashily) rendered randomized images have an expiration date novelty-wise. you're the one making extraordinary claims when social media shows a clear hostility toward the spam

[Anonymous No.6665035]

>>6665026
You have it so backwards, there is very little harassment of artists going on from AI users to artists but literally all the way from back in december if you posted even a regular looking ai generated work anywhere you would get a hundred people in your comments telling you "SOUL VS SOULLESS, THE COPYRIGHT, YOU'RE REPLACING ARTISTS" and trying to get you banned.

Acting like artists get even remotely as much hate from AI users as AI users get hate from artists is the biggest cope in the world.

[Anonymous No.6665041]

>>6665035
Actual falseflagging. We have archives and threads upon threads of AI retards threatening artists, spamming shit, stealing artstyles and sperging about jobs.
Pick another target, you will not win this one pa/g/eet.

[Anonymous No.6665043]

>>6665008
>he didn't watch GTC 2023
you said currently existing. Which was a lie
> Nvidia trained the technology on images licensed from Getty Images, Shutterstock Inc (SSTK.N), and Adobe, and plans to pay royalties.
So in other words the profit margin will be significantly lowered to the point of it being almost not worth it, while STILL not offering the most important part, copyright protection. And because of the negative perception you pajeets thankfully set,:
>The company also is advocating for a universal "do not train" tag that would allow photographers to request that their content not be used to train models.

A large majority of these photographers will be opting out of this. (btw thats even assuming you even get to opt out as default, rather than the popular push of being opt-in) They will see how lucrative their works really are, and leaving any "progress" these AI models will have at a near standstill reminiscent of pre 2022 AI.
A nothing burger. As a matter of fact, seeing as current AI popularity is based on having the smallest little "dopamine hit" updates, this actually helps its decline into fad. You NFT'd yourself

[Anonymous No.6665044]

>>6665031
I'm not mad you ESL moron, your post didn't make any sense and I pointed that out.

>>6665035
It's a fundamental pillar of their cope. Pretending AI artists are evil and always attacking artists when it's the polar opposite that's happening.

>>6665041
This is a strawman argument. You're implying some potential anonymous shitposters that are more than likely false flaggers are identical to every single AI artist. That is ridiculous. And there is 10000x more toxic posts from artists hating AI and they're all out in the public.

[Anonymous No.6665045]

>>6665035
>the AI tranny is feeling sorry for himself
lmfao
You chose yourself to become a thief. No artist forced into this position and now you're crying because there are consequences to being one.
ahahah how absolutely pathetic.

[Anonymous No.6665046]

>>6665043
I don't get it, why should there be an opt-out to begin with? it should be opted-out by default with an opt-in for fractal royalties

[Anonymous No.6665048]

>>6665044
>Pretending AI artists are evil and always attacking artists
From this very board, from the same retards that spam this threads
>>/ic/thread/6642050
You will not win this one pa/g/eet. Playing the victim here like a tranny won't help you

[Anonymous No.6665050]

>>6665044
>AI artist
still not a thing, trying to bully yourself into getting the label won't avail you.

[Anonymous No.6665053]

>>6665035
one is deserved and the other one isn't. you are a thief.

[Anonymous No.6665055]

>>6665043
>you said currently existing. Which was a lie
This isn't a lie. The Omniverse and Dall-E exist. Google's imagegen exists as well.
>So in other words the profit margin will be significantly lowered to the point of it being almost not worth it, while STILL not offering the most important part, copyright protection. And because of the negative perception you pajeets thankfully set,:
Nothing here made any sense and you can copyright the outputs of these models. And I love how you're talking about negative perceptions while being a racist making basless claims. Future generations will look at you with so much disdain. The Luddites had class bit you're just disgusting.

>A large majority of these photographers will be opting out of this. (btw thats even assuming you even get to opt out as default, rather than the popular push of being opt-in) They will see how lucrative their works really are, and leaving any "progress" these AI models will have at a near standstill reminiscent of pre 2022 AI.
A nothing burger. As a matter of fact, seeing as current AI popularity is based on having the smallest little "dopamine hit" updates, this actually helps its decline into fad. You NFT'd yourself
Do you understand what text-to-3D means? Do you know why text-to-img even exists? It was to train AIs to be able to see the world. Tools like ChatGPT can now see, type, and read. It can contextualize and cataloged any physical object and there are now models to create 3D objects. What do yo think companies like Microsoft and Nvidia are doing RIGHT NOW?

Since you probably can't answer that, I'll keep stringing you along. What happens when an AI can create and contextualize 3D objects that are identical to objects in the physical realm? Fully rendered with ray tracing(remember what Nvidia has been working on for years) making them indistinguishable from real photographs. Do you think they'll need photographs from buttmad photographers? Why are you so delusional, anon?

[Anonymous No.6665059]

>>6665048
>posts anonymous shitpost false flagger
Like I said, you have nothing. Post something public. I can easily.
https://twitter.com/TheFoodMage/status/1646449499445886976
Tons of people acting like assholes against a chill AI artist.

>>6665050
Here's another example of an asshole.

[Anonymous No.6665065]

>>6665055
>What happens when an AI can create and contextualize 3D objects that are identical to objects in the physical realm?
buttlerian jihad, silicon valley becomes a bonfire, complicit sheep get the firing range

[Anonymous No.6665066]

>>6665065
>schizophrenic fantasies
I know you're mentally ill but at least try to hide it.

[Anonymous No.6665068]

>>6665059
>Here's another example of an asshole.
sorry you don't pass

[Anonymous No.6665069]

>>6665055
> Dall-E exist.
The same dall-e that first showed us how many watermarks it had of sites like istock and shutterstock? LUL
>Nothing here made any sense and you can copyright the outputs of these model
It made perfect sense and, no you can not copyright them. Your gaslighting is very poor Paj
> It was to train AIs to be able to see the world
nvm im arguing with a schizo Paj. Moving on.

[Anonymous No.6665070]

>>6665055
>more r/singularity bullshit
You're an inbred online cult dude. No one thinks like this irl. Most actual people are negative to AI.
Just because you're too much of a cognitively decayed subhuman to view art as nothing more than a product to be consumed en masse doesn't mean all other people relate to art that way.

[Anonymous No.6665071]

>>6665066
I'm just answering your wank fantasy with humor. you remember humor, right? or do you need chatGPT and daddy google to remind you?

[Anonymous No.6665074]

>>6665070
>>more r/singularity bullshit
I don't even know what that is, go back you retarded troon. Your such a little bitch that can't even make an argument against my posts.

[Anonymous No.6665077]

>>6665045
>>6665053
>instantly backpedaled from "ai artists are harrassing humans" to "well actually humans are harrassing ai artists and it's a good thing actually"

stay seething, dishonest fucks

[Anonymous No.6665079]

>>6665071
>wank fantasy
kek you're a retard.

[Anonymous No.6665080]

>>6665046
im aware. But it mentioned something about a "do not train" tag which with the current opt in approach, wont be enough. Eventually these companies will bend the knee and have it be mandatory to be opt in. Which will further kneecap any advancements of these companies. At worst this is a nothing burger, at best its actually good news because like I said before,there will be no need to put the genie back in the bottle. It will die a slow painful death by a thousand cut s and be forgotten as another fad. The juice wont be worth the squeeze

[Anonymous No.6665084]

>>6664959
AI act is on its way in EU and similar legislations will probably follow in other countries, AI artworks slowly getting banned from more and more platforms, fair use seems more and more unlikely, more and more people finding AI generated artwork cringe...

>you will never strike down the ai menace
for sure, but maybe it will be used in actually useful or creative areas instead of talentless retards flooding social networks with shittaste photorealistic anime girls and hyperrendered epic backgrounds? I really don't get those AIpajeets

[Anonymous No.6665085]

>>6665074
Your dumb ramblings don't warrant a serious reply, only mockery.
It's very clear what this is about. You want to be an artist so badly, get all that praise and appreciation, but you just don't have the spark in you. At the end of the day you're an empty husk of a human being. You have to leech off the acheivements of others to feel alive.
Sad and pathetic.

[Anonymous No.6665086]

>>6665084
>be government
>china choses to use AI regardless
>wait for them to use them
>use their results
>who cares? they don't own it
>profit
the thing with AI is that it stifles innovation and encourages plagiarism, sloth and benefiting from another's work.

[Anonymous No.6665087]

>>6665080
>Which will further kneecap any advancements of these companies.
Read my post >>6665055

You do not need plebeian data for future models. AI can already create better data to train other AIs on. The "damage" if you want to call it that is already done. The models made for research like LAION are not going anywhere. No court case will change this and people will continue to use the model for their research into creating bigger and better AIs.

>>6665084
Explain in detail what those laws will do.
Explain why not being able to sell anime pictures on a few sites matters.
>for sure, but maybe it will be used in actually useful or creative areas instead of talentless retards flooding social networks with shittaste photorealistic anime girls and hyperrendered epic backgrounds? I really don't get those AIpajeets
And explain why you're so jealous of artists who are better than you.

>>6665085
They are intelligent posts, that's why you can't reply to them seriously. You can only spew insults like the nigger you are.

[Anonymous No.6665088]

>>6665087
Already read your schizo post and responded Paj. We're moving on. Final (You)

[Anonymous No.6665089]

>>6665079
it is, we can only speculate at this point and you're rejoicing at a scenario that makes everyone's life even worse.

[Anonymous No.6665095]

>>6665088
>Final (You)
I bet lol.

>>6665089
Not one of you has refuted a single point I've made and it's all backed up by things that have happened in the past few months. Literally only name calling and retarded posts from third worlders.
> that makes everyone's life even worse.
It doesn't though, it's by far a net positive.

[Anonymous No.6665099]

>>6665095
>Not one of you has refuted a single point I've made
you haven't provided anything but "nu-uh" and you just take commercial spiel from silicon valley as gospel
>It doesn't though, it's by far a net positive.
your naivety is endearing, I'll put it on account of your youth.

[Anonymous No.6665100]

>"I bet lol"

[Anonymous No.6665102]

>>6665099
Hes using the "its not like that sir! ITS JUST NOT OK!" line that gets used here very very frequently. Dont fall for it

[Anonymous No.6665103]

>>6665099
>you haven't provided anything but "nu-uh" and you just take commercial spiel from silicon valley as gospel
Yes I have lol. You're literally admitting to closing your ears to public facts coming from the relevant companies, this is proof to how ignorant and retarded you are.
>your naivety is endearing, I'll put it on account of your youth.
Feel free to explain why it's not a positive thing and I'll refute you. I'm not a retarded child like you who can only run away from points.

[Anonymous No.6665104]

so fan art will finally become illegal?

[Anonymous No.6665107]

>>6665087
>They are intelligent posts
You think highly of yourself I see

[Anonymous No.6665110]

>>6665107
The fact you can't refute anything I've said is proof enough. I can write a paragraph and you can only cry and name call.

[Anonymous No.6665114]

>>6665103
>You're literally admitting to closing your ears to public facts
doubly naive for buying corporate spiel. don't you think those entities have a vested interest into overblowing their results? where were you during covid? I've brought that claiming they're 100% ethical is dubious.
>Feel free to explain why it's not a positive thing
I'll give you a logic puzzle: speculate on how it could have a negative impact. of you cannot even entertain the thought then there's no point. if you can come up with a cogent one I'll give you another.

[Anonymous No.6665120]

>>6665114
>doubly naive for buying corporate spiel.
You're the only one talking about technological facts as spiel. You are a coping retard trying to delude himself. Stop acting like a retard and read my post carefully, you have no argument to make even though you hate what I'm saying. I'm presenting FACTS to you.
>I'll give you a logic puzzle: speculate on how it could have a negative impact. of you cannot even entertain the thought then there's no point. if you can come up with a cogent one I'll give you another.
I'll be waiting for your explanation, I'm not even sure how far you're reaching so "it" is nebulous to me. What is "it" anon? How is it going to have a negative impact?
At this point I have no doubt you're too stupid to come up with even that, since you're trying to argue when there is no argument to make. You have yet to make a real point and you're only digging yourself further into your pitiful hole.

[Anonymous No.6665124]

>>6665087
Oka i'll try to answer your questions
>AI act
It's a bit long, you can read it on https://artificialintelligenceact.eu
Pretty much, among other things, it makes the use of open source AI models illegal, with heavy fees for hosting sites like github. You can read about it on https://technomancers.ai/eu-ai-act-to-target-us-open-source-software/

>fair use
I think you already know about this one, it has been debated for like all 2023 now.

>why AI stuff getting banned from more and more platforms matters
idk m8, i think it's pretty self-explanatory? What will be the "Place" for AI generated artwork if you can't use it commercially because of copyright violation and not post it because platforms are banning it? IDK about selling pics, i don't think a lot of prompters are actually selling stuff. Maybe like the 0.1% of them?

>artists
this one feels like either you are retarded or it's a very low quality bait (which would still make you retarded).
To answer seriously, you have no idea what you're talking about. Being a prompter is completely different from being an artist - the comparison doesn't make sense to begin with.
>who are better than you
I consider myself a prettygud artist and can shit on AIfags all day. Hope i was clear! Here's a cat!

[Anonymous No.6665125]

>>6665110
Because I heard all that garbage before. You AI trannies keep spamming the same shit over and over. You're a thief and a parasite trying to justify yourself and there's nothing more to it.

[Anonymous No.6665126]

>facts
yes, just like vaxx facts
>>6665120
so you can't come up with a negative one? very well. I'll demonstrate by providing a potential positive one to illustrate:
AI image generation could be used for first draft storyboarding and animatic ideas, saving time during the brainstorming process by giving a base to work on. it could also be used to iterate on some clothing designs ideas based on a specific era for example, these could help spark or speed up serviceable ideas. the downsides would be that the over reliance on those would impoverish directing and artistic vision, making the whole less cohesive because of an overabundance of choice.

now reflect on a case where it would be detrimental.

[Anonymous No.6665127]

>>6665124
That's a great cat anon

[Anonymous No.6665128]

>>6665124
>aioomers getting btfod by cat drawings
you hate to see it

[Anonymous No.6665130]

>>6665124
>In a bold stroke, the EU’s amended AI Act would ban American companies such as OpenAI, Amazon, Google, and IBM from providing API access to generative AI models.
>bans third countries from using it
>You have to register your “high-risk” AI project or foundational model with the government
>API Essentially Banned
MY PENIS CAN ONLY GET SO FUCKING HARD ANON
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

[Anonymous No.6665132]

>>6665124
>Pretty much, among other things, it makes the use of open source AI models illegal, with heavy fees for hosting sites like github.
Explain, IN DETAIL, what this would do. I know what it is. I want you to tell me, and for you yourself to understand, what effect this would have.
>What will be the "Place" for AI generated artwork if you can't use it commercially
Almost no one is using it commercially on the sites you're talking about and it's being posted all over the internet and this will continue and more people will do it as time passes. More and more AI only sites will pop up too, some commercial and some not. You're always talking about it being banned but it isn't banned, you just can't sell it on a couple of sits which like you say is irrelevant.

>this one feels like either you are retarded or it's a very low quality bait (which would still make you retarded).
I'm just not insane and delusional like you are. You're not special for being able to draw just like a prompter isn't special for installing a program. But you're both artists. You both create art. I'll also argue 80% of AI art is better than yours.

[Anonymous No.6665142]

>>6665132
That's one ugly fucking cat

[Anonymous No.6665151]

>>6665132
>explain in detail
it's explained in that article m8. Open source models are the ones that produce that kind of "Wow" AI art because they sample more specific artists (for example in my research i found some specific models with API access to stablediffusion that specialized in anime girls, porn, backgrounds, pixel art etc, those are the ones producing AI art that looks more like the real thing), while for example dall-e 2 or stablediffusion are more generalist. It is pretty much impossible to produce actual illustrations like the one you posted only on those models, let alone if they have to give up on copyrighted images.

>it isn't banned
yet. Looking at the state of things we're very much going in that direction m8.

>both create art
it's more like, the model itself creates it. Prompting is pretty much like commissioning an artist. You have some kind of control over it, but nothing comparable to an actual artist who makes ALL the small decisions in the process. Bear in mind that i don't think prompting is bad in itself, just, it's a different thing that isn't comparable. I hope we're going in a good direction where prompting won't be a shallow substitute of art, but just another media with different uses and actual creativity.

>AI art is better than yours
well m8, it's your taste, i have no problems at all. Some people like Black Panther: Wakanda Forever too, who am i to judge them. Do you like Black Panther? Here's another panther (a cade) :DD

[Anonymous No.6665155]

>>6665132
>I want you to tell me

>I-I DONT WANT TO READ IT!! J-JUST TELL ME! THATS NOT THE WAY IT IS SIRS! NO NO NO THIS CANT BE!!!!!
ACK ACK ACK ACK ACK
AAAAACKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK

[Anonymous No.6665164]

>>6665151
>it's explained in that article m8.
No it isn't. It's a set of laughable rules that would gimp the EU and they have almost nothing to do with open source software. I want you to tell me what effect they will have. It seems to me you don't understand what you supposedly read.
>It is pretty much impossible to produce actual illustrations like the one you posted only on those models, let alone if they have to give up on copyrighted images.
You don't actually believe that right?
>yet. Looking at the state of things we're very much going in that direction m8.
No it isn't and this is the internet we're talking about. There are AI only websites, are they going to ban AI? Is Twitter and Instagram going to ban it? Artstation and Deviantart didn't. Midjourney has a million subs.
>it's more like,
Stop coping and you should learn the new skill. This is art produced by a tool no matter how much you delude yourself.

[Anonymous No.6665169]

>>6665164
>This is art produced by a tool
No disagreements here

[Anonymous No.6665173]

>>6665169
>abandons his argument for a cheap jab
Based concession.

[Anonymous No.6665175]

>>6665173
nta ai tard

[Anonymous No.6665176]

>>6665175
you mean AI artist :)

[Anonymous No.6665178]

>>6665176
What's the difference?

[Anonymous No.6665181]

>>6665178
the tard implies similarity to you

[Anonymous No.6665182]

>>6665178

any title with AI in it are just delusion

[Anonymous No.6665186]

>>6662698

[Anonymous No.6665187]

>>6665104
Fanart doesn't threatens the financial viability of the original, in many ways, its welcomed and encouraged.

[Anonymous No.6665188]

>>6665164
>you don't actually believe that
>stop coping
>laughable rules
>i want you to tell me

can you produce actual arguments, provide information or some valuable insight in AI art or do you just spill random keywords around? I poured a lot of effort in my responses and never disrespected you. My responses are based on a very long discussion i had with a friend of mine who's a very skilled programmer and techbro, and each one of my points was pretty much agreed on by both (even though he was against restriction on AI generated images), just saying i'm not uninformed on this stuff. I even considered becoming a prompter a couple times.
Are you actually trolling? I'm beginning to feel like i'm even a better prompter than you lmao, the pics you're posting don't do AIfags justice

[Anonymous No.6665189]

>>6665182
Imagine how ridiculous it would be to call yourself an "AI singer".
At least those AI fags making those fake music tracks have a tad bit more self-awareness than proomptards.

[Anonymous No.6665198]

>>6665188
I warned you anon
>>6665102
Unless by chance you're using his stupidity as an example to the larger crowd of people who are merely reading this thread instead of posting in it
In that case mfw is pic related

[Anonymous No.6665201]

>>6665188
> I poured a lot of effort in my responses
Sorry but nah, you spewed and now you're copping out again. Because you do not have a single argument and I know you realize this.
You posted a bill you have near zero understanding of. You couldn't comment on it at all and you don't understand what kind of impact it will have.
Then you implied vanilla SD art wasn't vanilla SD art and that it was impossible to create.
And now you're acting like you are in fact an AI art expert even though you admit you don't prompt. There's also some contradictions here, first it was "wow" art that SD couldn't produce and now it's garbage?! How did that happen?

>>6665189
A song comes from your throat. Images come from a whole lot of different types of tools, most recently your computer with a variety of programs. Fucking moron.

[Anonymous No.6665202]

TOTAL
CURRY
DEATH

[Anonymous No.6665204]

>>6665201
Your AI images indeed come from a whole lot of different types of tools

[Anonymous No.6665205]

>>6665188
>>6665198
Genuinely funny though. My reply had points you ignored and you act like I'm the disingenuous one here, while you strictly name call and retreat form any real discourse.

>>6665204
These are the first cats I've ever made, do you like them?

[Anonymous No.6665206]

>>6665205
>These are the first cats I've ever made, do you like them?
No.

[Anonymous No.6665208]

>>6665206
:(

[Anonymous No.6665211]

>>6665208
I can see this one was stolen from some chink

[Anonymous No.6665213]

>>6665211
>I can see things that aren't there
you might want to see the doctor about that

[Anonymous No.6665215]

>>6665201
And your mother was singing all kinds of songs before I came down her throat

[Anonymous No.6665217]

>>6665201
i commented on the bill tho, did you actually read? Read the second article i posted because it explains this stuff way more througly, maybe you didn't see the link?
-> https://technomancers.ai/eu-ai-act-to-target-us-open-source-software/

The rest of your response, i just can't understand or interpret in a clear definite way. Can you word it better?

>>6665198
benefit of doubt

[Anonymous No.6665218]

>>6665213
You're telling me those aren't moonrunes in that bottom left corner?
You're the alleged artist of this piece. Please enlighten me as to the deeper meaning behind those crazy looking symbols.

[Anonymous No.6665220]

>>6665198
>>6665205
nta btw. This is a cade war, i'll only post cades.

[Anonymous No.6665223]

>>6665217
>benefit of doubt
But there is no doubt in the benefit of him being this ignorant on the subject!

[Anonymous No.6665224]

>>6665217
> because it explains this stuff way more througly
It doesn't answer what I asked you, you also don't seem to understand that the world is larger than the EU which is pretty funny. This is going nowhere, you can't answer a simple question lol. What impact would it have?
>The rest of your response, i just can't understand or interpret in a clear definite way
Of course you'll pretend you can't. Once again you're copping out.

Loser.

[Anonymous No.6665232]

>>6665224
> the world is larger than the EU
nta but you didnt read it! LOL

[Anonymous No.6665234]

>>6665232
Yes I did.
>you better not release your AIs in the EU or we'll fine you!!!
Keep in mind this won't pass for years if ever. I hope you're not a European defending this because that kind of cuck behavior would be legendary.

[Anonymous No.6665236]

>>6665234
>I hope you're not a European defending this because that kind of cuck behavior would be legendary.
is that... fear i sense?

[Anonymous No.6665238]

>>6665236
>oi, you got a licence for that AI?
It's laughter you idiot.

[Anonymous No.6665242]

/g/ here. We're still laughing at you fags. You have been seething for almost a year now.

[Anonymous No.6665246]

everyone knows law is slow, but it's finally moving.
this is just the beginning and you know it.

[Anonymous No.6665248]

>>6665224
Ok man, fuck it, i'll bite.
>what impact would it have?
the models that are being used to make the best , more "Passing" AI illustrations are open source with API access to SD, OpenAI etc.
You really can't use Dall-e2 to produce convincing anime girls illustrations for example, because the model is not specialized in that kind of images, or modify the model in any way.
As said in the article,
>Under these rules, if a third party, using an API, figures out how to get a model to do something new, that third party must then get the new functionality certified
Which pretty much means a ban.

>only in EU
Yes, but you'd need to have slices of ham on your eyes to not see this as a big step towards more severe legislation in all countries. This is a pretty big deal. As an EUfag, i'm pretty happy that i won't have to compete with some AI model lel. Also no face recognition apparently!

Now i'll try to interpret the rest of your response:

>you implied vanilla SD art wasn't vanilla SD art and that it was impossible to create
english is very broken in this phrase. I cannot make sense of this at all. Language barrier maybe? Are you from India? I'm from Italy! :D

>There's also some contradictions here, first it was "wow" art that SD couldn't produce and now it's garbage?!
The "Wow" doesn't mean i "Wow" at it literally, it means it's an impressive feat for a diffusion model. I don't think it's garbage, it's just kinda soulless. Like black panther. Are you an actual MCU fan?

[Anonymous No.6665252]

>>6665242
And I never quite understood how jealous all you /g/ trannies were of real artists until I got to see how desperate you are trying to sell yourselves as such. Being a code monkey must suck so fucking bad. Good thing AI will relieve you of that burden soon while my skills will always be appreciated by everyone around me.

[Anonymous No.6665258]

>>6665242
oh yeah you guys had such a good 2023, like getting stomped out from all monetizable platforms top kek

[Anonymous No.6665259]

>>6665242
bullshit, literally untrue

[Anonymous No.6665264]

>>6665234
>didnt read the first provision in that link
>thinks international laws of copyright are exclusive to EU
God this is going to be a good year for artists

[Anonymous No.6665283]

The lawyers and bureaucrats will save us.

[Anonymous No.6665288]

>>6665283
Time to get your AI license cuck.

[Anonymous No.6665307]

>>6665164
>This is art produced by a tool no matter how much you delude yourself.
kek

[Anonymous No.6665315]

[Anonymous No.6665319]

>>6665315
did an artist become his step-dad and confiscated his bad dragon?

[Anonymous No.6665368]

>>6662626
nice.

Its the right thing. If they want to train AI they should pay the artists for the dataset. They would pay for every other dataset but not art? seems unfair

[Anonymous No.6665380]

>>6665307
the classic freudian slip

[Anonymous No.6665382]

>>6665164
I'm not even gonna comment on what you wrote, but you know when an image looks really fucking cool, and then you enlarge it, and it's absolute dog shit? Yeah, you're image was really disappointing.

[Anonymous No.6665868]

>>6665248
>the models that are being used to make the best , more "Passing" AI illustrations are open source with API access to SD, OpenAI etc.
And they are going nowhere. They are open source now and forever.
>You really can't use Dall-e2 to produce convincing anime girls illustrations for example, because the model is not specialized in that kind of images
Yes you can and there will be Dall-E 3, 4, 5 as well as other models like Niji Journey 2, 3, 4... You just won't have access to them, but they will always exist.
>Which pretty much means a ban.
It means companies will potentially be paying more money for licenses meaning APIs will cost more to use and be more locked down, it is not a ban. It's just a pain in the ass and there will be lawsuits for decades. Microsoft will just declare war on the EU before it passes and the EU isn't going to win.
>As an EUfag, i'm pretty happy
Literal cuck mentality. You're happy that you supposedly won't have free access to AI and that corporations will be dicking you. AI will still be around, it would potentially just cost you more money to use. This is a good thing to you? Jesus.

>>6665252
>>6665258
>>6665264
You guys are going to be seething for the rest of your life. AI is going nowhere.

[Anonymous No.6665889]

>>6665868
AI nigger is mad because his toy is getting paylocked lmao

[Anonymous No.6665929]

>>6665889
But it's free and open source.

[Anonymous No.6665951]

>>6665929
Stable diffusion? It's going to get pulled out, and Emad will go to jail. Sure, you could still use it like a pirate, but it will be stay like it is, shit, forever.

[Anonymous No.6665967]

>>6665951
It's installed on my computer, phone, and it's a torrent. You can't pull it out. It's also amazing and makes better art than you can.

[Anonymous No.6665976]

>>6665868
>AI is going nowhere.
True that.

>>6665967
We can't pull it out but we can cripple it's spread. The same way pirates and CP hoarders are crippled from spreading their shit on the web.

[Anonymous No.6665984]

Well, we've reached the point where platforms ban AI for spam and infringement (as predicted). Now we wait for the inevitable gutting of the whole internet because AI cultists keep searching for better and easier ways for falsification through their hedonism toys.

[Anonymous No.6665988]

>>6665976
No you can't lol. God damn you're delusional.

[Anonymous No.6666004]

>>6665988
Delusional is thinking governments will allow you free and unlimited access to weapons of narrative control. Keep accelerating the scorched earth endgame through coomer piccies, m80.

[Anonymous No.6666007]

>>6666004
They can't stop it and would be retarded to attempt it. Also why are you siding with tyranny again?

[Anonymous No.6666015]

>>6666007
>They can't stop it and would be retarded to attempt it.
And this is the nigger that dares call others delusional. Lmao.

>Also why are you siding with tyranny again?
I didn't unleash free access to WMDs to people all over. The rationale that it was done so everyone could stand for themselves is painfully naiive. What's most realistic it was done deliberately to spread chaos to have a strong enough basis for maximize control in the long run. Emad's portfolio is a very bold case in point.

[Anonymous No.6666025]

>>6666015
*for maximizing control

Every single AI debate is the exact same as it were back in Q4 last year. Meanwhile legislations and ways to deal with it are being considered by the minute and sped up the more AI cultists clown themselves (which luckily they're very damn fucking good at). Better AI just means more severe buttfucking laws in the future. Ultimately this debate serves nothing but project cope from both sides of the argument while actual change is beyond our individual control.

[Anonymous No.6666036]

>>6666015
>I didn't unleash free access to WMDs to people all over.
No one did. You're acting like images and words, something anyone can make at any time, are dangerous. You are a cuck trying to delude himself lmao. And the end game you wish for? That we simply have to pay for them instead of them being free. But they will always be free.

[Anonymous No.6666039]

>>6666007
>Also why are you siding with tyranny again?
>BUT MUH ART COMMUNISM, HOW DARE YOU MAKE ME WORK ON A SKILL FOR PROFIT!?
I don't even at this point

[Anonymous No.6666043]

>>6666036
>images and words, something anyone can make at any time, are dangerous
Removing the objective basis of concepts and information through flooding is indeed very dangerous, more dangerous than if it were left it in the hands of a private group of individuals who can be policed for misuse. The whole place will have to be policed instead of a few individuals.

>endgame you wish for
I didn't, but unfortunately you and your ilk are deadset on making it happen (and loving it).
Keep on spamming.

[Anonymous No.6666044]

>>6665319
It's the edgy phase where things like the natural world don't matter because we can just "build better machines".
Honestly it's better to pity these 12 year olds. If you think we have it bad now, just wait and see what they're going to inherit.

[Anonymous No.6666052]

>>6666007
One of the more desperate and pathetic reaches and comparisons I've ever seen. Gets a lol out of me.

[Anonymous No.6666053]

>>6666039
Using AI is a skill, tranny. Your sick drawings are quickly becoming worthless because computers can do the same thing faster.

>>6666043
Jesus Christ, shill harder glowie.

>>6666052
It's 100% on point.

[Anonymous No.6666054]

>>6666044
They don't have a concept of what 4chan and the Internet were like before easily affordable internet access from any place on the planet, or the world before the internet. It makes sense they would see positivity in any strong technological progress, whatever grim implications for society there might be.

[Anonymous No.6666057]

>>6666053
Your actions and the very outcome of your actions are and will always be beyond your control.

I accept your concession.

[Anonymous No.6666059]

>>6662626
Extremely based. Autists can still generate anime tiddies for free because no one would give a shit but corpos and shills can't because they would be large targets.

It's like piracy. Any large company that would make pirating easily availabe would get shut down immediately but random poo servers run by basement dwellers can continue on in obscurity.

[Anonymous No.6666064]

>>6666059
>but corpos and shills can't because they would be large targets.
Yes they can. The bill changes absolutely nothing in regards to this. The EU just doesn't want it in their country. The world will keep spinning and Europeans will just continue pirating. Nothing changes.

[Anonymous No.6666065]

>>6666053
>Using AI is a skill
I suppose if you think pressing a button is a skill that would explain a lot

[Anonymous No.6666066]

>>6666053
>Using AI is a skill, tranny.
I'm not the one here pretending to be something I am not, streetshitter.

[Anonymous No.6666069]

>>6666053
>Pretends to be an artist
>BU-BUH AI ART TAKES SKILL, I AM AN ARTIST, YO-YOU ARE A TRANNY
The fucking level of delusion, YWNBAA

[Anonymous No.6666072]

>>6666065
>>6666066
>>6666069
Pressing a button creates better art than you so it's le bad? lol. You are so pitifully angry.

[Anonymous No.6666075]

>>6666064
hmmmm copium

[Anonymous No.6666080]

>>6666072
So would you consider the Ctrl C and Ctrl Z art which everyone and their mother could do already as valid. And is a strap key bind the greatest artist of our time

[Anonymous No.6666086]

>>6666075
Explain how I'm wrong. Also I want to remind you that it will be years before anything tangible comes out of it, and things within it will change. Do you have enough diapers?

>>6666080
Impossible dangerous and should be banned!

[Anonymous No.6666097]

>>6666086
your scatological fascination is worrisome.

[Anonymous No.6666340]

>he thinks he can stop technology

[Anonymous No.6666360]

it's not about stopping but controlling it instead of letting it run wild

[Anonymous No.6666430]

>>6662626
>400 posts in and Salamandrha Singh still doesn't get that in case of adopting the technology, the CEO will get an already exploited unpaid intern to proompt, or better yet! will proompt himself with his own hands!
>but will never EVER hire a talentless third world code monkey from across the fucking pond to do something he can do for free

It has been spelled out for him multiple times like he's a 7 year old Down Syndrome kid with a brain tumor. Should we even try at this rate?

[Anonymous No.6666569]

>>6662626
None of this matters because people's computers can generate images and it's a completely decentralized uncontrolled process. Any law pertaining to this is unenforceable. You can only really control the "digital space" if you have North Korea levels of state power.

[Anonymous No.6666571]

>>6666569
>>You can only really control the "digital space" if you have North Korea levels of state power.
>COVID didn't teach him anything
Kek.

[Anonymous No.6666575]

>>6666571
?
My graphics card kept working through the pandemic unhindered, what are you hallucinating about?

[Anonymous No.6666577]

>>6666575
Better prepare expanding your Overton's Window now is all I'm saying.

[Anonymous No.6666579]

>>6666577
I'll expand your anus, that's what I'm gonna do.

[Anonymous No.6666583]

>>6666579
The AI will do that for you soon enough, and not just me but everyone around here.

[Anonymous No.6666600]

>>6666583
Don't threaten me with a good time!