Why most artists do not know this?

[Sigma No.6412808]

>TL:DR - AI-Generated graphics are always public domain. Therefore, not copyrightable.
>Yes, this matters a lot.

So, basically if you don't want to be replaced by weird, autistic and nihilistic coding bros, I suggest you do not allow them to manipulate law-makers and the public at large saying otherwise.

>Why are you posting this? This thread is for artwork discussion only.

Well, yeah but this matters a lot for artists. Please don't make me regret posting this here.

>Besides, /his/ only wants to talk about obscure shit nobody cares about. Most of the time.

>Anon, this sounds great! But I know nothing about copyright laws, plus I think you're dumb and this is fake.

As for the law, it basically boils down to this: if you lie about copyright laws (in this case, saying such graphics can be copyrighted) you are committing copyfraud since everything AI spits out is public domain, no exceptions.
Code cannot sign contracts, cannot give away property, cannot have SSN, etc.

>Why are you doing this, then?

Because I see almost no artist out there pointing out this simple, valid legal fact.

>What can I do to make this more widespread on society?

Just go out there and talk to people about it.

[Sigma No.6412812]

The attempted graphic artwork to go through copyrighting procedures, by the way

>Pic. very related

If the artists of the world do not do something about this, just roll over and enjoy the end of art forever.

Might as well become a NFT producer/speculator, if such thing ever occurs.

[Anonymous No.6412823]

I'm sure this isn't another false flag bait thread and there will be no shit slinging the same arguments being made in all the previous threads

[Anonymous No.6412824]

Artists are stupid. AI will win.

[Anonymous No.6412829]

>>6412824
/thread

[Anonymous No.6412832]

>>6412824
Not me because i am smarter than the AI.

[Anonymous No.6412845]

>>6412824

[Anonymous No.6412850]

>>6412808
>if you don't want to be replaced by weird, autistic and nihilistic coding bros, I suggest you do not allow them to manipulate law-makers and the public at large saying otherwise.
That's what we are trying to do, it's just not that easy. Look for Karla Ortiz, she activelly trying to talk about this, including talking to lawyers.

Anyway, it's pretty much obvious that if you simply prompt stuff and the output data is automatically generated by the AI, the author becomes the AI and since a robot cannot hold rights, you cannot copyright it.

No, when you simply prompt, no matter how many tokens you use, you cannot fully control the AI decisions

[Sigma No.6412865]

>>6412823
Logic and evidence is pointing towards that.

I hope we can change this, though. Artists need to drop the dumb unbusiness mindset and start to mobilize for their own rights and space in society.

>>6412850
Yes. You can't even compare this to photography because a camera cannot make decisions on it's own.

[Anonymous No.6412873]

>>6412808
>just vote harder
If there is more profit to be made with AI art then they will change the laws to make it legally protected intellectual property.
Nothing you do and no amount of shrieking to strangers about it will change this. The artist community is seen by most of society as totally insufferable, its much better to just adapt and incorporate AI art into our work instead of tilting at windmills

[Anonymous No.6412882]

>>6412865
Artists are really weak. About 2-3 weeks ago, RJ Palmer was ambushed in a call with a bunch of deviantart higher ups, talking about how AI is the future and that it's inevitable, later they "rescinded" their automated opt-in policy and RJ was like: don't harass them anymore guys, it's all good now.
Karla was in a Lightbox panel with the deviantart people and she was clipped out of context where she says that she's excited for AI and that's it, Karla tweeted at them that they misrepresented her position and they removed that video, Karla goes, "Ok, lay off guys".

It's annoying.

[Anonymous No.6412883]

>>6412873
The thing is, companies might benefit short term but long term it just creates precedents for everything to be replaced by AI. Most people who aren't redditors don't want this, the anger about AI art is proof that even normies aren't completely braindead in this regard

[Anonymous No.6412889]

>>6412850
>Karla
>trusting a woman to save your community
Rip human artists

[Anonymous No.6412894]

>>6412883
>just become luddites
Enjoy being a slave to the Chinese AI hivemind
>normies are upset
No they're not, they don't give a fuck about AI art taking jobs away from artists. Get off the internet and talk to real people.
Stop tilting at windmills and learn how to use AI as a tool

[Anonymous No.6412900]

>>6412894
>muh China
Go back to /pol/
>Get off the internet and talk to real people
Real people don't give a fuck about a bunch of redditors posting their computer generated waifus to piss of China

[Sigma No.6412902]

>>6412873
That makes no cultural, legal, philosophical or societal sense.

Should I give pennies as royalties every time I use my phone with some AI-powered app, then?

You could extrapolate more, less, the point still stands.

This isn't just a question of
>vote harder

Our society is literally based off of fundaments which are entirely against that.
You could argue that copyright laws today exist in order to protect people from having their work either subverted or co-opted in ways they did not want, without their approval.

[Anonymous No.6412903]

>another schizo samefag thread
Jannies not working hard today uh?

[Anonymous No.6412910]

I think this is about the AI itself holding the copyright. If a person generates an image using AI they can claim ownership over it, here's an example currently being looked at https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Idhn8eb9t883mm_U4CxAQQ_aANTI7UTX/view

[Anonymous No.6412911]

>>6412902
So if you don't want AI to be trained on your art then you have to keep it secret. Don't post or share it with anyone. Do you get mad at aspiring artists who see your art while they're learning and incorporate elements of your style? No? Okay so then you can't be mad at an AI using it to weight their creations by .00001 percent

[Sigma No.6412920]

You're all missing an important point here:

Nobody is against whether or not AI-graphics exist or not.

Or if normies can use it for whatever they want to.

The matter of the question here is: copyrights and monetization around AI-graphics.

In general, people are not impressed by prompters. It's literally you giving orders to a software, that's it.
Not to mention the motivations behind AI tools and technology are almost always dystopic, cynical, selfish and anti-people (I don't know how else to phrase this sorry).

I do not think this astroturfed and technocratic "wow technology is so great!" mentality will keep up for too long.

Just as an anecdote: 10% of workers in the US are people who work with logistics, moving and trucking.
This type of work while not as complex as art, is a big source of income for regular people. Automating it with AI would basically cripple millions of people, financially.

I do think we have to press those who are pro-AI with this type of reasoning:
>"what happens when they code your job away? Nobody thought art would be the next in the AI chopping block."

Because I do know for a fact that making art takes years of skill and practice. Would you like to see years of your life go to pure and simple waste?

[Sigma No.6412927]

>>6412911
This is literal industrial espionage, though.

Also, when did I consent to have my work fed to some code?

Without the already made work of millions of unwilling artists, this AI would be pretty much shitty at best when making artwork.

[Anonymous No.6412929]

>>6412894
> they don't give a fuck about AI art taking jobs away from artists
This is the absolute true, that’s why they need to see how AI can easily evolve to severely reduce the need of humans in other fields as well, including their own.

Yes, AI will create new jobs and opportunities, but they will much less than it’ll take. 1 experienced guy can do the work of a dozen with the AI. You can’t just exponentially grow your production if there’s not enough demand, meaning lots of cuts will occur.

[Anonymous No.6412933]

>>6412927
And human artists would be mediocre at best without other human artists and art to learn from.
Did you consent for aspiring artists to look at your art when you posted it on a public forum?

[Anonymous No.6412935]

>>6412929
Except you didn't care when technology was replacing other jobs and nobody will care until it is replacing their job. Remaining in denial won't solve anything and you can't stop it. The absolute most you could hope to do is kneecap your community and be at the mercy of people that don't reject new technology.

[Anonymous No.6412936]

>>6412927
We never needed your consent. Yours or anyone's.

[Anonymous No.6412940]

>>6412936
It is literally illegal to steal intellectual property so yeah you need my consent pajeet if you want your shit to be marketable in the west.

[Sigma No.6412941]

>>6412933
No.

Why are you comparing me to a bunch of code, though?

Does the fact that I have rights (just like other people) even matter to you?

[Anonymous No.6412945]

>>6412808
>AI-Generated graphics are always public domain.
wouldn't that just make everyone can use it?
how many public domain IP has been used by Disney at this point to make zillions of dollars

[Anonymous No.6412949]

>>6412941
What rights? The right to slow down technological progress like some religious fanatic in the dark ages? Fuck outta here. Go live on a doomsday compound with your genderfluid HIV positive buddies and make all the non-AI art you want. Don't try to force others to go along with your schizo worldview

[Sigma No.6412950]

>>6412940
Notice how nobody even dares to feed copyrighted music to AI-generated sound out there.

Why is that? Because musicians and record labels sue the crap out of code bros, that's why.

And as a result, AI-generated sound is so mediocre even royalty-free composers are better than that shit.

Why can't visual artists do the same, then?

[Sigma No.6412955]

>>6412945
They made it with real people who have then made agreements to receive royalties as long as they had traded their copyrights with Disney.

The key difference here is: people.

Code does not have rights, nor can it make such agreements. You have to stop thinking in terms of ideas and start to think in matters of actual reality, with people involved.

[Anonymous No.6412957]

>>6412940
Tell that to my lawyers

[Anonymous No.6412958]

>>6412949
What does your ideal future look like, anon? What role do you think you'll play in it?

[Anonymous No.6412960]

>>6412955
the point is that anyone can generate and use it
including clients and coders and corporate

[Anonymous No.6412961]

>>6412957
You can use your shit in India but you won't be able to market it in first world countries(where the money are). lol you idiot.

[Anonymous No.6412967]

>>6412950
Music AI is just harder to do. It will come along soon enough

[Anonymous No.6412968]

>>6412957
What are you gonna do with this image, tho? Post it on reddit to get 10 upvotes?

[Sigma No.6412969]

>>6412957
It has been told to the supreme court, actually.

They are siding with me.

Did you even check my images? >>6412808

>Pic. is, again, very related.

[Anonymous No.6412971]

>>6412961
Keep up your current societal degradation and you'll be watching Chinese and Indian movies in the west sooner than you think

[Anonymous No.6412973]

>>6412969
Read the actual court case if you are interested, it's not about what you think it is.

[Anonymous No.6412974]

>>6412967
But why did they refuse to train it on copyrighted music, wouldn't it have been easier to do with a larger sample size? It was ok for images, so surely it must be fine for music as well

[Anonymous No.6412975]

>>6412935
Except this time it will happen much faster and multiple jobs will eventually feel that simultaneously.

AI cannot be compared to any kind of automation created before, it will be a problem in a few years, you cannot saturate the market and believe everyone will be making money by using AI, only a fraction will.

[Sigma No.6412978]

>>6412967
I don't think it will.

Musicians, unlike visual artists (at least for now) are not afraid to start huge lawsuits.

As of right now, copyright laws are all on the side real artists.

[Anonymous No.6412979]

>>6412971
lol is this what the mighty Westerner fears the most? That their shitty Hollywood capeshit gets replaced by chinks and poos?

[Anonymous No.6412982]

>>6412974
Idk the music industry is notoriously Jewish so maybe that is a factor

[Anonymous No.6412985]

>>6412973
Explain what OP misunderstood about it?

[Anonymous No.6412986]

>>6412968
Not even, I just post them on 4chan for an average of about 0.5 (you)s. But they're just fun to make for the sake of it.

[Sigma No.6412987]

>>6412974
Because you can't just pick up a file from a hit song or great composer, feed it to AI and get away with it.

Do you even know what kind of legal teams record labels have, anyway?

[Anonymous No.6412990]

>>6412978
Ok well then america will be left behind and china, India, and whoever else wants to embrace AI will become dominant while the west descends into sectarian violence and fanatical technological restraint. Your choice white man

[Anonymous No.6412991]

>>6412986
Have you ever tried drawing

[Anonymous No.6412996]

>>6412991
Yes, but drawing takes a lot of time and effort so if I'm doing that I'm expecting a return on investment. These I can just post and not care if they get engagement.

[Sigma No.6412997]

>>6412979
This isn't just a westerner problem.

If you're an artist and you're made of flesh, this became an you problem as well.
Why are you trying to make an universally existential threat to everybody who makes art a geographical issue?

Corporations don't even have a specific location, allegiance or nationality, either.
They're the ones pushing this.

You thought it was hard to get into an art job before? Well if you let them have their way with the laws, it will become impossible and you could just give up at it.

[Anonymous No.6412998]

>>6412990
Why are you so afraid of other countries? Do you literally prefer for everyone in the West to be replaced by robots just so that chinks won't be able to do it first? If chinks were breeding superhumans by modifying their genes with AI, should everyone else start doing it, too?

[Anonymous No.6413001]

>>6412990
>chinks and street shitters are your examples
Lmao

[Anonymous No.6413002]

>>6412985
The case was about the AI itself owning the copyright. There've since been cases of humans using AI generated images in their work and being granted copyright.

[Anonymous No.6413004]

>>6412996
Why are you on this board if drawing is too much effort for you

[Sigma No.6413007]

>>6412990
Nobody but corporations will benefit from Ai-generated graphics.

And explain it to me why should USA, Australia or European countries respect "copyrights" from AI, anyway.

All you do is say a bunch of weird shit without explaining any of the benefits. Lazy and low-effort, just like the prompts.

[Anonymous No.6413009]

>>6412996
That’s something I’m ok with. Use it for fun, inspiration, learning, whatever, just don’t try to sell it. But if you do, at least be honest and say it’s AI generated.

[Anonymous No.6413010]

>>6412998
The point is that if we don't they will and once they do they will erase us. At least if we do it I will survive longer and get to maybe see the AI wars instead of getting a few extra years of trannies barking at me about dumb woke shit

[Anonymous No.6413011]

>>6413002
>There've since been cases of humans using AI generated images in their work and being granted copyright.
How much of their work was influenced by the AI?

[Anonymous No.6413015]

>>6413007
Your well-being is downstream from the well-being of corporations, as unfortunate as it is

[Sigma No.6413016]

>>6413002
AI and animals cannot hold copyrights.

Therefore it's straight to public comain.

>Pic also very related

[Anonymous No.6413017]

>>6412955
so nothing stop Corpo from using AI then since it is public domain IP (according to OP) and cut 2 dozens artists
nothing stop commissioners from using SD or midjourney to generate and stop using artist
back to square one

[Anonymous No.6413019]

Can't the janny just ban these AI shils already?

[Anonymous No.6413021]

Here's something fun I made with AI art. Enjoy guys!

[Anonymous No.6413024]

>>6413010
You sound like a schizo ngl. Chinks don't care about "erasing" the west, they profit from selling their shit here

[Sigma No.6413025]

>>6413002
As >>6413011 has said: you can use AI-graphics to incorporate into your work, this is legit.

But if it's 100% AI-made, then it's public domain and thus copyfraud.

[Anonymous No.6413030]

>>6413011
A lot, one example is a comicbook where all the art is initialy AI generated.
>>6413016
True, but humans can use AI and claim ownership over the result.

[Anonymous No.6413033]

>>6413015
Coorporations will also be replaced, though, the benefit is only short term. Nobody benefits from AI shit on the long run

[Anonymous No.6413034]

>>6412910
lmao what prevents me from looking at it and painting something much better, in high resolution and correct, having the timelapses and source psds and registering it myself?

[Sigma No.6413036]

>>6413017
And nothing stops people from creating enough output on their own to also rival said corporations with their own work.

In reality, corporations like Disney would be in big trouble with Ai-graphics.

I predict huge lawsuits coming from them because some proompter made work with their IP.
And there are legal precedents for this, as well.

[Anonymous No.6413037]

>>6413033
Its not about who benefits its about reality. Maybe we're worse off since the industrial revolution, it still happened and would have happened either way. Religious fanatics staved it off for a few centuries but look at how that turned out

[Sigma No.6413040]

>>6413030
If you don't have any source of human input, then it's basically claiming public domain as copyright.

This is basically fraud and, since it deals with the federal government, I'd say it's a federal crime as well.

[Anonymous No.6413041]

>>6413034
Nothing but that's already true for traditional art, if it's too similar you could get got for plagirism, that's about it.

[Anonymous No.6413042]

>>6413030
>all the art is initialy AI generated.
Did they actually use the generated art as it was or did they modify it afterwards?

[Sigma No.6413043]

>>6413041
Yeah but plagiarism with public domain is basically impossible.

[Anonymous No.6413046]

>>6413040
These AI's, fundementally, cannot work without human input, so that's a moot point.

[Anonymous No.6413048]

>>6412936
this is like people saying you can take the photos of some boomer on facebook, train a machine to shit out thousands of porn deepfakes on it, and proudly claim that you don't need their consent to use their face because the photos are on the internet.

I get why some people think this line of reasoning works, but is complete intellectual dishonesty and in the end just playing really fucking dumb with regards to consent, property, and image rights.

you have to literally ignore how things work nowadays to even suggest something like this as acceptable, legally or ethically.

[Anonymous No.6413049]

>>6413043
Well tehnically the person that originally generated the image and has the origina file could claim copyright over it, never been tried in court afaik.

[Anonymous No.6413051]

>>6413048
That's a quote from Ghost in the Shell, I'm not being serious.

[Anonymous No.6413052]

>>6413048
Fair use lol

[Anonymous No.6413054]

>>6413042
There was some photoshop work done on it, pretty minor stuff though, color correction, spot healing, liquify, that kinda thing.

[Anonymous No.6413055]

>>6413037
That's just a very nihilistic mindset, "it's gonna happen so why bother doing anything about it" ... if enough people recognize that it's bad to a point where it may lead to literal human extinction then yea, people should absolutely try to stop it.

[Anonymous No.6413056]

>>6413051
I know you are not being serious, but it's incredibly insane to keep seeing this argument being posted over and over by AI shills on the internet.

>>6413052
critique or parody only, and only in small scale, AI reproduction scale is infinite.

[Sigma No.6413057]

Whatever the case is: talk to artists you know in real life about it.

Make them know what copyfraud is.

Let's not allow code to replace people.
I don't want to live in the Matrix and neither do sane people.

>And yes, artists also need to stop being cunts.

[Anonymous No.6413058]

>>6413054
What's the comic called?

[Anonymous No.6413059]

>>6413055
But majority of people are retards. I wouldn't even shed a tear if billions died.

[Anonymous No.6413060]

>>6413055
>me losing art as a career is the same as humanity going extinct
Holy fuck you're out of touch. Please go tell random people on the street about this lol

[Anonymous No.6413063]

>>6413057
Just lrn2code

[Anonymous No.6413066]

>>6413060
AI tech absolutely strives to replace every human job sooner or later and if you ask AI enthusiasts about it, they usually admit it. They'll just claim it's fine because something something UBI

[Anonymous No.6413068]

>>6413058
“Zarya of the Dawn”, you can read their claim to the copyright office if you are curious. It was initially granted without disclosure of the AI generated nature, then a cancelation was initiated and now they want to have it reaffirmed https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Idhn8eb9t883mm_U4CxAQQ_aANTI7UTX/view

[Sigma No.6413070]

>>6413060
I rarely see anyone in favor of AI pointing out to anything even remotely viable as an alternative to their previous crafts or tasks in society.

Even very primitive societies had stuff for everybody to do.

This new so-called "advanced" society wouldn't even be able to provide that.
Sounds like a beyond primitive problem to me.

[Anonymous No.6413071]

Why should I care about this?

[Anonymous No.6413072]

>>6413068
>now they want to have it reaffirmed
So the case isn't even decided yet?

[Anonymous No.6413073]

>>6412894
>Stop tilting at windmills and learn how to use AI as a tool
More like: "Stop doing anything and learn how to let the AI do it all for you".

I saw a guy that used chatGPT to write a story and midjourney to illustrate it. Ok, so he did what?

I feel like AI fags are trying to insert them in their generations, like they were a important part of the production and that AI was used merely as tool.

[Sigma No.6413075]

>>6413068
Great public domain work that you did not make.

[Anonymous No.6413076]

>>6413030
you mean this? https://aibusiness.com/ml/ai-generated-comic-book-loses-copyright-protection

[Sigma No.6413077]

>>6413073
Redditor explains how to commit copyfraud.

[Anonymous No.6413078]

>>6413072
Yes.

[Anonymous No.6413079]

>>6413073
>I just want people to think I created something without actually having created it
This is the ultimate stage of a redditor

[Anonymous No.6413080]

>>6413066
You see it just comes off as artists trying to save their own skin. And artists are fucking unbearable. I say we let AI develop to destroy artist jobs and then we have out great crusade to prevent further development. Artists have been scummy propagandists for woke ideological garbage and I really don't give a fuck about them lol

[Anonymous No.6413083]

>>6413070
We have HR roasties sitting around in offices taking selfies and sending a useless email once an hour making 6 figures to do it. Our current society doesn't really have jobs for everyone but we just fake it

[Anonymous No.6413084]

>>6412808
Can AI art be considered transformative content? For example there are people who edit and use copyrighted content on youtube or collage art and some of this cannot be copyrighted because it is considered transformative. Wouldn't AI art then be considered transformative content in the same way they are?

[Anonymous No.6413087]

>>6413076
Yeah, that's it.

[Anonymous No.6413088]

>>6413084
Yes, it is which is why it isn't copyright infringement

[Anonymous No.6413091]

>>6413088
So isn't it futile for artists to take legal action against AI art then? If so why do people continue to debate the legality when it doesn't even hold up?

[Anonymous No.6413095]

>>6412894
>learn how to use AI as a tool
Took less than a day, thanks. Now that I have that in the back of my pocket I can keep creating without AI and not worry about it unless my job expects me to do it. Proompting is an unskilled task and anyone can get the hang of it quickly unless you're a 60 year old who doesn't know how to forward an email.

[Anonymous No.6413098]

>>6413066
AI enthusiasts are fucking idiots. They think since it's hip and cool it means things are going to get better with AI which is entirely the opposite.

[Anonymous No.6413101]

>>6413091
Because lawyers are making money off it and rich jews can bribe judges on occasion to make the transition into AI dominated culture a little less disruptive to their control over it

[Anonymous No.6413103]

>>6413080
You are a fucking retard and a pajeet if you think art is solely used for propaganda fucking cock gobbling retarded idiot.

[Anonymous No.6413104]

>>6413095
Pyw (AI)
>>6413098
>Electricity enthusiasts are fucking idiots
Thanks Amish guy

[Anonymous No.6413105]

>>6413103
All the artists I know are fucking faggot lefties so I truly support them having their livelihoods destroyed by AI lol

[Anonymous No.6413106]

>>6413091
It's a grey area righ now because AI art is not created by humans the same way any other form of art would be. Eg you can't copyright an art style and forbid other people from drawing similar things but feeding a bunch of someone else's art into SD, so that it produces images in that person's style? Not against the law but most would agree that it's fucked up, especially if you later want to claim copyright over the results. It's a good thing that the AI comic book claim has been denied so far, though.

[Anonymous No.6413108]

>>6413091
Because kikes are making loads of money off artists.

[Anonymous No.6413111]

>>6413108
Its actually kind of funny that artists think they'll continue to be taken care of by jews after they're no longer useful and they can outsource the work to AI. See how well that worked out for white Americans that "saved" them from the supposed holocaust

[Anonymous No.6413128]

>>6413073
> He thinks he will go to an art convention and anyone won't be able to spot the use of AI in his works in a a matter of nanoseconds

let's all laugh at this retard and his expectations.

[Anonymous No.6413133]

>>6413073
So basically the future of comics is just being a LARPer. People will respect the medium even less.

[Anonymous No.6413137]

>>6413104
The Amish are more respectable people than anyone on this site.

[Anonymous No.6413138]

>>6413133
As long as it creates fun content i don't care. I really don't give a fuck how "genuine" and artist is if they can produce something cool

[Anonymous No.6413141]

>>6413137
And they're also at the mercy of any group that's willing to use electricity, unless they're being protected by the mercy of the government (using electricity)

[Anonymous No.6413158]

>>6413128
Redditors don't actually leave their basement, so he'll be fine

[Anonymous No.6413160]

>>6412882
We don't really now how much they harass the pros. On one hand, they flood every serious discussion about thievery of AI art with the most insufferable trannies accounts to portrait artist as insane leftist, on the other hand I saw them accuse artist as Nazi simply because Hitler was an artists himself. They want to lure political fanatics from both sides to defense AI for them because these people are the most insane people in the world.

[Anonymous No.6413165]

>>6413160
They're really just self centered narcissists that think they can trick people that hate them into supporting their cause. Ain't happening

[Anonymous No.6413180]

>>6413138
Fair enough. As long as the "artist" and "writer" aren't soaking up unearned praise I could care less if people enjoy the content. They won't be able to make a name for themselves anyway with hundreds of millions of competitors.

[Anonymous No.6413186]

>>6413180
Yeah I mean if thats what people are worried about (people getting more attention than them) i think they have nothing to worry about since anybody can make the art that they like now, plus its pretty pathetic to care about something like that

[Anonymous No.6413195]

>>6413186
Not him, but the real problem should be drastically reducing people needed while also flooding the market.

[Anonymous No.6413200]

>earning recognition for your achievements
>bad.
always comes down to seeth doesn't it

[Anonymous No.6413201]

>>6413195
wont replace all* artists

[Anonymous No.6413203]

>>6413186
I personally enjoy knocking down self important retards a few pegs.

[Anonymous No.6413207]

>>6413203
This place is great for bullying faggoty "creatives"

[Anonymous No.6413208]

>>6413165
They have used the same bait for 10 years and always have some retards got hooked.

[Anonymous No.6413211]

>>6413207
Such was always the case, even long before AI

[Anonymous No.6413213]

>>6413203
>>6413207
Do you people even make art or do you just come here to shitpost

[Anonymous No.6413214]

>>6412950
Yeah, art is decentralized while music is controlled by a few labels. Messing with copywrited music means messing with big corp which is a big no.

So if artists want that kind of "protection" they will have to sell their souls to big corp.

[Anonymous No.6413215]

>>6413213
The fuck is "art"? Define it

[Anonymous No.6413230]

>>6413213
Of course they don't lol

[Anonymous No.6413248]

>>6413214
If they aren't trying it out already, I'm sure at some point the big labels will try using AI to rehash the things they already own and release new music by bands and singers that don't exist.

[Anonymous No.6413257]

>>6413208
Roll up and see
>>6413080
>>6413105
>>6413111
>>6412949

[Anonymous No.6413260]

>>6413213
Does ai count?

[Anonymous No.6413263]

>>6413260
Pyaiw

[Anonymous No.6413269]

>>6413195
Guy probably does not realize that this thing will affect even the gamedevs in the next few years. Plus as a gamedev I can tell you that AI is pretty bad for literally anything that is not pinup art or personal coom. Trying to use any of these tools to just "visualise" the conceptart is fucking impossible, so after spending whole day working with Midjurney and SD, we decided to go back to doodling with pencils. Not even to mention making textures that follow the UV. Professional artists are pretty safe since diffusion models are very limited with their derivativeness and trying to get what you want, even with professional prompt engineer (asked some guy on discord who was working with SD since release). It will start being a problem when AI start making full movies and games by themselves, until then there will still be need for commercial artists.

[Anonymous No.6413276]

>>6413248
They already do this on Spotify. They promote artists who don't exist and are just made up by the corporation on their playlists and such. Most of it is just drone type noise or other AI generated garbage. This is so they don't have to share as many profits to real musicians and can keep a percentage for themselves.

[Anonymous No.6413280]

>>6413248
Big jew always wins

[Anonymous No.6413295]

>>6412808
>Make AI artpiece
>Cant own it
>Say you made it by hand
>Nobody can tell the difference
>Get AI art copyrighted

[Anonymous No.6413383]

>>6412933
>hm, well you learned to make art by looking at other art, heh heh check mate sweetie you're just like the aye eye
AI shills being disingenuous, anthropomorphizing a dumb algorithm, and pretending that what they're doing isn't effectively just copying pictures and photobashing them together? Nooo. No way.

[Anonymous No.6413483]

>>6413295
Or just simply add minor changes made by hand and suddenly it's all yours

[Anonymous No.6413526]

>>6413073
>I saw a guy that used chatGPT to write a story and midjourney to illustrate it. Ok, so he did what?
Kek, found another one and he's crediting himself as an author and selling it at amazon too.

[Anonymous No.6413539]

>>6412850
>Karla Ortiz
You just want to give /g/ endless ammo don't you?
>>6412889
She even posts impulsively on twitter in ways that do the opposite of helping

[Anonymous No.6413541]

>>6412894
>Enjoy being a slave to the Chinese AI hivemind
The US cut their access to top of the line GPUs and that already fucks them in competing against the US in AI capabilities.
Honestly the class of people pushing for the genocide of humanity by thinking machines dropped the ball by targeting art this early in the game. A historic blunder if I've ever seen one.

[Anonymous No.6413564]

>>6413383
your brain is doing the same bro, taking what you seen before and breaking it down into parts and then reassembling the techniques and whatever in final image. it's the same with other parts of life, people get inspired by things happening around them and then act that way, that's why kids from violent families often end up violent themselves, and thats what you are doing with your art, seen someone draw idk skirts better than you and so you essentially copy their technique for that

[Anonymous No.6413570]

>>6413526
Ammaar Reshi - fucking every single time.

[Anonymous No.6413577]

>>6413541
They got too cocky from the scamdemic.

[Anonymous No.6413580]

>>6413541
>the game is rigged however (((they))) made a huge mistake going against spineless artists
Get real. Your unipolar world is over

[Anonymous No.6413586]

>>6413526
It's a book grooming little kids to love AI

[Anonymous No.6413587]

>>6413564
You will never be a real artist. You have no talent, you have no skills, you have no imagination. You are an untalented redditor twisting pixels by using buzzwords and interpolation into a crude mockery of nature’s perfection.

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

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

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

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

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

[Anonymous No.6413595]

>>6413586
>this is what discord art trannies consider grooming
It's over

[Anonymous No.6413596]

>>6413595
Are you an AI?

[Anonymous No.6413598]

>>6413587
ChatGPT rewrite this in the style of an anime villain channeling Tuxedo Mask

[Anonymous No.6413600]

>>6413564
Crazy that you talk so confidently about something you clearly don't understand just spouting off the first shit that comes to mind

[Anonymous No.6413601]

>>6413586

[Anonymous No.6413607]

>>6413587
ik it's a copypasta but
>you will never be a real artist
brooooo, why'd I want to downgrade myself like that?

>>6413600
>Crazy that you talk so confidently about something you clearly don't understand just spouting off the first shit that comes to mind

okay, prove me wrong then, that you don't use techniques and methods that you learned off other people, i would genuinely love to see an artstyle that's been entirely crafted by a single person, without any outside influences whatsoever

[Anonymous No.6413610]

>>6413587
You're right, but stop feeding the troll.

[Anonymous No.6413611]

>>6413607
Why make art then?

[Anonymous No.6413615]

>>6412850
>since a robot cannot hold rights
Unrelated, but I've been wondering how this impacts the "AI are just learning how to draw the same as humans" argument
Maybe the courts will rule that it's illegal to make machines that "learn" from copyrighted material without having some sort of license

[Anonymous No.6413618]

>>6413601
Kek

[Anonymous No.6413621]

>>6413615
It's a stupid argument to begin with. AI can't learn anything "the same as humans" because it doesn't have a human brain. If we pretend that there's no difference, then we would need to start thinking about giving AI algorithms human rights as well

[Anonymous No.6413622]

>>6413621
>we would need to start thinking about giving AI algorithms human rights as well
Don't give them any ideas anon

[Anonymous No.6413627]

>>6413586
>the story explores the incredible abilities of AI and the importance of using them for good
>for good
>while all he did is literally the bad example lmao
The irony.... imagine teaching your kid to normalize stealing

[Anonymous No.6413641]

>>6413627
You've never seen a scholarly debate regarding the epistemological exploration of Intellectual Property have you? You just call it stealing even if your monopoly on an idea because you produced some derivative work which makes you think can overwrite physical property rights in trad art.

[Anonymous No.6413647]

>>6413641
>using ChatGPT to write your posts

[Anonymous No.6413654]

>>6413621
>If we pretend that there's no difference, then we would need to start thinking about giving AI algorithms human rights as well
I'm not really keeping up with the discourse around AI art but I've seen a lot of people trying to distinguish the details of the learning processes of AI from humans, which feels like a red herring pro-AI people are laying down on purpose
I agree that just drawing a line between the rights of humans and machines (if they have any) is probably the best path forwards for artists. Although that could have it's own wider implicationsp2an

[Anonymous No.6413657]

>>6413647
/ic/ has been successfully gaslit

[Anonymous No.6413699]

>>6413621
It truly is horrible how badly this aspect has been pulled under the rug, on total bad faith.
A.I is not a person like entity when it comes down to property of created content (I, the person am the creator, AI just the tool) but it is a person when it comes down to the relationship with real artists (AI learns the same way a human does, so there's nothing wrong with giving nothing to the humans that created the learning data).
You can't have it both ways.

[Anonymous No.6413705]

>>6413641
It's not about stealing data, not ideas.

[Anonymous No.6413729]

>>6413699
ai niggers are the same group that argued nft's would eliminate poverty but simultaneously make them fabulously rich beyond their wildest dreams
all scammers talk out of both sides of their mouths and that hasn't changed, only their grift changes.

[Anonymous No.6413731]

>>6413104
>>Electricity enthusiasts are fucking idiots
They are in a sense, I mean global warming is a thing and if we don't handle it properly millions could die. What kind of genius get themselves into a situation like that?

[Anonymous No.6413739]

>>6413607
The problem is comparing how humans learn to ml models the similarities are at best superficial saying "ai learns like humans" is just obfuscation

[Anonymous No.6413743]

>>6413731
>themselves
that's the catch buddy, the millions dying will (mostly) be shaved off of the bottom 90% of humanity

[Anonymous No.6413745]

>>6413739
I wouldn't say it's about learning like humans, it's more about why it's fine for you to utilize memories of drawings of other people in your own drawings, but it's wrong for a machine to utilize the drawings too, sure the way they are used is different, since you cannot denoise an image in your brain, the result is still the same, the images you seen during your learning influencing your final output, same for AI.

[Anonymous No.6413750]

>>6413729
No we aren't.

[Anonymous No.6413754]

>>6413745
Memory bros...

https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2022/06/technology-helps-self-driving-cars-learn-own-memories

[Anonymous No.6413760]

>>6413699
No, ai doesn't learn the same way a human does fucking retard. Holy fuck. AI is more like an algorithm than AI there is really nothing that makes it human-like due to AI lacking in severe cognitive abilities and emotions that humans have.

[Anonymous No.6413761]

>>6413760
Yes, that is what I said, it is an absurd, but it is what we are told, it both is and isn't, only when it is convenient for shills.

[Anonymous No.6413762]

Hang on tight :)

[Anonymous No.6413766]

>>6413762
Is that the guy who tours preaching about his NFTs?

[Anonymous No.6413771]

>>6413766
No of course not you're imagining things.

[Anonymous No.6413773]

>>6413745
Doesn't matter and doesn't change the fact that the data was obtained through ill gotten methods and contains copyrighted/legally suspect material the idea that an algorithm should receive the same benefit of the doubt that a human mind does in regards to creation/copying is ridiculous even if it is "learning"

[Anonymous No.6413776]

>>6413773
Alright, please do forget any images that are copyrighted, you wouldn't want your brain to use them next time you are drawing, would you?

[Anonymous No.6413779]

>>6413776
>>6413699
Within the same thread, within the same range of posts, and you still try to act stupid.
Truly shameless bad faith, really hard to take you seriously

[Anonymous No.6413780]

>>6413773
>>6413776
Also there should be no benefit of the doubt, either it's fine both for humans and machines to process copyrighted images, and create images using that copyrighted data, or both are forbidden from doing that

[Anonymous No.6413782]

>>6413564
Actual retard with Dunning Kruger syndrome
Artists don't photobash with their brains idiot

[Anonymous No.6413790]

>>6413782
AI isn't photobashing either, that's not how the process works, however artists who learn off copyrighted material have that knowledge they gained off it influnece their future paintings, that shouldn't be legal

[Anonymous No.6413800]

>>6413586
>Indian last name
>works in Silicon Valley
>uses a children's book to shill software as world changing
AIfags are living parodies. It would be funny if it weren't so scummy.

[Anonymous No.6413801]

>>6413745
Because there is a difference between humans and machines, you idiot. Humans have rights, algorithms do not. It is a tool, it's like claiming that a car should have the right to go to prison if it malfunctions and drives over somebody. It's "fine" for an ai to "memorize" images and use them to interpolate other images but nobody can claim copyright over the results because the AI created them and an AI does not have rights to begin with.

Now, you can have lenghty discussions on how much percentage of an ai image has to be modified by a human so that said human can claim copyright over it and I assume these discussions will happen in various courts in the upcoming years. But that's not the same as claiming that a MACHINE should be able to claim copyright over an artwork.

[Anonymous No.6413812]

>>6413790
The explain Keanu Reeve's entire face showing up in a random prompt out of nowhere, looking suspiciously like it was photobashed.
Spoilers- you won't. Because that's more or less exactly how it works- in effect. That's the key words here, *in effect*. It's not the technical, literal explanation for it, but that's pretty much what it amounts to in the end result.

[Anonymous No.6413813]

>>6413586
>>6413526
kek

[Anonymous No.6413816]

>>6413801
But since image created by AI is completly free of any copyright, that'd mean ANY change done by you would be enough to make it copyrightable, as it's not like you are overwriting other copyrighted artwork with your changes, you are overwriting blank slate dumbass.
Also, I may be wrong on that, but all sources I see after a surface search, point towards the fact that it is fine to copyright AI artworks, as ArsTechnica states, "Despite popular misconception (explained in the Getty piece), the US Copyright Office has not ruled against copyright on AI artworks. Instead, it ruled out copyright registered to an AI as the author instead of a human."

[Anonymous No.6413824]

>>6413816
Well, that AI comic got denied its copyright claim despite having been made with human input, no? So it's still a grey area at best.

[Anonymous No.6413828]

>>6413812
Ah yes, a generic white male face popping up in a generated image, it's almost as if the model was trained on a large amount of these. Guess what, if you told someone who only seen Keanu Reeves out of all people to draw a smiling man, you have great chances it'll be keanu reeves that's being drawn, since that's only reference for how a human looks like for that person.

[Anonymous No.6413834]

More proof that AIfags are shameless shills.

https://nitter.it/CoreyBrickley/status/1602115880460091393

[Anonymous No.6413838]

>>6413824
On the other side you had this person
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2022/09/artist-receives-first-known-us-copyright-registration-for-generative-ai-art/
seems it's also a comic

[Anonymous No.6413843]

>>6412808
op already blown out weeks ago >>6413076

[Anonymous No.6413844]

>>6413834
one of them not like the others

[Anonymous No.6413845]

>>6413838
That's the same person, the request later got denied because the office claimed they "overlooked" that it was generated by an AI. See >>6413076

[Anonymous No.6413847]

>>6413828
>Guess what, if you told someone who only seen Keanu Reeves out of all people to draw a smiling man, you have great chances it'll be keanu reeves that's being drawn, since that's only reference for how a human looks like for that person.
Literally whomst would have never seen another person their whole life other than Keanu Reeves. What a retarded argument.

[Anonymous No.6413850]

>>6413834
These people sound like cultists kek. Even the "art" this guy chose looks like the kind of shit Jehova's witnesses would put out, those creepy, dead-eyed smiles...

[Anonymous No.6413860]

>>6413838
What's with techies immediately jumping into one of if not the most challenging creative field in the art world? They could mog photobash concept artists and low-effort pinup patrons sure, but sequential art requires extensive knowledge in a plethora of things like gesture, composition, story, flow, characterization, and many many more things. These hacks get their sweaty fingers on a waifu gacha and immediately they think of themselves as Guillermo del Toro

[Anonymous No.6413866]

>>6413828
>the nAIggerfAIggot resorts to bald-faced lies and denial of what is right in front of both of our faces

[Anonymous No.6413875]

>>6413850
This stuff is gonna bring in a new era of the most cursed children's propoganda ever seen. Elsagate 2.0 but this time it's Mormons and people grooming little kids to transition. I for one, look forward to the youtube compilations making fun of them.

[Anonymous No.6413881]

>>6412808
The End of Art: An Argument Against Image AIs
by Stephen Zapata:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjSxFAGP9Ss

[Anonymous No.6413882]

>>6413812
It's not even the same face. Also where's the seed? Give the prompt. Would you like to take this to /g/ and get mogged again by people who obsess over this field as opposed to you who thinks you can disrupt SD with white noise or add images to LAION by generating it locally?

[Anonymous No.6413890]

>>6413882
Have you ever made art?

[Anonymous No.6413892]

>>6413881
That's too dramatic and clickbaity. "The rape of the artist" sounds better and more attention grabbing.

[Anonymous No.6413893]

>>6413890
>has he installed SD?
I guess he made art then, lmao

[Anonymous No.6413905]

>>6413882
>it's not even the same face
>same beard, same face, head inclined at the same angle, looks 99% like the image in question
>i-it's not the same broh, it's just not, look, the pixels aren't even identical IT'S NOT THE SAME OKAY?!?!?!?!
And the denial continues.
I got it from here, by the way- https://www.artstation.com/artwork/14zy3K
Coincidentally, it was one of you fAIggots shilling in a thread that lead me to this, so you have my thanks for that, whoever it was.
By the way, while we're here, let's just pull out another clear case of SD generating what is undeniably something that it was trained on. I also got this from an AI fag that posted it as an example of the SamDoesArts dataset. I don't have to do this myself, you guys just shoot yourselves in the foot for me.

[Anonymous No.6413917]

>>6413905
The seething by AIcels over that guy was truly something else. Also perfect example of soul vs soulless, even if you look past the nightmare hands

[Anonymous No.6413922]

>>6412808
It's all useless now, they will just keep generating AI images and training models no matter what. They don't need Stability AI for that anymore.

[Anonymous No.6413933]

>>6413905
call me a coomer, but I'm glad sam's shit got trained, seen pretty hot images sam would never draw ;)

[Anonymous No.6413943]

>>6413905
Anon that's not even SD. It's MidJourney LMAO. We already know you have zero scholarly interest in AI but proceed to talk out your ass. You don't need to make yourself look dumber.

[Anonymous No.6413947]

>>6413943
Have you ever created anything

[Anonymous No.6413951]

>>6413943
Well, thanks for informing me that I actually have a clear cut case of plagiarism from TWO different image generation algorithms! This is better than I thought at first!
Thank you anon, you're very helpful. I'll be sure to mention that the next time I post these two images, and change the filename of the first to reflect that correction.

[Anonymous No.6413958]

>>6412920
Exactly.
Keep up the good fight Sigma.

[Anonymous No.6413960]

>>6413800
He's also an NFTfag.

[Anonymous No.6413968]

>>6413843
>ai comic loses copyright
>this is op getting btfo

[Anonymous No.6413974]

>>6413780
Just because aifags like you equate humans with ai doesn't mean its true

[Anonymous No.6413976]

>>6413960
I still can’t begin to understand how people fell for nft

[Anonymous No.6413978]

>https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2022/12/china-bans-ai-generated-media-without-watermarks/
Also, reminder that even China thinks AIcels are a fraud

[Anonymous No.6413982]

>>6412808
I'll take "Weird", autistic and nihilistic coding bros over you trannies drawing furry porn for money any day. It's time for bad artists to get back to their true calling: Minimum wage unskilled labor.

[Anonymous No.6413984]

>>6413383
I see you just discovered img2img. Now you can take the time to learn how it actually works.

[Anonymous No.6413988]

>>6413978
>Chinks have more soul then AIfags
This is unreal, we are reaching levels of soullessness never to been imaginable. It also makes 100% sense. Why didn’t we do it from the start?

[Anonymous No.6413996]

>>6413978
China cares about domestic control, it doesn't care about ai niggers specifically but it's a step in the right direction. It will have ramifications for all, including any "prompteur" hoping for a studio job. Anglosphere should follow suit.

[Anonymous No.6413997]

>>6413982
>I'll take "Weird", autistic and nihilistic coding bros over you trannies drawing furry porn for money any day

>AIfag pretending they aren't the same people

[Anonymous No.6414003]

>>6413996
It's just funny because one of the arguments redditors kept making was that it's no use to stop the dystopian AI future because something something China

[Anonymous No.6414007]

>>6413997
>r/VaushV
It fascinating how this guy manages to attract the most insufferable people online

[Anonymous No.6414009]

>>6413997
Did this guy get his butthole molested by an artist or something

[Anonymous No.6414010]

Dear artists, how long do you think copyright should last, and why.

[Anonymous No.6414011]

>>6414010
Until I am dead. After that all free loaders can take a hike and make their own properties. Before that I need to be able to support myself in retirement.

[Anonymous No.6414012]

>>6413997
He says there's no justification for getting into art even as a hobby, but has "art" in his username and does AI art as a hobby..

[Anonymous No.6414014]

>>6413982
The divide between 'coder bros' and 'artists' is pointless because AI threatens to devalue both. Given that a very large amount of software solves the same problems over and over again, AI might replace a lot of the work software developers do faster than it replaces artists. Artists that draw similar stuff over and over will probably get their shit owned too, but 3d artists, animators, mechanical designers, product designers, etc are prolly gonna be fine for awhile.

[Anonymous No.6414016]

>>6414007
How the hell is it fascinating? He's a literal real life soijack

[Anonymous No.6414022]

>>6414009
>>6414012
My guess is that it's someone who always loved drawing as a kid and got praised by his classmates just to later discover that you need to practise to actually get anywhere near decent. Just instead of trying, he gave up, yet never got over it and now all the hidden frustration and jealousy are bursting out of him ... in the form of ai created bondage furry art.

[Anonymous No.6414024]

>>6413997
Reading through those comments you barely see any difference from the average faggots posting on this board just from the snarky effemminated writing style alone.

He does have a few valid points though, even more valid since it's all being downvoted, just for being "rude", but artists being the retarded niggers they are, they wouldn't want to hear or read anything that shatters their delusions, no matter if you give them diabetes with words.
Well, it's not like they can read either.

[Anonymous No.6414028]

>>6414016
I'm not saying he's fascinating as a person, I'm fascinated by the sheer amount of human scum he manages to attract

[Anonymous No.6414029]

>>6414014
The job loss is inevitable, yeah. The real issue for artists is the wrongful use of copyrighted content but AIbros are desperate to distract everyone from that issue (and honestly most art people aren't doing a great job at staying on topic either)

[Anonymous No.6414030]

>>6413982
>implying they aren't doing the same thing for money
And if you want unskilled labor, look at codemonkies.

[Anonymous No.6414036]

Hey I got some good news, kinda. Don't ask me how I know but the Music version of AI art is right around the corner, and it's actually good. So maybe the focus will shift away from visual art.

[Anonymous No.6414038]

>>6414036
So they stopped being scared of the music industry?

[Anonymous No.6414040]

>>6414036
Yes, resident >>>/mu/fag, you told us 135464 times already

[Anonymous No.6414041]

>>6414030
Whats the highest aspiration of an artist? Creating entertainment? Propaganda? Like what is the economic purpose of art that you think you artists deserve to be paid more than minimum wage, if at all?

[Anonymous No.6414042]

>>6414029
Well there's a similar issue with Github and Copilot that artists should keep an eye on. Github is a website where people can upload code. Code can be set to 'public' so that anyone can see it. Microsoft (owner of Github so the behaviour should surprise no one) scanned many millions of lines of code to create an AI tool that auto generates code for you. This AI is worse for copyright violation than the art stuff because it sometimes just copy pastes stuff directly -- ie the code looks exactly the same as what it was trained on.

Anyways, iirc someone has sued Microsoft because of this and the ruling might be important for artistfriends because of its wide reaching implications on the use of AI. imo the cat's already out of the bag though and there's not a lot of ways anyone can prove that an image or text was AI generated.

If you are privileged enough in life and are worried about this shit, I think you should learn as much as you can about the tools you are scared of and be on the right side of wherever this leads.

[Anonymous No.6414048]

>>6414041
Do you measure everything in your life by its "economic purpose"?

[Anonymous No.6414056]

>>6414041
>what's the highest aspiration of an artist?
likes and followers so they can open up a patreon, get $10k a month and stop drawing while they spam their twitter accounts with clips from the videogames they play while also virtue signaling about the gays or something for clout
while circlejerking with other high follow count artists on the discords so they can feel special that they made friends with other famous people while being famous

OR

Exposing and grooming children to their sexual fetishes and get money and admiration from them

If you think artists are motivated by economic purpose, you don't know anything.

[Anonymous No.6414059]

>>6414041
The question is worded in such a bad faith format that I don't think you're actually looking for an answer.
You've cried to a song, you have a favorite movie that defines an aspect of your personality, you watched spongebob as a kid and without videogames you would had likely already killed yourself long ago.
What is there to live for, if there is no art?
This is not an abstract tearjerker, this is a very concrete question, there is no art, what do you do?

[Anonymous No.6414060]

>>6414042
>imo the cat's already out of the bag though and there's not a lot of ways anyone can prove that an image or text was AI generated.
I'm not a lawyer but I feel like copyright law is complex and important enough to make the issue not completely settled yet. I could see a future where ML is regulated to only be done on licensed data sets or something. This would still fuck over 90% of artists but that's not really in the realm of the law anymore.

[Anonymous No.6414064]

>>6414048
I do when thinking about its place in the economy and whether it should be a high paying career

[Anonymous No.6414067]

>>6414059
No I'm actually not a mindless consumer and I didn't form my identity around mass media and entertainment. You sound like a miserable bugperson

[Anonymous No.6414068]

>>6414059
Your post is basically
>wow how are you supposed to feel if you don't consume art? There is no meaning if you don't consume! be grateful to artists!! let that sink in!
Holy npc on a stick

[Anonymous No.6414070]

>>6414067
>>6414068
Life is consumption.
Food, conversation, sunlight, water.
All forms of sensory and material consumption that qualify a good life.
Consumption without a basis is what is bad and what makes the 'consoomer', consumption for consumptions sake, or consumption in order to escape reality rather than to better oneself through some moral or knowledge gained.
If you think otherwise, make sure to stop talking to others, don't ever read another book or watch another movie, either, lest you be le heckin' consoomer.

[Anonymous No.6414071]

>>6414067
>>6414068
You say that, but you still do it, don't you?
Right as we speak you're listening to music, the moment you get off work you're not sitting down to read plato, you watch anime or play videogames, in fact chances are it's the only thing you ever do, let's face it, you're on 4chan on an A.I thread in /ic/ why pretend you're any better?

[Anonymous No.6414072]

>>6414070
>if I expand the concept of consuming to mean everything, then you're a mindless consumer too!
>checkmate, I don't have to address your actual argument!
Jokes on you, I never expected intellectual honesty on 4chan in the first place

[Anonymous No.6414074]

>>6414041
What's the highest aspiration of a codemonkey?

[Anonymous No.6414075]

>>6414041
>>Whats the highest aspiration of an artist?
it vary depending on the individual artist and their personal goals and motivations. It has no ultimate goal unless you count graphic designers and commercial illustrators in which case there is a metric to be met. I do art to create entertainment or express myself creatively. In the case of troons and goomers, it may be to create propaganda or to make a political or social statement. Ultimately, the purpose of art and the value it holds is subjective, and different people may have different opinions on the matter. Why is that so fucking hard to grasp?
Once again /ic/ gives no shits about art and just wants to gate keep its "Artist identity". But that's' nothing new /ic/ and twitter troon artists have been histrionic YEARS before AI.

[Anonymous No.6414076]

>>6414074
HRT and dilation

[Anonymous No.6414077]

>>6414072
I'm not the original anon.
I just thought
>>wow how are you supposed to feel if you don't consume art? There is no meaning if you don't consume! be grateful to artists!! let that sink in!
was short sighted.
What argument are you giving? That wanting to feel anything from art is bad? It is a very weird sort of own. Why even have any sort of art in the first place, should we just rid society of it?

[Anonymous No.6414079]

>>6414074
>>What's the highest aspiration of a codemonkey?
The term "codemonkey" is often used as a pejorative term to refer to a programmer or software developer, and it suggests that they are just a mindless worker who simply follows orders and writes code without any thought or creativity. As such, it is difficult to say what the highest aspiration of a "codemonkey" might be, as it depends on the individual and their personal goals and motivations. Some programmers may be motivated by a desire to solve complex technical problems and create innovative software, while others may be more focused on career advancement or financial gain. Ultimately, the aspirations of any individual, regardless of their profession, are likely to be unique and personal to them.

[Anonymous No.6414080]

>>6414071
I don't play videogames, I'm not listening to music, I rarely listen to music and usually only as background and white noise to drown out distractions. I don't watch anime, no. I do like making fun pictures with AI art but art is not the purpose of life. I'm here because I thought I might find some people here that appreciate the possibilities that AI art opens up instead of just a bunch of crabs in a bucket.

[Anonymous No.6414082]

>>6414076
Well, to be fair, that's the highest aspiration of the average codemonkey and the average artist kek
That's the most malicious thing about all of this, is it turns two groups of people who have historically enjoyed similar things, worked together to improve communication and entertainment, into two warring factions, arguing pointlessly about who will get baleeted first.

Wonder who could be behind this.

[Anonymous No.6414084]

>>6414080
>I don't play videogames, I'm not listening to music, I rarely listen to music and usually only as background and white noise to drown out distractions. I don't watch anime, no. I do like making fun pictures with AI art but art is not the purpose of life. I'm here because I thought I might find some people here that appreciate the possibilities that AI art opens up instead of just a bunch of crabs in a bucket.
It sounds like you are interested in exploring the possibilities of AI art and are looking for others who share your interest. While art may not be the purpose of life for everyone, it can certainly be a meaningful and enjoyable pursuit for many people. There may be others on this forum who are interested in AI art and would be happy to discuss it with you. It can be rewarding to connect with others who share your interests and to discuss the potential of AI art and how it is evolving.

[Anonymous No.6414086]

>>6414082
The tradies?

[Anonymous No.6414087]

>>6414070
>consuming = good
No.
Consuming shouldn't take priority or such an importance in life, since if you do, you define your existence by the things you consume and that makes you less than a person.

What defines an artist or a real person is creation, the urge to create and how the artist expresses himself.

Now post your work, you stupid nigger.
>>6414071
I am clearly mentally, morally and genetically superior to you.

Maybe go back to r*ddit where low iq faggots like yourself will agree and upvote your post so you can validate your own intelligence.

[Anonymous No.6414090]

>the genie is out of the bottle

[Anonymous No.6414091]

>>6414086
based, electricity was a mistake

[Anonymous No.6414092]

>>6414087
>posts anime screencap

[Anonymous No.6414094]

>>6414092
Anime website.

[Anonymous No.6414096]

>>6414080
Have you ever been able to enjoy art before you discovered ai art? This also applies to writing btw

[Anonymous No.6414099]

>>6414074
>>6414079
https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammerHumor/search?q=ai&restrict_sr=on&include_over_18=on
codebros are panicking, chat ai shits out more efficient code than the average coder

[Anonymous No.6414100]

>>6414075
>I do art to create entertainment or express myself creatively. In the case of troons and goomers, it may be to create propaganda or to make a political or social statement.
People trying to better the world in their own way just seems morally more justifiable than someone jerking off in the corner for their own benefit only, never got how people like you find their own point of view anything but pathetic.
>>6414087
>>consuming = good
>No.
You completely missed the point of what I said, wow. Anyway, if consuming on the whole, even in cases to try to inspire yourself and raise yourself spiritually or morally is bad ( even though no true creative does not have their inspirations ) make sure to never do it again.
Make sure to never look ANY type of art again, listen to ANY music again, read ANY type of book again, or talk to ANY other person again, lest you be going against your own morals. Delete that file while you are at it, you probably didn't create that.

[Anonymous No.6414101]

>>6414041
>>6414087
>>6414067
>>6414068
By the way, you bunch of retards, the question was what was the higher aspiration of an artist in order to justify getting paid anything more than pennies, and I answered it literally defines the lives of everyone it touches, it creates culture and identity, and that's very valuable.
The individual journey of personal artistry is something entirely separate not worth sharing with the likes of you.

[Anonymous No.6414102]

Just made this with AI art, what do you guys think? And feel free to use, sell, or repost as you wish! Enjoy!

[Anonymous No.6414104]

>>6414099
it's fine, true code-bros (non pajeets) know and worship the coming technological singularity, ie Nerd Rapture

soon all will be ai

[Anonymous No.6414106]

>>6414101
The nazis did value art highly for its propaganda and national identity formation potential

[Anonymous No.6414105]

>>6414102
Doesn't read well, barely looks like pepe, it needs more stylistic changes for it to work as one.
But good try

[Anonymous No.6414107]

>>6414101
artfags already get paid in pennies, 99% of 'tards who call themselves artist never made any money with their art

[Anonymous No.6414108]

>>6414101
These people are deep nihilists that find anyone who actually is privy to trying to do something positive for the collective of man as morally reprehensible, see how they value art only as a mastrubatory, self serving activity and hate it's possible use as a general force for good.

[Anonymous No.6414109]

>>6414100
This jump to a binary all or nothing mindset is just a concession in a serious discussion. Accepted

[Anonymous No.6414110]

>>6414102
why does he wear the mask?

[Anonymous No.6414113]

>>6414105
How did you know it was a pepe

[Anonymous No.6414114]

>>6414100
>"you either consume and make it your priority and make it define your identity or you don't consume at all. Gotcha!"
Peak NPC.

Are you going to post your work?

[Anonymous No.6414115]

>>6414104
What do you think your personal role will be in that future scenario, anon?

[Anonymous No.6414118]

>>6414115
it doesn't matter, who cares what happens after Jesus returns?

[Anonymous No.6414119]

>>6414110
For (you)s

[Anonymous No.6414120]

>>6414113
Because I'm used to see pepes everywhere, someone not as close to the concept of pepes as me will totally miss it

[Anonymous No.6414122]

>>6414109
>This jump to a binary all or nothing mindset is just a concession in a serious discussion. Accepted
you did that with my argument by caricaturizing it here:
>>consuming = good
>No.
When in the original post I said
>Consumption without a basis is what is bad and what makes the 'consoomer', consumption for consumptions sake, or consumption in order to escape reality rather than to better oneself through some moral or knowledge gained.
clearly I was trying to add nuance that you took away.
>>"you either consume and make it your priority and make it define your identity or you don't consume at all. Gotcha!"
>talking this way about forms of consumption that better the mind and soul
kek
So education is consooming now? Are you all going to go back into the forests and live like animals to prove how you aren't NPCs?

[Anonymous No.6414123]

>>6414115
stand in line for UBI rations along with everyone else who isn't related to a billionaire, lmao

[Anonymous No.6414125]

>>6414113
are you stupid

[Anonymous No.6414126]

>>6413978
Good.

[Anonymous No.6414128]

>>6414122
>>6414114
meant to reply here as well
>>6414104
The implicit anti-humanism of the techfag comes out like always

[Anonymous No.6414129]

>>6414120
So its a good subtle pepe

[Anonymous No.6414131]

>>6414123
And then what? Xou go home and play with ai generators all day?

[Anonymous No.6414134]

>>6414129
It's a hard to read pepe, but it's a step in a good direction, you can work it some more

[Anonymous No.6414135]

>>6414123
>stand in line and be gunned down along with everyone else who isn't related to a billionaire, lmao

[Anonymous No.6414138]

>>6414134
What should I add. It feels pretty clean as it is

[Anonymous No.6414140]

>>6414131
you mean mindless click on stupid shit for amusement, yes I guess

[Anonymous No.6414141]

>>6414134
Which do you like more, this...

[Anonymous No.6414142]

>>6414134
Or this?

[Anonymous No.6414143]

>>6414140
How is that different from just mindlessly consuming anything you see on tv?

[Anonymous No.6414144]

>>6414135
Good that's the way it should, I don't even get why the global elite hasn't fucking starting culling poor people there is no reason for them to exist anymore and other useless eaters. You don't need mass workers in factories even with 3rd world labor most of it is automated.
I fucking hate poor people, poverty must be genetic, just fucking gas them already.

[Anonymous No.6414148]

I also have Santa bane pepe

[Anonymous No.6414149]

>>6414138
Pepes have different proportions to humans, your pepe is very human like, it has a human head and that makes his eyes and body-head relationship odd and unpepe like.
So either make the picture more cartoonish like the original pepe, or go full realism and create a semi realistic reconstruction of pepe proportions with real looking facial and body features.

[Anonymous No.6414150]

>>6414142
this is better

[Anonymous No.6414152]

>>6414149
You know its also Bane right?

[Anonymous No.6414154]

>>6414144
>I don't even get why the global elite hasn't fucking starting culling poor people there is no reason for them to exist anymore and other useless eaters
Idk anon, maybe because the "elites" make their money from selling shit and machines won't buy their products? I guess you were also one of the people who thought the vaxx was gonna kill everyone except you and Klaus Schwab, huh

[Anonymous No.6414156]

>>6414143
tv is far more passive
tho I guess boomer parents would claim longer attention span is better, but you lose control and let the machine feed you

[Anonymous No.6414158]

All trolling aside, you do commercial artwork or graphic design I would seriously consider an alternate source of income unless you are established enough to make use of AI in your workflow

Pic very related.

[Anonymous No.6414160]

>>6414101
>>6414107
What's worse is that these AI fags are tech shills or silicon valley types trying to get rich quick, so they ignore that people in both the creative fields and practical trade fields get treated like crap by corporations. Plus, this is how you can tell that AI shills aren't actually normal programmers either. Normal programmers know how it feels to have corpos try anything to circumvent paying for them and they know how inefficient AI programs really are at getting jobs done.

[Anonymous No.6414163]

>>6414122
Yours is not nuance, it's either absolute illiterate retardation or dishonest niggetry.
And you keep making the same retarded point
>"You either consume or don't consume at all"
as an argument.

If you use tools available to better yourself or gain knowledge, that isn't considered consumption.

An actual person doesn't define themselves by the things they consume or the general tools they use to create or better themselves.

Either buy yourself some IQ points or shut the fuck up.

[Anonymous No.6414165]

>>6414158
all products are 3D rendered these days, the turn around time is much shorter than using photographers, nobody gave a shit when product photography was killed, and no one will care when corpo suits use ai to produce their goyslop trash instead of hiring artfags

[Anonymous No.6414166]

>>6414152
Yes, but right now it just looks like green bane with a pepe eye.
In order for the pepe/bane mashup to work it has to have a good stylistic relationship between the two, and that's a hard thing to achieve, specially if you're going for a realistic approach.
But it is certainly possible, if you keep working on it with this in mind.

[Anonymous No.6414167]

>>6414166
What do you think of this one up here?
>>6414119

[Anonymous No.6414168]

>>6414144
You are poor compared to the 0.1%ers anon. You are dying too.
>>6414163
>Yours is not nuance, it's either absolute illiterate retardation or dishonest niggetry.
adding /pol/ buzzwords and shapirospeak isn't making your argument better. Calm down anon.
>If you use tools available to better yourself or gain knowledge, that isn't considered consumption.
>consuming isn't consumption
kek, ok? just change the meanings of words to fit your argument. You agree with me - there are different types of consumption.
>An actual person doesn't define themselves by the things they consume or the general tools they use to create or better themselves.
I agree, but there is a difference between defining yourself by and being inspired by.

[Anonymous No.6414170]

>>6414165
This is nothing like photography getting killed by 3d rendering. You don't even need 3d rendering for this.

[Anonymous No.6414171]

>>6414168
>somebody dismantling my arguments is shapirospeak
Fuckin yikes
Step away from the keyboard, for the love of God

[Anonymous No.6414173]

>>6414119
This one is a step in the right direction, and this makes the issues with the proportions more obvious.
If you give this guy a more pepe like shape to his head, he'll look a lot better, although I'm not sure if this will work with a regular human body proportion, but I'm sure you can give it a try.

[Anonymous No.6414174]

>Pajeet Shadman thread

[Anonymous No.6414176]

>>6414171
>somebody dismantling my arguments is shapirospeak
Your argument is that blind consumption is bad, and that people should interact with media because out of a desire for betterment. I agree. The act of taking in a piece of media is consumption, to read a book is to consume it. I really don't get why you can't admit to this.

[Anonymous No.6414180]

>>6414168
>muh pol buzzwords
>shapirospeak
>hurr durr just change the meanings
>wow like u agree with me
Nigger, it's obvious you're the one who heavily consumes media and treats it as gaining knowledge.

Literally shut the fuck up, you goddamn low iq porch monkey.

[Anonymous No.6414182]

>>6414176
Fuckin touch grass, holy shit lmao

[Anonymous No.6414183]

>>6414170
Well, have they solved the copyright issue yet? Cause what company would want an ad that everyone else can just re-use with no repercussions because it was made by an algorithm?

[Anonymous No.6414184]

6414182
>WOW TOUCH GRASS WOW LOL AND LMAO
Human bros, we got btfo

[Anonymous No.6414186]

>>6414182
o...ok...

[Anonymous No.6414189]

>>6414182
lmao this nigga got backed into a corner

[Anonymous No.6414190]

>>6414183
No but there's nothing stopping i.e Nike from using AI generated assets and then incorporating it into their advertising if the work was posted edited. In effect it makes their marketers lives easier.

[Anonymous No.6414192]

>>6412903
Jannies are the fa/g/gots anon-kun.Its as predictable as disney shit now.

[Anonymous No.6414193]

>>6414190
Post Edited*

[Anonymous No.6414195]

>>6414189
Gorgias by Plato is a great dialogue on this by the way

[Anonymous No.6414198]

Did anyone get bingo?

[Anonymous No.6414201]

>>6414198
The cope goes deep lol

[Anonymous No.6414202]

>>6414195
Thanks for the recommendation anon, I truly will read it now, I've been putting off the greeks for far too long, and looking for the similarities with this conversation will be a fun way to go about it.

[Anonymous No.6414203]

>>6414183
there is no copyright issue because the ai is like a human but it isn't a human because it's a tool for us to use so it shouldn't be regulated but it's also just like you and me so it should be considered art and is just as soulful and imaginative as we are and it doesn't take anyone's data it imagines it but don't you dare gatekeep your art or else it can't learn and it will take everyone's jobs and that's sad but it wont take my job because it's just a tool for me and ubi will save us all because the government can obviously save us but those archaic copyright laws written by the government are stupid and and and and and and and and and and and and

there, I saved you 40 more minutes

[Anonymous No.6414210]

>>6414202
:) have fun anon it is a good read

[Anonymous No.6414211]

>>6414203
oh no no no
this is what happens when your country doesn't teach critical thinking skills, but you put them in charge of the world

[Anonymous No.6414339]

>>6412850
>the output data is automatically generated by the AI
More like, output mashed up from stolen works by poojeet programm.

[Anonymous No.6414365]

>>6412808
lol. That's the AI companies attempt to try and deflect blame.

It is the AI company who are already breaking the copyright law when they use stolen art in their product.

[Anonymous No.6414403]

>>6412808
imagine, becoming a shill for Intellectual property. Illustrators deserve the fucking industry-wide purge

[Anonymous No.6414410]

>>6414403

[Anonymous No.6414411]

>>6414410
it's IP and Copyright laws that is the reason why Disney is a fucking conglomerate, sitting hundred of years-old cultural artifacts that should've been public domain by now. If modern illustrators are this petty and anal about AI generated images that they have to agree with fucking Disney on the existence of copyright laws, then they're completely deserve to get castrated. Get fucked

[Anonymous No.6414416]

>>6414411
it's the faceless megacorps like MS who are pushing ai

[Anonymous No.6414430]

>>6413997
Wow! I wonder if this fine individual posts here? Because I swear I've heard all of this before.

[Anonymous No.6414437]

>>6414411
the ones investing in ai art are the billionaires, not artists, lol. how much of an idiot can you be?

[Anonymous No.6414447]

>>6414411
Funny how big companies growing into monopolies is mostly a problem originating from the USA. It's not copyright laws that are the problem. It's corporatism that is the problem. "Companies being people" and all that. How the wealthy can abuse the court system to sue people into submission in the USA.

[Anonymous No.6414456]

>>6414339
Simplifying it to "mashed up" is pretty disingenuous but if thats the only way you think you can win the argument we accept your concession. Mcdonalds is always hiring, you will be fine

[Anonymous No.6414474]

>>6414456
It's interpolated between different images so yea, anon was right. Just because you use a million artworks to mash something up, doesn't mean you created something new
>b-but muh algorithm thinks just like me!!
Ok then why not start advocating for giving it human rights as well?

[Anonymous No.6414487]

>>6414474
Its not interpolative its extrapolative
It does use similar methods to the human brain, but what makes us worthy of human rights is not our ability to make art. Its essentially just a compartmentalization of our creative processes, which is not where our moral value derives from. I understand its frightening and you're desperate to cling to any line of reasoning that might convince people to shut it down and save you from the impending doom for your ideal career, but you should have some intellectual honesty. Really, learn to use it as a tool and a way to improve what you make by hand. Its simply a way for artists to make things much more efficiently. Its the democratization of art.
I'm sure catholic priests had a similar angst about the Bible being translated so that laypeople could read it without having to use them as an intermediary. Like with the church, artists seem to be more worried about losing control and losing their place in the world, about no longer being needed or special. But if they really had the ideals they claimed to they would support this fully. It allows people to manifest their visions without going through a repetitive process of learning a technical skill that often limits them as much as it helps them. Everyone can be an artist now, that should make you happy. And if you learn how to use AI well, you can still have a place in the world. But if you remain stubborn and hostile to it, you'll end up an old grandma crocheting scarves alone in your house for distant family members that will throw them in a closet to gather dust while they wear a superior store-bought product.
The only person you harm is yourself by letting fear and anger control you. Look at the bright side for a change

[Anonymous No.6414489]

>>6414487
>it's totally just like us but only in this one area that suits me
This is why nobody likes redditors. See >>6413587

[Anonymous No.6414490]

>>6414489
I accept your concession

[Anonymous No.6414492]

>>6414490
YWNBAA

Post your ai work

[Anonymous No.6414495]

>>6414492
I just made this picture of you when the AI really kicks in

[Anonymous No.6414497]

>>6414495
Wow, prompt?

[Anonymous No.6414507]

>>6414497
It was img2img,
I mostly like making anti-LGBT stuff like this though

[Anonymous No.6414513]

>>6414507
>anti-LGBT stuff
Kinda old fashioned tbqh

[Anonymous No.6414514]

>>6414513
Better than judeo-fashioned

[Anonymous No.6414668]

>all the aikeks still polluting this place
That you have so little faith in yourself and your fellow man, that you'd let a machine make a mockery of the most humane things of all in your stead, and rejoice at the thought of everyone becoming a mediocre drone like yourself
Even the shittiest /beg/ achieved what you couldn't by actually trying to hold a pencil
You should kill yourself

[Anonymous No.6414685]

>>6414668
That ship sailed long ago when we started shoehorning black and fags into art

[Anonymous No.6414896]

>>6414203
Screenshotted this, excellent and hilarious post anon

[Anonymous No.6414933]

Is it really the AI's fault though? Talentless phonies have been ripping off other artists even way back by tracing over their works and claiming it as their own.

AI just attracted these shitters to do it even easier for them.

Besides, artists were never treated like humans in the first place. Let the fuckers who likes AI-generated art outsource their shit to AI instead.

[Anonymous No.6414945]

>>6414203
kek

[Anonymous No.6415110]

Quote from https://ipwatchdog.com/2022/02/23/thaler-loses-ai-authorship-fight-u-s-copyright-office/ :

'The Copyright Office’s refusal letter indicates that Dr. Thaler did not assert that the work involved contributions from a human author,” noted Joshua Simmons of Kirkland and Ellis LLP, “but rather that, like his patent applications, he appears to be testing whether U.S. law would recognize artificial intelligences themselves as authors.

As a result, the letter does not resolve the question that is more likely to recur: how much human involvement is required to protect a work created using an artificial intelligence,” explains Simmons. “It is this question for which more guidance would be useful to those working in the field.'

[Anonymous No.6415111]

>>6414487
>we democratized art
>but only if you have an expensive graphic cards to run it and pay ai company for subscription fee
>pencil and paper? never heard of it

man you really must love sucking ai company dick that much and shitting out talking points about democratization but thats what i expected from pajeets; equality for all but only if it benefit me. Art was free for everyone who is willing to learn. Too dumb enough to see that ai will be the new church that steals power from the individual so it can empower itself and as it ask you put money in the basket. See i can make retarded analogies too.

>The only person you harm is yourself by letting fear and anger control you. Look at the bright side for a change
>yes let us control you instead

[Anonymous No.6415120]

>>6415110

Following up, the Director of the U.S. Copyright Office did not rule out copyright for images generated by text-to-image systems: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZdOI2inQ4A .

[Anonymous No.6415150]

>>6415110

Following up again, this Twitter thread contains questions purportedly from the U.S. Copyright Office about an AI-involved work: https://twitter.com/rainisto/status/1575493586061500417 .

[Anonymous No.6415184]

>>6414041
Artists aspire to inspire

[Anonymous No.6415378]

>>6415111
>expensive graphic cards
>~300$
yer tablet costs more
have you ever bashed digifags for having a pc?

[Anonymous No.6415380]

>>6414041
to create
which ai does not
simple as

[Anonymous No.6415561]

https://twitter.com/gigazine/status/1602506150158946304
It's time to bow to Xi and take the China pill. They crack down harder on AI than anyone else.

[Anonymous No.6415606]

>>6415380
Yes it does

[Anonymous No.6415624]

>>6415606
nah

[Anonymous No.6415651]

>>6415624
I think you just have a poor understanding of how the software works. Its just a tool

[Anonymous No.6415670]

>>6415651
just fix the hands already, nerd

[Anonymous No.6415691]

>>6415651
Is it a tool or does it create? You can't have both

[Anonymous No.6415695]

>>6415691
it's a tool that creates ;)

[Anonymous No.6415707]

>>6415651
>>6415606
this gen will never accept ai
too new
next gen will know nothing but ai

[Anonymous No.6415714]

>>6412808
>Well, yeah but this matters a lot for artists.
If it matters to you, then you're not artist

[Anonymous No.6415737]

Art has no ethics
There is no rules, only tools
The purpose for the artist is to manifest art
Art is made for the sake of art
If the work serves a message, it is propaganda
If the work serves to make money, it is product
If the work servers to gain attention, it is a distraction
AI generated graphics have proved one thing:
Majority of "artists" and art consumers are tasteless hacks and charlatan posers whose wealth of knowledge and appreciation for the craft is as poor as the common metropolitan schizo junkie.

[Anonymous No.6415739]

>>6415737
stop stealing my shit, nerd

[Anonymous No.6415743]

>>6415739
steal it back and do it better

[Anonymous No.6415745]

>>6415743
or better yet, punch in the face, faggot

[Anonymous No.6415747]

>>6415745
so your shit artist then

[Anonymous No.6415754]

>>6415747
>the thief steals from you and insults you for not stopping him
lmao

[Anonymous No.6415757]

>>6415754
prove me wrong then

[Anonymous No.6415989]

>>6415739
Pretty sure the AI would be better without including your garbage art shitting up its training dataset lol

[Anonymous No.6415998]

>>6413976
>vaguely interesting tech with cool buzzwords
>see some guy got rich
>everyone in my echo chamber talking about how cool it is
>I-i could be that guy!
>invest money
>desperate to shill to others
>repeat x100

[Anonymous No.6416327]

>>6415989
Then why not remake it so it doesn't use stolen data anymore?

[Anonymous No.6416790]

>>6416327
How is it stolen? You put it out on the internet, it learned from it. Its not reselling your shitty art, trust me lol.
If you want a handout, go fuck yourself. I suggest you take up a new career before its too late

[Anonymous No.6417234]

I'm taking this war one step further.

I take AI "art" and use it as the base for my own creations, just motify the composition a little bit, at my own rendering and I got myself an enviromental concept, fuck you AI tards, you started this.

[Anonymous No.6417271]

>>6417234
Ok, that's actually encouraged by the AI art community. But if it helps you feel like a rebel, you can pretend to not know this

[Anonymous No.6417972]

>>6414514
>he says while he makes ai art

[Anonymous No.6417976]

>>6415737
>If the work serves a message, it is propaganda
Seems like only propaganda has a purpose in this world then. Kys

[Anonymous No.6418378]

>>6413564
YWNBAA

[Anonymous No.6418532]

>>6416790

>it learned from it

fuck off you retard. AI doesn't browse internet and learn. It's machine learning from data that is being fed to it by human.

It means. Someone was paid to take photos and feed it into the AI where it do it's thing and shits out a model to be use by retards like you.

They label this shit "AI" and people actually it's an actual Artificial Intellect with conscience.

Go get a real job fucktard. One that doesn't involve a lot of thinking.

[Anonymous No.6418651]

>>6418532
I'm sorry that such a powerful tool has made your art inferior, but we won't stunt technological progression out of pity for you.

[Anonymous No.6418862]

>>6418651
ywnbaa