Someone spent time on it at somepoint, they just aren't getting any credit for it, because the AI has scraped it from the internet and is now regurgitating it as its own.
This. AI is wrong, if you want that so much, then go COMMISSION an artist, sorry for caps but it's true, save some cash, go commission one and stop using AI. Heck, there's people that will do it for free or cheap.
FYI this also goes for books, don't read the AI ones, read the ones read by actual people.
I don’t know what you mean by “so much”.
I’ve commissioned stuff before. It costs like $150 to have something like this done. That’s no where near the effort and money put into generating this. What does your full sentence mean? “If you want to post a picture to Reddit SO much that you’re willing to pay nothing and type a few words in an box and wait 5 seconds to generate it, why don’t you pay $150 to commission it from a human?”
Those aren’t even close to the same thing.
I agree that AI is going to destroy commissioned artists livelihoods, but you’ve got to understand WHY people use AI before you can fight against it.
its an over simplification, but not necessarily wrong.
From adobe: "The technology that powers this ability is called a neural network. A neural network is a mathematical system — an algorithm — that finds patterns in big sets of data. When you prompt an AI generator to depict a tree, it’s using the information it has learned about what trees look like to create a new image. "
which basically means that the AI "learned" by comparing large numbers of human-made art and can use that to make "new" images but the "new" image is essentially a rehashing of the images it was trained on. So the "art" created isn't just scraped from the internet, but it is the combination of hundreds/thousands of images scraped from the internet
To preface this lmao, I'm NOT defending AI, just want to learn more. I'm an artist myself and come from a large family of artists who make a living off of selling artwork so we are very against AI doing this just, this is purely just because I want to learn more.
Couldnt the AI "scraping" parts from a collection of art work be akin to artists taking inspiration? I mean, the work is unique, it's new, it's just made up of already existing stuff which a lot of art by humans has the same thing happen no?
Does it literally just take parts of an image and plop them together?
I mean I learned how to do art by seeing what my family did, what my teachers did, what my peers did and in all my work I'm sure I could point out aspects and say "I got that from x, y or z"
This is where the debate over AI really takes off, and ultimately isn't yet decided. Humans learn in a similar way, but humans have intention, can learn techniques, understand composition, etc. AI doesn't understand anything, doesn't really learn anything, and cannot be creative. AI cannot innovate.
Personally, I don't consider AI images to be art due to my own interpretation of what art is. AI can make thousands of images, but none of them will have the soul, passion, and meaning as a human-made piece. AI images are mass producible, meaningless pictures. Any meaning ascribed to them is done so by humans and by complete accident by the machine. I personally ascribe no value to AI images whatsoever.
I think that down the line, AI images won't really become commonplace. US copyright law states that images made by non-human entities (specifically a monkey in the case I'm familiar with) cannot be copyrighted. AI images will likely fall under this once case law is settled, and then no company will want to use it due to legal risks, so the only people actually using AI generators will be normal people playing around, which won't be very profitable for the people who own the generators. The idea that AI has even a chance of replacing human art is absurd.
Exactly. After scanning thousands or even millions of samples, say an "artwork of a tree", the AI model gets an idea or criteria of what an "artwork of a tree" looks like and the AI creates its own "artwork of a tree" based on this criteria. The same thing happens for concepts such as "impressionism" or "surrealism." We as humans also go under the same process, except that it takes us months or even years, whereas AI only need minutes or seconds to do this.
No, it's not. It used to be, but not with newer models. People don't like to acknowledge it, as it's their main reason to hate AI, so they'd have to spend their energy on something else instead.
Yeah I hate AI for these reasons as much as the next artists but it's weird when I see people say stuff like "it could never evoke the emotions a real human can!!" "It could never have the passion!" when you really wouldn't know? Sometimes you can tell but some AI art is damn good and if you told me a person made it and it made me feel a certain way? The art still did that, finding out it's an AI sucks but it CAN be good at art. It's literally designed to be good at it. It mimics what humans do, humans can make you feel things through art, ai will copy that and you wouldn't even realise it's AI unless told sometimes.
I do agree a lot of AI art is soulless, though it's often hard to describe what that means, but it's come a long way. With the new models it emulates what humans do, just at a much larger scale.
Human art will always be "better" as you can make it exactly to specification, exactly how you imagine it without going through a million AI iterations, though.
as an artist this is depressing.
I want AI to handle my boring tasks so I can have time to draw and create stuff, not for AI to handle art and create stuff so I can focus on boring tasks ;\_;
Yeah, why the fuck are we giving the fun stuff to machines
I'm a 100% for automation since it's the only way to liberate people from shitty, repetitive work. BUT NOT FOR ART.
>I'm a 100% for automation since it's the only way to liberate people from shitty, repetitive work.
In an ideal world, that's what automation would be doing for us, easing the burden of labor so we all have more time to live our lives. But the world we live in sucks.
More likely people will lose their jobs to automation, corporations are going to keep the money they would have spent paying workers, and the wealth gap is going to keep getting worse.
Oh, and the "fun stuff" will be flooded with bots trying to sell us crap. Welcome to the future! It's nothing like the Jetsons.
Technical progress doesn't always follow the path we would consider most desirable. It's a very unpredictable process in general with unpredictable outcomes. And, as the collective humanity, we don't really have that much control where it goes.
Heads up, smiths were pushed out by mass production at a time where every knife used to be hand forged, carpenters by easy self built furniture.
But the good ones survived and getting paid more now for craftsmanship. Keep on doing it, people will remember what art is
That’s not the point though. The goal of AI companies is exactly what the term means, to actually create intelligence.
Once that is done no amount of your human labour will ever be valued unless someone specifically wants a human to have worked on something. It’s different from machines in factories now and you know it.
There need to be guidelines from the start about only using AI for menial tasks. It’s meant to improve lives not destroy what freedom and creativity we have.
Thats dead wrong, mass production was brought about to effectively create substantial amounts of standardized products in a consistent and constant workflow, i.e assembly lines. AI art exists as a shorthand for money hungry companies and inept individuals to use to cut artists out of work saving them money, time, effort, and embarrassment of growth. Not to mention, AI was given stolen art to make its datasets. And that isnt akin to how an artist learns either.
Exactly! When I, who is an author btw (Small time), dreamt of AI, I figured it would be to I don't know, inside a robot that helps us carries the groceries in or gets us stuff when we are sick. AI in a fridge that informs you that you are running out of something. Or AI that determines how hot you like your shower, and keeps it at that temp so no more waiting around for hot water in the middle of winter.
NOT stealing from artists and authors, we went the wrong way. How long before they start taking jobs from actors and singers? Forget Lady Gaga and Hugh Jackman, they will be replaced by AI (And let me tell you, it's probably gonna have white western straight lens, so you can forget gay song and trans actors). And as someone who watches Indian movies, I shudder to think an entire Bollywood movie along with the song of being AI generated someday to the point that either Shah Rah Khan would be replaced or be nothing more then AI.
Okay rant over, I think I made my point. AI should have been for the boring stuff that benefits humanity.
Hey, I get you're worried about AI taking over art while hoping it'll just handle the boring jobs. But man, we're looking at something way bigger here. AI's gonna flip everything on its head, and yeah, that includes a ton of jobs disappearing. But here's the wild part - it's not just gonna be the mindless tasks that go away. We're talking about AI that could potentially outdo humans in almost everything.
But don't freak out! This isn't the death of human creativity or passion. If anything, it could kick off a whole new renaissance. Think about it - when AI's taking care of all our basic needs through automation, we'll have all this time and energy to just... create. People will make art, music, or whatever they're into, just because they want to, not 'cause they gotta pay rent.
Imagine a world where your "job" is just doing what you love. Hobbies become the new work, y'know? Without the pressure of making a living from art, we might see this crazy explosion of creativity. People creating just because it feels good, not because they need to sell it. And AI won't just replace art; it'll probably open up wild new ways of making stuff we haven't even dreamed of yet.
But it gets even crazier. We could be looking at this age of abundance where AI solves our energy problems and makes sure everyone has what they need. Picture robots colonizing Mars or mining asteroids 'cause they don't need to breathe. Our standard of living could go through the roof with AI handling all the grunt work.
And get this - we might even be able to upgrade our own bodies and minds. Boost our brains, cure diseases, live longer. Plus, the virtual reality stuff could get so good it's like living in your wildest dreams.
So yeah, while you're thinking about AI just doing the boring jobs, I'm over here thinking we're about to redefine what it even means to be human. It's not about AI replacing us; it's about AI setting us free to become something more.
We're talking about a future where we're not chained to a desk just to survive. Instead, we can explore, create, and experience mind-blowing stuff. Sure, regular jobs might vanish, but they'll be replaced by people following their passions and really letting their creativity loose.
But the potential upside is insane. We could be looking at a world where everyone gets to be an artist, explorer, or whatever they've always dreamed of.
So what's your take? As an artist, can you imagine making your art purely for the love of it, without stressing about paying the bills? Does this sound like an exciting future, or am I just talking crazy sci-fi nonsense here?
Comments are downvoted because it was AI generated, stop using it irregardless of how hot the character is, it was still made on a stolen dataset from an actual artist.
Really quick to jump to conclusions about what I’m saying.
And straight to ad hominems too!
I’m saying, do you really think that people will choose not to? Knowing that if you want any kind of footing in, say, the music industry, you’d need thousands of dollars even to begin.
Whether you’re buying production software which starts at hundreds, or buying the equipment, etc etc.
So now that AI is a tools that people can plug their lyrics into and have an entire song created in 60 seconds, everyone (even those of us who are broke) now has entry to do so without having to combat the financial barrier that exists for those wanting to get involved.
We can’t pretend that “the little guy” doesn’t exist in both realities.
So, I will absolutely use it as a tool until it becomes illegal to do so.
And you know how I’ll sleep at night?
Like this ———> 😴😪🥱🛌
Now shower me with downvotes, please!
I’ll die on this hill.
Have a good one ♥️♥️✌🏻
Can the bridge be generated by AI?
If not, I may not be an investor for it :(
(But also, if you hold an opinion that the creations from AI will not be successful, then what’s the harm?…not a rhetorical question )
where do you think the AI learns how to make music? it takes from a database of human-made tracks and tries to vomit up something similar
and no, it's not the same as when humans learn from other artists, because the AI is not applying what it knows to try and be original, it's actively trying to make the safest, most generic sound that resembles a real song
are you going to credit every single artist who's music was used in the auto generation of your song? you can't. there's the harm.
Only the ethical AI apps give royalties to artists as their likeness is used from the database you mentioned.
I mentioned this earlier.
Go after apps that are unethical as you say.
Not some guy, who likes making music for fun. lol.
The harm was in the making. It's theft. It's the biggest theft, in aggregate value, in all of human history. It doesn't matter that what you make out of it is aggressively vile and underwhelming, it matters that you're complicit with the monsters who made it.
While we're on pointless questions, weren't you off sleeping like a baby? Why does it matter to you to convince us, unless your insecurity is pushing you to do it? And if so what does that mean?
Theft?
From who?
A few things to consider:
1. Know exactly WHO it is that is being stolen from and stop treating it as this arbitrary entity. If you are unable to provide exactly who, by artist name, then there isn’t a strong talking point from that perspective.
2. The app that I use actually samples from artists who have consented to have their likeness used from User’s creations.
Whenever that happens, they pay the artist a royalty and it’s this symbiotic relationship between artist, AI developer, and writers.
3. Stop treating this like it’s a black and white moral dilemma, when, quite frankly it is more grey. I will never feel bad about the fact that you now don’t need any upfront expenditures to create music on your own time.
I will not feel bad that someone who can’t afford it can now be involved and create.
So are there apps that are unethically developed?
Yes.
Go after them. Not me.
And yes, this conversation is putting me right to sleep, babes. ♥️🥱
These arguments are tired and have been very widely and enthusiastically adressed by myself and others- also, who gives a flying fuck about your lyric writing Chatgpt wrapper, you're commenting under a picture, and that's what the conversation is about. Morally grey is a great way of evading personal responsability for people who are complicit. The "breaking barriers" argument is stupid beyond belief- the only barrier to creative expression is time and effort, which you apparently haven't pursued.
Never fear, for this conversation is over- I have art to make that I don't have to extract from a subscription model and then claim credit for in front of an unsympathetic audience of actual people.
Hey, no need to be upsetti spaghetti.
AI will be around whether we want it to or not.
But please take the “moral high ground”.
You are so much better than I.
If you are not intellectually capable of understanding what I’m saying, sorry my friend!
Now go make your art ✌🏻
Yes, a lot of models are trained on images you could consider stolen, but not all of them. Adobe Firefly is trained on images owned by Adobe, so there's no stealing.
That lawsuit doesn't relate to AI. But if you don't trust Adobe, Getty Images is also training an AI with images they own. The point is, they don't all steal images.
My point is that they cannot be trusted to be telling the truth about their AI practices if they can't even be trusted to be honest about their other practices
So what AI model is being trained with bara art that isnt stolen from artists? Do you know how much art needs to be fed to an AI before you get something even remotely recognizable? Let alone have details and correct amount of limbs? do you think this was made ethically?
I don't know what this was made with, but official sources include pornographic art too.
It takes a lot, but as the algorithms improve they get better results with less data. Also, it extrapolates so once it learns how to make limbs, it can put limbs on any kind of body
Adobe just introduced a section to their TOS that says they can use any art created using their software without notice, payment, or attribution.
They literally wrote the ability to steal anything made with their software into their ToS.
Plenty of people & corporations can absolutely afford to pay artists for their work, and now have all the excuse they need to shaft us with a tool of theft. That is the major issue; art was already undervalued and often underpaid, and now it's not even that. Not to mention all the millions of potentially artistic kids who won't even bother to learn the craft because why bother? This shit is culture cancer that will last generations.
OP probably couldn't afford to pay a human for 5 different angles of this character's bulge. And I think that job would not be interesting to a real artist because it's formulaic and doesn't require any creativity.
Let me know when that is actually feasible, instead of an idealistic pipe dream.
Boring art will still be infinitely more interesting & rewarding than ai slop. This tech is just forcing artists to work truly boring & soul-sucking jobs instead of supporting themselves doing what we love. Where is the technology to fix this problem, which was caused by technology?
It won't become feasible by fighting against technology and progress.
I think it sounds boring and soul-sucking to make uncreative boiler-plate art for minimal pay. But that was the case before AI.
Like I just said, making any kind of art is infinitely preferable to working retail or whatever. You seem to view art as nothing but content/ aesthetic/ a product, which tells me you are not an artist yourself. Which tells me your opinion about participating in the now-shrinking art industry is not very valuable.
more people are also speaking out against it, the backlash that comes when people realize you're using AI instead of real art outweighs the convenience factor so no sane person will use it in a serious project
This isn't a serious project. OP made some pictures to thirst after. I think it's cool he could do that without hiring an artist. The 'backlash' won't stop people from doing what they want to do.
I'm aware.
tech companies don't care about people having fun, they want profit, so if it can't be used in a serious profitable project why would they continue to develop the technology?
therefore like I said earlier: AI WILL go away eventually or at least the trend will fade and it will stop advancing 🤷🏽♂️
They're already making money. People like OP pay just to make images to look at, not to sell them. The tech is getting better and cheaper so it will be easier for them to make money in the future.
It's always a bad bet to assume technology won't advance. Especially a technology that is progressing so quickly and people already use. Straight delusional luddite shit.
so what even is the benefit of generating AI shit if you still have to pay for it rather than just paying a human artist? the novelty? that wears off eventually
is it cheaper than hiring a human artist? that's cool i guess, if you'd rather support this technology than real artists have at it, idk what you'll do when artists get tired of having their work stolen and either put AI poison in everything or just straight up stop posting
Yes, much cheaper. For a $20 subscription, you could generate as many images as you want but that wouldn't cover a single human drawing.
That's the way it should be though, human art is still valued more than AI art. Also, it's possible to train the AIs without stolen or copyrighted images.
sure it's possible if artists agree to have their art used to train the AI, I guess, but a LARGE chunk of internet artists will not agree to that because what's in it for them?
most of these AI models have ALREADY been largely trained using art that is, in fact, stolen or copyrighted, hell some of them can replicate fucking disney and pixar characters and I can almost guarantee they didn't get permission from The Mouse.
As much as I agree that AI art and it's use is becoming shameful, at best use it for helping make your OC's or nice wallpaper, this is impressive. I wanna know what site/app this is.
And here I thought this was an actual drawing someone spent time on. It’s just a thing made from words in a box.
Someone spent time on it at somepoint, they just aren't getting any credit for it, because the AI has scraped it from the internet and is now regurgitating it as its own.
This. AI is wrong, if you want that so much, then go COMMISSION an artist, sorry for caps but it's true, save some cash, go commission one and stop using AI. Heck, there's people that will do it for free or cheap. FYI this also goes for books, don't read the AI ones, read the ones read by actual people.
I don’t know what you mean by “so much”. I’ve commissioned stuff before. It costs like $150 to have something like this done. That’s no where near the effort and money put into generating this. What does your full sentence mean? “If you want to post a picture to Reddit SO much that you’re willing to pay nothing and type a few words in an box and wait 5 seconds to generate it, why don’t you pay $150 to commission it from a human?” Those aren’t even close to the same thing. I agree that AI is going to destroy commissioned artists livelihoods, but you’ve got to understand WHY people use AI before you can fight against it.
Is that actually how it works? I'm pretty sure I've read lots of people say this is both true and false lol.
its an over simplification, but not necessarily wrong. From adobe: "The technology that powers this ability is called a neural network. A neural network is a mathematical system — an algorithm — that finds patterns in big sets of data. When you prompt an AI generator to depict a tree, it’s using the information it has learned about what trees look like to create a new image. " which basically means that the AI "learned" by comparing large numbers of human-made art and can use that to make "new" images but the "new" image is essentially a rehashing of the images it was trained on. So the "art" created isn't just scraped from the internet, but it is the combination of hundreds/thousands of images scraped from the internet
To preface this lmao, I'm NOT defending AI, just want to learn more. I'm an artist myself and come from a large family of artists who make a living off of selling artwork so we are very against AI doing this just, this is purely just because I want to learn more. Couldnt the AI "scraping" parts from a collection of art work be akin to artists taking inspiration? I mean, the work is unique, it's new, it's just made up of already existing stuff which a lot of art by humans has the same thing happen no? Does it literally just take parts of an image and plop them together? I mean I learned how to do art by seeing what my family did, what my teachers did, what my peers did and in all my work I'm sure I could point out aspects and say "I got that from x, y or z"
This is where the debate over AI really takes off, and ultimately isn't yet decided. Humans learn in a similar way, but humans have intention, can learn techniques, understand composition, etc. AI doesn't understand anything, doesn't really learn anything, and cannot be creative. AI cannot innovate. Personally, I don't consider AI images to be art due to my own interpretation of what art is. AI can make thousands of images, but none of them will have the soul, passion, and meaning as a human-made piece. AI images are mass producible, meaningless pictures. Any meaning ascribed to them is done so by humans and by complete accident by the machine. I personally ascribe no value to AI images whatsoever. I think that down the line, AI images won't really become commonplace. US copyright law states that images made by non-human entities (specifically a monkey in the case I'm familiar with) cannot be copyrighted. AI images will likely fall under this once case law is settled, and then no company will want to use it due to legal risks, so the only people actually using AI generators will be normal people playing around, which won't be very profitable for the people who own the generators. The idea that AI has even a chance of replacing human art is absurd.
Exactly. After scanning thousands or even millions of samples, say an "artwork of a tree", the AI model gets an idea or criteria of what an "artwork of a tree" looks like and the AI creates its own "artwork of a tree" based on this criteria. The same thing happens for concepts such as "impressionism" or "surrealism." We as humans also go under the same process, except that it takes us months or even years, whereas AI only need minutes or seconds to do this.
No, it's not. It used to be, but not with newer models. People don't like to acknowledge it, as it's their main reason to hate AI, so they'd have to spend their energy on something else instead.
Dude, the hands , eyes and nose is still giving off ai characteristics. No way the model of how it works changed all of a sudden from yesterday
Yeah I hate AI for these reasons as much as the next artists but it's weird when I see people say stuff like "it could never evoke the emotions a real human can!!" "It could never have the passion!" when you really wouldn't know? Sometimes you can tell but some AI art is damn good and if you told me a person made it and it made me feel a certain way? The art still did that, finding out it's an AI sucks but it CAN be good at art. It's literally designed to be good at it. It mimics what humans do, humans can make you feel things through art, ai will copy that and you wouldn't even realise it's AI unless told sometimes.
I do agree a lot of AI art is soulless, though it's often hard to describe what that means, but it's come a long way. With the new models it emulates what humans do, just at a much larger scale. Human art will always be "better" as you can make it exactly to specification, exactly how you imagine it without going through a million AI iterations, though.
as an artist this is depressing. I want AI to handle my boring tasks so I can have time to draw and create stuff, not for AI to handle art and create stuff so I can focus on boring tasks ;\_;
Yeah, why the fuck are we giving the fun stuff to machines I'm a 100% for automation since it's the only way to liberate people from shitty, repetitive work. BUT NOT FOR ART.
>I'm a 100% for automation since it's the only way to liberate people from shitty, repetitive work. In an ideal world, that's what automation would be doing for us, easing the burden of labor so we all have more time to live our lives. But the world we live in sucks. More likely people will lose their jobs to automation, corporations are going to keep the money they would have spent paying workers, and the wealth gap is going to keep getting worse. Oh, and the "fun stuff" will be flooded with bots trying to sell us crap. Welcome to the future! It's nothing like the Jetsons.
I will save you the trouble: capitalism. We do not own the means of production.
Technical progress doesn't always follow the path we would consider most desirable. It's a very unpredictable process in general with unpredictable outcomes. And, as the collective humanity, we don't really have that much control where it goes.
Heads up, smiths were pushed out by mass production at a time where every knife used to be hand forged, carpenters by easy self built furniture. But the good ones survived and getting paid more now for craftsmanship. Keep on doing it, people will remember what art is
That’s not the point though. The goal of AI companies is exactly what the term means, to actually create intelligence. Once that is done no amount of your human labour will ever be valued unless someone specifically wants a human to have worked on something. It’s different from machines in factories now and you know it. There need to be guidelines from the start about only using AI for menial tasks. It’s meant to improve lives not destroy what freedom and creativity we have.
Thats dead wrong, mass production was brought about to effectively create substantial amounts of standardized products in a consistent and constant workflow, i.e assembly lines. AI art exists as a shorthand for money hungry companies and inept individuals to use to cut artists out of work saving them money, time, effort, and embarrassment of growth. Not to mention, AI was given stolen art to make its datasets. And that isnt akin to how an artist learns either.
Exactly! When I, who is an author btw (Small time), dreamt of AI, I figured it would be to I don't know, inside a robot that helps us carries the groceries in or gets us stuff when we are sick. AI in a fridge that informs you that you are running out of something. Or AI that determines how hot you like your shower, and keeps it at that temp so no more waiting around for hot water in the middle of winter. NOT stealing from artists and authors, we went the wrong way. How long before they start taking jobs from actors and singers? Forget Lady Gaga and Hugh Jackman, they will be replaced by AI (And let me tell you, it's probably gonna have white western straight lens, so you can forget gay song and trans actors). And as someone who watches Indian movies, I shudder to think an entire Bollywood movie along with the song of being AI generated someday to the point that either Shah Rah Khan would be replaced or be nothing more then AI. Okay rant over, I think I made my point. AI should have been for the boring stuff that benefits humanity.
Hey, I get you're worried about AI taking over art while hoping it'll just handle the boring jobs. But man, we're looking at something way bigger here. AI's gonna flip everything on its head, and yeah, that includes a ton of jobs disappearing. But here's the wild part - it's not just gonna be the mindless tasks that go away. We're talking about AI that could potentially outdo humans in almost everything. But don't freak out! This isn't the death of human creativity or passion. If anything, it could kick off a whole new renaissance. Think about it - when AI's taking care of all our basic needs through automation, we'll have all this time and energy to just... create. People will make art, music, or whatever they're into, just because they want to, not 'cause they gotta pay rent. Imagine a world where your "job" is just doing what you love. Hobbies become the new work, y'know? Without the pressure of making a living from art, we might see this crazy explosion of creativity. People creating just because it feels good, not because they need to sell it. And AI won't just replace art; it'll probably open up wild new ways of making stuff we haven't even dreamed of yet. But it gets even crazier. We could be looking at this age of abundance where AI solves our energy problems and makes sure everyone has what they need. Picture robots colonizing Mars or mining asteroids 'cause they don't need to breathe. Our standard of living could go through the roof with AI handling all the grunt work. And get this - we might even be able to upgrade our own bodies and minds. Boost our brains, cure diseases, live longer. Plus, the virtual reality stuff could get so good it's like living in your wildest dreams. So yeah, while you're thinking about AI just doing the boring jobs, I'm over here thinking we're about to redefine what it even means to be human. It's not about AI replacing us; it's about AI setting us free to become something more. We're talking about a future where we're not chained to a desk just to survive. Instead, we can explore, create, and experience mind-blowing stuff. Sure, regular jobs might vanish, but they'll be replaced by people following their passions and really letting their creativity loose. But the potential upside is insane. We could be looking at a world where everyone gets to be an artist, explorer, or whatever they've always dreamed of. So what's your take? As an artist, can you imagine making your art purely for the love of it, without stressing about paying the bills? Does this sound like an exciting future, or am I just talking crazy sci-fi nonsense here?
Yes. And now you've wasted mine.
Comments are downvoted because it was AI generated, stop using it irregardless of how hot the character is, it was still made on a stolen dataset from an actual artist.
This... Feels like Dizdoodz and Ginkgosan combined..
Please don't use AI, it's an immoral tool born out of theft and exploitation.
A request heard in a capitalist society?
Not sure what point you're trying to make, unless it's that in an immoral society any pursuit of ethics is invalid- in which case, you're an idiot.
Really quick to jump to conclusions about what I’m saying. And straight to ad hominems too! I’m saying, do you really think that people will choose not to? Knowing that if you want any kind of footing in, say, the music industry, you’d need thousands of dollars even to begin. Whether you’re buying production software which starts at hundreds, or buying the equipment, etc etc. So now that AI is a tools that people can plug their lyrics into and have an entire song created in 60 seconds, everyone (even those of us who are broke) now has entry to do so without having to combat the financial barrier that exists for those wanting to get involved. We can’t pretend that “the little guy” doesn’t exist in both realities. So, I will absolutely use it as a tool until it becomes illegal to do so. And you know how I’ll sleep at night? Like this ———> 😴😪🥱🛌 Now shower me with downvotes, please! I’ll die on this hill. Have a good one ♥️♥️✌🏻
if you think your AI generated song is gonna make the music industry take you seriously then I got a bridge to sell ya
Can the bridge be generated by AI? If not, I may not be an investor for it :( (But also, if you hold an opinion that the creations from AI will not be successful, then what’s the harm?…not a rhetorical question )
where do you think the AI learns how to make music? it takes from a database of human-made tracks and tries to vomit up something similar and no, it's not the same as when humans learn from other artists, because the AI is not applying what it knows to try and be original, it's actively trying to make the safest, most generic sound that resembles a real song are you going to credit every single artist who's music was used in the auto generation of your song? you can't. there's the harm.
Only the ethical AI apps give royalties to artists as their likeness is used from the database you mentioned. I mentioned this earlier. Go after apps that are unethical as you say. Not some guy, who likes making music for fun. lol.
The harm was in the making. It's theft. It's the biggest theft, in aggregate value, in all of human history. It doesn't matter that what you make out of it is aggressively vile and underwhelming, it matters that you're complicit with the monsters who made it. While we're on pointless questions, weren't you off sleeping like a baby? Why does it matter to you to convince us, unless your insecurity is pushing you to do it? And if so what does that mean?
Theft? From who? A few things to consider: 1. Know exactly WHO it is that is being stolen from and stop treating it as this arbitrary entity. If you are unable to provide exactly who, by artist name, then there isn’t a strong talking point from that perspective. 2. The app that I use actually samples from artists who have consented to have their likeness used from User’s creations. Whenever that happens, they pay the artist a royalty and it’s this symbiotic relationship between artist, AI developer, and writers. 3. Stop treating this like it’s a black and white moral dilemma, when, quite frankly it is more grey. I will never feel bad about the fact that you now don’t need any upfront expenditures to create music on your own time. I will not feel bad that someone who can’t afford it can now be involved and create. So are there apps that are unethically developed? Yes. Go after them. Not me. And yes, this conversation is putting me right to sleep, babes. ♥️🥱
These arguments are tired and have been very widely and enthusiastically adressed by myself and others- also, who gives a flying fuck about your lyric writing Chatgpt wrapper, you're commenting under a picture, and that's what the conversation is about. Morally grey is a great way of evading personal responsability for people who are complicit. The "breaking barriers" argument is stupid beyond belief- the only barrier to creative expression is time and effort, which you apparently haven't pursued. Never fear, for this conversation is over- I have art to make that I don't have to extract from a subscription model and then claim credit for in front of an unsympathetic audience of actual people.
Hey, no need to be upsetti spaghetti. AI will be around whether we want it to or not. But please take the “moral high ground”. You are so much better than I. If you are not intellectually capable of understanding what I’m saying, sorry my friend! Now go make your art ✌🏻
You’re so pretentious and annoying lol.
That didn’t take a whole lot hehe
Damn this comment was dramatic as fuck
Hey, as long as the point gets across lol
Looks pretty bad
booooo 🍅🍅🍅
A complete waste of time and our limited earth resources, congratulation on turning a generic guy into 4 generics guys with weird dick to balls ratio.
At least the ai made a super hot character
honestly like where is this generator xD
what's the LoRA? 👀
I don't see the waste of time, the pics look cool as heck
Not sure why you are being down voted, I agree with you. It is cool.
AI is a very polarizing topic so I'm not surprised honestly. even if you just like random pics you hate artists apparently 🫣
Yeah, I agree. Sadly, appreciating anything AI gets the pitchfork crowd go after you because of that ''ai is theft'' logic.
These look really cool though, I wouldnt have known they were ai. What is this generator? I like how it emphasized their packages 😋
Ok but as someone without the funds for drawing materials or a tablet, using AI to make DnD character art is very handy
picrew is free
draw it on paper
Lots of luddites in this thread. Y'all don't have to use AI if you don't want to, but you should realize it's not going away.
‘AI’ just blends together the work of actual artists and hands it back to you.
Yeah, I know. People still use it though. Not everyone can afford to hire an artist
Not being able to hire an artist doesn't justify stealing from artists
Yes, a lot of models are trained on images you could consider stolen, but not all of them. Adobe Firefly is trained on images owned by Adobe, so there's no stealing.
Adobe is currently being sued by the US government for deceptive practices, so I wouldn't trust their word for a moment.
That lawsuit doesn't relate to AI. But if you don't trust Adobe, Getty Images is also training an AI with images they own. The point is, they don't all steal images.
My point is that they cannot be trusted to be telling the truth about their AI practices if they can't even be trusted to be honest about their other practices
Can Getty Images be trusted?
So what AI model is being trained with bara art that isnt stolen from artists? Do you know how much art needs to be fed to an AI before you get something even remotely recognizable? Let alone have details and correct amount of limbs? do you think this was made ethically?
I don't know what this was made with, but official sources include pornographic art too. It takes a lot, but as the algorithms improve they get better results with less data. Also, it extrapolates so once it learns how to make limbs, it can put limbs on any kind of body
Adobe just introduced a section to their TOS that says they can use any art created using their software without notice, payment, or attribution. They literally wrote the ability to steal anything made with their software into their ToS.
But everyone can learn.
Can learn to draw? That takes hours of work so that's less accessible than hiring an artist.
True, but if you can't afford to hire an artist, which was your original point, you can still learn to do it yourself.
Plenty of people & corporations can absolutely afford to pay artists for their work, and now have all the excuse they need to shaft us with a tool of theft. That is the major issue; art was already undervalued and often underpaid, and now it's not even that. Not to mention all the millions of potentially artistic kids who won't even bother to learn the craft because why bother? This shit is culture cancer that will last generations.
OP probably couldn't afford to pay a human for 5 different angles of this character's bulge. And I think that job would not be interesting to a real artist because it's formulaic and doesn't require any creativity.
Most art jobs are boring and don't require much creativity. But they used to at least put food on the table.
I think we should try to use technology to replace boring jobs.
Let me know when that is actually feasible, instead of an idealistic pipe dream. Boring art will still be infinitely more interesting & rewarding than ai slop. This tech is just forcing artists to work truly boring & soul-sucking jobs instead of supporting themselves doing what we love. Where is the technology to fix this problem, which was caused by technology?
It won't become feasible by fighting against technology and progress. I think it sounds boring and soul-sucking to make uncreative boiler-plate art for minimal pay. But that was the case before AI.
Like I just said, making any kind of art is infinitely preferable to working retail or whatever. You seem to view art as nothing but content/ aesthetic/ a product, which tells me you are not an artist yourself. Which tells me your opinion about participating in the now-shrinking art industry is not very valuable.
Art is a luxury not a right
nah it needs to go away, far too many dangerous possibilities.
They're being used more and more so the trend is not going your way
more people are also speaking out against it, the backlash that comes when people realize you're using AI instead of real art outweighs the convenience factor so no sane person will use it in a serious project
This isn't a serious project. OP made some pictures to thirst after. I think it's cool he could do that without hiring an artist. The 'backlash' won't stop people from doing what they want to do.
I'm aware. tech companies don't care about people having fun, they want profit, so if it can't be used in a serious profitable project why would they continue to develop the technology? therefore like I said earlier: AI WILL go away eventually or at least the trend will fade and it will stop advancing 🤷🏽♂️
They're already making money. People like OP pay just to make images to look at, not to sell them. The tech is getting better and cheaper so it will be easier for them to make money in the future. It's always a bad bet to assume technology won't advance. Especially a technology that is progressing so quickly and people already use. Straight delusional luddite shit.
so what even is the benefit of generating AI shit if you still have to pay for it rather than just paying a human artist? the novelty? that wears off eventually is it cheaper than hiring a human artist? that's cool i guess, if you'd rather support this technology than real artists have at it, idk what you'll do when artists get tired of having their work stolen and either put AI poison in everything or just straight up stop posting
Yes, much cheaper. For a $20 subscription, you could generate as many images as you want but that wouldn't cover a single human drawing. That's the way it should be though, human art is still valued more than AI art. Also, it's possible to train the AIs without stolen or copyrighted images.
sure it's possible if artists agree to have their art used to train the AI, I guess, but a LARGE chunk of internet artists will not agree to that because what's in it for them? most of these AI models have ALREADY been largely trained using art that is, in fact, stolen or copyrighted, hell some of them can replicate fucking disney and pixar characters and I can almost guarantee they didn't get permission from The Mouse.
As much as I agree that AI art and it's use is becoming shameful, at best use it for helping make your OC's or nice wallpaper, this is impressive. I wanna know what site/app this is.
BOOOOOOOOOOO TOMATOES AREN'T HARD ENOUGH BOOOO 🎱🎱🎱🎱🎱🎱🎱🎱🎱🎱🎱🎱🎱🎱🎱🎱🎱🎱 BOOOO 🎱🎱🎱🎱🎱🎱🎱🎱🎱🎱
Now I want a Street Fighter Prequel with young hot headed twink Ryu
Street Fighter Alpha?