They’ll enjoy the assembly line thoughtless content put out by Disney and Warner Bros for profit and not for any meaningful discussion or art, but the moment someone does the same with a calculator they’ll lose their minds and say art is dead.
Maybe we can just go back to enjoying things and stop pretending to protect artists while constantly accusing artists of using AI.
Remember when Wacom and Photoshop wasn’t see as a form of art and only traditional art was valid? Or when artists mocked photography?
Or when people about 3 years ago were anti-copyright and have completely done a 180 on it. Still don’t get how they can be anti copyright but then instantly say “but this is my exception, this is for me, not for the public. I’ll gladly take the public however.”
I don’t like supporting the thing that steals artists work and then makes a worse version of it. The thing they said “wow this is actually really great” already existed and was stolen to generate the worse one, and now the person who actually created the value gets no credit.
The biggest issue with this (imo) is it pushes artists out for more ai image generation, but ai image generation will only get worse as it’s trained on a greater percent of ai images, so we essentially lose the source of good images for short term ai images.
Lemmy has a profound ability to retroactively decide something they once liked sucks. Not in the same way as learning something negative about the context, the artist, or the process and regretting that something they liked could come from a negative source. No, I mean they retroactively decide that the thing they liked is actually awful and they never liked it; because Lemmy is full of emotional children who collapse into hysterics the moment they see the letters A and I together, with most not even able to fully articulate why they feel the way they do, other than “AI bad!”
It’s like if you gave a meat lover a vegan hot dog without telling them; and at first they like it and say how good it is. But then when you tell them it’s not meat they immediately spit it out and start gagging and crying and saying how disgusting it is, as if moments ago they weren’t just saying how much they liked it.
Yes I can enjoy eating a hotdog but if I find out you stole that hot dog from a 13 year old, now I’m too upset that you stole from someone to enjoy it anymore. It’s not that they “don’t like it” anymore, they just hate that it’s ai generated more than they like the image.
Yes, as I said, you can regret the circumstances that led to it. You can even dislike continuing to consume it. What we are talking about is you going “Mmm… Delicious!” Then spitting it out and going “Blegh, disgusting! Who could ever enjoy something that tastes like THAT!”
The quality of the art isn’t in question here. what is, is what got it there. So yeah, if I see an picture and like it, but then find out it’s made by a talentless little hack that typed a sentence into a text prompt-
… It instantly sucks ass.
You see, it’s this reason that drives us to put our children’s shitty pictures on the fridge. It’s not because it’s art show adjacent work. It’s becase of the effort and time spent learning to make it what it is. Effort is something we call an “added value”. As is experience and training. These things are all subconsciously included in how we appreciate a thing- how we attribute a value it.
-and all of these things are ONLY acquired by a human being.
So no, it’s not “lemmy retroactively deciding something liked once sucked”
It’s learning that something they once liked, took zero effort to make, and wasn’t even created by a human being, but instead- a sweaty little wannabe “artist” behind a keyboard.
I like the metaphor where you deny someone’s dietary/moral choices, essentially made them party to a grave sin in their eyes, rob them of their ability to consent, and then laugh at them when they’re upset about it. It’s really fucking telling.
I… swore it was the other way round. Either way, their metaphor isn’t the same as the actual situation because most who don’t like AI hate it on a moral ground (wasteful, egregious) rather than on a pure aesthetic one.
If you like it, who cares?
They’ll enjoy the assembly line thoughtless content put out by Disney and Warner Bros for profit and not for any meaningful discussion or art, but the moment someone does the same with a calculator they’ll lose their minds and say art is dead.
Maybe we can just go back to enjoying things and stop pretending to protect artists while constantly accusing artists of using AI.
Remember when Wacom and Photoshop wasn’t see as a form of art and only traditional art was valid? Or when artists mocked photography?
Or when people about 3 years ago were anti-copyright and have completely done a 180 on it. Still don’t get how they can be anti copyright but then instantly say “but this is my exception, this is for me, not for the public. I’ll gladly take the public however.”
I don’t like supporting the thing that steals artists work and then makes a worse version of it. The thing they said “wow this is actually really great” already existed and was stolen to generate the worse one, and now the person who actually created the value gets no credit.
The biggest issue with this (imo) is it pushes artists out for more ai image generation, but ai image generation will only get worse as it’s trained on a greater percent of ai images, so we essentially lose the source of good images for short term ai images.
“steals artists work and makes a worse version of it”
You’re literally describing virtually every human artist.
If it gets worse we won’t use it, will we? Self solving problem, if true.
Lemmy has a profound ability to retroactively decide something they once liked sucks. Not in the same way as learning something negative about the context, the artist, or the process and regretting that something they liked could come from a negative source. No, I mean they retroactively decide that the thing they liked is actually awful and they never liked it; because Lemmy is full of emotional children who collapse into hysterics the moment they see the letters A and I together, with most not even able to fully articulate why they feel the way they do, other than “AI bad!”
It’s like if you gave a meat lover a vegan hot dog without telling them; and at first they like it and say how good it is. But then when you tell them it’s not meat they immediately spit it out and start gagging and crying and saying how disgusting it is, as if moments ago they weren’t just saying how much they liked it.
Yes I can enjoy eating a hotdog but if I find out you stole that hot dog from a 13 year old, now I’m too upset that you stole from someone to enjoy it anymore. It’s not that they “don’t like it” anymore, they just hate that it’s ai generated more than they like the image.
Yes, as I said, you can regret the circumstances that led to it. You can even dislike continuing to consume it. What we are talking about is you going “Mmm… Delicious!” Then spitting it out and going “Blegh, disgusting! Who could ever enjoy something that tastes like THAT!”
If you think people who hate AI haven’t articulated many reasons why, you must not be listening.
The quality of the art isn’t in question here. what is, is what got it there. So yeah, if I see an picture and like it, but then find out it’s made by a talentless little hack that typed a sentence into a text prompt-
… It instantly sucks ass.
You see, it’s this reason that drives us to put our children’s shitty pictures on the fridge. It’s not because it’s art show adjacent work. It’s becase of the effort and time spent learning to make it what it is. Effort is something we call an “added value”. As is experience and training. These things are all subconsciously included in how we appreciate a thing- how we attribute a value it.
-and all of these things are ONLY acquired by a human being.
So no, it’s not “lemmy retroactively deciding something liked once sucked”
It’s learning that something they once liked, took zero effort to make, and wasn’t even created by a human being, but instead- a sweaty little wannabe “artist” behind a keyboard.
There is NO defense for AI making slop art.
I like the metaphor where you deny someone’s dietary/moral choices, essentially made them party to a grave sin in their eyes, rob them of their ability to consent, and then laugh at them when they’re upset about it. It’s really fucking telling.
I think you inverted the scenario. Otherwise you’re suggesting there’s some way that eating a veggie dog is a grave sin
I… swore it was the other way round. Either way, their metaphor isn’t the same as the actual situation because most who don’t like AI hate it on a moral ground (wasteful, egregious) rather than on a pure aesthetic one.
See? Just like I said: emotional children.
They literally glossed over your point and the other dude, and then claim humans are perfect art making creatures.
Spoken just like someone who would actually argue that a computer can crate the human equivalent of art.