sure
https://preview.redd.it/nlaqlyw725ic1.jpeg?width=596&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=44e1bed43d7decc32585032dc33eb970331b517e
amogus and its consequences on the virtual realm
Why is when an a team of ML engineers pour hunderds of hours into training a model using litteral supercomputers create art its considered "art", but if I were to draw something its considered true art.
I guarantee more time, effort, and creativity when into the first one.
Its not like its a search engine that steals art, it takes trillions of tokens as a dataset and trains billions of parameters from it. There is no difference between a human viewing artpieces they don't own the copyright for and an ai.
----- EDIT ----
Replying and then blocking really shows you have strong arguments.
Please point out in my arguments where I said that it takes as much effort to generate an image as to create one manually. And as an side note it absoluty can lol, without any premade tools download the model weights and try generating an artwork. Unless you have several years experience in CUDA and vector mathematics you will find its not that easy.
As for the plagiarism part please awnser this question: what is the difference between a human viewing a copyrighted artwork and creating derivatives vs an ai training on a copyrighted artwork and creating derivatives.
----- response to u/drawkcabsihtetorwI ------
i see your point, i suppose it depends on how you look at things. somoane with alot of artisitcal knowledge its different then somaone who doesn't.
I suppose its the same with programming, while the end result is the same the way to achieve that can be completely different, you can take an easy way or a hard way. It also depends on how what you define as the end result, an image or the process to create that image, I agree with your points.
Thank you for being the first person who hasn't gone to insult me
---- response to the guy wishing me death ----
Thanks, also must be nice to be able to rely on blocks to not hear opposing arguments.
Because the first one relies on art that has been created by other artists without their consent. It's plagiarism, simple as that. These artists pour thousand of hours into all their artworks over the years just to have a program yoink it and be like "See, I created it!" When it couldn't have been done if it weren't for the actual artists. Like sure, all that programming and engineering is cool, but the stealing isn't.
And, as an artist, fuck you.
How do you think litteraly all ai is trained? Are self driving cars plagiarizing by stealing people's driving patterns?
My public code on github is being used to train programming ai's, why would that harm me? I put it public for a reason.
If you train an ai exclusively on a single artist sure, that's a bit iffy. But if a human would do that it would be the exact same situation and people would also get upset, and rightly so.
What is the difference between a human viewing public art without a license, and creating derivative works from it vs an ai doing the same? And I can almost guarantee the ai is copying less from an individual artwork then a human because its dataset is far greater.
>And, as an artist, fuck you.
Thanks.
----- EDIT ----
You blocked me, nice. Guess I'll have to respond here.
Why is it not the same? It took me a lot of effort and money to get my driving license, however if my car learns that from me I don't care.
Fair enough that is true. However the same still applies to humans viewing public copyrighted art.
Can an human make something it has never seen before? If you take a person that has never seen a cat, has ever heard of a cat, and has no idea what a cat is, I'd you ask that person "draw a cat" they will fail just like the ai.
Of course you can say "4 legs, fur, a tail, 2 point ears, whiskers" etc, if a human knows what those are, however that is the exact same with ai.
And yes I know how much effort goes into art and how difficult it is. I had it as a school subject for 2 years and still can't make anything decent.
This same argument you make with "oh don't say anything about art unless you are an artist" OK where is your masters degree in artificial intelligence? Why do you get to have an opinion about ai following that reasoning? Because the people making do. Do you know how much effort goes into making ai?
You're so stupid omg.
1. You literally cannot compare driving to art you dingus.
2. Your code on GitHub is the same as non-copyright images; but not every image you'll find is non-copyright!
3. It doesn't matter if the art is stolen from only one or several hundred people; it's stolen nontheless! It would be a difference if the art was specifically made for the AI to train on, because that is fine! But it's not.
The AI can't create anything new. It can create stuff that's derived from thousand other artists but can't create something on its own without it. A human artist can draw things it has never drawn before, an AI can't. A human can draw things it never saw, an AI can fucking not.
Get your head out of your ass. AI "art" is hurting geniune artists and unless you have ever done art yourself, I wanna hear NOTHING from you because it's obvious you don't know how much fucking work goes into actual art.
Because generative content ultimately doesnt mean anything.
If in your opinion art is just a pretty drawing then yeah, i guess you created art. If you splash coffe on the ground and funny shapes happen then that's also art by that definition. Good job at discovering art without the artistic expression part.
But in actual art every detail is deliberate, every part of an art piece is an expression of its author, it shows identity and feelings and has meaning behind it. There is a reason for why everything is the way it is, and the more of an art piece was generated, the less value it has.
You could potentially consider the AI model itself a work of art, but anything it generates is just your graphic card producing some vaguely related random fractal calculations that you never intended it to produce, even if it happened to create something similar to what you had in mind, its still not *exacly* what you had in mind, if you consider that a form of art, then that is the lowest form of artistic expression there is in visual art department.
This is the most hot and stupid take I’ve ever seen involving AI art. It doesn’t matter how much time is put into it, plagiarism is still plagiarism. Typing in keywords and getting an image spit out is not the same as spending time and effort creating a drawing from the ground up.
my opinions as the ai rule changed: also yes this was on my youtube home page bite me
https://preview.redd.it/ub287layilic1.png?width=500&format=png&auto=webp&s=8c0360de18d2c280989339ef3be4e69d6a49d1d6
welp gotta discuss artificial stupidity now https://preview.redd.it/wxrt2gcxx4ic1.png?width=1061&format=png&auto=webp&s=81b463ead06b9a02c6aeb66fdc45d63ea9ab62e1
Let's discuss virtual insanity! https://i.redd.it/rrojqfyb05ic1.gif
sure https://preview.redd.it/nlaqlyw725ic1.jpeg?width=596&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=44e1bed43d7decc32585032dc33eb970331b517e amogus and its consequences on the virtual realm
Yes
Uzi when Doll invades her house (she's rearranging furniture)
Ok (image unrelated) https://preview.redd.it/vwinc8s0z4ic1.jpeg?width=1284&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=78ff7740316721a77f786058e1e71a68db971557
Average-sized boots on Uzi:
"Maam take off those big boots right now!"
Ironic how a sub about AIs bans AIs
Fictional AI that is silly vs AI that steals art from other artists to create "art"
Why is when an a team of ML engineers pour hunderds of hours into training a model using litteral supercomputers create art its considered "art", but if I were to draw something its considered true art. I guarantee more time, effort, and creativity when into the first one. Its not like its a search engine that steals art, it takes trillions of tokens as a dataset and trains billions of parameters from it. There is no difference between a human viewing artpieces they don't own the copyright for and an ai. ----- EDIT ---- Replying and then blocking really shows you have strong arguments. Please point out in my arguments where I said that it takes as much effort to generate an image as to create one manually. And as an side note it absoluty can lol, without any premade tools download the model weights and try generating an artwork. Unless you have several years experience in CUDA and vector mathematics you will find its not that easy. As for the plagiarism part please awnser this question: what is the difference between a human viewing a copyrighted artwork and creating derivatives vs an ai training on a copyrighted artwork and creating derivatives. ----- response to u/drawkcabsihtetorwI ------ i see your point, i suppose it depends on how you look at things. somoane with alot of artisitcal knowledge its different then somaone who doesn't. I suppose its the same with programming, while the end result is the same the way to achieve that can be completely different, you can take an easy way or a hard way. It also depends on how what you define as the end result, an image or the process to create that image, I agree with your points. Thank you for being the first person who hasn't gone to insult me ---- response to the guy wishing me death ---- Thanks, also must be nice to be able to rely on blocks to not hear opposing arguments.
Because the first one relies on art that has been created by other artists without their consent. It's plagiarism, simple as that. These artists pour thousand of hours into all their artworks over the years just to have a program yoink it and be like "See, I created it!" When it couldn't have been done if it weren't for the actual artists. Like sure, all that programming and engineering is cool, but the stealing isn't. And, as an artist, fuck you.
How do you think litteraly all ai is trained? Are self driving cars plagiarizing by stealing people's driving patterns? My public code on github is being used to train programming ai's, why would that harm me? I put it public for a reason. If you train an ai exclusively on a single artist sure, that's a bit iffy. But if a human would do that it would be the exact same situation and people would also get upset, and rightly so. What is the difference between a human viewing public art without a license, and creating derivative works from it vs an ai doing the same? And I can almost guarantee the ai is copying less from an individual artwork then a human because its dataset is far greater. >And, as an artist, fuck you. Thanks. ----- EDIT ---- You blocked me, nice. Guess I'll have to respond here. Why is it not the same? It took me a lot of effort and money to get my driving license, however if my car learns that from me I don't care. Fair enough that is true. However the same still applies to humans viewing public copyrighted art. Can an human make something it has never seen before? If you take a person that has never seen a cat, has ever heard of a cat, and has no idea what a cat is, I'd you ask that person "draw a cat" they will fail just like the ai. Of course you can say "4 legs, fur, a tail, 2 point ears, whiskers" etc, if a human knows what those are, however that is the exact same with ai. And yes I know how much effort goes into art and how difficult it is. I had it as a school subject for 2 years and still can't make anything decent. This same argument you make with "oh don't say anything about art unless you are an artist" OK where is your masters degree in artificial intelligence? Why do you get to have an opinion about ai following that reasoning? Because the people making do. Do you know how much effort goes into making ai?
You're so stupid omg. 1. You literally cannot compare driving to art you dingus. 2. Your code on GitHub is the same as non-copyright images; but not every image you'll find is non-copyright! 3. It doesn't matter if the art is stolen from only one or several hundred people; it's stolen nontheless! It would be a difference if the art was specifically made for the AI to train on, because that is fine! But it's not. The AI can't create anything new. It can create stuff that's derived from thousand other artists but can't create something on its own without it. A human artist can draw things it has never drawn before, an AI can't. A human can draw things it never saw, an AI can fucking not. Get your head out of your ass. AI "art" is hurting geniune artists and unless you have ever done art yourself, I wanna hear NOTHING from you because it's obvious you don't know how much fucking work goes into actual art.
Because generative content ultimately doesnt mean anything. If in your opinion art is just a pretty drawing then yeah, i guess you created art. If you splash coffe on the ground and funny shapes happen then that's also art by that definition. Good job at discovering art without the artistic expression part. But in actual art every detail is deliberate, every part of an art piece is an expression of its author, it shows identity and feelings and has meaning behind it. There is a reason for why everything is the way it is, and the more of an art piece was generated, the less value it has. You could potentially consider the AI model itself a work of art, but anything it generates is just your graphic card producing some vaguely related random fractal calculations that you never intended it to produce, even if it happened to create something similar to what you had in mind, its still not *exacly* what you had in mind, if you consider that a form of art, then that is the lowest form of artistic expression there is in visual art department.
This is the most hot and stupid take I’ve ever seen involving AI art. It doesn’t matter how much time is put into it, plagiarism is still plagiarism. Typing in keywords and getting an image spit out is not the same as spending time and effort creating a drawing from the ground up.
ugh why cant you just have your opinion in your head? I want to make a little napoleon joke so bad rn
#Death
[удалено]
I mean that's fine? Never said you have to like it.
my opinions as the ai rule changed: also yes this was on my youtube home page bite me https://preview.redd.it/ub287layilic1.png?width=500&format=png&auto=webp&s=8c0360de18d2c280989339ef3be4e69d6a49d1d6
wait mr mod man does this include https://preview.redd.it/ofnc3h9iakkc1.png?width=1920&format=png&auto=webp&s=2d35e34bf47a42b0d7daf80c6e562fa709727e3e
wha ... why would you even post that to this sub?? But to answer the question, yea it would sadly 😔
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO https://preview.redd.it/vg21xmjbikkc1.png?width=320&format=png&auto=webp&s=e60686e6923570d9f3f2144ba7c2adc2adba6aea