The one used in this thread: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/12973939

Mind you, I didn't set out to deceive anyone. It was more of a "why call attention to it" thing. It's probably the only time I've posted anything AI where I didn't explicitly call attention to it as AI. But I've learned in the times I did do that here that some person or other would be upset, pretty much no matter what the content was of what I posted.

I figured, one of the primary complaints about AI generated images, is essentially that they look like they're trying to look professional but make basic errors. Which I think is a fair criticism. So I thought, what if I use stick figures. That's closer to meme level of illustration and expectations are lower for it, so if some basic mistakes exist, that's par for the course.

I did write the text itself as rhetoric and fictional conversation, but I didn't draw any of the image, nor did I place the text in the image. It was received extremely well for a lemmygrad post. I'm sure it is easily the most upvoted post I've ever made. I don't know what made it work so well, maybe the commonness of issues with landlords, but I can only guess as the responses didn't tell me much about the why.

One person did say "Ai stickfigures?" which surprised me a bit. I didn't think it looked overtly AI genned. But I asked them "why do you ask?" because I wanted to be sure whether it was confrontational or sincere interest in where it came from. They never responded, so I'm not sure.

But anyway, the fact that it was AI somehow didn't prevent it from seemingly resonating with people. I never would have drawn any such image on my own. I could make an attempt, but it would probably look like a child's fridge drawing and I would have especially struggled with the vividness of the facial expressions, which was where I sought to do the contrast between the feigned victimhood followed by literal mustache twirling villain. Caricature, but gets the point across.

Given how I've seen some react on here, I can't help but think it would have been a shitshow if I'd called attention to it being AI generated or if it had been drawn in such a way that it looked stereotypically "AI". Instead, as of posting this, it totaled at 111 upvotes and 0 downvotes.

It's always hard to tell the impact things have in a virtual forum, but with the limited metrics I have to go by, it went really well. And I didn't draw a pixel of it. This paints a picture for me that the issue with AI generated content in these spaces is not when it's AI generated but when people believe that it is. But people can believe something is even when it isn't. Or in this case, likely assume it isn't when it is. Maybe I'm wrong and the 100+ people who upvoted thought "AI" and upvoted anyway, but given how things usually go here, I doubt it.

I hope no one takes this as trickery or something. Having seen more recent angst on here relating to AI, I thought calling attention to this is an opportunity to make a point. When I went to make that image, it was mainly about seeing what kind of effective agitprop I could make with AI. Maybe knowing this explicitly will inspire some people to think more about how they can use it too, beyond the hated stereotypes, with thoughtfulness of design put into it. I am still determined to aid in strategic thought and practice, no matter how much mud is slung. Liberation demands it of me.

You're right to be mad about a lot of things. Help me help you be mad at the right people in a way that will change the world for the better.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 1 hour ago

I implore you to read what I said.

This is irrelevant except that I'm an artist. I'm not arguing for the "Soul" of human made work. I'm not arguing for copyright I actually despise most forms of copyright law. I'm not arguing that AI "erodes" Artists market share.

Although an argument could be made on my suggestion that the working class has a negative attitude due to the destabilization of their lives as a result of AI. I was referring to audience perception. I'm not arguing for the "Morality" of AI. I'm describing reasons as to why it has a negative reception among working class people. And that the state can make far more effective use of it than any proletarian movement. Once the dictatorship of the proletariat is in place, it'll be just as useful I'm sure.

The idea that artists are incapable of being revolutionary and are subsumed by the bourgeois in the essay is laughable. Artists, being artisans, do not exploit others for their labor value. While I agree with a fair bit of this article it itself is forming odd ideas over artists that I think will be found to be a mistake. but it goes beyond the discussion here.

  • source
  • parent