[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

There is a difference. You're a human, not a machine. Don't compare yourself to one. We artists don't compare ourselves to them, either. But you're right in that, to a layperson, AI art seems to evoke the same emotions as human art. But you know why that is? Because AI art is also human art, just remixed by a machine. The problem is that the machine can't tell you its sources because either the programmers didn't care about coding in credits and only took copyrighted artwork in bulk as raw material, or it's very hard for the neural network algorithm to tell you how it came up with an output.

On the topic of inspiration, we as artists love it when other artists are influenced by us. "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery" as they say. If another artist likes us they're also a fan. That's great. But we're not fond of an AI pretending to be us in front of non-artists, because 1. it's just a program that took our art (without permission) from its database because it was tagged as appropriate, and 2. it doesn't even give us credit. I mean, as far as we know, the programmers who coded the AI didn't even take one look at our art, they just mass downloaded whole websites and our art came along with them. We don't like that.

Edit: Whoever downvoted me, at least refute my points.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

I think the problematic AI tool here isn't AI that helps artists finish artwork or automate menial tasks, but AI that has been fed with every copyrighted artwork on the internet and is sold as an artist-replacement tool.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

Sucks if you’re an artist but the automobile and steam engine sucked for those whose profession was stabling and shoeing horses too, yet we can’t hold back progress. People will still commission artistic works, it’ll just revert to being very skilled artists and very wealthy people.

Can't believe I'm reading this take on a communist website. If you're arguing from a capitalists' standpoint, then there's the counterpoint that the existing art generators are full of copyrighted artwork taken without the authors' permission, and so they should be deemed illegal (this would be true under socialism as well tbf). Then further generators would only be allowed to use either public domain or properly licensed artwork as its training set, which will inevitably lower the variety and quality of the outputs (sorry programmers).

From a communist standpoint we should stand in solidarity with the artists whose livelihoods are being put in risk and oppose unethical AI art.

Capitalists are not about to allow banning of a cost-cutting measure any more than they would have allowed banning the steam engine or mechanical factories to save the jobs of workers. They’re just not.

This is fundamentally different because the generators were fed basically every artwork on the internet, no matter if they were copyrighted or not, in order to make the thing work. They should have never been able to become public services, much less PAID services, and should have been restricted to academic circles as proofs-of-concept, due to the blatant and massive copyright infringement taking place. This is allowed to go on because artists are usually poor and have no individual leverage, but say, if tomorrow an AI movie generator was released that was fed every Hollywood movie ever and could output a Marvel-quality blockbuster with just a prompt and enough time, believe me, shit would be sued to destruction in days.

Artists should be collectivizing right now and preparing a lawsuit against those operating AI art generators fed on their copyrighted artwork. So yes, the proverbial machine can be smashed in this case, if only because it infringes copyright law in such a massive way.

[-] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago

In a January 2021 wiretap, Testa said he “would make a massacre like the one in New Zealand, but I wouldn’t go to the blacks, I would go to the barracks in Marigliano.”

Ukraine, US and NATO will now be responsible for unleashing Nazi terrorism upon Europe. All just because they wanted to own the Ruskies.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

Sometimes it's nice seeing fascists and capitalists being so honest and direct about the reason they do what they do: class interests. No beating around the bush with concern trolling, no religious/racial/cultural/ideological/"freedom and democracy" nonsense, no, just straight up power and money.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

This is what I was gonna say. What the fuck

[-] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago

That's interesting. The fact that capitalist developers are still building using the commieblock urban format nowadays proves how practical and functional it is.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

Oddly satisfying

[-] [email protected] 0 points 3 years ago

Some think the Palace of the Soviets was excessive, but no, that was just a life-size Lenin on top of it:

[-] [email protected] 1 points 3 years ago

A CIA-directed website defending fascists? Color me shocked

[-] [email protected] 0 points 3 years ago

Are there any made in amerikkka consumer products even left?

view more: ‹ prev next ›

mmhhkk

0 post score
0 comment score
joined 4 years ago