• M68040 [they/them]
    hexbear
    16
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    The gutting of the humanities and other things generally written off as "frivolous" kind of terrified me. There's something that feels distinctly wrong about these attempts at destroying and anyone that even might turn an introspective gaze on society itself. Like they don't want anything that might foster self-awareness accessible to the layman.

  • Tankiedesantski [he/him]
    hexbear
    8
    2 months ago

    An art major's half asleep doodles can receive copyright protection whereas an image created by a million dollar supercomputer running the most sophisticated AI model possible cannot.

    Extremely rare artist x lawyer crossover to dunk on the AI bros.

    • The_Jewish_Cuban [he/him]
      hexbear
      35
      2 months ago

      Right, the only value and purpose of arts and literature, it's creation and enjoyment, is to make a product to sell or consume a story. What a foolish opinion.

      • @istanbullu@lemmy.ml
        hexbear
        1
        2 months ago

        Stable Diffusion is open source and free to be used by anyone. A lot of people have used it for creation and enjoyment. It cuts artists out of the loop and enables a lot of ordinary people to create art. I see this as a huge win.

        • ProfessorOwl_PhD [any]
          hexbear
          21
          2 months ago

          enables a lot of ordinary people to create art.

          Exactly the type of fucking idiot that's never created art in their life.
          "Art is paintings of horses"-ass motherfucker.
          The reason you can't make art isn't because you're bad at drawing or painting and need AI to help you, it's because you don't have the creativity to overcome those limitations. No matter what words you put into stable diffusion, you will only create pictures, not art - there's no meaning underlying the piece, you just typed "t-rex with massive tits" and called the output art because you can't tell the difference.

          • yoink [she/her]
            hexbear
            17
            2 months ago

            its not even that they don't have the creativity - its that people have been so poisoned by commodity capitalism that they feel like their art 'doesn't count' unless it looks like 'real art' that can make money

            people are so isolated from the creative process that they think they can dump it entirely, as if all it is is just knowing how to scribble on a page

          • @istanbullu@lemmy.ml
            hexbear
            2
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Well, people like what comes out of Stable Diffusion. Which is perfectly fine.

            This is like the pizza shop complaining that I'm cooking at home.

            • yoink [she/her]
              hexbear
              21
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              its more like the pizza shop calling you out when you're cooking frozen pizza and calling yourself a chef

              all power to you if you want to just consume slop, but dont complain when you turn around years later and the quality of everything across the board has gone even further to shit cos you were so happy you could type in words and see anything you wanted for all the 15 minutes of dopamine it gave you

              • @istanbullu@lemmy.ml
                hexbear
                1
                2 months ago

                Artist incomes are threatened by the rise of Generative models. Especially mediocre artists who Stable Diffusion have already surpassed.

                Technology changes the world and obsoletes some professions. It has been like this for ever. Artists are not any different.

                • axont [she/her, comrade/them]
                  hexbear
                  20
                  edit-2
                  2 months ago

                  even mediocre artists actually create art, which is something stable diffusion can't do and will never be able to do. You completely misunderstand what art is and its purpose. It's not just a nice looking picture or a meandering story. You understand art as a technical profession creating a product to sell, which is why you equate AI slop with art. Your earlier comment making a distinction between artists and "ordinary people" is completely wrong. The distinction between someone who's an artist and otherwise isn't technical proficiency or ability to make a picture. It's a deeper skill than that, the ability to be creative, to have perspective. It's an ability to communicate. AI can't communicate because it doesn't have a perspective, since it doesn't actually know anything.

                • yoink [she/her]
                  hexbear
                  11
                  2 months ago

                  genuinely curious what you mean by 'mediocre artists' and the idea that Stable Diffusion has 'surpassed' them

                  do you have any examples? or is this just a vibes thing?

                • ProfessorOwl_PhD [any]
                  hexbear
                  10
                  2 months ago

                  How will AI take over creative professions when it can't even perform rote professions? AI chatbots keep going rogue and lying to customers about company policies (and even the actual law), image generators can't get enough of illegal and violent imagery, facial recognition AI's keep identifying black people as all looking the same - in art the value of a peice is constrained by the meaning it has to people, so why do you think that LLMs and all the other predictive generators we laughably call intelligent will be able to create meaningful peices by putting together the most likely set of pixels?

        • AOCapitulator [they/them]
          hexbear
          8
          2 months ago

          Wait you think this is a good thing?

          You think it's a good thing that people will be even more unable to express themselves in our capitalist hell scape?

          You REALLY don't see how this will bring on yet more horrors?

          • @istanbullu@lemmy.ml
            hexbear
            1
            2 months ago

            Quite the opposite. AI allows people to express themselves in interesting ways. There are communities of people online sharing beautiful images and videos they created with Stable Diffusion. Why is that bad?

            • AOCapitulator [they/them]
              hexbear
              3
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              THAT isn't bad. But you are incredibly naive if you think that's where this will stay in this hell world of ours, if you think it will simply be a nice tool to allow greater access to creative expression

              • @istanbullu@lemmy.ml
                hexbear
                1
                2 months ago

                It cuts out the middlemen, which is usually good. People don't need to pay an artist to make something, they can just make one themselves using AI.

                • AOCapitulator [they/them]
                  hexbear
                  3
                  2 months ago

                  the middle men

                  Describing normal working artists this way is weird as fuck, you have such a warped conception of reality

    • NuraShiny [any]
      hexbear
      18
      2 months ago

      I would like you to know that if you say this, or other things you said in this thread to my face, I would punch the smug out of you.

      Remember this post in a few years when your billion dollar theft machines have shut down for being huge wastes of money and effort and the few survivors, if any, have been sectioned off into expensive subscription models that you are priced out of because they need to make the literal billions of dollars it costs to make and run them back at some point.

      This is the same-ass bubble as NFTs and crypto and it will also die.

    • @exocrinous@startrek.website
      hexbear
      7
      2 months ago

      If AI becomes responsible for producing Disney musicals, then they probably won't have any gay-coded characters anymore. What about Scar? What about Ursula? What about Gaston? What about Shang??

      We need human artists because humans are capable of sneaking content that is actually societally beneficial into what would otherwise be soulless corporate products.

  • Bilb!@lemmy.ml
    hexbear
    5
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Matthew Dow Smith, whomever the fuck that is, has a sophisticated delusion about what's actually going on and he's incorporated it into his persecution complex. Not impressed.

  • people_are_cute@lemmy.sdf.org
    hexbear
    4
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    AI art tools democratize art by empowering those who weren't born with the affinity, talent or privilege to become artists themselves. They allow regular people the freedom of expression in new dimensions. They are amazing.

    They are not made to replace human art. They are made to supplement it. The "artists" who feel threatened and offended at its existence are probably not very good at their art.

  • Evilsandwichman [none/use name]
    hexbear
    4
    2 months ago

    I mean they're kind of succeeding; with AI art, people no longer have to settle with Picasso looking artwork.

    • axont [she/her, comrade/them]
      hexbear
      8
      2 months ago

      yeah instead I have to settle for the two genres of mangled 18 fingered Lovecraft monster or Dreamworks style anime girl. cool

    • ProfessorOwl_PhD [any]
      hexbear
      4
      2 months ago

      No, it uses appropriate coordinating conjunctions. A run on sentence isn't just one that's long.