The site knows it's wrong, but just went right ahead and did it anyway

I expect more "artists are just spoiled aristocrats" radioactive takes, but I'm posting this anyway. :this-is-fine:

  • Antoine_St_Hexubeary [none/use name]
    ·
    2 years ago

    Weird take: the area where it will catch on first is children's book illustrations.

    Any hand-wringing about this by consumer advocates or within the publishing industry will be met with the same thought-terminating cliche that anyone who has concerns about the quality of children's media should already be familiar with: "kids can't tell the difference." The devaluation you're talking about will enter an irreversible end-stage once the children raised on AI art are adults.

    • KiaKaha [he/him]
      ·
      2 years ago

      Nah, children’s illustrations are too stylised. They don’t lend themselves well to AI.

      I’d expect AI to be used for more generic stuff first. Stock photos, fantasy/RPG art assets, porn, etc.

      • Antoine_St_Hexubeary [none/use name]
        ·
        2 years ago

        There is a lot of super-generic low-effort art happening in the "dollar-store children's books" space right now. The writing isn't much better.

        • KiaKaha [he/him]
          ·
          2 years ago

          That’s disappointing to hear. The ones I’ve seen recently (albeit at real bookshops) are of decent quality.

          • Antoine_St_Hexubeary [none/use name]
            ·
            2 years ago

            Oh yeah, there is a lot of very clever work being done in some quarters, but every time my mother-in-law goes to the dollar store she brings my daughter one of these ten-page-long whatchamacallits with no author listed, and they're always full of borderline-uncanny illustrations and imperfect rhyme. Sorry, this is a hot-button issue for me right now.