https://archive.ph/tR7s6

Get fuuuuuuuuuuuuuucked

“This isn’t going to stop,” Allen told the New York Times. “Art is dead, dude. It’s over. A.I. won. Humans lost.”

"But I still want to get paid for it."

  • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
    ·
    1 hour ago

    I get that socialists will naturally be sympathetic to artists who often are not well compensated for their labor. However I think it’s also important that we understand that in order to make a living, independent artists rely heavily on intellectual property law. As such, they tend to want to categorize all AI art as unoriginal and derivative of existing works.

    Unfortunately I think that’s a bit of a liberal argument. It ascribes some ineffable quality to human creativity that AI cannot replicate. In doing so it obfuscates the process by which the state creates and enforces a market for intellectual property. Therefore, I don’t think it’s particularly useful argument for socialists to make.

    That’s not to say “AI” companies aren’t exploiting the work of unpaid artists. That is definitely still true. We just need to be advocating for solutions that go beyond what capitalist markets can offer.

    • Andrzej3K [none/use name]
      ·
      34 minutes ago

      I don't think it is a particularly ineffable quality though? It's art because another human did it, and it really doesn't have to be much deeper than that. That said, I do agree that intellectual property is ultimately blind alley. What most people don't understand is that IP laws are only enforceable in the name of capital.

    • UlyssesT [he/him]
      ·
      edit-2
      10 minutes ago

      We just need to be advocating for solutions that go beyond what capitalist markets can offer.

      Most of the people posting here currently live under capitalism. Unless you have solutions you want to advocate for now that for some reason you left unsaid in your post, it sounds more like a "stop complaining" proposal.

  • DPRK_Chopra [comrade/them]
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Transformer based "AI" technology is not just a grift. While there is a lot of hype around it, it is also producing real results and has the potential to cause a massive devaluation of labor.

    Fuck this dude though.

  • adultswim_antifa [he/him]
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Most artists are making millions of dollars and very few are starving. Come on artists, share the wealth! how-much-could-it-cost

  • UlyssesT [he/him]
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    “This isn’t going to stop,” Allen told the New York Times. “Art is dead, dude. It’s over. A.I. won. Humans lost.”

    Good gravy. This isn't far off at all from the inevitabilist bootlickery I sometimes see on Hexbear about this treat printer shit.

    LLMs would just be tools, useful for a task, if it wasn't for the hype-driven euphoria and venture capital momentum that is pushing to burn forests and turn lakes to dust in the drive to make ever larger data centers for reasons that range from arrogance to the occult.

    https://futurism.com/openai-employees-say-firms-chief-scientist-has-been-making-strange-spiritual-claims

    As it stands, I give full uncritical support to yo ho ho everything that "prompt engineers" think is theirs because they pressed enter first. pirate-jammin

      • Belly_Beanis [he/him]
        ·
        2 hours ago

        A lot of music is focus-grouped and has algorithms behind it because major labels want to turn it into a commodity. I'm not a musician so I forget what they are exactly, but there's beats and music notes common in a lot of songs put there because they sell. Regardless, people will always want to hear live music. Nobody is going to pay hundreds of dollars to watch holograms of dead people.

        But yeah. The camera did more damage to artists than AI ever has or will. If painting survived photography, it will survive AI slop.

        • Tom742 [comrade/them]
          ·
          10 minutes ago

          Anti-intellectualism devaluing the arts and suppressing wages to below livable standards will kill art long before anything else.

      • UlyssesT [he/him]
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Even if they somehow were, what good would it do? Who would even be around to enjoy the prompted floods of slop? What would distinguish it?

  • bazingabrain [comrade/them]
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    I mean even if we disregard the AI art shit, this piece is so bland, fails the 3 second rule and has practically no direction or sense of light direction. Its like pouring fifty brands of cereals in a bowl of milk because you think more cereals=more good, except, no, fuckface, its just gonna turn into a disgusting, unpalatable mush that no one in their right mind would eat.
    also

    Jason M. Allen, an executive at a tabletop gaming startup,

    get this fucking guy out of here hes a fucking bozo!

    • Belly_Beanis [he/him]
      ·
      2 hours ago

      "Tabletop gaming startup" has to be a bit. Like there's no way he's getting venture capitalists to invest in Pokémon cards...r-right?

  • PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmygrad.ml
    ·
    4 hours ago

    I hope this and similar affairs turn into huge IP shitstorm which will explode straight into the faces of publishing mafia.

    But i suspect they will just lobby legislation to copyright absolutely everything then give themselves the rights.

  • GlueBear [they/them, comrade/them]
    ·
    4 hours ago

    AI art just steals from other artists to make it's own cursed style.

    No such thing as AI artist bc their is no such thing as AI art.

    • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
      ·
      51 minutes ago

      I disagree that AI is “stealing” for the same reason I don’t think piracy is stealing. It’s true that everything AI produces is inherently derivative. However, intellectual property only exists as a set of market relationships enforced by the state. Even so, I would agree that artists are getting exploited. However, that’s because the market they are forced to engage with is controlled by capital and not because IP is a physical thing that can be stolen.

    • DragonBallZinn [he/him]
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Everyone’s a property rights absolutist until the rich demand you share with them.

    • Des [she/her, they/them]
      ·
      3 hours ago

      i mean every booster for AI tech is basically a weird asshole.

      if they were smarter and got more personable people to advocate for the tech maybe regular people would hate it less

      but instead it's either smarmy techbro psychos or cringe right wing assholes using it exclusively.

      • Boredom [none/use name]
        ·
        19 minutes ago

        The famous people only shill for ai stuff right before the bubble bursts.

      • StalinStan [none/use name]
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Yeah, like in thr absence of capitlaism ai could be treat. But I stead being teatoilled about it people keep trying to use it to neoliberal harder so that does suck.

    • Z_Poster365 [none/use name]
      ·
      2 hours ago

      That’s what you get when you have a detestable crowd of conmen jumping from hyped thing to hyped thing to try and speculate and con money out of late entrants. It’s the same people, the crypto-bros and wallstreet bets people that go around pushing AI hype and everyone knows it reeks

      • StalinStan [none/use name]
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Yeah, ai is a fun toy. That is all it is going to be in this iteration. That's fine though. People like fun toys. That is the level of serious thought it deserves.

  • FlakesBongler [they/them]
    ·
    6 hours ago

    But I still want to get paid for it

    If only there was an economic system that made it so he could make a good living regardless of the output of his work... soviet-hmm