In the Dune books there was something called the “Butlerian Jihad” where people rejected machines that did any type of thinking. Thought that was interesting considering how long ago it was written.
I like to feed AI's other AI art and have them create the same thing from the same prompt. I then take the ones with the most fingers and deformities and give them to more AIs. It feels illegal unless it's in Alabama.
Some tracking and royalties for usage like the music industry for example could be a helpful way to deal with what is likely going to be around in some form for a while.
Mandatory intellectual property searches/confirmations prior to using maybe?
We can't even effectively fight international copyright infringement now. It sucks and I wish things were different bc all the arts should be respected more but my jaded realism knows how much humans suck at making good choices.
I would focus on advocacy for enforceable rules/compensation
It's been a plague in the R34 community the absolute worst with it filling 332k places in the archive while people like me are trying to archive people's hard work for people to enjoy in the future
AI Art is NOT art, hell there is so many cheaper artists so support REAL Artists 💜
Just a minor comment as what people call AI nowadays gives a bad name to AI, this is about "AI generated" art which is different from AI assisted (like red eye removal, focus on faces, etc in cameras or image processing assistance like selecting a foreground object in an image).
I think t's fine to generate AI art for personal use but i specfically dislike people who mass generating loads of AI "art" then sell it. Hope it won't evolve into easy-money-making trend, waste tons of water and electricity, saturated market, poisoning future AI and human art-making ability.
Fortunately AI ‘art’ is glitzy crap without essence. So far. I’ve not seen a single piece that conveys an emotional relationship between the artist and the subject and/or medium. And none that invites an emotional exploration of the piece by the audience. Pulp novel cover work at best.
Use glaze and nightshade! They're A.I. poison! The university of chicago is working on integrating the two together so you can protect art style AND poison AI but for now use glaze for art and nightshade to poison IN THAT ORDER https://glaze.cs.uchicago.edu/
Unfortunately, AI is inevitable. I agree with you on principle, but electronic computing's end-game always has been artificial general intelligence. So if you wanna stop AI completely, you're gonna have to go back to 1904 and prevent Fleming from inventing the vacuum tube
Yes, plus, there's nothing wrong with developing new software tools for artists, as long as it's done respectfully to artists of the past and present. I think these ML based tools could be really useful.
1st thing we must call for in our fight against AI is every thing generated, visual, written, audio, etc must be easily identified as nonhuman generated. There must be an AI signature in the file. Next we need a new vocabulary to reference the work. You can’t call it a “painting” without paint, etc.
This should actually be standard, legally enforced procedure — alas, just a handful of content sites are labeling AI-generated content as such. And a lot of it can look just as the real thing to the untrained eye.
Just curious about the position (not taking a side); what's the stance on a (hypothetical?) model trained entirely on public domain or legally licensed data?
That may be the case for the status quo and how things are being done now, but it's not the same to say that all involved issues are inherent to the technology. A hypothetical may elucidate issues, but if you're determined to present only broad-based objections, I don't know what would satisfy you.
That would be fine imo, but I think that would end up being a very different thing than what AI companies are currently building right now. (They’ve already admitted they need copyrighted/stolen artwork to function).
until the tech bros got involved, this was more or less the case for folks studying & creating generative “ai” models. the answer, as admitted by openai, is that those models don’t have nearly enough data to get the results we’ve been seeing from these unethical models. but there are other concerns-
namely, that any tech made to remove artists from art could be seen as unethical and might also leave whole creative industries in ruin. those models could also end up cannibalizing themselves if they were to (hypothetically) run out of new data and start only training on their own ai sludge.
I won't dispute that, though I'm interested to see how it all evolves (the tech, the discourse, the exploitation, the well-intentioned use cases). Nothing stands still. We'll see.
lastly, there’s simply the ethics of cultural progress: gen ai is incapable of true innovation; everything it creates is literally a derivative of its training data, sometimes to the point of obvious plagiarism. if allowed to flourish and push out actual artists, what’s left for the future?
My impish nature immediately wants to ask AI to suggest changes to the comic, and post the result. But I won't because that feels like it crosses a line. Also the result would likely be illegible, which is less fun.
That is the word I was looking for! 😉
Imp brain: "lol, that would be funny!"
Grown-up brain: "No, that would be obnoxious, don't do that".
Imp brain: "Spoilsport. Can I at least say I thought about it but didn't?"
Grown-up brain: "Fine, but don't come crying to me if someone calls you obnoxious".
One way to fight back is by subscribing to and reporting AI accounts to my labeling service @ozone.thebull.app which you can only do on the website right now. But we can label any AI accounts so that you can hide them from your timeline and help suffocate them.
Note: this version is standalone, i.e. without Glaze. Please be aware that a shaded image that is not Glazed is potentially vulnerable to style mimicry. We are testing and will release a combined version of Glaze/Nightshade when ready.
Not all AI tools are bad to be fair. However, I do agree that AI ‘art’ programs are a big problem! I don’t rely on my art for a living. But artist friends of mine already have their artworks stolen or livelihoods affected because of AI
Sadly there still exists some with this mindset: AI mimics like how irl artists do.
Ya know... ya telling me ya have brain cancer without telling me ya have brain cancer.
They think they’re neutral and that’s evolution. Hello? Yer blatantly defending AI by lamely comparing it with a human being!
Yes - these aren't humans imitating or intelligence, but machines using sets of data input to output randomized combinations with other sets of data to filter that into coherent results. And most of both data sets are human labor that is stolen, taken without active consent or coerced.
And this whole "but what are human brains but generation machines" is philosophy as cover story for how every single machine learning project only exists by harvesting the work of humans and the vast majority did not compensate the workers adequately or at all but is still seeking profit themselves.
There's no direct analogy, but it's sort of not being paid to build every part of the machine used to eliminate your job.
And tech bros pretend that as it's not the exactly same as previous schemes & scams there's no legal or moral issues. They want to dominate before regs & activists catch up.
Like Air BnB or Uber, most tech companies seek to expand so fast the illusion of a done deal gives them immunity from brazen malfeasance, i.e. "but you can't stop us now or make us pay for labor, we're so pervasive, and we profit very important people".
Aye, can never agree more to this.
They rob us artists the time, the efforts, and in many cases, the mean of living, then tell us to step down.
Whenever I meet them, I always make it clear: If you don’t stand up for & support us, stay out of our fight! Don’t obstruct us with brainless logics!
The best way to fight AI to shame people and companies who use it.
"Is your company struggling financially? I'm legit concerned about your business because you can't seem to afford artists and are cutting corners, but you cutting these same corners on your products? Are your products even safe?"
AI in the world of music is not yet that advanced. But the development is going fast . But the love of art and the passion for a project will (hopefully) be more appreciated again.
Might want to change the third picture AI word because it potentially can be cropped without context and haters will accuse you for hating AI in general
It's insane how it's destroyed most popular areas I use to visit. Along with the hatred towards normal artists. I have had to jump away from most big social medias. Honestly it's a breath of fresh air.
I could be overthinking, but I'm wondering if we should be using the term "human" artists. Artists can ONLY be human. We should never give even the tacit indication that AI can be an "artist."
I like to say that humans are the only living beings who ★consciously★ create art. Sure we've seen videos of painting elephants, dogs etc, but I doubt they do it with a "creating art" mindset. And AI, well, is neither of these.
Comments
I think AI artwork is unlikely to be fully banned and there's no way we'll get worldwide agreement on "the rules". But we need some "rules" for sure.
Mandatory intellectual property searches/confirmations prior to using maybe?
I would focus on advocacy for enforceable rules/compensation
hypothetical question this day will never come
It's been a plague in the R34 community the absolute worst with it filling 332k places in the archive while people like me are trying to archive people's hard work for people to enjoy in the future
AI Art is NOT art, hell there is so many cheaper artists so support REAL Artists 💜
Dave Rapoza said it best here (very good interview with Steven Zapata btw)
https://youtu.be/A8-nsFN-pWQ?si=ix_NuoKPin_R105l&t=3177
The way it's being used is new, but that use doesn't have to be inevitable.
I've followed AI most of my life and I really hope it ends up on the right track again soon.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/ai-generated-data-can-poison-future-ai-models/
Imp brain: "lol, that would be funny!"
Grown-up brain: "No, that would be obnoxious, don't do that".
Imp brain: "Spoilsport. Can I at least say I thought about it but didn't?"
Grown-up brain: "Fine, but don't come crying to me if someone calls you obnoxious".
Silver lining, you will not miss the people you block. They literally need you more than you need them.
I follow a bunch of actual artists and they deserve my engagement.
https://nightshade.cs.uchicago.edu/
Definitely worth looking into to help protect art from AI Theft.
Note: this version is standalone, i.e. without Glaze. Please be aware that a shaded image that is not Glazed is potentially vulnerable to style mimicry. We are testing and will release a combined version of Glaze/Nightshade when ready.
Please support Artist!
https://www.wired.com/story/millions-of-workers-are-training-ai-models-for-pennies/
Why can't they wake the frick up and realize?
Funny how that works. 😀
(Don't buy AI art either -- hopefully that will help discourage it)
Ya know... ya telling me ya have brain cancer without telling me ya have brain cancer.
They think they’re neutral and that’s evolution. Hello? Yer blatantly defending AI by lamely comparing it with a human being!
And tech bros pretend that as it's not the exactly same as previous schemes & scams there's no legal or moral issues. They want to dominate before regs & activists catch up.
They rob us artists the time, the efforts, and in many cases, the mean of living, then tell us to step down.
Whenever I meet them, I always make it clear: If you don’t stand up for & support us, stay out of our fight! Don’t obstruct us with brainless logics!
"Is your company struggling financially? I'm legit concerned about your business because you can't seem to afford artists and are cutting corners, but you cutting these same corners on your products? Are your products even safe?"