A.I. Art is Terrifying

check out boomslank: boomslank.com/aztrosist
listen to my music: sptfy.com/lilacboy
more links: linktr.ee/aztrosist

[@Praecantetia]

I once tossed "The most desirable object" at Dall e. Dall e 2 gave me ice cream. Dall e mini gave me black holes and galaxies.

[@anth636]

The new Google vs. Bing

[@Praecantetia]

@@anth636 true

[@wilmerreinholdsson1181]

Ok now do more and record your findings in a paper and publish it to a scientific journal

[@romhackd]

what’s more horrifying than ai art is the fact that you know what homestuck is

[@Ttegegg]

What’s a homestuck

[@romhackd]

@@Ttegegg webcomic that’s like 8000 pages long that was rlly popular in like 2012

[@sitkinator]

Personally I feel that AI art could be useful for young game devs who can’t get jobs and need some textures for their game or use it to make variations of textures they already made, though it should NOT replace real artists.

[@moistoyst3187]

I think there were actually AI Texture Art generators before this too

[@solidice5660]

Don’t worry the billion dollar corporations will abuse this technology to no end.

[@Praecantetia]

@@moistoyst3187 there were also noise based ones

[@waterbird2686]

Its been useful for me as a hobbist

[@CleanDeeds]

THIS WAS MY EXACT THOUGHT PROCESS

[@analysis726]

on one of the ai art generators i found there literally was a “make as NFT” option

[@rodrigocoockiemonster4460]

AI just cannot replicate the 80's pop up Halloween book style I love so much. It cannot replicate my favourite porn artist so there's that

[@marley0615]

give it 5-10 years, i'd say

[@jondoe6608]

give it about 6-7 hours on a gtx 3080, if you want to teach it a specific art style you need to write captions for about 20-60 images and then train an embedding, iv done this a few times now and its really cool, you can teach it to do art styles & paint specific people and objects. you can even use more then one embedding at a time, iv made an embedding of my self, so it knows how to draw me, then when queried with an art style I can create a cool self portraits!

[@ghoulbuster1]

Dall-e is old news, what you really want is "Stable Diffusion" That's where the real uncomprehensible horrors reside.

[@rodrigocoockiemonster4460]

@@ghoulbuster1 I never even used dallE

[@glowiboi]

Look at Midjourney, you can use ur favorite artist as reference.

[@mountingfailure2309]

Did he say Junji Ito's art looks bad?

[@rodrigocoockiemonster4460]

So honesty?

[@tl1119]

He said that ai's attempt at recreating junji ito's style is bad. That image was generated, are you blind?

[@JoshFloor]

Don't worry, soon AI will generate morals for us to follow, and we won't have to think about the loss of human touch in art ☺️

[@duroburo7039]

What do you mean "human touch"? If you were a machine, do you ever think you would have considered "human touch" at all, if you could produce a higher quantity of images in the same quality to human made images in a fraction of the time? Also, under which circumstances would AI be able to enforce these morals? Why would an AI generate morals for humans to follow? Why would one of its top priorities be for us to ignore this esoteric human touch in art? Finally, are you being ironic or are you an honest Post-Humanist?

[@skrish3976]

@@duroburo7039 shut up

[@blockhead7395]

*incoherent screeching*

[@kittenwizard4703]

@@duroburo7039 whoooosh

[@duroburo7039]

@@kittenwizard4703 how is this a joke? whats so funny about the loss of human touch in art or AI giving generating morals for us to follow?

[@DJ-fb9cf]

It's A.I. as long it has more material, developers, and people who tell it that "Yes this image does look good and was what I wanted." it IS going to get better. I'd LOVE to have a tool that could put my thoughts and words into an image that I could then take and customize. I agree that putting A.I. art in a separate category and warning people that you do use it for your art is a great idea though, transparency goes a long way and would help people open up more to the idea I think.

[@jondoe6608]

yah, iv been loving it too, and I draw all the time, so yah just don't be an asshole and be ethical, but thats what you should do all the time! its a really cool tech!

[@RemyVonLion]

live laugh love is actually a pretty solid answer to the meaning of life lol

[@SturmyDrangs]

For me, it's more like image generation, not art. Unless the A.I. is sentient enough to create something that is truly inspiring, emotional, profound, or just really horny enough to create some quality "off-brand" material, I can't see it under the same category as art, which is created not generated.

[@greencatdude866]

Honestly, AI art will be a tool for us and won't replace us as artists.

[@fernandae.d.332]

A tool is something that helps you do your job, not something that takes your work and imitate it.

[@greencatdude866]

@@corurachi7054 I completely understand the worries about it due to how people currently use it. Hopefully, AI art will be regulated and whatever is fed is with the permission of or fed by the artist in efforts tp assist others with ideas.

[@SplendidMeepers]

Dude like real talk, if AI companies copyright their art and they have seemingly infinite possibilities doesn’t that mean nothing is safe? Sucks as an artist 😔 spooky stuff to talk about during a spooky month

[@Loderyod]

"The US Copyright Office has rejected a request to let an AI copyright a work of art. Last week, a three-person board reviewed a 2019 ruling against Steven Thaler, who tried to copyright a picture on behalf of an algorithm he dubbed Creativity Machine. The board found that Thaler’s AI-created image didn’t include an element of “human authorship” - a necessary standard, it said, for protection." Source: random site

[@jondoe6608]

Copyright already only basically benefits large corporate entities, If Disney decided to get "inspired" by your work, do you really have the ability and money to sue em? Copyright is a joke and should be removed, it only benefits the powerful.

[@__-be1gk]

The lengths people will go to not pay artists are ridiculous

[@thatonegoblin7051]

People just don't value it. That's life.

[@waterbird2686]

But its free tho

[@idontcheckmynotifications]

Artis are pretty screwed over by being undervalued and many not stsnding up for themselves or having the platform to do so, it sucks, it sucks its often assumed as “talent” which helps devalue the work and shit

[@fernandae.d.332]

I think AI as a technology is not a problem, but the fact that the companies making profit from it are using artworks to train them, without conpensation or even the artist know that their art is being used. However theres a double standard since the mayority of music generating AIs only use voluntarily uploaded non-copyrighted music. There's even AIs trained to copy one artstyle in particular using artworks without consent, such as happened with Samedoesart.

[@user-yt4cl9il5j]

6:58 fifth one's shy face is so cute

[@possiblymisha]

It seems kinda unfair that you didn't showcase any of the good image AI like Midjourney. But, I'm more pressed that bro called Junji Ito (one of the most popular horror mangaka)'s art shit. He has some pretty good works.

[@NedInYaHead]

I definitely can't see AI art replacing artefacts of culture, like stories, gallery art or comedy, but I think it's amazing that the layperson can have a concept, aesthetic or visual in their head and realise it with minimal skill investment. Is that not a good thing, overall? It gives otherwise restless creativity an outlet without the time and labour that the average person can't justify for just one idea. Not to mention, although this will push some bespoke artists out of work, it will mean that there is a higher pool of creatives who are no longer burdened with the requests of others. REAL art will become much more valuable in comparison. Although it may take over service jobs, one thing AI will *never* touch is creative and intellectual pursuits, because by virtue of nature humans have to connect with and understand it, meaning the AI would have to *think* like a human to produce it.

[@wilmerreinholdsson1181]

Wait an actual good take? In the KZbin comment section?! Damn dude genuinely fantastic opinion on the matter. I hope good fortune upon your family Have a wonderful day

[@pugasaurusrex8253]

@@wilmerreinholdsson1181 Huh that’s weird Y’all didn’t argue

[@twingolord]

i didnt know you made art, looks great

[@doodlebob9943]

mona lisa in the thumbnail really said 😐

[@MrMoptop2]

Did he just say Junji Ito's art looks like shit

[@flobbingmaster]

YEAH, i had to pause and check i wasn't the only one to notice.... hey Aztrosist, get real

[@Juan_shot]

I'm sure it was sarcasm

[@tl1119]

He said that ai's attempt at recreating junji ito's style is bad. That image was generated, are you blind?

[@MrMoptop2]

@@tl1119 Given that he was talking about references, I had assumed that reference images were being shown and I didn’t look too closely at all of them. The Akira Toriyama image definitely gives it away though

[@jamepix]

8:08 death grips

[@toadtime-4206]

7:46 the last one looks like critical

[@arachnidlupus7625]

Thank Youuu, you can support scientific advancements, while acknowledging some of its unethical qualities, such as AI generated technology replacing actual, living people, who have humane intent in their artwork. I am not anti-automation, but replacing artists (musicians, painters, designers etc.) just does NOT sit well with me.

[@aguilar2461]

I've seen this take countless times, and before I say anything, I must inform whoever reads this that i am an artist myself, it doesn't make sense to say that they are “stealing art”, AI has to learn how to draw, so it looks up pictures, people do the exact same thing and call it inspiration, now obviously if it's the same picture with slight modifications now that is stealing, and people have been doing that before these AIs appeared, it's a tool, just like the programs people use to draw digitally, and guess what? they also said that wasn't real art because they got a lot of help with the program, it was said too about photography, so instead of complaining about something that really has many upsides and, as far as I've seen, has the same downsides any other tool has apart from more accessibility to people, it would be better to just learn how to use it. Also, a lot of tweaking with the AI and post-production is done anyway if you want a proper picture, and even if that wasn't the case, AI still needs pictures as a source, so if someone wanted to draw a new idea, style, or something specific then they would have to make it and get the AI to use it, and since AI needs a lot of data to learn to do stuff they would have to make plenty of pictures about that style or whatever they want to do.

[@Ilamarea]

AI is the Great Filter, the solution of Fermi's Paradox, our inevitable extinction. Art is the least worthwhile thing to talk about. It's obvious artists have years until their craft turns into crocheting.

[@Gwood6]

i cant believe the entire aztrosist channel is actually ai generated

[@BungusThe3th]

Hey man really appreciated the shout out cant wait to colab again

[@athullnexus5450]

What is he saying at 3:40? I can't hear him over the boom?

[@GoddoDoggo]

Do they have an AI bot that will just clean up lineart for me, because that would actually be really handy.

[@ct3000]

Not specifically to my knowledge but there are ways with stable diffusion to kind of do this. I have seen plenty of people take there sketches and have an AI convert it to a full color illustration, it's not perfect but honestly I just see all this AI stuff as another production tool in the pipe line. Not something that will replace artists, but rather a new weapon for them.

[@jondoe6608]

look into stable diffusion's inpaint mode

[@ct3000]

@@jondoe6608 I know lol I was just using it

[@ybtan4014]

This video is so damn good

[@krish-ut9de]

first time seeing him irl, he looks cool asf

[@XzMondayNightzX]

Don't show him the Novella AI image generator. It still hasn't mastered hands, feet or hips to ass connections and some of the works give me nightmares. It's learning off stolen work and will not stop to reduce a nation to a bunch of coomers.

[@RandomtheRando]

Yes

[@nepprived]

why did the 4th picture of danny davito look like a politician at 9:01

[@user-yt4cl9il5j]

A.I art is so fun and interesting lol

[@angeloid_]

Bro you need to check out NovelAI image generation

[@DigitalCosmos555]

Dalle 2 is not very good compared to stable diffusion. Also the prompts could be formed better

[@LikaLaruku]

Yeah, he literally picked THE worst & most outdated art generator to focus on.

[@triestatckr]

9:38 wHAT THE HELL WERE THOSE HANDS DUDE

[@goldfof7277]

i love the sonic cd in the background

[@rarebitchonline]

hearing the word homestuck gave me fucking whiplash

[@dingokingo]

bro called Junji Ito shit 💀

[@LeGrungler]

ik right!!!

[@portugeese_man_o_war]

7:31 moist critical

[@jacobchapman8180]

If the AI was wholesale copy-pasting entire pieces of other art to mash together, the plagiarism argument would make a lot more sense. But when it's working on such a small scale by mimicking style and shapes, especially using a large array of samples from different artists, that's just how art is made. Everything has already been created to some extent, all art is referencing things you have seen consciously or unconsciously. I think it's still proper to make your source list transparent and credit them, but you can argue that anyone using the english language is copying Shakespeare because they use the same letters. A lot of jobs have been automated and replaced, so you need to either adapt or become so specialized that a machine can't take your spot. That's just the time we're living in.

[@Green_T111]

7:29 4th one mamamax

[@Julzaa]

Bro kept showing the award-winning picture by Midjourney but only used DALL•E

[@methodof3]

Fuck this is actually hilarious

[@Dacronhai]

>this looks worse than a kids drawing >wrote "beating" instead of "being"

[@republicofsingapore177]

You really asked an ai to generate a random word at the end and you then say "boomslank" like it's nothing

[@leonardodoujinshi2939]

i just wanna say you drew the courage sticker like a crywank album cover

[@FranzJx]

0:12 ayo what's on the left

[@heibk-2019]

Wtf

[@puz]

did aztrosist accidentally diss JUNJI ITO'S ARTSTYLE

[@captainhaxs]

have you tried stablediffusion? btw your probablly going to be banned from dalle for inputting a political figure.

[@TheNormalplayer12]

Yeah it actually does fictional characters and real people way better (plus no rules technically). It seems like Dall-e just kinda gets most of it references off of stock images. plus you can train StableDiffusion with your own images.

[@medaizeh2401]

nice trAIsh pfp

[@kjfoxx]

Aztro we need an updatee

[@maximusgoodmeme8183]

Mane if doesnt matter ai art is going to be replacing art

[@AshnSilvercorp]

tbh the moral argument feels like an afterthought... the tools are already here. People are gonna start using them. AI generating code I question a ton, cause it can straight up copy text. Same for AI generated writing. But art is oddly endless. TBH the result is probably going to be an excess of overused prompts? Yea I don't think anyone knows where this is going, and art communities of today are going to get mad regardless...

[@GoddoDoggo]

I mean some of it just feels like tracing with extra steps, and if you're making a profit off of art that you traced from someone else, that's pretty trashy.

[@AshnSilvercorp]

@@GoddoDoggo I mean, you can already go pretty far with 3D tools doing the same thing. Even then, what is referencing? I feel like at some point all art is derivative. Art shouldn't be copied, but at some point it seems people are getting mad that another technological tool is coming along again in a way that cuts more effort for boilerplate stuff. It feels like the 3D revolution all over again.

[@5JSX5]

The generated art is based on real art so I think the AI won't stray too far from the style of the art used as datapoints. Therefore you will either get a bunch of similar stuff regardless of what prompt you put in (which would probably lead to people switching to a different AI or a real artist after a while), or you have the AI try to stray away from what it's good at and therefore generate acceptable results much more rarely (which would also lead to people switching except maybe even faster). As for the moral argument, I think people who use other people's art for their AI should ask first and give credit or pay the artist if they want them to.

[@5JSX5]

@@AnnasVirtual yes

[@jondoe6608]

​@@GoddoDoggo Dude pre AI they cried all the time about being "traced" for when anyone drew something that even slightly had a similar aspect or style. I stopped following art stuff on social media years ago to how dramatic a lot of people are over such stupid stuff. When "GitHub Copilot" started "smuggling" copyleft code, no one came to die on our hill, where was all the outrage and drama? But the thing is, AI is just a tool, if it makes programming simpler, it allows you to take on more ambitious tasks. (I dont use it rn, its stucks, but its the same for art right now too). The AI one day will help me write boiler plate code. For artists like imagine training an embedding on your own art style, so that it can take a simple sketch and produce a finished image. Maybe then you could as one person make long length animations. Ai is a tool like all others, its just a very powerful one. So hopefully this will humble them a bit and eventually lead to more art and more ambitious artist once they are done crying.

[@shatteringeye999]

beep

[@ai-art]

Do you only work in dall-e?

[@medaizeh2401]

Did you get tired of the NFT bandwagon, techbro

[@LikaLaruku]

I don't think he was keeping up with how fast AI art was improving & how many new generators have popped up when he made this. It's kinda like seeing a movie use a bunch of 5 year old memes.

[@ninjamonkey9848]

4:16 she looks like Marge

[@FinnsArtistryChannel]

I want to become AI

[@ptwob]

Aztro ur a gem

[@esoteric7990]

2:11 Minor spelling mistake

[@DSMChip]

judging by what i've seen, it looks like dall-e has fallen from grace it don't even look like what it once did like a few months back lmfao

[@SuiteLifeofDioBrando]

If AI art makes high quality rule number, I will embrace it.

[@Eeter26]

Makes sense with that profile picture

[@entropy404]

Average zorn enjoyer.

[@Raphe9000]

I think that's already happening

[@josephegginton4055]

Thats already started happening

[@majorblitz3846]

One problem, the AI being very inconsistent with character accessories, sometimes even being inconsistent with haircut and skin color that it throw off the touch instead.

[@FollowerofDuck]

i dont think anyone looks at ai art in the same way that they do human art

[@shanestinson5967]

Why does the thumbnail look like the one weird looking priest dude from berserk

[@satanzbarz6111]

you should make an ai generated video about something random like the history of chapstick

[@tofu3942]

WHAT THE FUCK I WAs THINKING THAT WTFFFFF 1:58

[@alface935]

On Pixiv a lot of Loli and Shota art have been popping up from NovelAI and thoses are really good

[@LikaLaruku]

I scoffed at AI art until someone showed me some realistic lingerie pinups from E-Hentai Org. They looked like real women, except for the watermelon sized boobs & messed-up fingers or missing arms, but the landscape backgrounds & clothing were just amazing & creative.

[@alface935]

@@LikaLaruku True

[@randommics]

another terrible thing ai can lead people to do is to create criminal imagery. well however calculators exists and we cant use them on tests and still have mathematicians. there will probably have more things to ai, like it had to 3d art as well, that will make it more artistic than just a couple of words that even babies can write.

[@Zenmxn]

As an artist my self, i don't really care.

[@Ron-ni8uu]

We should put brakes on this horrifying ai.

[@RandomUser11170]

Haha lol, I love A.I. art, except for the part that I HATE!! Anyway, stream Lilac Boy

[@Ethan.Murphy2003]

Aztro has a face?!

[@PSRB-zg8ue]

there definitely should be laws restricting where the art comes from, in my opinion. but it’s kind of like chess in a way. chess AIs can beat humans 100% of the time, but people still play. the distinction should still definitely be made though, with whatever artist’s consent to use their art style.

[@ryanthompson3737]

Then there should be laws restricting what art humans are allowed to see. If AI isn't allowed to take inspiration from other people's art, then humans shouldn't be allowed to either. Fun fact, humans retain images and memories of art we have seen and then assign contextual data to those memories in order to recall them... this is no different than an AI retaining an image in it's memory and assigning contextual data to those images. Tell me... how do you know what a banana is if you haven't seen one and assigned a name and context to it? Stop pretending like AI works ANY different than humans. We just function better because we've had trillions of iterations over billions of years to perfect it through natural processes.

[@PSRB-zg8ue]

@@ryanthompson3737 maybe i explained my point of view wrong. what i meant was that it should be with the express consent and knowledge of the artists. i’m just thinking about this ethically, if i was an artist and someone took my style to turn a buck online, well i’d be out of a job. i do totally agree with you about the whole frame of reference thing.

[@Dipsxi]

MidJourney makes better A.I. art.

[@nocturne6320]

Depends. Midjourney is better for creative art and makes great results even from few words, Dall-E is better for stock image type images and needs rich description of what you want to make. But most importantly Stable Diffusion is the best anyway

[@colewenger-pb3hb]

Hi aztrozist

[@colewenger-pb3hb]

Aztrosist 🤭

[@Forcoy]

Very specific stable diffusion prompts are better than dalle's + it's faster, free and open source

[@jayjam_]

Cmon Aztro use mario galaxy bg music like every other youtuber. i dont want the urge to play terraria mid video

[@LikaLaruku]

The easiest way to thwart AI art, at least on the browser generators, is to upload a shitton of intentionally bad art & photographs of unattractive people with tags that lie, so it messes with the results.

[@XyNoST]

NO LOVE DEEP WEB !

[@apl6171]

Aztrosist if you dyed your hair you would look like Kurt cobain

[@DreamEatinDonuts]

the fourth pic generated with your face looks like you fused with egoraptor

[@Mahoromatic]

A hitpiece I bet.

[@xionkuriyama5697]

When the livelihood and income of my friends are being threatened, who's the real target of a 'hit'?

[@Mahoromatic]

@@xionkuriyama5697 It's gonna happen to all of us eventually. Better to accept it the easy way than the hard way.

[@aydothepotato2599]

"Bad thing is going to happen, best to do nothing"

[@VacantMinded]

@@aydothepotato2599 Correct that is a silly statement it should be "Bad thing is going to happen, it cannot be stopped, adapt and overcome."

[@Mahoromatic]

@@aydothepotato2599 Fellas you gotta understand we're through the looking glass here. This thing's gonna be bigger than any of us can imagine.

[@beangobernador]

why

[@theyoten1613]

AI trains on people's art, but it doesn't use any to make the images you ask; it doesn't do collages of existing images. It's the exact same way a human learns.

[@Storse]

It doesn't matter that it doesn't use people's images to make stuff, the fact that data was stolen from artists to use as training data in the first place is the issue

[@Storse]

@@ChaosSwissroIl the art IS the data, but if you want to go at it that way stable diffusion, one of the most popular AI art generators has private medical photos in its training database.

[@Storse]

@@ChaosSwissroIl that's not what i'm asking of AI at all, i'm asking for public domain images to be used as training data and have an opt-in system for artists, i want it to be ethically trained. you cant compare human art to ai art when they arent made through the same process at all.

[@Storse]

@@ChaosSwissroIl what does this have to do with my point? You're arguing something that I don't care about. The issue is the theft of data and work being taken by the creators of the AI to train their AI. I don't care about deep learning and how it operates I want basic respect for artists as creators and people.

[@Storse]

@@ChaosSwissroIland you're implying that the AI is alive and sentient like humans which is just not true, we don't have the ability to make true AI at this point because we don't know what constitutes true consciousness, AI art gen is not alive it's not trying to tell stories or conveying their skill through art making, it's generating pictures through specific inputs via text or sliders.

[@willarddavis7938]

AI art just feels like the same trend as photoshopping

[@MartinHindenes]

AI art is a net positive for both artists and non-artists. It's just another tool for creative minds to utilize. As demonstrated in the video, you actually need good prompts to create decent artwork with AI too. Just typing random stuff without specifying if it should be photorealistic etc will give you random results.

[@numerum_bestia]

I wouldn’t have a problem with it if they had taken the time to ask artists for permission to use their work. I love creating art but I would never do it as a job so I don’t have as much at stake as those who depend on selling their art for a living. I think these generators should be removed. They need to start training the A.I again but with the permission of the artists that these programs are drawing their information from.

[@numerum_bestia]

I’m sure many artists would jump at the opportunity for their work to be used in this way if they were actually asked beforehand. They will have to reform these programs or they will be facing a huge lawsuit. Not only from individual artists but from companies like Disney which are incredibly fickle and litigious when it comes to the use of their intellectual properties.

[@MartinHindenes]

@@numerum_bestia the training data used is publicly published art though. I don't see how that breaks any laws, because there's 0 instances where any artwork is being reproduced in close to its entirety by the AI (the one shown early in this video is a remix of an image input by a user, not caused by the training data, huge difference). The AI learns only artstyles, not the specific artworks. There are no laws against copying a style, that I'm aware of. It's similar to taking inspiration from someone when you make your own art, which is completely legit and almost every artist does it.

[@medaizeh2401]

" i-its just a tool " so naive it's adorable

[@MartinHindenes]

@@medaizeh2401 it's not naive at all. I work with automation for my day job, I know it doesn't replace humans - what it does is free up time from menial tasks and shift the focus to more meaningful work. If you go out of business as an artist because of AI art, I'm sorry to inform you that you weren't very creative in the first place.

[@GerritTime]

the people who made Dall-e are kind of like the scientists who worked on the Manhattan Project. they both spent a lot of time and effort to create something extremely powerful, but at the same time knew that there were gonna be some very big consequences

[@bobdole8830]

Do shitmimis agayne

[@anissodon3714]

Ai generated ads 🙏🏾

[@nocturne6320]

A few notes for the video. First of all thank you for making an entertaining video and trying to stay objective instead of just whining "AI bad". Now for some notes as to why you got bad results and my take on some of the concerns. THE CONCERNS: Yes, training AI on images without consent of the authors is bad, this is an issue that will need to be solved. But at the same time the damage has been already done, the models are trained and in case of Stable Diffusion already downloaded thousands of times. Its impossible to delete them. Instead of crying over spilled milk artists should look forward and figure out how to deal with the aftermath. (Please don't take this in negative light, I just think it's pointless spending energy being angry instead of trying to deal with the problem) Also even if by some miracle it was made illegal to train on art without consent you'd have to be a newborn to think that individuals would respect that law. Just see how people on the internet respect copyright and anti piracy laws. AI won't replace artists, because it can't. AI doesn't replace the creativity of the artist, but the manual skill required to transfer the idea into reality. The creativity of an artist will still be required to use AI generators, except this time artists won't have to suffer trough stressful overtimes in order to finish their work. AI won't steal your customers who could commission you for your art. There will always be two groups of people, the first will always buy your (for a lack of a better word) product (be it an art piece, software, game, etc.), be it because they think its morally correct, or because there is no alternative, or (in case of software) they are afraid of viruses from cracked versions, etc. Even if AI art became indistinguishable from your art, these people will ALWAYS go for "the real deal", you in this case. Then there's the other group, the people who just follow you for the art you post publicly and that's it, these people won't ever commission you, they might not be able to afford it, or they don't have anything to commission, or simply don't want to, or there's another reason. Some of these people might go for the AI alternative as it's faster, or cheaper, etc. and some will just keep liking the things you post. But you won't loose on any revenue as there wasn't any revenue to gain from them to begin with. Of course there will be a group of people who will stop commissioning you because a cheaper alternative popped up, but those people most likely didn't care much for your art to begin with. WHY BAD RESULTS: You used Dall-E, which is not a good choice if you want creativity "by default". When using Dall-E you have to be very descriptive. You can't just type in "tree" and expect a cool result, you have to be specific (what kind of tree, where is it located, is it a photo or a painting, what is the season, time of day, etc.). The AI can't read your mind, so think about what kind of result you're expecting and describe it. If you DO want great looking outputs from just a few words check out Midjourney, or Stable Diffusion. For the inpainting (where you used your own images), again, be more descriptive, or use a different generator. Also leave more context, you left little to no content in the image after erasing parts of it, combined with the lack of description its hard for the AI to guess what should go there.

[@LordGremlin]

If ai programs are trained off of copyrighted material then they need to be deleted. Stable Diffusion was trained by stealing from countless people, either pay every single one for their work being used or delete the program

[@LordGremlin]

@@ChaosSwissroIl Except an ai isn't a person. People develop their own styles as they learn and their skill increase, and yes, people get criticized for stealing other peoples style. You're arguing that someone else's art being plugged into a machine is the same as human learning, when its not.

[@nocturne6320]

@@LordGremlin Have you seen Midjourney? That AI has effectively developed its own artstyle. AI isn't a person, but that does not mean the learning process cannot be the same, although probably more simple.

[@ryanthompson3737]

@@LordGremlin And that's where your sides logic falls apart. AI has a CLEAR style of its own because the way it computes its "memories" into images is vastly different than the way you or I do it. I also love when you guys say "It's not HUMAN" as if you're somehow a special being sent down from the heavens by god himself, specifically created in his image or some bullshit. Sorry to burst your bubble... you're nothing more than a fleshy computer that took billions of years to train and required the deaths of trillions of failed experiments before you. Stop trying to make yourself feel better about our very mediocre existence.

[@mcgullible5212]

Every artist trains on other artist. It's not fundamentally different from what people already do.

[@Storse]

Except the AI isn't a human being, it doesn't draw inspiration or work like a human it takes data and uses that to inform the images it denoises It's an issue that people's art were pilfered and laundered in the first place. An AI isn't a person, stop attributing the qualities of a person to machine.

[@5JSX5]

This is not true. You learn by practicing the different building blocks that make up a piece of art, not by copying parts of other people's art or the whole thing. You don't even need art as a reference point to be able to do this, you can use real objects or photos or whatever. You use art for inspiration, to get ideas on what to make, but just looking at pictures wouldn't allow you to recreate them, or even create something based on them. AI uses entire completed works of art as building blocks, not inspiration.

[@apprehendedavocado169]

it takes blood, sweat and tears for a human to replicate somebody else's style. the AI copies it using a cold mechanical algorithm. nobody would feel flattered to have their artstyle effortlessly ripped off by a machine.

[@jondoe6608]

@@Storse Except there is nothing special about humans, the brain is ultimately a type of computer running an complex algorithm. It's funny to see how no one cried out when Microsoft decided to "launder" Copyleft (GPL type licensed) code via "GitHub Copilot", and yet there was no negative reaction, it was mostly positive. "it reduced the amount of boiler plate". but the moment AI is applied to a "creative" field its funny how now its a problem. I hope this technology humbles the artist community off there fart huffing high horse. The thing is, I don't fear AI, its been helpful, it makes thing easier, but that means I can be more ambitious.

[@jondoe6608]

​@@apprehendedavocado169 it use to take blood sweat and tears for humans to manually craft any sort of good, and yet I don't see many people complaining about other items being commodities now, why is art any more or less special? 200 years ago only kings and high ups could afford to have indoor plumbing, in 5 years anyone will be able to afford custom made paintings and murals adorning there homes.

[@PHERNO_]

BOOO HOOO WAAAA WAAAA WAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

[@NabbyLloyd]

"ai art will never replace human art. also please do not submit it to our art contest because it will beat human competitors"

[@majorblitz3846]

It's the equivalent of bring camera calculator app to the math exam that supposed to have a clear rules whether it's calculator-free or permitted to certain extend.

[@5JSX5]

The problem with these algorithms is that they only have a shot at creating something that looks good or even just okay if you give them a *LOT* of art that already exists (preferrably from a single artist or a small amount of artists who all have a very similar style), therefore you didn't actually reduce the amount of human input needed to make valuable art instead of the cursed stuff AI ususally produces. AI can't generate art out of thin air. The people working on these AI still need artists to make a lot of art to have as datapoints to be able to generate any new art. And this wouldn't actually be a big deal if people actually worked with artists and paid them for their work properly, but as far as I know most of the AI art projects just straight up took art without asking anyone first.

[@Thomas_Angelo]

True. It's very scary that artists will be useless in future

[@duroburo7039]

Should usefulness really be something to value in art?

[@Riskofdisconnect]

@@duroburo7039 there's art for art's sake and art for the sake of a product. Human-made art for the sake of art won't ever go away as long as people exist but art for the purpose of a product will almost certainly be mostly AI as programs improve.

[@duroburo7039]

@@Riskofdisconnect then we will need to come up with a replacement for living from selling products/services in the future

[@Riskofdisconnect]

@@duroburo7039 Indeed.

[@omegazero5884]

An issue also is the people using the AI with a stick up their ass. You know the people who are like Why are you mad I'm using the art of a recently dead artist for AI art or your just mad because AI is the future and your goons be out of a job in 10 years. Also man I'm sorry for artist like you guys just had the NFT shit happen to you and now this like damn sorry.

[@kanireader]

I hope we finally can replace artists once and for all so that they can all go and get real jobs 🙏

[@wilmerreinholdsson1181]

Based as fuck holy shit. Give this man a Ted talk please

[@idontcheckmynotifications]

ok if art aint a job go do it in yo free time on that level

[@wilmerreinholdsson1181]

@@idontcheckmynotifications so I guess that one went over your head. I do believe it was meant to be a joke

[@mogo-wc7xw]

I don't think you know how jobs work

[@tothedome566]

ai art is based don't @ me

[@FrenchThottyAmelia]

You can’t copyright a style 😂

[@TakuCityPop]

Agreed it seems that even in this video that he said stealing styles.. so it's stealing when an AI does it but it's not stealing when humans have done it for the last 1000 years and beyond.