The AI Art Apocalypse

[@HelloFutureMe]

In a world of AI, it's even more important to support human artists. I'd mean a lot if you supported me :) www.patreon.com/hellofutureme (come join the Discord/writing workshops!) Thank you so much to my patrons whose support makes my work possible.

[@pyeitme508]

BRUH 😅

[@SkyP9812]

You claim you're human? Prove it! Tap each square with a car on it

[@TomFranklinX]

AI is to art what the printing press is to books. It will make the product 1000x more accessible to everyone. Pretending that AI art only benefits "corporations" is patently dishonest.

[@epothos1]

License

[@atharvadeshpande4749]

@@TomFranklinX That's the catch he didn't say that watch the bloody video before saying shit like that...

[@OverlySarcasticProductions]

As an artist, I think I've identified why AI art specifically hits this horrible, gut-wrenching dread button for almost every artist I've talked to: It jams its finger right onto every artist's first and worst insecurity - "Why should I make this if someone else can make it better?" And the answer, of course, is that we love to create, and we love making art, and our unique personhood and experience means that the art we create will not be quite like anyone else's. We eventually learn to trust our audience when they say "holy shit! Two cakes!" But the existential dread doesn't ever fully neutralize. It scabs over and eventually scars, but it's still a sore spot. We pour years of our life into improving our craft, cursed with the artist's perspective of fixating on the flaws in our own work. We eventually accept that constant improvement means we'll lose the ability to enjoy our older work. We have to learn not to self-deprecate and to trust our audience to draw their own conclusions. So when someone takes their thumb, jams it right into that old wound and proudly crows that their Anime Waifu Generator can do exactly what you do but better and cheaper, it hurts like hell, no matter how untrue or irrelevant it is. It's pain on pain, exacerbated by the gleeful dickishness of the people being most aggressive about it. It's an old, solved problem. We've all already learned how to create despite feeling outclassed. We know how to practice focusing on the merit of our own, unique work instead of constantly comparing ourself to others. That doesn't mean it doesn't hurt. It just means the pain will pass. -R

[@Dragon151]

This is something that scares me. As a person with musical aspirations, I already see AI slowly seeping into it. I already struggle with thinking I can make it without the existence of AI, now I might literally never have a chance because AI could eventually be better and way cheaper, so why bother with a real human? I still have the wound wide open and it's already threatening to jam its finger in.

[@pomegranatejelly9767]

If it helps, AI will never be able to understand themes, nuance, or niche forms of beauty in ways that humans can. Because of that, people will always want to commission art, even from artists who aren't top tier, to bring their incredibly specific ideas to life. I could easily ask an AI to draw one of the characters in my book, but it'd never be able to capture the little details in their expressions that I imagine. A real artist will always be preferable for things that personal.

[@pallas9113]

Yes. Also I think the definition of "better" gets muddy in the field of art. I'm not here to be useful, affordable, and convenient for others' needs. That makes me a way worse tool than the AIs, which were designed and optimized for that specific purpose, and have now slowly gained the functioning toolsets to fulfill the requirements of the consumers/commissioners. Fine by me.

[@4dragons632]

Maybe it's because I'm only a hobbyist artist, but I never felt this way about it. Maybe that's because I don't think about someone else making the thing I make but better. My ideas are so specific that nobody was ever going to make them if it wasn't me, and I refuse to let them just rattle around in my head without at least trying to take a shot at them. All the AI art does is make endless disposable mainstream stuff, and it allows me to at least make _something_ on the days when I'm too uninspired to draw for myself.

[@justsomeguywithahandlebarm2456]

about right yeahh....

[@Mecharnie_Dobbs]

31:58 They are also missing the point that Lud, the founder of the Ludites, said "If a machine can replace a working human, then the wages that human would have earned, should go to the benefit of all mankind, not just to the owner of the machine"

[@TAP7a]

Based luddites

[@Frommerman]

@@TAP7a The only thing the luddites did wrong was smash machines instead of the men who claimed to own them. If they'd swarmed more factories and made red art of the management we might be in a better place now.

[@thegrunbeld6876]

Socialize the means of productions!!!

[@Derek_H_360]

Marxist says what?

[@godlyvex5543]

@@Derek_H_360 It's odd that you use that as an insult when "technology should benefit everyone, not just the few" is just common sense

[@nayR5]

"Whenever a new technology is developed it's used for two things: war, and porn." -Rhett McLaughlin

[@Mightydoggo]

Looking at Ukraine situation I wouldn´t be surprised if ChatGPT is leading the Russian army at this point.

[@powercore2000]

TRUUUUUUUUE

[@realGBx64]

Yeah but wouldn’t it be nice if we could just make porn without actually hurting people (like the porn industry did/does for decades)?

[@zimzob]

@@realGBx64 training people to get off by completely dissociating from any real human interaction surely couldn’t have any negative effects.

[@realGBx64]

@@zimzob mind you that already happened with real porn. Just because the pixels on the screen were generated by pointing a camera to (often abused, drug addict or even drugged) humans, that doesn’t make real porn “human interaction”.

[@Shitennou3]

There is more than just the legal aspect for me. My friends keep trying to convince me, that once the source-artists will get paid for their contributions, or get to give or withdraw their consent, then AI art will be a fair and uplifting tool for everyone. Meanwhile it just makes me so sad, that a computer is able to produce within seconds the thing, which I trained to do since I was 9 years old and what still takes me hours for each piece. Just knowing that this exists is so demotivating.

[@forgotmylinetwice3010]

I think that source-artists getting paid for contributions to monetized AI “art” is actually a huge step in the right direction and a fair compromise for now

[@AllmondMillk]

@@forgotmylinetwice3010miss the point much?

[@forgotmylinetwice3010]

@@AllmondMillk Can you read? I’m simply agreeing with his friends about source-artists getting paid for their work

[@blisk667]

Bwaaah

[@koumorichinpo4326]

i agree and as a consumer, i don't want to see media churned out by machines, i want the human touch. an image made by a software to me is the most uninteresting thing in the world.

[@helpineedsleep2101]

there is nothing more dystopian than a world where ai generates art and poetry and humans work away at menial jobs

[@crediblesalamander8056]

it's horrifying on a visceral level. not even the most creative and insightful science-fiction and horror writers imagined such an abomination (I think)

[@Frommerman]

@@crediblesalamander8056 House of the Scorpion did. It's a world where an ancient drug lord conquered Mexico and turned the entire country into a gigantic opium farm, hacking people's brains to turn them into robotic slaves to run the entire operation. The US let this happen because anyone trying to cross the border just gets caught by the drug lord's guys and turned into a mindless slave. The drug lord got to be 149 years old by cloning himself a bunch of times and harvesting the organs of the clones. It's never mentioned what is going on in the United States because it basically doesn't matter. Man, that book was fucked. It's been years since I've thought about it, and that was supposed to be a young adult novel.

[@kayemni]

Only if you limit yourself to what was and not what could be

[@Mega4est]

Once most of the content is generated by AI, people will begin to value human-created art much more. For now, AI generated stuff seems novel and able to replace humans completely, but after a while people will learn to tell the difference between the human and AI generated content. We will get fed up with tons of artificial mediocrity very fast and will crave for curated and hand-crafted things even more. At least people who have taste will.

[@PolyChromium]

Yes, because mediocrity isn’t flourishing already

[@BladeWinters]

Never thought I would be getting a video essay on AI from my online storytelling teacher but it didnot seem out of place at all and my expectation were high. I was not disappointed.

[@lukeskywalkerthe2nd773]

Ikr!

[@HinekoAkahi]

People used to imagine a world where robots were doing all the hard work and people get to make art all day. Now we seem to be heading towards a world where robots are making the art and people work harder than ever. How's that for dramatic irony.

[@michellemonet4358]

Eek

[@daniel4647]

Yeah. But that's just because it turns out that it's harder to make the body than the brain. The bodies are in development and will be here soon. The thing is, just because AI can make art doesn't mean we can't also do it. We don't actually have to work more than ever either, we're forced to, but it's not because we really need to. We've already reached post-scarcity, we just haven't been able to get rid of the oppressive system and the people that enjoy it yet. But this oppressive system is even more obsolete than art, at this point oppressing humans is just something the economic elite does as a hobby because they're bored, there is no real reason for it. And in the same way we can all make art without there being any real reason for it. Pretty soon we'll have all the robots and gene editing and cure for aging and all that fancy stuff, and then we can just live for the sake of living, for ever. It's going to be an adjustment.

[@laurentiuvladutmanea3622]

​@@daniel4647 What you said has nothing to do woth anything. The AIs are nothing like the human brain. They are mindless algorithms. They are just doing statistics really fast. That is it.

[@bunnyben5607]

Commercial art is hard, repetitive work. Think of the people who sit down and do thousands of frames of animation for your TV show, or make the hundreds of art assets in games. I'm actually not scared, people have been shown to have higher levels of happiness in blue collar jobs vs white collar. There may be some connection between blue collar work and eudaimonic well being (assuming working conditions aren't bad of course).

[@Realfreakyclothes]

@@daniel4647 very well said! Indeed if we move into the future as created by Star Trek where monitory value becomes obsolete then the idea that ai art is replacing the artist will become an irrelevance. Art will be created not for a living but for catharsis (and possibly innovation) I.e. art for the fun of it while we may as artists currently fear our work disappears as a result of ai it’s quite possible that simply will not make any difference in the long term

[@rex-k3x]

A lot of people also make AI images of non-consenting people in vulnurable ways, mostly porn, including children. I've experienced this first hand and had AI-generated porn of me sent to me online, generated by using images of my face and body that I posted publically. I'm *15.* There is nothing more terrifying then seeing images of yourself, distorted and butchered by AI, used for other people's gross entertainment. This shouldn't be something I'm scared of. I should be allowed to post pictures of myself online, or my art, without wondering if people are going to feed it into a machine, post it online, or just immortalize images of me I never even made forever.

[@breadstick4458]

I agree that’s gross, but unfortunately that’s been a thing for a while, basic deepfaking tech has existed for a ages no it’s not a new problem

[@laurentiuvladutmanea3622]

This is disgusting. This is why such technoogy should be banned.

[@breadstick4458]

@@laurentiuvladutmanea3622 really? Not to try to downplay its gross and disgusting, but people have done far worse with phones, computers and almost any modern technology. Banning technology only limits human progress. We didn’t ban all planes after 9/11, we just made them more secure

[@rex-k3x]

@@breadstick4458 I never said it was a new problem? That's literally not the point at all dude. The point is teens shouldn't be afraid of their faces being used to generate pornography wtf

[@breadstick4458]

@@rex-k3x what I was saying it’s not a reason to ban ai or anything like that. I know u didn’t say just giving my opinion. I never argued it wasn’t gross. What should be done is crack down in those specific ai, most of the time people buy these deepfake ai so cracking down on those would help this issue

[@LeUsFTW]

I find it hilarious how these companies are so excited about "creative jobs not being necessary in the future" when those are the FUN jobs, the ones most people WANT to have, but can't afford to. Instead of working on nullifying bad jobs people don't want, like solving sweat shops, certain food shortages, assembly lines, trash collecting, cleaning, literally anything dangerous.... jobs no one actually enjoys or wants to do, especially for minimum pay. No, instead let's take away the fun ones and make everyone have to do the boring jobs, let's make, for example, concept artists obsolete and send them to microchip assembly lines to create more robots to do the fun concept art instead! Because the goal is not to improve human life, but to make a robot utopia, of course!

[@BlackMita]

No such thing as a fun job.

[@triton62674]

Maybe this will have art look increasingly more like a hobby than something someone can do full-time, it increases the barrier to entry for art but nothing stops you from making it.

[@pegramsabbath]

@@BlackMita Would you rather be forced to work from dawn to dusk on fields to be able to afford living, or have hundreds of different career options to pick from to afford living?

[@theoryianabsolute8777]

Artist is actually not productive job, now there is another way to push this job back to hobby, as it is.

[@bleebobloop3175]

@@BlackMita id say making art is fun, but idk about you

[@notablecascade7]

Thank you so much for clearing the next two hours and 20 minutes off my schedule for me 🙏🏻

[@loumoncollin3027]

I'm an animation student and as i'm just starting to discover the animation industry i can't help but fear from the rise of AI, one of my friend is doing an internship at an animation studio and her job is to draw sketches then to put them through Midjourney and the result is used in the production , it is really demotivating for her as she feels she has no real use here. It's really scary to witness for me and my peers...

[@CampingforCool41]

God that’s depressing af. So I’m guessing they doing that instead of paying a background artist?

[@Turanic1]

change the subject of study asap, otherwise by the time you finish the profession might be obsolete, check AI coca cola commercial

[@thedankengine585]

Hello, may I ask what studio this was? I'm a concept art student too

[@reltcstone2]

yeah im curious which studio. I'm a concept artist myself.

[@simongutkas2870]

please get over it, change your industry, it will change to something you wont like at all. Trust me, Ive spent my fair lifetime on understanding where this world is going.

[@edward.constantine]

The fact that people have the audacity to submit AI-generated "stories" to literary magazines-when I've spent hundreds of hours submitting my hard work and getting hundreds of rejections-that sh*t kinda pisses me off. Not gonna lie.

[@ReneCapone510]

It seems super wrong

[@SigFigNewton]

I’m looking forward to how good AI stories will eventually get

[@maximilian_degen]

@@SigFigNewton but what is the point? reading a story means you connect to the experience of the author. how would you connect to a made up story by a machine? it's completely meaningless, is it not?

[@aphr0d]

@@maximilian_degenyou’re right. it is. Humans can always tell what’s human. Hopefully lol. Good luck to our future!

[@Julez60]

@@SigFigNewton if you can't be bothered to write a story. Why the hell should anyone be bothered to read it?

[@catherineelmore2004]

I’m not a writer or a (visual) artist- my creative outlet has always been the performing arts- but as someone with a lot of artist and writer friends, this is something that’s been super concerning. I’m also a lawyer- but my knowledge of IP is limited. So hearing the viewpoint of a creative with a background in copyright law was *incredibly* enlightening. Great video, Tim!

[@ShaddyFromHatena]

Given enough time, without constraints they'll find a way to automate performing arts too. Holograms and ai rendering, you name it. It's a terrifying concept, how truly invasive it could be.

[@catherineelmore2004]

@@ShaddyFromHatena I agree 100%. They already have AI music programs- who’s to say that actors, singers, etc. aren’t next? Like… I,m not a Luddite, I don’t want to sound alarmist- I agree with Tim that with appropriate, ethical models, AI could be a useful tool… but I’m legitimately concerned for all creatives out there, regardless of medium, if we keep going headlong without hitting the breaks.

[@ShaddyFromHatena]

Yeah for sure. I am a programmer, I like making ai generated magic cards using a text neural network even, these tools can be used for good, but there is so much harm they can do too. I hope we really are catching this one early, and that we can learn from the past to prevent the worst outcomes before the damage is done.

[@vickytaa1]

i actually believe performing arts will be harder to automate... because automation for that already exists! live action movies, tv shows and animation movies already basically give us automated performance. when i go to the theatre, i do it because i want to see the bodies of actual people interacting, in a dark place, with other people around me creating an audience. if i wanted to watch a hologram or something like that, i would just watch a movie. "holograms" are kind of redundant at this point.

[@ShaddyFromHatena]

@@vickytaa1 It is unlikely now because right now it is hard to make money off of, so there's less profit incentive compared to the difficulty. With enough time though, there will be no difficulty, and an AI that can model realistic indestinguishable theater experiences with the right technology will inevitably be cheaper than paying a host of however many actors, set designers, special effects artists, ect. Unless someone decides that the moral values outweigh profit or a law is introduced, it could happen. That isn't to say it will happen, it's likely that it won't, but just the idea that even something so physical, so human focused as performing arts might be automated? It's not a comforting thought.

[@cogu]

It's staggering how many of the problems mentioned trace back to the system we've immersed ourselves in. From artists not being able to make minimum wage, to free time being an absolute luxury, to crypto bros looking for a quick buck, to corporations embracing whatever direction will help their bottom line. At what point do we stop blaming new technology and start blaming a system meant to exploit the many in favor of the few? We're waaaaay past the point where every human should have food security, housing and sufficient income regardless of their work. AI amplifies this on a massive scale by automating so much more. So I'd say we need to look at more fundamental structures of how we organize society or we're just pushing the problem further down the line.

[@shmel3689]

hitting the nail on the head. I doubt people would care if we weren't barely surviving as is. I for sure wouldn't.

[@jichaelmorgan3796]

There is probably no way around going through hard times and risking regime take over by making a drastic change in the system. Most people don't want to hear that, which makes a regime take over more likely, because they are expecting governments to fix society's problems when what is likely needed is spiritual growth as a society, a type of thing that usually only happens after hitting rock bottom, unfortunately.

[@Монс-й1ь]

Karl Marx: "They Called Me a Mad Man"

[@danielodeniyi8729]

Not at all, hey quick experiment try work with a comic artist, maybe Give them 1-2 week to finish up 5 page of comic. The answer is they won't, comic artist work on a page for 7-8 hours and get page 100-150$ calculate that and see where the problem arises. Art is not efficient and I get that many people don't won't that, but why complain we aren't getting paid enough. Doing inefficient work leads to inefficient results.

[@simpletown323]

Ive been blaming the system since i was a kid. Growing up with really bad ADD and an unstable home life showed me that the school systems hate kids like me, someone who refuses to conform, and it extends to all aspects of western society. Capitalism is literally fucking all of us except the rich

[@kaikalter]

It's crazy how quickly this all has become near normal

[@Ben-rz9cf]

Thats what is wrong with this all. Its the normalization of art theft. Not some technology that is coming to steal all our jobs--PEOPLE are coming to steal or creative efforts, and our jobs with it.

[@Gamingpandacat]

Disruptive tech is often like that, people who want to push the new product always have the money to push stuff for nearly free, killing all the other options by making them seem expensive and inconvenient Like how Uber killed the Taxi industry and now they're ramping up the prices nonstop.

[@josephjarosch8739]

I am sure that phrase get's said at least once a decade, with every technological revolution.

[@MarchingArrow]

@@josephjarosch8739 Something being said often or regularly doesn’t always mean that it doesn’t matter or doesn’t carry weight. I cannot imagine a single more upsetting reality than one where the robots paint and write poetry and the humans toil away at menial jobs and fully lose the meaning behind creating art in the first place.

[@laurentiuvladutmanea3622]

​@@Gamingpandacat That is in the USA. There are many countries were Uber failed or was even banned.

[@sundaddy1077]

i dont think i hated ai art until someone posted a picture in an art server and said "how did i do" and i was going to start with how dynamic the pose is, and how vibrant the colors were, then i realised the eyes dont match, the hair randomly disappears, and the fingers dont add up. Of course shitty people will use AI to get compliments, but the worst thing abt it is that its not really Art. It was not made by a person who thinks, and feels. It is not a projection of the artist's skill and intent. Its just empty pixels. I was so hyped about analysing this image made by someone, tell them how to do better or the things they have done well, but turns out it was just a program struggling to even come up with decent anatomy.

[@eyesofthecervino3366]

That's an interesting way of putting that. It's almost like, in analyzing someone's art, you're halfway saying "I like your personality, and I think you did a good job letting it show in your work." Finding out it's A.I. generated robs you of that human connection.

[@nightslasher9384]

So true. Caught one of those AI bros in our art server. 😤

[@mewowzers]

LITERALLY! it’s like saying that ai could replace human connection entirely when you say it can replace art… wait people do say that nvm

[@xerxer9251]

So that triggered you? I mean they are idiots in every group lying and pretending just to get compliments.

[@OMGUKILLKENNY2]

Yeah but that is just people being annoying and not really a criticism of AI art tools itself.

[@seeranos]

When you mention how animators and texture artists have been using ai tools for a long time, i think primarily they will be talking about photogrammetry and motion capture. The photogrammetry is obviously fairly automatic, but motion capture is not a simple plug and play automation. You have to resolve the delta between a captured actor and the target model, as well as manage interpolations between capture frames. Then on top of that you have to tweak animations to account for collisions, timing, and character performance. Its actually quite involved and not really automatable.

[@CaptainKeen]

He's not talking about that though. He's talking about situations where a digital artist, for a movie or a videogame, will use AI to do the grunt work of creating the "textures" on repeating surfaces like walls. It's essentially just a piece of art pasted onto the digital surface, kind of like a matte painting might be used for the background in an old movie, or a digital version in a modern movie or game.

[@seeranos]

​ @CaptainKeen Repeating textures are not a problem that needs solving by AI. Tiling textures barely even exist anymore in game development. Nearly everything is already produced procedurally through a series of layering and combining nodes of noise and math and distortions. Computers can already programmatically generate these nodes, so when an artist or tools programmer doesn't use those, it's because they are looking for very specific controls, at which point it's much easier to build and arrange texture elements by hand.

[@parsus7797]

I don't want to discourage you but if you look up developments in any aspect of motion capture (from face to hands and full body capture) there is AI based research and major progress towards automatically converting any captured motion (sometimes even in realtime) to character animation. Last of Us Part II and maybe the remake of the first one already use a technique called motion matching, where instead of handcrafted animation for defined inputs and scenarios, the game searches a motion capture/animation library to fit the current pose to the situations (alongside some IKs).

[@Glowbox3D]

For now at least. It's moving so fast, in a decade or less, we will have fully made feature films using this tech, and be indistinguishable from real, tactile media.

[@parsus7797]

@@Glowbox3D well I don't know about that. Something that people never consider about saying stuff like 'in 10 years...' is scalability. A lot of current advancements in AI tech is due to billion dollar companies like Google, OpenAI, Nvidia etc. aggressively scaling their resources against the problems rather than strongly evolving their methodology. We are already experiencing diminishing returns on these investments. We can't and won't scale hardware resources forever.

[@RioEin]

its so much fun to see how little ppl value artist while having a high demand for art.

[@GreasyOaf]

Are you seeking validation

[@Markustempest]

That's because art is a luxury if you're selling it. I have high demand for a new Corvette but that doesn't mean I'm cutting into my rent money to buy one.

[@TheCapitalWanderer]

​@@Markustempestgotta love the fact that you brought up a corvette there.

[@partimentieveryday]

@@Markustempest you have high demand for a corvette? don't. stop buying shit

[@goodgrief888]

Contemporary people assume that artists don’t work at their skill, don’t have to practice their craft. Because they believe it’s just an inherent talent, they believe that art doesn’t have monetary value, that people shouldn’t be paid for their time and effort that they put into making art. That it’s all ripe for the picking, since it was just sitting in our brains waiting to be spewed out onto a campus in a moment of “inspiration” without us having any actual reason how it got out of us. We are just the conduit for this inspiration. Meanwhile they now believe that creating a corporation is somehow a valuable skill that’s worth billions.

[@cloerouch7002]

So... I'm one of the people who said having an endless stream of algorithmically generated content catered to my interests would be cool and, you're 100% right, I was only seeing it from a consumer's point of view. I didn't for a second consider any of the implications of that for artists, and I didn't realize that it would mean loosing the opportunity to connect to another human being through their art... You completely changed my mind. Thank you! 🧡

[@markmurex6559]

Artists can't fight AI by crying more. Sad, but true. The era of AI will ensure the demise of the artist. Adapt to survive.

[@metalsludge8205]

​@@markmurex6559 might wanna work on getting some bitches so your genes can survive lmoa

[@kindlingking]

​@@markmurex6559 I don't think it would be so devastating. It won't destroy art in general or most artists really, only "lesser" ones who rely entirely on their ability to make nice pictures for their income and, as practice shows, often feel entitled to their success, despite there being tens of millions of them around.

[@laurentiuvladutmanea3622]

​@@markmurex6559 1. You are one defeatist person. We eliminated leaded gasoline, many countries put succesful laws against guns, people managed to limit malware on the internet, we bullied nfts from the internet and in many places, people work to make the cities car free and walkable. In conclusion we have control over how technology will spread. 2. Dude. Artists adapt by opposing this.

[@markmurex6559]

@@laurentiuvladutmanea3622 Good luck opposing this. You will find it an impossible task to defeat AI.

[@Nikitomate]

I am a professional artist for 11 years and an art educator for 5 years now and in my experience you can take away the stylus from a digital artist and they will still be able to create a picture wirh a pen. You take away the oil paints from a painter and they will still draw with a pen. You take away the ai generator and those people will cry that they won't be able to do art anymore. Even a photographer can explain to you the process, the lense width, the angle and the tools they needed. Give them a pen and they will scribble you the composition and values they want. Art takes time, knowledge and human ingenuity. Those tech bros think they found a cheat code to not practise art for doing art. But there is no cheat code and artist won't get replaced any time soon by ai and two lines of prompt. It is still frustrating though, that someone unwilling to take the time to work on doing art demands recognition for fiddling with a piece of software. (And to the people coming at me with "I have no tiiiiiime": learn to live with your limitations and draw anyway. I had to work shitty part time jobs and draw in between for years!)

[@azutheboredcat2441]

You’ve put into words something I have known without being able to explain. Thank you!

[@Brandon82967]

But if you take away the pen, they can't draw. That's what happens when you take away tools from anyone. Good for you. Some people have busier schedules or disabilities that make it impossible to draw. Why can't they make art?

[@Nikitomate]

@@Brandon82967 That's a lame ass excuse. I teach comics and have a girl with disability in my group. She does art about horses. There are also artists doing art with their mouth or their foot, because they have no arms. I also saw nude sketches from someone with cerebral palsy, who needed a big piece of paper to work, but had a real eye for the subject and his work was fascinating. Frida Kahlo was physically disabled and made it big, Vincent van Gogh had shizophrenia and also made it big. I follow a person with dwarfism on instagram, who does beautiful highly detailed pencil portraits. Also you can doodle during breaks, in front of the tv, on the weekends. Take a course to learn it for several days with a professional artist. I worked my ass off in different jobs before I could go full time and I still drew whenever I could in this time. What I see, is that you are not interested in learning art and think you are now entitled in calling yourself artist when you are just punching in some letters and let a program copy other artists work. Art is not a finished, highly rendered product. It is all the thoughts and steps in between that lead to the highly rendered, finished product and every artist, big or small, will tell you this one way or another. If you want to be an artist, then start drawing!

[@azutheboredcat2441]

@@Brandon82967 You can understand the process without the tool. No tool is universally accessible, but you can find a way to make art by adapting either the tool or the use of it. It isn’t a matter of if someone can make art, it’s a matter of _how_ they can: which tools can be used without modification, which tools need to be modified, which tools simply don’t work. *I believe @@Nikitomate meant that if you take the AI away, those that use them won’t have the technical knowledge that’s typically learned during the process, because all they know to do is commission for art instead of making it* I make art in the scraps of time I have available. It’s slow, but it’s something. Time is a larger issue though, because I don’t have enough to enjoy the process of creating

[@dragondelsur5156]

@@Brandon82967 Disability is not the end be all argument to defend AI, you're just insulting disabled people by making treating them as worthless without a corporate blob. Disabled people have made art for longer than you can imagine, hell, one of the most famous musicians was deaf and that didn't stop him from using a piano.

[@jirij]

One scary thing is AI acting as humans - most of your KZbin comments will be AI generated, congratulating you on great work done, praising your opinions, showing emotions of support, giving you subconscious hints, steering you towards more advertiser-friendly content, while making you feel like your work matters. ... Despite few humans actually seeing it.

[@Hangul_Is_Forbidden_In_Handles]

This is the waking nightmare, man.

[@LuisSierra42]

I am an A.I generated person

[@principleshipcoleoid8095]

Imagine.. Even vtuber AIs are a thing now. Tbf, part of the appeal is collabs with actuall humans and the AI being a little bit schizo gassliting trolls

[@dmitryalexandersamoilov]

killer robot dogs, smart heat seeking fully-automatic bullets, smart nanobot viruses which mutate when contacting vaccines, ai overlord big brother government... eh :) it would make a good movie.

[@DestinyFaux]

this already happens and has been happening, for like a long time now

[@rizwanzaman1793]

As an artist I never felt so hated before. When I bring up my concerns I am always told these things "I don't want change" "I don't want A.I. to be used as a tool" "I will be replaced anyway" "I should just die" etc. All this sickens me, and I really feel absolutely hopeless.

[@2265Hello]

I am sorry you along with many creatives have to go through this. Some supporters of AI have an almost cult like worship of it and display disgusting behavior. But never let that stop you from creating or voicing your concerns.

[@rizwanzaman1793]

@@2265Hello thank you for your support! This all feels so uncertain but I am glad to see people who are seeing our side of the story.

[@alezar2035]

In the near future, AI will be able to replicate everything every artist does WITHOUT the copyright problems it has today It is already doing that in a limited number of AIs who are being not trained with images or text but with the fundamentals of human comprehension You will be completely replaced and there will be no legal problems, even if today there are The rest of us will be replaced too, you will just be first

[@2265Hello]

@@alezar2035 bait 💀

[@emmareiman64]

@@2265Hello Yeah... Buddy, I can't even explain the feeling I had just last Monday. Me and two of my buddies are sitting near each other around a table, all of us drawing and making art in our own ways. And behind our backs? Two dudes are talking about AI, phrasing it and wondering what it'll do, speaking of what all it might be capable of doing in the future. And all 3 of us are just... So. Extremely. Uncomfortable. We're looking at each other, try to just keep working and ignore it. But when these people are clearly unaware of the harm that AI is doing and are speaking of it like the new god - while we are concerned for our work and potential livelihood, the stuff that's going to keep us alive - it was super awkward. We kept our words to ourselves. All of us are so tired of trying to speak to people about this stuff anymore. We know they're not going to listen or stop. Our lives don't matter to them

[@DemiLuna5E]

I do not fear AI. I fear the -corporate- commercial exploitation of AI.

[@admiralbiatch1988]

The AI bros mentioned in the "facts vs. feelings" section who actively despise artists are the ones who I fear as well since they're the ones who actively support the unethical parts of AI development and will enable corporate exploitation in the name of winning some culture war they have against artists.

[@Sandstimes]

Fr, exploitation is already such a huge issue in the creative field. An individual dicking around on it in doesn't bother me but we're already seeing corporations dropping their artists (most notably certain book publishers that are just using ai generated cover illustrations now). I actually don't even think automation in a vacuum is a bad thing but our society is structured in such a way that we *need* to work to survive, unless we entirely restructure society ai and automation will always have some damage that comes with it

[@yinkim6652]

i fear the ppl using the tool too. most of them seemed so entitle and vengeful to artists

[@corgano6068]

Remove the word corporate and this exactly. I don't fear a knife. I fear someone using that knife to stab me.

[@TFrills]

small business can benefit greatly though. That allows people to more easily climb the social ladder.

[@firun2635]

One of my computer science lecturers once said that computers are machines that are completely stupid, but can think VERY fast (or something like that). Sums up AI perfectly.

[@littlerave86]

Ha! One of my college professors said the same.

[@jaskarvinmakal9174]

One of the most interesting ways I've heard to describe this is from the 3 body problem series, where an alien kingdom comes up with a way to compute using cavalry and flags, although sets of switches also work as that's exactly what it is.

[@OnigoroshiZero]

Only that the current AI is not stupid, actually it's smarter than the vast majority of humans. GPT-4 can achieve 130-155 in IQ tests, and that was without it even using vision.

[@dragondelsur5156]

​@@OnigoroshiZeroSource: I made it up

[@Twiddle_things]

​@@OnigoroshiZero ...do you know what IQ is? It's pretty clear that GPT is smarter than *you* in that regard.

[@ny4nk0]

"If your concern is democratizing art... then it (AI art) should be put into the public domain" And yet *some* AI artists don't seem to like that idea very much...

[@clydeberry8523]

Stable diffusion 1.5 (and I think a few other too) have been open sourced, and it is the only AI that I use or would recommend for that reason.

[@ny4nk0]

@@clydeberry8523 I was referring to the material generated by the models. To put it plainly, it seems a bit hypocritical to use a model trained on copyrighted data obtained without consent, and then turn around and whine when you can't copyright the output.

[@clydeberry8523]

@@ny4nk0 I agree, but that seems besides the point of democratization. I am of the mind that art should be untethered from the creator, and all this business of who owns what and market substitutes is beside the point of why I both create (I do non AI art as well) and consume art.

[@ny4nk0]

​@@clydeberry8523 When most people speak of "the democratization of art", they are referring to the production, not the final product. They want everyone to have equal access to the "skill" of artmaking, but to each "own" the final result as a product of their own creativity. Most non-AI artists would disagree with you as well in regards to the untethering of the creator - most artists feel their work is a deeply personal reflection of themselves and their lived experience.

[@moritakaishida7963]

That isn't what they mean dumbass. When they say democratise they mean "I don't want to put in the work like real artist had to, I just want the end result immediately" Art is already democratised, anyone can pick up a pencil and draw, anyone can pick up a brush and paint, and with digital art programs you don't even need to pay for supplies . You aren't against AI art, you just want it to fit your agenda

[@isaacstokes4481]

My dream was to create a comic and have that as my livelihood when id finished school, and Ai art is pushing me more and more to not going into the industry because of EVEN LESS job security than there already is in the industry. Ai art is successfully pushing me less and less towards my dream. You might ask why I wouldn't use the tool however I wanted to create a comic not just for writing but also because I LOVE to draw, and do not get any where near the same excitement from editing an Ai image. No I am not a perfect artist but I have put hundreds of hours of my life into trying to improve and learn, and am now at a stage of just giving up on my own art because I cannot envision a world where I succeed, which was already hard to imagine in such a competitive industry. Some of my mates have even mocked me, calling me "short sighted" simply for working on my art.

[@markmurex6559]

If you cry more, people will give you money. Actually, you could probably make more as a beggar than you would have made as an artist anyways.

[@viridianacortes9642]

Don’t give up. There is nothing stopping you from telling your story. It would be a shame to deprive the world of your unique pov and art style. I believe in you. Keep going. Don’t give up!

[@amethystimagination3332]

Create out of spite, don’t let some smug crypto bros who don’t value art beyond a consumer commodity scare you.

[@ElJorro]

Create anyway.

[@colorpg152]

@@viridianacortes9642 yes there is something stopping him the fact i would become a time and effort sink without payment stop being disingenuous

[@stingspring3168]

Ahh yes, sweet manmade horrors beyond comprehension is the best way to start my saturday. Love how ai is doing painting and writing while humans are left to manual labor.

[@lostboi2271]

"Manmade horrors beyond comprehension" is still one of the best phrases ever put to paper (keyboard)

[@boid9761]

​@@lostboi2271 There's now a post ironic version of this "ah sweet! Natural horrors beyond my comprehension"

[@boid9761]

Do you want Men of Iron? Because that's how we get Men of Iron

[@heavenlyarianator6335]

This is what I’m saying, it’s never going to make good art but that’s all anyone is trying to use it for when it should be doing math and physical labor

[@lostboi2271]

@@boid9761 love that version as well

[@DS-wp2dj]

I guess the reason tech bros are so afraid of AI immediately wanting to kill them if it had sentience, is because they're trying to create something that can perform the intellectual and emotional labor of a human, without valuing the humanity inherent to that labor. The ideal AI would be capable of things only a human mind is capable of, producing the things we value that only a human mind can create, but digitally enslaved to the will of user. Instinctively they recognise that what they want from technology is digital slavery -work without pay and without choice to opt-out.They're terrified of what they instinctively feel is the logical conclusion of wanting to exploit people without consequences

[@Hoonters-goona-Hoont]

Oh gosh, you're so horrifyingly, ridiculously right. :'D My my, but isn't the human condition absurd?

[@lizardqueen6041]

THAT EXPLAINS IT!!

[@joelrobinson5457]

Holy f+**

[@SigFigNewton]

Never seen people so mad about an expansion of creative outlets

[@chloewebb5526]

When I was a kid, I wanted to be an artist, a musician, and I also wanted to create video games. I got my first guitar and keyboard at 8 years old, just cheap $100 starter instruments, but never had lessons due to being poor. As a teenager I kept messing around with the instruments, but just wasnt as advanced as other people my age due to me just not putting in the time to practice and work through the sounding bad parts to get to the sounding good parts. Same with drawing - I pretty much gave up because it require way too much discipline and time that I would rather spend hanging out with friends, reading, or playing video games. Then when I was 17, I finally got serious about art and music. I really wanted to express myself through those mediums. So I spent my free time playing guitar, playing piano, drawing everything around me, and learning the techniques that great artists and musicians use to create great music and art. It took a bit of patience, but within a year, there was a difference, and that made me want to see how much better I could get. It was a journey that made every work of art or piece of music not simply a reflection of my emotions or place in life, but a stillframe of a moment in my journey to better the skills that I had been working on and dreaming of since I was a little kid. I'm 38 now. I play guitar, piano, cello, and bass. I sing, I draw, I do tattoos, and love using graphite more than anything as an artist. Now, I have started to attempt to write a little bit of code, and am creating pixelated textures that I can use when creating custom levels in Quake 1 - this is the very beginning of that last dream I had as a kid, to create video games. I don't expect it to be something I make a living doing, but it's something I'm passionate about. I am patient, and I know that my patience and dedication to the hobby will yield results, as it would for anyone who spent the time trying instead of using a text prompt and expecting a copyrighted work of art.

[@DavidSartor0]

I don't understand the point of this comment. It's well-written, I think.

[@kalliskivike]

@@DavidSartor0 It means if your passionate about something, keep doing it even as a side which in her case it brings her fullfilment which AI will never give. Besides you don't need to worry about any possible copyright heading your way with AI. Right now AI art is still in beginning stage when it comes to that and there have been many lawsuits already

[@rammym23]

No, what she's saying is if you're passionate about something, keep doing it - and that INCLUDES using AI to make art. She's saying that she's already a talented artist, and she uses AI to make things that she's always wanted that she couldn't make before. She doesn't assume it's going to make a masterpiece for her with a few words; she understands that AI is literally just a tool and the only reason why it's a "danger" to artists at all is a result of capitalist exploitation of the tool, not the tool itself. She's saying "hey listen, 'real artists use AI too'" in a sea of people saying that it's impossible, nobody understands the technology, while not making any effort to actually understand it themselves

[@RabidDisposition]

This is true passion. You don't need any praise or compensation, simply creating is enough to keep you creating, and that is what makes a true artist in my book. You have my utmost respect.

[@chloewebb5526]

@@rammym23 If a restaurant allows it's patrons to give orders for custom dishes and I walk in , giving the most detailed description of the meal I want - without telling the the measurements of exactly how to make it - does that make me a chef? When someone describes the tattoo they want to me, I painstakingly will draw and redraw it a few times before it might be exactly what they want - but I am still the artist in my line of work. Creating with AI is not creating art. However, using the AI to get ideas, find inspiration, or use as reference for size, shape or composition - that still makes you the artist with your work. The point of me telling my story was to describe the very long process of becoming an artist that can create work that people enjoy. That process taught me how to be patient and how to wait a long time for a big payoff. I almost didn't pursue art because it seemed to take to long to cultivate the actual talent of creating the art from my mind with my own two hands. I was terrible at drawing compared to other kids and even teens in middle school, with sloppy handwriting. It's my belief that any person can cultivate an artistic discipline without shortcuts. And they best part is that after I create a piece, to this day, I stil look at each one with a layer of disbelief and pride, that I actually made the thing sitting in front of me, its a feeling only a creator can get. I didn't get that from using Dall-e

[@mangotortoise1273]

Man, I'm not even an artist for a living, I literally write to make life in this hellscape more bearable and everything about A.I. art and writing is making it agonizingly hard to get up in the morning. Kudos to all y'all full-time artists, keep fighting the good fight.

[@BinaryDood]

Even just watching an anime from 20 years ago felt less meaningful. It felt that even this unique experience may not matter anymore in a future os indistinguishable noise

[@sadscientist9995]

AI can write

[@Its_Not_Suspicious]

​@@sadscientist9995 he knows that, he said so

[@leestrz4153]

Some people are easily discouraged and others easily inspired. I've been a starving artist most of my life but I'm on the optimistic end of it. I always see these amazing photos and drawings that are beyond my own abilities and think man I'm a pretty shit photographer, artist etc. But I aspire to be more like those works. It pushes me forward. Funnily enough though soon as I start something I feel great. The up and down motions are normal, but even when you feel demotivated try to remind yourself why you love art, why you write and look for inspiration and send appreciation to others.

[@brojakmate9872]

Why do you think it is the "good" fight?

[@kemerydunn9532]

I read a story on reddit (possibly it was a comment not the post) where an artist had a commission back out because "i was able to get midjourney to make what i want and look like your style and its good enough". Its a frickin horror story. They used the artists IG handle to prompt the AI to copy them. I think its also worth mentioning that fan art is not protected under Fair Use for sale. Its technically illegal to sell fan art. But fanart fulfills both criteria of being expressive and has 100% human intervention/hands on creation. If fan art cant be sold legally neither should AI which cant meet either criteria.

[@markmurex6559]

I get it, but I don't. If the tool is available and easy to use, people will use it. Crying about it doesn't get money in your pocket for making art.

[@kemerydunn9532]

@@markmurex6559 but they backed out of a commission, revoking the job that the artist was counting on because they'd agreed to it. Its one thing to tell AI to make art that looks like a small artist's when they didn't give the AI developers permission to use it, but it even worse to offer a job, get the details hashed out, and then back out part way through. And it's not just that they backed out because they didn't need it anymore because AI made it, they got AI to mimick that specific artists style which she spent year and years cultivating.

[@Verpal]

@@kemerydunn9532 Whilst I can imagine the pain felt by this artist, the chance of humanity can just press a delete button collectively and revert the AI research back is almost non-existent, I afraid they will just have to acknowledge the competition and hopefully, correctly convince their customer that AI is still a limited imitation for now. Artist will have to compete with better quality and human interaction, it is......unhinged, for lack of a better word, to expect current situation can be improved when a random guy with cheapest GPU can took album on IG and generate a somewhat convincing copy of the artist style. 6 months ago or so I occasionally commission artist in FFXIV (the mmo) with some basic work here and there, nowadays I only commission major piece, and a filthy rich RP group I knew also greatly reduced amount of low end work. The amount of money they spent on commissioning didn't really decreased, but all of which now went to higher end artist, low to mid end were completely cut off and were essentially starving now, even with generosity of FFXIV community. For example, back then they hire an artist to sit in their FC house (think guild HQ) during major events and that artist will do free quick sketches/insert other art, they pay cash generously on per night basis, now this role is reduced into a discord bot that visitor can prompt whenever they enter FC discord channel.

[@kemerydunn9532]

@@Verpal but how can artists compete when their competitive attributes are being stolen? What sets artists apart from each other is their individuality and style-- it's like a fingerprint. When a human looks at and admires another artists work and incorporates aspects into their own, they will only ever get a piece of it and it will still have their fingerprint on it as well. A customer can choose between all of the artists and find the one that fits their vision. How can human artists compete when the very thing that makes them competitive -- their human individuality -- is stolen? Ethical AI is absolutely necessary. Talking about commissions from a business side of things, I'm trying to understand what you're saying, but it sounds like you shifted away from commissioning everything and only commission the big stuff. That's fine, but the problem that this redditor had was that they backed out of an agreed upon commission. It isn't that the customer stopped going to them, it's that they cancelled an order already placed.

[@Verpal]

@@kemerydunn9532 I am not trying to argue against the idea of ''ethical AI'', but you cannot realistically regulate something that can be trained in most high end gamer GPU, even if you change GPU driver, there are always unofficial driver you can use, the cat is out of the bag, you can regulate however you want, but it serve nothing other than a bit of political scoring points. I don't know the detail about whatever that deal is, just trying to give another perspective on change in commission behavior from my experience. it is particularly noteworthy for me since I know that artist personally, this is actually the best nighttime job she ever had, and now she have problem paying rent. I tried petition on her behalf, but FC leadership crunched the number, and hiring her consistently become less than optimal. She was ''optimize'' out of work, which is sad.

[@lorpis8284]

I think AI produced art is the perfect manifestation of how corporate ethics take the humanity out of everything.

[@dragondelsur5156]

They say everything we love is destined to die, fucking hell.

[@lorpis8284]

@@dragondelsur5156 everything we hate as well.

[@dontmisunderstand6041]

In other words, you're saying money is the root of all evil.

[@lorpis8284]

​@@dontmisunderstand6041 Nope. Just the anti social/human nature of what they teach in business school.

[@lorpis8284]

@@dontmisunderstand6041 Money as a commodity rather than a measure of value is what makes our economy so wrong. That's a whole different conversation though.

[@eliyahzayin5469]

I'm not sure if this made me feel less or more worried about AI. In either case, I appreciate the detailed breakdown of the issues and relationship between AI art and it's users. Thanks for what you do!

[@beatbahlek9815]

I like the fact that you added the possibility of using AI as a learning tool in the end, which is almost exactly what I was thinking. It would be like a very very very patient tutor.

[@nidohime6233]

Or a very terrible one.

[@wa5657]

i also quite enjoy the thought.... in the ideal case, that would be truly endlessly useful but first, such ai must be almost impeccable in its knowledge of the subject it's like, yeah, human teachers make mistakes and can't know everything, but when you learn from the machine there is something that makes you trust it gives you unbiased advice with backing of thousands of great minds all the while we have our "ai" spitting out almost pure nonsense at times because of its learning algorithms, how it consolidates information, how it takes or doesn't take feedback of other users into consideration (sorry if something's wrong with my english)

[@marek_tarnawski]

I've read that as Van Gogh was learning and developing his paintings, he was actually trying to be impressionist. However he didn't reach his goal. No matter how much he tried it ended looking quite different from the style popular at the time. But after while he just let go. The style he ended up going towards became Van Gogh style. Something new. So in case of humans even if you consciously try to emulate some of your influences, it always will be tainted with your personal touch and imperfections....and that's actually good. It's personal contribution to development of art. With AI generators and "in the style of artist" it's never adding anything new. Maybe except for crappy hands and uncanny valley.

[@racool911]

Isn't crappy hands and uncanny valley a form of imperfection? Or is that also taken from the original artist lol

[@null7198]

You don't give consideration to how it could inspire someone to make something new. You don't really question the notion of what "Something New" is. You try to paint this visage of what the process of artistry is and an artists journey, while disallowing AI or the strives as humanity we've taken to get here the same kindness; basically leaving a muddy footnote at the bottom. You biasely respect imperfections in some cases but not in others, basically amounting to choosing when to see the Forrest for its trees. This overall view is just Biased-- And it sucks no one can see when they're doing it. I mean I'm biased towards AI for it being perceived as "Evil" essentially, but I'm also an artist and can see the worries-- But ALL you guys can see is the worries, the revenue loss, this breaking down of what we call "Art"-- Yet it's mindsets like these that in my eyes are the signs we've lost that long, long ago.

[@psyche1988]

@@null7198 1 and 0 is not art. Get it through your thick skull: Art is made by humans for other humans for it is we that assign meaning and it's we that need meaning.

[@TrueFork]

Van Gogh wasn't actually particularly original. Many of his paintings are very blatant copies of other artists' works, and even "his" signature impasto style was borrowed from Adolphe Monticelli. An AI or even a photoshop filter could have generated most of his paintings, by putting a Monticelli impasto effect over the works he ripped of. Van Gogh is famous today because his next of kin knew how to do a successful PR campaign.

[@augustus4832]

​@@psyche1988 ok boomer

[@Hughes81]

For my 40th birthday I wanted a Shadowrun piece base on my character in Steve Prescott's art style. So I contacted Steve Prescott and paid for the piece. I also found that piece, which I did share on FB, on someone else's post as an AI ripped picture.

[@TheSilentPr0tag0nist]

This almost made me cry, out of all the crap I see ai art doing, for some reason these sort of examples make me so sad, I hope it didn't effect you too much.

[@ricoochie9149]

terrible....next time before you post a valuable piece of art online, take the image and downgrade it to be a much smaller image, less pixels...that way it stops anyone from using it but your audience can still enjoy viewing it

[@saliferousstudios]

​@@ricoochie9149no, use glaze or nightshade on it. Both preferably.

[@KatherinaBathory]

A friend made an experiment. He has a lot of his art on deviant art and he uploaded ONE that was passed through an AI filter... It's his most popular drawing now. It's the one with the most likes and the most views. It was rather sad. I didn't like it as much, I like his style and the AI changed it to something much more generic, but people seemed to like the generic more 😢

[@alaskaface7147]

As I get older my perspective on humanity becomes increasingly bleak. This is one of many reasons. Most people like stuff that’s light, pretty, happy, or otherwise lacking in emotional or philosophical depth- GENERIC. I gave up on pursuing my talent in art because I recognized that even if I was eventually popular or appreciated for my unusual style/content (my work was often very dark/violent/gory/sexual, displaying the dark side of life and human nature, etc), it would almost certainly be long after I was dead. So I took up work as a builder that earns enough money so that I could finally buy enough property to finally just get the hell away from everyone else and get some peace. I’m using my creative skill working with my hands to build things for myself, I spend most of my free time as far away from other people as I possibly can, and I’m the happiest I’ve ever been, lol. It’s a sad statement but damn, people are just so disappointing I can’t bear to be near them anymore, much less show them work that came straight from the darkest depths of my soul just so they can spit in my face. This disgusting AI catastrophe is just more icing on the shit cake of humanity. Fuck em, I say

[@ihavetubes]

@@alaskaface7147 you can go deep into a forest and still hear planes fly over, there is no escape.

[@KiraSlith]

What is more "generic" than something that's broadly popular? All efforts designed to reach a "broader audience" inevitably end in something lacking character. It's also what generic AI models are designed to do in the first place, produce something inoffensive and broadly popular, because most people aren't intimate with art enough to see beyond a surface level.

[@crepooscul]

Oh man, you've only realized now that the common pleb has dogshit tastes? Just look at the state of music for a second to see what I mean. Of course when it comes to art, the average pleb will also like photorealistic generic bleakness. The more "photorealistic" something is, the better it is in their minds. This has always been the case, they don't care about your composition or story, most people don't see it. They just see a "pretty" rendered image. I guess the most upsetting thing for artists is realizing that most people are simply art illiterate, and they fail to absorb what the artist poured into the image. The only people who can understand are other artists, and a few people who appreciate art, analyze it, and can even give proper criticism despite not being an artist themselves.

[@crepooscul]

@@alaskaface7147 You are absolutely correct, couldn't have put it into words better myself and I'm not even an artist. This AI stuff is shocking. Not because it's good, because if you look at the bigger picture you see it for what it is, a data recycler, pattern reading. It's a complex piece of software, but its scope is ultimately to be an overengineered trash factory. Utterly worthless, utterly pointless at least when it comes to art and most other things. But it showed another dreadful aspect of humanity, it showed how ugly envy can really get and how disappointing most people are as you said, how lazy they are, how they want to go through life with a minimal amount of mental effort, doing nothing more than just consumer every single day. My advice though, do keep making art if you still have the time for it. There are still a sizeable bunch of us who enjoy the work of artists, and more importantly you have other artists to interact with.

[@olevam1]

"people can have nuanced takes on copyright" I loved that statement, super true in this, and so many other fields

[@martletkay]

I dunno, if I own it, I own it.

[@ultimabarricada7859]

I dunno, if I copy it, I copy it.

[@martletkay]

@@ultimabarricada7859 Then I take you to court and I own you

[@trippybruh1592]

@@martletkay He lives in China unfortunately..

[@lilymcmillan2239]

AI terrifies me. I'm a teenager, and this is the world I will grow up in. I want to be a director, actor and writer and I am terrified I will never get to do that, because my dream, my ideas and humanity will be rendered obsolete by ai. I don''t want to grow up in this world.

[@averyhappysock]

same boat here, i've had artistic interests since i could count my age on two hands and they have only accumulated and grown stronger with age, then right as i start putting in the legwork to realize my dreams ai barges in and crushes everything, born just in the right time to both be inspired by the works i grew up with AND be prevented from ever manifesting that inspiration. what a shit world.

[@kendylfrye760]

​@@averyhappysock You have the full potential in you I know you can do it GO BEYOND!!!! PLUS ULTRA!!!

[@Black_Corey]

That's part of the problem of growing up. You start out as SpongeBob then slowly turn into Squidward.

[@DyanBermeo]

Writing is dead.

[@mjt1517]

I can't wait for strong AI advancement *BECAUSE* I want to see ordinary people making their own movies. Imagine having the tools to create a high quality, full length feature film and it's just you in your pajamas sitting in your room at home, designing and hacking away at the story. Could you make a living doing that? Would a studio buy a ready made film from some rando they've never heard of? I bet it'll happen, once those tools exist. (And as long as you don't use trademarked characters or copyrighted stories, you could probably even skip the studios and sell streaming access on your own website.) Personally, I'm going to redo the Star Wars prequels like they should have been done in the first place. And no Jar Jar Binks in my unofficial fan version. Not to sell, but to put things right in the galaxy. Even if I'm the only viewer.

[@kieranc747]

I'd been working on developing digital art skills for a couple years when AI art suddenly exploded as a phenomenon on the internet, and I've got to be honest with myself, the effect it's had on my artistic drive has been devastating. Knowing that there are so many people just gleefully saying that I shouldn't bother with this skill that I've poured hours and hours of effort into developing, that I should just get a "real job", and other such bunk. Nowadays I can maybe work up the drive to do one or two big pictures a month, rather than often multiple pictures in a day which I'd been doing before. It's just not fun anymore, not with this sword of damocles hanging over the whole artistic community. It really sucks.

[@rhythmandblues_alibi]

I feel the same way. Just getting to the point of having the self confidence and motivation to actually draw again, for the first time since I was a teen, just in time for it to be made even more difficult for artists to make a living from their work. I wanted to be an animator, an illustrator. That feels further away now than ever. I never put the time into learning digital art and always felt behind because of it and now I'm kinda glad I didn't because it's like.. what's the point?

[@SugarThyme]

I'll say, as someone who hires artists often, I don't think AI comes close to competing. When AI artists try to trick me into paying for their stuff claiming to be "artists," what they're hoping for is that I'll pay for whatever random glob of pixels they generate. But I want something specific. I don't want a random glob of pixels. I had to forcefully end a contract with one who misrepresented himself as an artist a while back and turned around and hired someone who I knew actually could draw. The AI artist kept trying to cancel my requests to cancel despite never turning in what I asked for, complaining they had worked for hours to turn in stuff that I didn't ask for, and kept insisting they would "get it right the next time." They never got it even close to right. Shad's video on how he does AI art was also a good representation of this. It can only copy what it already has. It can't create something new. So when he tries to get it to generate his original character, even when he gives it a sketch to start from, it can't do it. He puts the two side by side acting as if he got the AI to generate his character, but the AI character is nothing like his original design. Because the AI can't create anything new, people like myself who have specific characters to make and need it done well have no use for AI generators, only real artists. Not to mention that I actually want to own the rights to publish the stuff. I hate that artists are getting so mistreated and feeling like their skills are worthless. You guys are absolutely needed by other people who care about their work. No AI is going to generate my specific character with his specific look, and I'm not going to pay for something subpar that gets something "sort of maybe kind of a little like him."

[@SugarThyme]

Addendum to the previous: I think of the art generation tools simply as tools and it's the way they're being used that's the problem. I don't have an inherent problem with the tool on its own, just how seeds are being fed to them and such. And I think they have their uses that are just fine. But they don't come close to the real artists and they're not replacing real artists anytime soon. There is no one using an art generator tool that would be able to come anywhere close to creating my book cover how I want it because there would be no seeds for the machine to draw from. The art generator would just mash together a glob of random stuff that it's been taught is "probably similar." It's much better just to hire someone who knows what they're doing. So I might generate a quick image of, say, a helicopter, or grab a photo of a helicopter, and throw it up in the corner to tell the artist, "I want a helicopter up here, but I want it to face this direction instead," and that's a potential use for a generator. But I don't see how they'll ever be able to sufficiently replace artists when they can only create from old and can't create new. That doesn't work when you need something very specific.

[@Atypical_Typo]

Started getting more serious with writing (was a childhood passion) when AI writing started popping up. As a non English native who prefers writing in English because it sounds better (imo), seeing AI putting my creative talents to shame in comparison makes it hard for me to work on my writing skills...

[@SugarThyme]

@@Atypical_Typo Don't despair. There's just a new set of errors for them to make because computers can't think like humans. Some mistakes I ran into were, "The windows set up a table." (supposed to be "A table was set up by the windows.") and "The Queen will have her way with my dead body." (supposed to be "OVER my dead body"...) But the machines don't understand the pieces. They don't think, "Hey, saying 'with my dead body' sounds kind of sketchy." To a machine, it's just placing 'correct' parts of a sentence together without understanding the overall meaning. They can be good at spotting certain things and terrible at others. You are absolutely an essential part of writing a good story, though. No machine is going to replace you anytime soon because they don't have the intelligence or creativity to. Your English is great, btw.

[@maluse227]

AI kind of terrifies me because its going to hit my field really hard. I'm working to complete my Ph.D right now with my goal being to become a prof, and the number of undergrads I see proudly boasting about how they used chatgpt to write their essays is alarming to me, its reshaping how academia will work in the future. And at least for me its telling me I will need to change how I grade in order to work around programs like that, thankfully at the moment I have yet to see any AI that can write an academic paper that deserves anything beyond a C or a B-, but I'm terrified of it getting better and allowing students to just turn their brains off.

[@RowanArk]

Oh that's terrible to hear! If you just use that to write your essays for you, you won't actually learn anything

[@glint6070]

@@RowanArk Many students would tell you that they already don't learn anything

[@irecordwithaphone1856]

That is already terrifying, C's get degrees. If it's even capable of that we're already in bad territory

[@principleshipcoleoid8095]

Chatgpt does not understand what it writes. It will "hallusinate" sources and facts. But yea, cheating is a huge problem. Humanity evolved to act first think later to a large degree, which could doom us all. Or create damaging side effects. Or maybe we'll just get something akin to post scarsity and will end up as pets to AI overlord who's goal is as foreign to us as our goals are to an ant.

[@eyesofthecervino3366]

Maybe in the future students will be graded on assignments more like an interview, where they deliver their work verbally, and then you ask questions and judge how well they respond. Something that forces them to demonstrate some personal understanding of the material they're presenting. That, or we could just require students to also keep and turn in handwritten outlines and rough drafts. That should be a lot harder to fake.

[@gridlock489]

I’m MOST concerned with the chilling effect on young would-be artists, who never pick up a pen or camera because “What’s the point? AI could do it better.” Also the chilling effect of how expensive litigation is, combined with how this hydra probably CANNOT be slain. “Democratizing art” seems to be code for “anarchy within art”

[@idkusername5789]

I agree with everything except the last point, because that’s not what political anarchy is.

[@littleleakyleakythere]

^ thats not what anarchy is

[@gridlock489]

Taking the power to create art away from artists and handing it to every person who can type into a text field isn’t anarchy? I guess it isn’t since the people in charge of the AI tools will be the ones with power. It’s a sticky subject and terms aren’t defined yet

[@mihaelfailslife2096]

I think with the huge rise of AI "artists", art will generally become very private form of self therapy for those who really enjoy it. Think of it as yoga or meditation. Majority of people will never care enough to take a look at someone someone else's art because they will be obsessed with their own. Needless to say, death of music, writing, painting and other similar industries will occur that will manifest through mass depression among artists who established their career to a point where it pays their bills.

[@davidioanhedges]

Anyone with a cheap camera can easily take a photo that is a more accurate picture of an object than any artist can produce ... so why paint? Most artists will never be as good as the best artists, so why bother learning to paint ... Inexplicably people still do ... People also do Sport, Crafts, etc ... even though they are not very good at them and never will be ...

[@Medved725]

It's been my belief that humans have always been problem solvers, we made spears because we don't have claws, clothes because we don't have fur, boats because we don't have gills, and aeroplanes because we don't have wings. Now though we seem to have convinced ourselves that creativity and expression are also problems.

[@benmccarthy1799]

I think the "problem" these techbros have is that they cant find an honest way to increase their stock price. They are just willing to butcher literally anything in pursuit of impossible growth.

[@yvindvego9404]

no one is stopping people from being creative and to express themselves just because ai art is becoming a thing.

[@Mente_Fugaz]

​​​​​@@yvindvego9404yes it does, because when you can't make a live out of your expression , you can't have the same time to make it, because now you need to work now on repetitive/ boring jobs, reducing everything to a mere hobby to have fun , in a world where the AI can give you the dopamine in seconds making you think you are expressing your way to see the world, when you are just consuming the way AI blend the works of art that humans made

[@laurentiuvladutmanea3622]

@@yvindvego9404 How are they supposed to be creative when they are starving on the streets?

[@dragondelsur5156]

​@@yvindvego9404 What do we win if our art gives no reward?

[@Nenilein]

The amount of people in the comments failing to realize that "human creativity" by definition involved emotions and opinions, neither of which machine learning has, is frightening.

[@Julez60]

Tech bros and their deranged contempt for actual artists 🤦‍♂️

[@myamo.o]

the ai bros have given me lost hope for humanity, how do some humans just lack the awareness and empathy for whats going on. they KNOW that its gonna ruin artists' livelihoods, but they just "don't care" because their lazy arses want "cheap, fast, and better" art made by fucking robots. can you believe the amount of ai bro comments i've seen that advocate for this shit? one of the commentors that I saw whilst scrolling said: "“Art” is just a word pretentious people came up with to make themselves feel better about having no real skills. And now AI has made it so everyone is an “Artist” by default, they’re upset because their “skill” no longer means anything." - some apathetic, miserable stranger this is fucking terrifying.

[@ObsidianLife]

… Not to mention actual experiences!

[@GabrielleTollerson]

​@@Julez60 exactly

[@GabrielleTollerson]

​@@ObsidianLife yes!!

[@guadacaram]

Just something running on my mind: I have a little bump on my middle finger, right where a pencil sits when I hold it. I was very much born from that, from holding pencils and pens and brushes and whatever I'm using to draw or paint or write. And I think itsn't it wonderful how the art I've made left physical evidence on my own body?

[@winstonpoplin]

My fingers are permanently bent and twisted from using my hands in hard manual labor and mechanical repair my whole life. I personally don't find it so wonderful that my hands are fucked from doing work. But that's just me. Edit: I meant no offense to anyone here. I was just taking this opportunity to post about my hands being ruined through my desire to fulfill my passion to create.

[@wuba5456]

@@winstonpoplin oh you poor thing, I hope they don't ache constantly and/or that you've found ways to soothe any pain, at least for a bit

[@NaritaZaraki]

@@winstonpoplin I am genuinely sorry for the condition of your hands. I know tone and intention is near impossible to gauge online, but I can only promise that I mean that sincerely. You are however making a comparison that is entirely irrelevant to the OP's comment. What's happened to your hands is a result of harsh exploitative labor conditions that, by design, dehumanize and devalue the worker to the point of treating their mental, emotional, and physical health as utterly disposable. Someone finding beauty and wonder in their artistic expression, the voice of their soul, leaving a tangible mark on their physical body is not the same. One is the product of our deeply flawed economic, social, and political systems, the other is a physical manifestation of an artists passion and love for their craft.

[@winstonpoplin]

@naritazaraki177 I find great beauty and wonder in building and maintaining machines. Machines and mechanical design is every bit an art form as much as making a painting is. The care and love i put into the caring for and designing my machines is the deepest love i have. It is how i express myself and sooth my mind. Does it really not meet your criteria for valuable self-expression and art? (For context i am working on my own personal machines in my own free time at my home. Not as a job.)

[@Hilliam66]

⁠​⁠@@winstonpoplin ​​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​​⁠​⁠I think there’s a bit of tonal inconsistency there. That beauty, wonder, and care for your craft isn’t captured by the description of fingers being “permanently bent and twisted” and hands being “fucked from doing work.” And yet, someone who’s completely regretful of the physical effects of working with machines wouldn’t describe it as how they express themself and sooth their mind. So, I’m not entirely sure what you’re trying to get at. Maybe that it’s unfortunate that the human body is sometimes not well equipped to meet the lasting physical demands of work we enjoy doing? Maybe that people doing work they choose to do is satisfying and meaningful to such a degree that any consequences or lasting effects are minor in comparison?

[@flintlocke1344]

Last year I decided to stop using Hero Forge to design my D&D characters and sketch them instead. They’re nowhere near as fast or high-quality, but it’s been liberating to have such direct control over my characters. This was around the same time AI art was starting to really take off in some online communities I followed, and I felt invalid and devalued by it. I had and still have no intention of going into art professionally, but I felt so inadequate whenever I’d post a distinctly amateur pencil sketch on a Discord server and have it followed by a gorgeous portrait made by a machine. I don’t have a point to make; I just wanted to share my little experience. The video was excellent. I’m glad that you made it.

[@OlympusLaunch]

I find toying with the AI art tools quite interesting, although I share others concerns about copywrite issues and stealing artists work for profit. But at the same time I think the value of a piece of art isn't simply in it's visual aesthetic value, but also the core essence behind the piece, for lack of a better term. When you sketch a character it may not be visually stunning in the same way as a professional painters work, or some of these generated images, but it is imbued with your unique creative vision and personality as an artist, and I think that's just as valuable. I think the real danger of these tools is to outsource our own creative vision and allow the machines to start to dictate that core essence. To the extent these tools can be developed and used ethically, I think we need to make sure to remember that our creative essence and impulse is an important part of art. Not just because it expresses it's self at the level of aesthetics either, but because it guides the core direction of the piece at a deep level. You can never get Midjourney or Stable Diffusion to replicate that level of depth because there is no actual mind with a harmonious concept guiding it.

[@emmareiman64]

No, I think you got it We all have our own experiences & thoughts on it, and I'd say yours are very valid Let me first say that I find it wonderful that you took the step of trying to sketch out your own ideas and visualize your character through what your own hands can make

[@Forgefaerie]

personaly I do a little bit of both, I find Hero Forge to be a lot of fun, but I also like doing my own sketching, the thing is though... unless something has changed recently? Hero Forge is not AI. Hero forge is a collection of assets that were created by human artists that users can then combine in a variety of ways to create a customized miniature. its not especially different from the way player character customization works in video games or even going further back - the way playing with paper dolls (or Mr Potato head) works - where you have your base figure and you can attach outfits, accessories and even facial features and hair. but all of those were created by humans who got paid for it. and while combination of any given set of features will look different - those individual assets remain unchanged. that said... as someone currently going to school for art degree and hoping to maybe take my art further then a personal hobby.. it is incredibly disheartening to see the way people treat human artists vs AI.

[@flintlocke1344]

⁠​⁠@@ForgefaerieI wasn’t saying Hero Forge is AI, sorry for the confusion. I stopped using Hero Forge because I felt it limited my creativity and design concepts, and because I wanted to practice drawing. I brought it up as context to my actual experience with AI.

[@Forgefaerie]

@@flintlocke1344 oh I get it, and yeah I guess I was mostly trying to say that even some professional artists relax with coloring books sometimes :D and it may be different from you, but for me sometimes it can even jolt inspiration of my own :)

[@mistingwolf]

The deviantART AI was a total fiasco. Every account was defaulted to opt in to the program. Many people were up in arms about this, especially for accounts that were abandoned due to various circumstances, including those accounts of artists who have passed away with no means to consent to the program. The backpedal done by dA was swift and accounts now default to opt out. It was a blunder, but at least they addressed it with acceptable speed.

[@SatansLilHelper666]

What's awful about AI art for me is that it is litterly taking away one of the only things I can do to survive. Because of my chronic back pain and ptsd there are very little other jobs I can do and definitely none that can bring the same happiness that doing art can. And now I'm litterly having my hours cut in half thanks to AI art and my livlyhood is going in the drain. Just thanks for making this video its nice to see that not everyone is ignorant of the harm AI art can cause and hopefully it will spread some awareness.

[@RealCodreX]

I'm sorry you're so ill, but as harsh as it may sounds, that's your problem. Nobody asked the workshops how they felt when the big industrial companies took their jobs away. Or the workers in said industrial companies when they were replaced by the assembly line. Automation will always take away more jobs than it can create, and the ones it creates will always be more demanding than those that existed. Whether you like it or not, this is the future. And as the past has shown us, the future simply doesn't care.

[@kitsunephantom6155]

@@RealCodreX So instead of trying to make things better for the less fortunate, you tell them to just suck it up? How cruel and callous of you. What is the point in progress if not to help those who cannot help themselves?

[@sfkdsxzjkcfjldskaf99sddf809sdf]

@@RealCodreX Go outside and touch grass, you've lost touch with reality and what it means to be a human and it shows

[@GalaxyPedlar]

@@RealCodreX What kind of dumb might-make-right argument is that? It's like saying "That bear might have just torn your leg off, but he's torn a lot of other people's legs off too, so that makes it okay."

[@Mayhzon]

What kind of art do you do? What type of collaberations do you do?

[@Ottonymos]

The whole notion of prompt engineering strikes me as the clearest example of being an "idea guy" that I've ever seen, and it tracks with the mindset I associate with techbros generally. These are the sorts of people who just want to see their ideas built by an army of serfs, and generative AI allows them to obfuscate the whole thing about "serfs" into the background where they don't have to think about it.

[@Silverfirefly1]

It's a crutch, a stepping stone to the audience being it's own creator. Any text based middle man will be automated. If you need a person to translate your vision into visuals using the AI and you plan to describe that vision to the person via language, then there is an AI for that. Needing prompt jockeys will be akin to needing an expert to access your emails for you in the 90s if you were over 50, with just a little more progress on user interface and a chunk of general upskilling of the general population it will all be done away with. Basic competence with AI tools will be foundational to education.

[@rudolfambrozenvtuber]

@@Silverfirefly1 lmao

[@rudolfambrozenvtuber]

@@Cha4k You're treating the whole discussion as if its still on square one and every premise needs justifying. This is the clearest possible sign that you're approaching it disengenuously

[@ohBoyahandle]

@@Cha4k where are you people coming from??? there's like 20-30 of you parasites writing under every comment about the "marvels" of ai?? please tell me where because i will have an easier time breathing knowing all of you crawled out of the same hole

[@MTwistedTales]

It’s funny, going into screen play, I always said when asked by people what job security looked like for me “at least I can’t be automated out of existence” Really eating my words on the one. Not really thrilled about what’s happening. Fascinating video, kudos.

[@tarazzzs]

At least we now can shut the old folk who tell us stories about 'stable jobs' and how we should get one. Their talk now is noting but fairy tales.

[@dragondelsur5156]

​@@tarazzzsA stable job is as much of a lie as the american dream.

[@deusex9731]

the funniest thing was an insta account that only posted ai generated stuff and in their bio it said that all rights belong to them. As an artist, i dont have any problem with people using Ai for themselves in any way, its that people/companies directly compete and want to make quick money off of it

[@rudolffatransky581]

Thinking you are an artist, only because you gave 13 words as a prompt, is like thinking you are a programmer, because you gave Minecraft few numbers as a seed.

[@RabidDisposition]

I feel the same way about "artists" making 10k a painting just for splashing some paint onto canvas.

[@JubulusPrime]

@@RabidDisposition Didn't yo mom teach you two wrongs doesn't make a right? Just because those people pretend what they make is art doesn't mean it is ok for you to do the same, It is wrong for both of you to claim either ai or that rich person shit is art.

[@RabidDisposition]

@@JubulusPrime it really doesn't matter at all. Art is totally arbitrary and holds zero real world value.

[@JubulusPrime]

@@RabidDisposition Depends on what you define as "Real world value" this is all subjective. It may not matter to you but it could mean everything to someone else. And for the boring cunts that see price as the most objective value then tons of old art sells for billions. You could say art holds no real world value the same way you could say life holds no real world value, you could say scientific progress holds no real world value, you could say reality holds no real world value. Saying anything doesn't hold value is just an opinion that holds no real world value lol. Value itself is subjective, just a concept, it is not based on reality. So why be a sorry cunt when you can just be less of an asshole? Ai "art" is not art in my opinion, but just as I see value in hard work, imagination and dedication of real art, I see the scientific progress in ai images. I value both, but I do not see ai as art.

[@chloewebb5526]

I spent 13 years just becoming a decent artist, and another 13 becoming one that feels that deserve the praise their work gets. Typing 13 words is a joke.

[@Tarus_Giggy]

Something I often think about in terms of AI art is that it can't really grow on it's own. For example the stylisation of "Spiderman into the Spiderverse" was a huge development for 3D animation, for such an evolution to happen in that medium, human influence had to be involved. Humans naturally want things to change and develop when they stagnate, so we experiment and find new ways to be creative. But AI won't be able to develop in any way, if artists are removed from the picture. They will only be able to work with what they've been given, nothing new can come from them because they can't make anything new on its own.

[@GeorgeThoughts]

This is techincally why calling all these stable diffusion art generators "AI" is incorrect. They are "machine learning", they are not Artificial Intelligence. Because true AI is defined by the ability to grow and learn and create new things on its own without external input, like a child does. True AI doesn't exist, yet. But people are probably calling all this machine learning "AI" because it sounds cooler.

[@raizin4908]

AI can absolutely create new, original and creative things. You just let it combine ideas that are not usually combined. However, at this point in time AI cannot distinguish quality from trash, and imaginative from derivative. To consistently get good creative results, it needs a human to come up with good creative prompts, and to filter the bad results from the good. It needs a human to provide it with a creative spark, or at least to sift the original results that resonate with humans from the derivative trash.

[@InnsmouthAdmiral]

@@GeorgeThoughts By AI, you mean AGI here.

[@zendao7967]

You don't really need AI replacing people in its totality to create a doomsday scenario. You just need workflows that have AI integrated to be 10 times faster than traditional workflows. That means a team of 10 people now only requires 1 person to do the whole thing, thus making 9 people jobless.

[@jcorey333]

I think that significant amounts of creativity is in synthesis - taking two disparate ideas and combining them - and Stable diffusion is definitely able to do this.

[@junebuggeryy]

As an artist, it's really to hard put into words the despair that comes with AI art. It's like I've fought my whole life to be a part of a future that's rejected me, that wants me dead. Thank you for this wonderfully nuanced video, the amount of care you've put into this deep dive on is really valuable.

[@ChristianIce]

Trust me, when the AI revolution will be complete, artists will be the ones who will better survive. If you drive a vehicle or your work has anything to do with repetitive tasks, or interrogting databases, you'll be replaced. The paint on the wall, the live concert, the creation of something actually new... will survive.

[@s0ne01]

​@@ChristianIce I agree. Work with actual experience emotion and intention behind it.

[@GeahkBurchill]

Yeah, I feel this too. I’ve never felt so adrift at sea than staring down the barrel of my 30+ years agonizing over being a skilled enough artist (and being in poverty the whole time) only to have shitty kids laugh about how ‘they can do better with prompts for free’.

[@thelelanatorlol3978]

@@GeahkBurchill Anyone genuinely laughing at artists for having their jobs automated (I support AI art and think artists whining about the ''emotion within art'' are hypocrites for reasons I can elaborate on if you wish but I am not laughing at artists and putting them down for their passions) are not the ones having the last laugh because art related jobs are just the first drops of rain before a major flood happens in the work industry as a whole. This can easily turn bad but equally turn very good (post scarcity society good)

[@CampingforCool41]

@@thelelanatorlol3978there’s not going to be a post scarcity society as long as capitalism exists.

[@randyconnolly572]

As someone who teaches at a university on these issues, this is a tremendous resource for both students and professors! Its long-form nature allowed the argument to properly unfold. Your critical passion as a result felt well earned and completely justified. Please do more work in this style!

[@captainpumpkinhead1512]

I've got to say, this video is the most balanced discussion of the Machine Learning art controversy that I've seen. I might not agree with everything he's said, but I feel like he's really tried your best to portray both sides accurately. Since you said you teach about this stuff, I want to offer the perspective on this topic of a techbro who loves stuff like Stable Diffusion and ChatGPT. *Biggest criticism:* When speaking about ML companies stealing artists' art to train their models, I think a much _stronger argument_ is to emphasize the *scale* of the operation. Focusing on "the process isn't the same" doesn't really make much sense, at least to me. It feels like an excuse made to justify one's feelings (This is not an attack, I'm guilty of this too). To me, a machine learning algorithm training itself on art seems like the same thing as a human training themself on art. What makes this _different_, and what makes this feel at least a little bit ethically uncomfortable, is the scale that this is being done on. If I, a not-very-good artist, practice by replicating some SameDoesArt pieces to the best of my ability, I am adding to the artistic world. In theory, as long as I keep practicing and getting better, I can eventually become a good enough artist that the next generation of beginners might want to train on my art. In that sense, I am giving back to the world of art, and so is SamDoesArt. It doesn't really matter that only 1/100 artists get good enough to reach that point, because the internet allows us all to capitalize on the gains of that one person. In that sense, SamDoesArt (or insert whoever here) is giving back. He trained his art by practicing on his predecessors, he is giving back by allowing those who come after him to train on his art. I think what makes the Stable Diffusion situation so uncomfortable is that it doesn't feel like it has the same give and take. It can make artists feel like, "Well what was all my effort for, if some nobody can just type something in and get art better than anything I've ever made?" It can feel invalidating. And I think we as empathetic humans have to respect that and be cognizant of that. It can also strike fear of replacement within an already volatile and underpaid field. I think a lot of the bad blood from this controversy comes from some of us techbros not having empathy for how an artist might feel seeing this, and from some artists having an initial emotionally charged reaction (which is totally understandable) and not seeing it from the point of view of those of us who don't have time in our lives to learn to draw (hurray, capitalism... /s) but who still wish we could make amazing things. I think emphasizing the scale of this training, and how it doesn't engage in the same give/take that the older system does is a much stronger argument. I also think that "the process is different" angle should be dropped or emphasized less, because emphasizing weak arguments tends to make your stance as a whole weaker. (You can look up "Bayesian reasoning" for more on this, it's really interesting.) I'm sure not everyone will agree with me, so I look forward to hearing criticisms.

[@KiraSlith]

@@captainpumpkinhead1512 It's not a balanced discussion in the slightest, the legal arguments made are founded on an incorrect assessment of the law as it applies in the first place and of how the AI actually works, under normal training circumstances the AI itself does not contain any recognizable element of the original art in any format, that's just not how it works. His moral arguments don't line up either. They're the same blatantly dishonest arguments as the gun debate, tools are tools, what people do with them is on the user not the toolmaker.

[@captainpumpkinhead1512]

@@KiraSlith That's more or less why I worded it as "the *most* balanced discussion" that I'd seen. His bias is clear, and I don't think he's gotten everything right, but he's gotten much more right than other artists I've found who have talked about the subject.

[@dragondelsur5156]

​@@captainpumpkinhead1512 He has a right to bias especially in a corporate world like this one.

[@maikyodel]

Hello, professional illustrator here! When you got to the part of the statistics of word prompts was incredible and I laughed so much. The average being 13 words?? When I studied, we got this thing called "briefing" which is basically the instructions we have to follow to create a piece. The briefing can be incredibly detailed (I've gotten briefings that were 3-page long PDFs with both descriptions and visual references for my commissions!!) or very brief and open for the artist to do whatever (my class joined an art contest and we had to make a piece that would reflect the theme: "Behind the mask" ) Tbh, most AI promoters sound more like commissioners. The "artist" is the machine, not them. I send a lot of Work-in-progress and variations to my customers so they can check if everything is going according to how they want and they tell me to change a thing or mix another thing or try something different... and still, that doesn't really make them the artist. They are just still telling me what to do and I AM the one doing the work of changing the things. When this tech initially popped up, I did mess a bit with it. I wanted to use it mostly to create backgrounds I could reference because I struggle with drawing backgrounds sometimes, but once I saw ALL the cons the technology has?? Nope, I completely dropped it. AI tech bros don't realise that we, artists, are not against AI because we can also see how this can help us in our creative process by giving us ideas or aiding us in parts of our pieces, but we just want this tech to be ethical and our rights to be respected the same way the music industry's rights are. We don't want our labor to be exploited by AI companies, who are making a HUGE profit from these AI generators without giving the people they are exploiting their fair cut because "they are too hard to track" then maybe just don't use those images?? easy as that. Tbh, a lot of the tech bros who use this just look like they hate the people their exploitative machine was made from. "Adapt or die" they said... so we made data-poisoning tools to protect our work. And they complain for us adapting??? They just want to exploit us. AI is a tool but just to an extent, because an artist can adapt to a different tool. I can draw both digitally and traditionally. The moment I drop my digital tablet I can pick up a pencil and paper and create work of similar quality to the digital one. I have seen a very popular analogy: "AI users who claim to be artists are like customers going to McDonalds, asking for a well-done BigMac without pickles and extra tomato and calling themselves a chef" I'm a small artist. I had to registrate as a freelancer in my country, which doesn't have a percentage method for taxes, but a fixed number regardless of what you earn. And I have been in negative for months now. I'm sure a bunch of my former customers don't commission artists anymore because they can generate their own art. People like me are the ones actually being affected by this. The ones whose art is being weaponized against us, making it an unfair competition.

[@mink2882]

Hey, cool art, followed you on Tumblr. Taxes in your country aren't proportional to what you earn as an artist/freelancer? That's messed up. (I feel like taxes, social security and retirement are lacking in some way in most countries for artists) Hope you're doing well.

[@maikyodel]

@@mink2882 In Spain, is you earn 650€/month or less, you have to pay 250€/monthly. This means even if you earn 0, you still owe the state 250€. I had to take care of my sick grandma last year and had no time for work, so I had to survive on my savings. The number you pay monthly does increase the more you earn, but it's so poorly done, it's not proportional at all. People who earn +6k€ a month, have to pay 500€ monthly. A person who earns monthly 650€ or less has to pay minimum the 30% of their salary, someone who earns 6k or more has to pay less than 2%. We can barely survive with 650€ which isn't even the official inter-professional minimum wage, imagine if we end up with only 400€ because the government takes the rest just in freelance taxes.

[@icaruskeyartist]

Artisan art is already a thing, even in formal art settings. People just don't really seem to give things like printmaking and book arts the time of day.

[@haydentempest3874]

I do think that last section of the video is enough that it could be expanded into its own video essay. This a huge leap forward in the power of the weapons used in the "war on reality". What is the news when an AI generates a script, read by text to speech and then slotted together with a midjourney video? When you come home from your desk job and chat to an AI, watch an AI movie, and finish with your own bedtime AI story why should you care how other people feel, what's happening in another country? Idk maybe that's alarmist, just feels like a real loss of human connection

[@canesvenatici4259]

The human race is indeed steadily becoming more atomised.

[@joelrobinson5457]

This guy called ai girlfriend scams

[@annaissodone]

i'm just so angry that there are millions of ways we can actually use AI in our day to day life to make our life better, but no of course the companies who create them use them to rob creatives of their work

[@cosmicspacething3474]

So that our only option is to work for them. Unfortunately AI will replace them too in the long term

[@Bustermachine]

I mean, yes and no, there are a lot of uses. But a lot of those use cases are ones where 'AI' doesn't actually offer any better utility than the technology that came before it. What's the difference between asking ChatGPT for a recipe and just asking an old school search engine, for instance? ChatGPT isn't formulating a new cookie recipe using deep knowledge of chemistry and thermo dynamics, it's just regurgitating a cookie recipe it scraped from the internet. And there's a non trivial chance ChatGPT will remember part of the recipe wrong because of how it stores information. Google maps won't be made noticeably better with more advanced AI, since it relies on tracking cars in the traffic stream through user's android phones as the ultimate litmus for its predictive algorithms. These sorts of AI are, by definition, not good at logic or setting up problems to solved in physics/engineering. They're unreliable as reporters. They can't find things out for themselves . . . It's a powerful tool, but it's ultimately not as robust as people are claiming. The big thing that's caused it to blow is not that the power it holds has drastically increased per se, but that it has become more accessible.

[@themsuicjunkies]

For all the crap Google gets, deservedly so, they were being a little bit more ethical about AI untill they were driven to this stupid arma race by Open AI. They also created Alpha Fold that is a real breakthough that could help people.

[@strykerten560]

@@Bustermachine I think your ideas on the limits of AI are a bit outdated. This technology is developing shockingly fast. You talk about AI logic, not good at physics, cant find things out for themselves, but this is rapidly changing. GPT4 has a dramatically better grasp of logic than chatGPT that came before it. It has developed theory of mind, and it is far better at predicting outcomes of someones hypothetical actions,. It still makes mistakes, and there are some areas left where an average human is better, but we are seeing decades of progress in months The difference is not merely is of access, it truly is orders of magnitude more capable. GPT4 can do things now that I thought would be impossible within my lifetime

[@ThingsAreGettingTooSpicy]

Corporations will steal everything they can. But just because thieves can use a hammer to break through your window, this does not, in my opinion, make hammers the evil part. I think a lot of people just don't realize that the foundation of how our economy works is in fact a decision we made, an assumption, that can, and should, be challenged, so they dismiss the idea of stopping corporations taking people's livelihoods and move on to the only thing they think they can change: the tools they use to do so.

[@Tantacrul]

This was a great deep dive and really helpful - especially the break down of copyright-related legal challenges in other domains. Thanks!

[@HelloFutureMe]

Glad you liked it! There are some things I would add now, so feel free to reach out if you want more detail. Though I do stand by it. ~ Tim

[@DRLifter]

When asked, "If you had enough money to never need to work again, What would you do for the rest of your life?" Most would answer, "I would do something creative, or Volunteer to help people in need." Is it any wonder this is where the hedge funds and corporations are starting with AI? Can't have those pesky people going a creating stuff we don't control, they may just create something we can't own.

[@LucasDimoveo]

You can still create stuff with your free time, even if you don’t sell it

[@colorpg152]

​@@LucasDimoveo why are you being so disingenuous? if they can just make a similar copy of it for free its theft and if you don't get back anything for the effort you put then its expense reserved for the rich, have you no shame? its not like this isn't clearly obvious to you so why even write that comment?

[@nielskorpel8860]

"If bots do our jobs for us, we will have time to do other things, like art or something." No, we won't have time for other things unless we are paid for the time or for the other things. "Paying for free time" is not 'efficient' for companies. "Paying for the other things, like Art," is what we constantly try to automate away. So no, the premise is bullshit, because that is not how this stuff works.

[@ccaagg]

@@nielskorpel8860 No, if bots do our current jobs for us, we'd be paid enough from what we do in our 'free time'. Look to classical civilisations and what the employment situation of _citizens_ was. There's a reason we see it as such an artistic, philosophical and scientific peak - aside from the lowest strata of citizens, they were free from work as we know it. They achieved that by having so much work done by slaves. Slavery is morally abhorrent, but the point is that they didn't have to work the way that we see work, because that was all 'automated' with slaves. It's absolutely how this stuff works.

[@Dexter01992]

Vast majority of professional artists begun by doing it for entertaining without compensation, while doing a different job. Many of us would keep doing it anyway for free even if AI out-do everything we do a million times. The problem is that if factory becomes the only job left (until it gets taken too), it goes back into doing art only in free time. For some people it would become impossible to keep practicing it due to now having more responsibilities than the past and having different priorities.

[@bradleyjeansonne8768]

Thank you so much for this video. I've been a professional concept artist and art director (mostly in video games) for more than 20 years, and I can't imagine how terrifying it must be for those just getting into my profession at this point in history. I was inspired by creative futurists and writers like Syd Mead and H.R. Giger and Clarke, and Douglas Adams, but I wonder where the hope and aspiration will come from in the future. If I was my same curious and confused 12-year old self, looking at this world and seeing this technological and political/ economic landscape right now, I'm not sure I would have made the effort and sacrifice to become an artist or creative. I would have been fascinated by the possibilities of AI, but also deterred by the force of change to choose a different path, I think.

[@featherwishyREAL]

As someone who looked into your exact profession and was getting ready to enter it: honestly these last few months with the AI advancements are scaring me horribly. I had been aspiring to go into digital art for the past few years of my life- and as I am readying up to apply for colleges in a few months I don’t even know if this is the right choice. As you’d been working in this industry for a while- would you even recommend trying to enter it now?

[@bradleyjeansonne8768]

@@featherwishyREAL It's a really tough spot to be in, and I empathize. Things have dramatically changed as I've learned and worked over the last few decades. When I was first starting out as a kid I was passionate to invent and design cool technological empowerment things, to bring about the sci-fi future I read about and dreamed about. And so I learned to draw and design so I could show those ideas to others. At the time, that was on paper using pen and paper. And keep in mind, this was at the very early stages of the Internet and the deluge of easily available imagery. Eventually after studying Fine Art for a couple of years, I realized I needed to be more engaged at the design level, and I switched to getting a degree in Industrial Design. Of course I still keep a sketchpad with me all the time, but my drive was always to design cool stuff, not just to "express myself" with an artistic statement. Which works great in Concept Art and Art Direction, because you almost NEVER work alone. You're always collaborating with a team of creatives and technical geniuses. I slowly transitioned over the years to working digitally, and nowadays almost all concept design is done using either a stylus sketching on a computer or pad, or 3D modeling tools directly, going through several stages and several hands on the way. I mostly do "Art Direction" now, with an emphasis on making higher level decisions, rather than pushing the stylus around on the tablet myself. And now with AI tools, there will likely be a lot more interposition of pseudo-creative tools between decision-making and final result. The whole profession of "concept artist" will probably evolve toward becoming more of a "Design Director" position. Not that there won't be artists directly creating, but they will be more rare (and potentially better paid?) It's a really tough call for you to make. I suppose the defining decisions would revolve around what you truly love about the profession - Are you super interested in being the person who crafts the final work? Or are you in love with the idea of designing and making the decisions? It's still a wonderful thing to do, but I'm guessing the whole decision process must be very different for someone just getting into it these days. Good luck to you! Edit: ---- I Also need to point out ----- A large part of what I do is communicate and ask the right questions with clients and teams to develop the project over time. I've never met a client who could easily describe what they want from Day 1. Often, my job is to educate them on how to get there. If they could do that alone, they probably wouldn't need me. Perhaps AI will change that but it's essentially a reciprocal problem from "Prompt Engineering" as described in the video. If the AI gets to the point where it can intelligently ask probing questions and develop a well-crafted collaborative process that helps a project connect to an audience, then I'd start to worry a lot more.

[@Texelion]

Something weird is that to be creative we need to experience stuff, watch movies, read books and comics, look at pictures and paintings, develop our culture. Now imagine a beginner who doesn't go trhough all that process, and all they have is an IA and some prompts. After a few years that AI might just be feeding itself with its own creations, generating the same shit over and over because there is nobody to actually make something new.

[@dragondelsur5156]

​@@TexelionThe irony is, I've heard someone was feeding an AI it's own art and the quality degraded considerably.

[@mondodimotori]

I would've learnd to use these new AI tools to express my creativity even better. But no, I had to do with digital tools that made me express my creativity better than with just pencil and paper.

[@bycloudAI]

1:08:58 omg it's me lol I have to say though, this video is probably one of the most well researched and educational take on the whole AI Art situation, mad respect to you Tim for the amount of work you have put in. It's hard to "dislike" something while having to understand what's going on with it and how it works, and usually people just point fingers when they don't like something too. So I'm really glad someone reputable on YT have finally made something that is both rational and reasonable for people to see, instead of just spreading & fostering discontent and hate.

[@PanRokador]

People needs to understand that some things shouldn't be replaced by machines, one of them is the art, or passions and hobbies in general. I'm all over art, and seeing how glorified AI images became... it's making me really depressed

[@rockoman100]

Automation tools have been introduced to art before. You are all catastrophizing. AI art is already part of artistic production pipelines across the industry. It is used primarily by artists. It only scares precarious commission-based petite bourgeois artisans.

[@SigFigNewton]

Panrokador hates carpentry and pottery. If they didn’t, they’d be talking about how tragic it is that chairs and bowls are made in factories.

[@danhelsting6308]

would be realy fun to see AI starting to "eat its own tail" (like an Ouroboros) because there will come so much AI generated art that the AI's start cpoiyng its own generated art simply because the internet is flooded with it. to the pint that AI art becomes easy to distinguish because it looks to much like itself. (wishful thinking, i know.)

[@dragondelsur5156]

AI WILL eventually eat it's own tail if that's all there is on the web. Have you heard of AI degradation? When you feed it it's own vomit, the quality decreases again and again until the result end up looking even worse than before.

[@qwertysacks]

the majority of popular ai models / open source models were generated using data before the models were made. even then it isnt impossible to use a negative prompt like "chatgpt" or "dali" in the same way the normal prompt is used

[@alternatea4591]

This is actually happening. If AI models are trained on their own art, they get worse and worse at making coherent images. So at least for now, they need human art to survive. I still don't want any ai to use my art to survive, though. I hope in the future there will be laws requiring ai developers to show their database to the public, and artists can sue them if they use their art without consent. I don't want to spend my life's work feeding this massive blob of a machine.

[@aff77141]

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised. But we'll need some strong websites to protect artists and to educate said artists so that things don't slip through the cracks

[@Ilyak1986]

That's called Model Collapse. There's an arXiv paper on it.

[@Dgrif12]

An additional consideration regarding ownership of AI art is regarding the prompt. It would be difficult to reasonably recognize ownership of an AI prompt, as if to say "I thought of this idea first, so nobody can employ this idea in the future!" That is the mindset of a patent troll.

[@phoenixfritzinger9185]

Oh god it would be early 2010’s Deviantart all over again But this time with lawyers

[@LimeyLassen]

ORIGINAL CHARACTER DO NOT STEAL

[@origaminosferatu3357]

As a struggling writer currently working on a piece about AI this is easily the most considered, well researched and interesting thought piece on the subject I've seen recently. Thanks so much. Also that end credit song is a friggin BOP.

[@Manus594]

i am an art student, a few weeks ago one of my teachers said that we should all have a non-creative backup plan because most of our dreams and jobs will not exist in a few years. this NEEDS to be stopped as soon as possible. these people really need to step back and think about what they are doing. a whole generation of artist will end up doing office jobs and it will be their fault.

[@zedeps]

They know full well what they're doing, they have absolutely stepped back and thought. They just fully, completely, do not care. And they've convinced a significant portion of people that they shouldn't care either.

[@OMGUKILLKENNY2]

Careers are not games. They are services. In a free market the best service survives.

[@dragondelsur5156]

​@@OMGUKILLKENNY2 Like scratching your balls on a desk for 8 hours?

[@jasonx7501]

@@OMGUKILLKENNY2 Exactly. If I want to save hundreds of hours and money on generative AI for a hobby project, that's my business. No one owes these people anything.

[@bogaziciliceohaluk]

wtf are you on about? this NEEDS to be stopped? go cry in your room and tell your mama and papa

[@yeoldeharbinger5880]

After about an hour and a half, it just started getting more and more painful to think about it. I don't want to give up on my passions, but it's becoming more and more likely that nothing I ever do in my life will ever take off. It feels like art now is a dead end, we'll never see real emotion in anything anybody creates. We'd have to constantly ask the question: Was this made by a man or a machine? And I don't want that question to exist.

[@emmareiman64]

I feel like I've seen this exact comment in a dream recently. Word to word, that ending bit seems so familiar to me, even as I have Aphantasia and cannot visualize what I saw before. But I feel this, so much. Truly though, even before the whole AI fiasco, I had little faith in ever making a living through my art. I adore online communities, the ability to see everyone's creative fruits and sharing some of my work too. Especially work around things like fandoms I enjoy, all the art and writing done by fans is So Great. But it has brought up the thought of 'am I good enough' or 'will I ever be able to do what these people do'. There's always a start to everything, you just have to keep trying and have backup plans and whatnot. Perhaps one day you'll get lucky But AI is scary on a whole other level With artists, you at least know that people spent time on the things they do. Everything on the picture is the re for a reason and was planned to be there. The people have spent years learning and honing their craft, and I respect those people so much for getting that far. They've learned so much! But with AI? With the people who just press a button? They don't value the work. They don't value the years people have spent learning and getting better. When they see a picture, all they see is the picture, but none of the work that exists behind it. If AI made pictures already lacked meaning due to just being a mashup of things copied from stolen art, then this just highlights another aspect in it lacking a soul. There's no emotional attachment to what an AI has created. There's no deep story behind what's in the picture.

[@Ilyak1986]

It was made by a man using a machine. Humans have used tools for millennia. There's a reason humanity invented various paintbrushes, along with inventing photoshop. AI is yet another tool for a *human being* to prompt. Or is AI supposed to just guess at what someone wants without any prompting?

[@markmurex6559]

Art is a dead end if you want to make money from it. You can still build that skill and make art if you want.

[@viridianacortes9642]

Don’t give up. Things will be rough for a bit. But I think eventually it’ll be okay. Don’t give up.

[@AzafuseKingTora]

@@markmurex6559 And? People that are passionate about art want to do it for a living or atleast want to get something in return for their hard work, I want to work and earn money doing something that I like and many people will always support hard human work because it has that human's "soul".

[@skye738]

I think the comparison you made about AI promptists being more akin to commissioners than artists is the best way to put it into words.

[@tami7992]

Definitely

[@ptolemaicfoxxo3032]

I personally dont agree with it. You commission an artist because you want a piece of art and you want the artist to add their own personal flair to your ideas. Its their art with your character in it. With AI theres no personal reasoning or style to it, its just loosely based off other peoples already existing work. To me its more like a google search.

[@adrianpaul1985]

@@ptolemaicfoxxo3032 exactly. People who make AI art weren't going to pay for art in the first place. They don't really appreciate art.

[@Hencid]

absolutely amazing video, i have seen many "ai absolutist" rush to obvuscate the discourse with every false equivalency they can find and is nice to see people personally invested in the act of creating( to which everyone has access to) take back the discourse

[@darlingestt]

I used to enjoy AI because I didn’t really consider what was wrong about it, but what really gutted me and made me stop using it was realizing how actual artists have been beaten by AI in COMPETITIONS. That is so unfair I can’t even describe it.

[@dickjones9207]

that means that artists just sucked

[@chippetychaps]

​@dickjones9207 or the judges were distracted by fancy rendering while the fundamentals were lacking.

[@thepinkestpigglet7529]

​@@dickjones9207 have you seen the art submitted to these compitions

[@joeschmoe3815]

​@@dickjones9207that's like sending a super fast marathon cyborg to human sports competitions and then saying 'the humans just sucked'. Total break with reality right there, bro.

[@dickjones9207]

@@joeschmoe3815 if you actually think ai is better than real artists then you're just a trash artist and have no taste, nothing ai has made has come close to Moby Dick, the exact same for generated images. the issue is just that most artist are often very awful and untalented, ai is just mediocre, and thats enough to outshine them

[@sungbokbessell7853]

Automated farming and clothing has its own issues as well. Monoculture and fast fashion have far reaching negative effects. The more I learn about some of this stuff the more I believe that nothing is actually “cheap” or easily accessible. If you aren’t the one paying for it someone or something else is. Exploitation is far too common and easily accomplished. Edit. Excellent video thank you so much for making this!

[@FoxInTheStudio]

Absolutely. This is why so many of us are moving towards growing food and cloth making.

[@wanda_walker]

Exactly. Dressmaking used to be a profession you could go into and make a decent wage (as a woman, even back into the 1700s), but now all you can basically do is make dresses for yourself and for friends as gifts, because no one will ever be willing to pay you what the cost of your materials are these days, let alone the cost of the labor involved in sewing it. No one values the labor or materials anymore; they'd rather just buy plastic garbage a literal slave was paid pennies to make in Cambodia. I fear this'll be the way everything will be, where nothing can be a profession anymore, it can only be a hobby you do on the weekends that other people think is interesting but otherwise pointless.

[@shadushio9682]

My main fear with AI is what it'll look like in 20-100 years. How much power will we have given it, and how dependent will we be on it?

[@boid9761]

Quite a bit. I'm more fearful of the future that decides that progress is bad Dune basically outlawed computers of any kind And if you want true horror, look up a Servitor

[@cman4740]

@@huhulalammm Everything has to be open source and by the people for the people. Imagine a fascist regime with a tightly regulated, closely observed AI.

[@RandomPerson-tz7wk]

Not really any different than now. it's the next stage of computer and Internet. The final decision will always be in your hands. But it will enable you to have as much information in more digestible format. Instead of having to manual read through 100page to understand something. Ai will shift through the data and give you what you specifically want to understand. At best, basically everything you do now. Except way faster. Instead of having to write and respond to email. You can just ask ai to write for you and decide how to response accept or reject?

[@huhulalammm]

@@cman4740 that's what democracy is for. are you rather some capitalistic company make absolute monopoly over things? that's what sam altman is trying to do. he took years of research from researchers. created a product and now is giving fear mongering statements everyday to create monopoly over AI. and when a country is trying to look further into AI, he literally is threatening to pull Open AI from that region. look it up. it is happening. altman threatened to pull OpenAI from europe if regulators don't listen to him. it is his way or the high way.

[@christianpetersen163]

That's funny, because I'm concerned about what AI will be able to do TODAY and what it will be capable of in 6 months, and how much power we have given tech companies since 2000, and how totally dependent we already are on the technology in our pockets.

[@xyphire7555]

I love it when he comes out with these longer videos. It may take me many sessions to watch but I will be.

[@BusinessWolf1]

We need AI specific law, not just to update copyright law. We need big tech/data specific law as well. Too many parties are playing fast and loose with things that are going to be extremely heavily regulated in the future.

[@chai1537]

Hi, Tim. I'm a creative artist with a style based on Korean webtoon and Japanese anime, and I just wanted to give my two cents on the subject as a person who is, and will continue to be heavily affected by all this. I hate the argument "Aren't AI art generators just doing what humans have been doing for years?" because... no. I've been refining my art style for YEARS. My choice in what inspirations I take and what parts of my art I decide to improve are done by MY choices alone. I hate the idea that something that I had refined for years can be just stolen away in seconds and be used to chug out some second-hand photoshop edit that I had no hand in, no knowledge in, no choice in. Despite this, companies are extremely quick to capitalize on assets that can lower costs of human resources. When I was working in a webtoon studio a year with the AI generated art just starting to gain attraction, one of the first things the higher ups wanted to do was to see if they could use it to lower artists costs. Money really does affect how artists are employed and paid in the industry, and it was demoralizing. I left the company soon after because I couldn't bring myself to comply with policies like that. This is something that is already happening. Even as copyright laws are being refined, industries are still taking advantage of this technology and it's hitting us hard. Rayark was a company that was known for their beautiful styles of art. They recently stopped having an art director and replaced their art team with an AI art generator, and the quality of their art has dropped. Naver Webtoon Korea has incorporated a policy on their amateur artists that states that anyone who publishes their work on the site will have automatically given their consent on having their art styles and works being used in their AI art generator, even as those amateur artists are actively speaking out against it. At the end of the day, I can't bring myself to agree with the people who argue that AI art is a "the next step". It's not a step forward when it's chugging out sludge from thousands, millions of stolen art from artists who, like me, have been working hard to establish their portfolios, competitiveness, creativity, and skills. It's not fair for us who are passionate about our art. It's only "fair" for only for those who are dishonest.

[@markmurex6559]

Do you really thinks artists will beat out AI by some miracle? No matter what happens, the artist is no more.

[@squidyboyproductions1458]

Man this comment really summarizes everything I hate about AI art! It's absolutely pathetic that they would rather use a machine to replicate an artist's unique art style, than to just commission the artist for some artwork! It feels like most people want to be an artist, but don't want to put in the time and effort to become one 😢

[@pyropulseIXXI]

Good points. Also, AI does not work like a human at all. It is not doing what a human does; a human can create from nothing; being inspired and creating a style is not at all the same as what an AI does, which is literally steal work and profit from it. Put simply, if a human did what AI does, the human would be infringing on copyright. Furthermore, AI is going to be used to oppress people and decrease freedoms and turn us into even greater wage slaves. These losers that want AI don't realize that it isn't going to save them; it is going to be used for the sole benefit of the so-called "Elite," whilst the common plebe gets the inferior version that only serves to take away all the creative aspects and leaves the human as a literal slave

[@laurentiuvladutmanea3622]

​@@markmurex6559 You are one defeatist person. Just as we beat leaded gasoline, we can beat AI.

[@byujkt3822]

It's not about AI arts anymore, it's the peoples, we can't stop them. The models is being public. Thanks to CIVITAI the source of various models all around internet, NSFW and *public. More and more AI arts platforms, app generator using those models and sharing on social media getting 100k likes and views in short time. AI arts getting bigger and gain more supports everyday.

[@8bitkitty222]

i feel the common attitudes towards “AI” “art” exist because of how society nowadays fundamentally devalues artists and the work we do to make the media people love. learning to make art is a skill that takes years of honing and quite frankly i think a lot of people, especially big corporations and these insufferable grindset tech bros fucking hate us for that. as it is, art is not something that people can automate and pay workers less than a dollar a day in developing countries to do while they make billions in profit. from small independent creators to disney employees, artists are expected to put in hours of labor for pittance. these sorts of people are whipped into a frothing rage at the mere suggestion that we should be paid for our work. “AI” “art” will never be ethical until those concerns are addressed, and the machinery of capitalism will almost definitely work to ensure that it’s about as ethical as SHEIN sweatshops in china. it’s disgusting and it’s exhausting to see how goddamn entitled people feel to the labor of artists, and when they can’t get us to make them art for free, they immediately turn to cheap imitations of our labor. people buy shitty sweatshop clothing because it’s cheap and it’s easy, no matter how terrible the quality is. the way things are looking, “AI” “art” is looking to be the exact same. the thing that disgusts me most is the way people will gladly take cheap, imprecise imitations of an artists work over having to actually commission someone. there is no artistic value in “AI” “art”. yes, some of it can look pretty. but looking pretty is not the reason most art gets made. it’s a creative process, a learning process, a process of self expression and interpretation. you can’t look at an “AI generated” image and wonder what it means, what the artist felt, or why it was made. it means nothing in the sense that it was not made with intent. the artist consists of hundreds or thousands of people who had their art stolen and thrown into what amounts to a wood chipper for a machine to assemble the fragments into a full image. it was made by a soulless computer program guessing the most likely combination of pixels. thats why i’ve been putting it in air quotes - because art is more than just a pretty picture, it requires intent, and these computer programs aren’t “intelligent” the way the word is meaningfully defined by most dictionaries; it reads as a misnomer to anyone not in the tech field. at least imo, “machine generated image” is more accurate.

[@leahsartiguess]

as a professional illustrator, i just wanna say that your comment was beautifully written and spot-on.

[@swimmerkat3965]

Preach dude. These bloodsucking ghouls will cause human creativity to atrophy and decline. Just nuke Silicon Valley already. These fuckers are ruining the world

[@anelisatorr]

THIS 🙌

[@ptolemaicfoxxo3032]

Hah! Thats exactly what ive been calling it The "Infinite pretty picture maker" "Art mutilator" I feel bad for people i consider friends who do it. They dont understand at all even if they commission real artists too. As though giving artists money somehow makes it okay to then contribute to it being stolen. No thought, just pretty picture, want. Like hours being wasted away on youtube, you want a distraction, here you go.

[@normietwiceremoved]

"when they can’t get us to make them art for free, they immediately turn to cheap imitations of our labor. people buy shitty sweatshop clothing because it’s cheap and it’s easy, no matter how terrible the quality is." EXACTLY. This is what I've been saying to people.

[@nidohime6233]

AI has the capability of creating beautiful fantasy worlds full with dragons, but it would never ask why it needs dragons in its fantasy world. Is more about the execution than the ideas themselves, art is about guiding those ideas to leave a emotion to the audience.

[@steveejohnson7932]

Ai could 100% explain why dragons are needed in a fantasy setting.

[@viorp5267]

Yeah the one having the idea is the writer writing in a propt lol Also this implies there is not piles of mindless fantasy art from human artist where the armor makes no sense at all for example. But hey maybe now that AI art can take over making mindless simple art without soul like headshots of OCs, fetish art, simple scenery etc. artists actually will bother making what you propose thought out well executed stuff with the purpose of evoking emotion.

[@BHBalast]

The problem is AI could easily do this even today, it could easily make up the story and prepare art based on it. You just slap LLM on top of stable diffusion.

[@vedritmathias9193]

*To be fair*... A lot of fantasy creators don't ask why their worlds need dragons. They just exist because "dragons are fantastical" or - at best - "dragons are cool"

[@moritakaishida7963]

It's not capable of making anything beautiful, everything it makes looks fucking disgusting

[@c.m.9369]

Saying AI art „democratizes“ art is like saying: „Allowing people to use a car during a running competition democratizes competitive sports“. It‘s nonsense. It‘s meaningless.

[@bezhimr]

maybe it's more like „Allowing people to use a car during a trip democratizes travelling“? 🤔

[@mickiemallorie]

@@bezhimr you could walk to travel. What AI is doing is removing the hurdle of actually being skilled in art. Using your analogy its clear what people really want is expediency, so "Allowing people to use a car during a trip expedites travel"...its a cheat code to the monetization of art. You no longer have to work for the piece of capital that artists have been starving on for all of these centuries. And even if say...I don't want to sell it, I just don't want to pay for it...I can now do that.

[@EkoFranko]

@@mickiemallorie You just described photography

[@ste887]

@@EkoFranko and no doubt still life artists said the same thing about the camera when it was invented.

[@darkzeroprojects4245]

​​@@EkoFranko Different things entirely . Have to stop you right there. If you are making such a arguement, then you're likely not going to have a solid case

[@j.c.jeggis1818]

The scariest thing about AI to me is how some people treat it like the supercomputer from Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy that will provide truth beyond human knowledge.

[@thelelanatorlol3978]

It absolutely can, humans are not omnipotent and there is absolutely the possibility of inherently more intelligent entities than humans in this universe. Whether we create them or they come from another world or whatever is irrelevant tbh.

[@lostgarbage4055]

It will, in time. The tech we see right now is worst it`ll ever be.

[@tentativegazer]

​@@lostgarbage4055 Honestly if that does happen I think it will happen like it does in Hitchhiker's. When technology gets good enough to replicate human intelligence it will replicate human flaws. At the point AI surpasses us it will already be sentient so who cares as much, I doubt it would view us as "obsolete" because that's a very inhuman way of thinking. We train AI on ourselves, if it does get as smart as us, it's gonna act like us.

[@lostgarbage4055]

@@tentativegazer People already treat each other as obsolete and wish d**th upon those who do as much as disagree on some topics. If AI starts thinking like us - we're so doomed

[@Colddirector]

@@lostgarbage4055 Personally I think it’s probably going to follow the same path as smartphones - first 5-6 years it develops like crazy but comes to a careening halt once they start to hit the upper limit of ways it can be optimized. The tech industry is frankly addicted to this idea of constant revolution and growth, and I think it’s in for a pretty nasty shock going into the late 20s-30s. We’re already seeing the beginning of it with the failure of self driving cars, metaverse and web3.

[@TheRandomYoYo]

Finally. To all human creators. Another suggestion: Market your stuff as Human-Made. And take screencaps of the progress as you make that art. Bundle them up to the delivery as proof. For now it's a good solution. It's a receipt of the creative process you were commissioned to do. Ignore the AI art, within a couple of years the market will be so oversaturated with the same style that having an actual human made pieces from the period will be worth so much more. Just keep the receipt, bundle it with the final product, and see the flood take everything and leave real quality behind.

[@tuckvison]

He's pretty obviously a guy, cops are just transphobic.

[@studioe27]

This is the way.

[@screeno42]

I imagine a speedpaint recording would be a bit more convenient than screencaps(possibly more interesting as a secondary piece too)

[@FlorianXXV]

People might as well generate Videos of painting a certain image if the AI get's sophisticated enough...

[@daviddobarganes9115]

I worry this is a tragically optimistic solution, but it's something

[@grandadmiralzaarin4962]

"We thought to banish work, but instead banished thought."-Ian Malcolm

[@darthrevan5976]

Which movie did he say that in?

[@grandadmiralzaarin4962]

@@darthrevan5976 the first novel

[@darthrevan5976]

@@grandadmiralzaarin4962 thanks

[@meoof5925]

this video is mostly about visual art, but some time ago i saw a couple of twitter users with screenshots of comments people left under their fanfics. something like "it will probably never be finished so i just put it into chatgpt and got a good ending with marriage and kids". just seeing it felt disgusting. even the silly goofy self-indulgent stuff that people make for free, simply because it makes them happy, isn't safe. what also felt weird is how polite and nice they tried to sound in those comments while practically saying "i do not respect you or your work and i'm the correct one in this situation." using emojis and stuff. so shameless.

[@dragondelsur5156]

How disgusting can these people be?

[@demakusan_Art]

It's like ok .. if you do that why do you have to tell people? As if to brag about it, do these people have narcissistic tendencies , they seem like attention res

[@agme8045]

What the heck do you expect from a fanfic reader lmao

[@candydream16]

​@@agme8045I expect basic decency from everyone, just because someone is a fanfic reader doesn't make them a bad person

[@Bvic3]

I always find it fascinating how the marxist culture of the artist community is so outraged by attacks on private property. Meanwhile, the engineering culture worships forking the work of others. Create a software library is a giant creative work. And we upload it to Github, a platform designed with the explicit purpose of making it easier to "steal" and modify your creative work. With 3D printing and China's PCBway, we fork hardware components and eletronics harware circuit boards too now. We are all in love with Copilot/Codeium. It's so funny how the rabid marxists worship private property of cultural content so fervently after two centuries of trying to outlaw private property of others.

[@crediblesalamander8056]

The most comprehensive and nuanced video I've seen about AI Art. Fantastic work by Tim and Lalit.

[@AnalogueAbsynth]

Thanks for making such an in depth video. I once thought AI would only be used to eliminate boring tasks, leading to a utopia where people have time for things they love, like creating art. Why oh why did we skip that and go straight to automating the end goal? The future looks incredibly bleak to me.

[@fieryrebirth]

It's probably because corporations control society, not human individuals -- the humans running said corporations are driven by greed, and the power that come from it, nothing more.

[@HinataElyonToph]

Because corporations will do anything to exploit everyone and hoard all the money for themselves

[@strykerten560]

The people doing the boring work will lose their jobs too, just let it cook. Pretty soon all humanity is going to have to struggle with finding meaning in a world where you provide no economic utility. I think in the end it will lead to a better world, but getting to that better world is going to involve a lot of pain along the way

[@kazpondo2439]

This video means a lot to me. I've been working on a novel for years on and off, and I keep feeling less and less like my story will be relevant or unique when I finish it. I'm an artist as well, and I feel like starting to try and make money with my art would be futile, all because of AI.

[@Hmm_Ace_Attorney_Channel]

AI cannot write proper novels, not yet. There is far too much interconnectivity for an algorithm to keep track of without significant human interference (which nullifies the point of using an algorithm). Though, I would say it's a good plan to try and get it polished and published before AI makes many more leaps, which is what I am trying to do.

[@dancypants1023]

Make it for fun not for profit.

[@kazpondo2439]

@dancypants1023 I wish it was that simple, my friend...

[@BlockCheddar]

The issue with the concept that AI is making art more accessible is that art *is* accessible. There are thousands of artists out there who are begging for work. And yet so many scumbags are too damn lazy and stingy to pay them to make something for them. Despite any good AI could do if it was trained ethically, it will always be used by cheap people who don't care about their fellow humans. Artists and writers are some of the most exploited workers out of all the arts-- theft and plagiarism was always common and frowned upon, but now it's even easier to do-- and it's anonymous.

[@carlfrancis156]

Imagine you are a musician. You've dumped thousands of hours and dollars into your skill, but you are broke because making music isn't profitable and you've had to sink so much money into equipment. You've worked really hard to put together an album. You wrote, performed, recorded, and produced the whole thing on your own because you can't afford to pay for help. Everything is set for release, except for the art. You're a terrible artist, you've tried very hard, but you have a nervous system disorder that causes your hands to shake, and creating passable art just isn't possible for you. You have no money to pay an artist, so what do you do? Not release it, release with very poor art, or use an AI art generator? Is art accessible to a broke musician who has a disability?

[@ckoniges]

​@@carlfrancis156dude I know so many people who put out great music with shit art to get themselves started. It's fine!

[@carlfrancis156]

@@ckoniges I think this is a reasonable response, though I will point out that if art was as accessible as this comment states, I wouldn't need to use my stick figure level art. Maybe my low quality art will make me stand out from the 100,000 songs uploaded to Spotify every day. Saying art is accessible is kinda ableist, which is the point I'm attempting to make.

[@dragondelsur5156]

​@@carlfrancis156 Your point is to pull a hugely specific example as to why you SHOULD use AI, it's fucking stupid.

[@sunnydayluxe]

@@carlfrancis156 "you have no money to pay an artist" yeah so release it with your shitty art. you're not entitled to free labor, and AI art generation is predicated on theft. this isn't a difficult concept, you just really want to find an excuse. edit: also your phone camera is free.

[@Lost_Elfgirl]

I'm sorry for my english but I have to answer: THANK YOU! You speak to me from the soul! I am a hobby artist and writer and have been in a state of shock for months that I have not published anything since the first AI reports. The feelings and depression I got knowing that my work, my ideas and all that I value in other artists is being trampled upon is beyond words except - it breaks my heart and soul but it goea worse, like I describe at the end! The song "The Sound of Silence" has always moved me deeply, but since that AI thing it expresses exactly what is happening here. "People talking without speaking, People hearing without listening, People writing songs that voices never shared. ..." I always was crying with hearing this song, as if I had known what will I see now into this. I'm crying a lot more now. A tide of soulless quantity overwhelms the quality and appreciation of a relationship to a process. But what you didn't mention is that in this dystopia it will be even more valuable to have those skills, soul and connection to something. Perhaps real art by anyone out there will therefore become an elite product that will at least be of great value to enthusiasts and one's own bubble, since everywhere else out there is only dull meaningless mass production. That is currently my saving thought, which does not let me completely despair of myself, my true talent and skill and the future. I didn't want to draw or write for a long time, I was so demotivated and depressed. Now I've decided that I can't let all this shit stop ME from expressing true creativity. But like so many artists, I agree and have decided not to put anything freely accessible online or to hide it behind paywalls as long as this technology does not have to comply with the Creative Commons License AND AI images/texts are subject to labeling requirements. If the world wants to end in a cheap, soulless mass, then let it go, but I live on, on my island at least, full of deep and meaningful ideas, drawings and written stories, and all who still share a spark of true enthusiasm with me, I'll let on my beach and no one else. That's what they wanted and that's what they're gonna get. Maybe one day they will ask themselves why everything has become so the same and so superficially dull and maybe then we will see it again, the appreciation. The bigger problem with AI is not even the theft and devaluation of art, but that we as humanity have already forgotten how to think creatively and consciously in many areas of everyday life, because we take over the thinking or remembering of programs and machines permit. We humans are lazy and driven by addiction because people always choose the easiest way. And so we will lose more and more of the skills that allow us to think creatively and translate that into art or something else if the work involved is taken away from us. These are all learning and thought processes that will eventually no longer exist because there will no longer be any young artists who will still bother to learn something. Then we're headed for a world where there will soon be very, very few, if any, people who can think creatively. Create NEW worlds, write novels, develop games, create art...etc! But that's the least of the problems. And now I might open up a real dystopia for one or the other: The real disaster for our society is rather that creativity is needed in order to be able to solve problems with new approaches, to be able to invent something new. Not only art, but also technology, science. As depressed as I am about a world devoid of new art and imagination, and how much it will turn us into meaningless and message-devoid zombies, consuming the same thing over and over again... a future without progress in areas as needed as science really damns me great fear in relation to medicines, technology research, upcoming energy and water emergencies, natural disasters, wars, diseases ...! I sincerely hope that the class action lawsuits will fortunately get the AI seriously, so that in the future they will at least have to adhere to the Creative Common License in order not to eliminate any residue of true creativity in our society and that this technology will not only be used for fun but also to have questions in science and technology solved from a different perspective, for which incidentally there are already the first astonishing and frightening results. But at least that helps us a bit and doesn't just let us degenerate in our own abilities. Thank you and everyone to read this. Don't give up and... see you on our islands!

[@PthumerianDusk]

I love the mental image of an island in this context. I feel exactly like you, but your comment also gives me a lot of hope. Thank you for taking the time to write this

[@Lost_Elfgirl]

@@PthumerianDusk I have to screenshot this, cuz your answer gives me hope too, thanks!

[@thesecrettragedyclothingco7194]

When i hear the sound if silence song it makes me think they were singing about ufos and aliens. Telepathy ect.

[@xhagast]

Sorry but I fear we need to go Ludite, at least partially.

[@lukeskywalkerthe2nd773]

I think that no matter what happens with AI, for better or worse (and I pray to God it is for the better--that we don't become a horrifying dystopia as indeed described in this excellent video), I will always create stories and art. Art is, to me, one of the most precious things that we humans have, perhaps second to only being able to connect, love, and make friends with other human beings, which stories can often help us do as well. I cannot bare to not create, and AI won't stop me, as demoralizing as it can be.

[@emmareiman64]

You go buddy! Love what you create and are able to make with your own hands - or whatever it is that you use to make your art

[@markmurex6559]

It is only demoralizing if you plan on making money from making art. Other than that, it's a nice hobby.

[@arowyn.m]

I’ve wanted nothing but to be a professional artist since I was 7. More recently (past two years) I’ve had a full blown plan and passion to become a video game concept artist. I literally came here to get some hope after clicking off an unrelated podcast where one of the creators mentioned offhand how they’d wanted to become a video game concept artist for the longest time, but just gave up after AI came on the scene. It’s incredibly demoralizing to have worked at improving my craft for YEARS, only for an unethical program to pop up and remove passion from the equation. I hope that the world comes to its senses and remembers that we are not made only to consume, but to create as well.

[@cleotaylor9576]

I feel the same way, ever since I was 10 or so, I knew I wanted to be a writer. But, with the rise of ai, I've been reconsidering it. I want to create, and I want to share my creations with the world, but if the world grows to have no place for someone like me, then what's the point?

[@cleotaylor9576]

Don't get me wrong, I want to stay hopeful, and I've been trying to be. But sometimes the possibility of a future where ai could potentially replace creativity really gets to me.

[@arowyn.m]

@@cleotaylor9576 I totally understand… tbh it’s devastating to see computers start to take over the kind of creativity that makes humanity so different from other animals. Animals have been seen making base tools with understanding for their use, but never has another species made art with the kind of intention and understanding humans have. Supporting AI is promoting base consumerism, something that we have far enough of already. I don’t want to live in a world where I can’t live off of doing something I’ve basically devoted myself to, and some people don’t seem to understand that line of thinking. It’s like Easy Entertainment = Lifelong Happiness

[@anthonyschlott916]

'Unethical program' What do you mean? What makes it unethical? Your entire meaning seems backwards considering we also created these AI and will create more. The world didn't care for those who made typewriters or for people who worked film for Kodak. The world simply is advancing forward. However cruel that may sound, it is what it is. Dreams and passions will die and continue to be so. Personally speaking, I want to see what we as humans are fully capable of. I want to see AI flourish and all that can be. Whatever harm will be will be. That doesn't mean I don't on some level sympathize however, but the world moves forward.

[@arowyn.m]

@@cleotaylor9576 Yep trying to stay hopeful too. Idc I’m still going to go to school for this, I’m still going to pursue my dream. If I fail, I fail, but at least I’ll have fought to do what I’ve always wanted to do instead of rolling over and letting some new program stomp me into the dirt. Spite’s a hell of a motivator and I definitely recommend it 💀👍

[@ShadowXBlaster]

*You're a Godsend!!* I am not Artist, but I like drawing and I respect Artists & Art a lot. I recently saw one artist saying how all of this has affected her and she was depressed. And there are numerous artists like her in the same boat as her. It hurts to see such stuff happening. When this AI stuff started coming into my awareness, I had so many things I wanted to so say, prove my reasoning by facts and logic. I had a lot in my mind. It distracted me from my work I'm pursuing with interest I researched so much stuff, had a lots of discussion with different people, wrote so many long word documents because I wanted to make a video to explain almost everything and about the misinformation and agenda surrounding this topic. It distracted me from my work I'm pursuing with interest. It made me depressed too to see such unfairness and people actually supporting it. You know, those *AI TechBros*... You explained almost everything that I wanted to say, even so many more things. And all of that in so much detail. I Thank You from the bottom of my Heart. Not only this video helped me lift up my mood, it also gave me hope. I'm not sure if it's too much of an exaggeration, but this means a world to a lot of people. It means a lot to me. Again, *Thank You!!*

[@halfheartxi]

As a small independent artist, I feel heard. Like this feeling of dread has gotten a lot lighter. I don't feel so alone anymore. Thank you so much for addressing all the core issues! Keep making art, friends♡

[@tarazzzs]

I wish you productive career in a future, and now matter how un-skill you think your work is, there always will be people who's emotions and souls get effected by it. And as attempt to inspire you let me tell you a thing I heard from a book seller many years ago: "Even if its printed on toilet paper, there are always will be people who willing to pay for it and love it" I remember this works each time I see how many people still buy Call of Duty (I hate that game and cant understand how some people spend their life making it). Different people love and hate random things.

[@aleclorian7329]

@@Cha4k i dont believe for a second youre an artist if you think ai is a tool. do you think that looking up an image in google makes you a photographer? because thats what you sound like.

[@ObsessedwithZelda2]

Also, as someone with pretty low empathy, don’t let anyone use it as an excuse. The idea of art theft causes absolutely 0 emotional stir in me, I just do not care in that way. I still don’t do it. People express that hurts them, and that’s enough. You don’t need empathy to not be a jerk, you just have to choose to do what’s right- or in this case, not do something wrong

[@DavidSartor0]

Empathy makes it much easier. Not having it does seem to absolve people; if it's their fault, then the fault is low empathy, not anything they "have control over".

[@Hoonters-goona-Hoont]

@@DavidSartor0 Valid point, but also just reinforcing OP's point about it being a matter of personal choice (Or education, humanist nurture etc etc) to be a Jerk or not.

[@DavidSartor0]

@@Hoonters-goona-Hoont Thank you. How so?

[@mr-op8cv]

It doesn’t steal art you’re misinformed

[@sonobeno]

Impressively well put! As an artist with friends who think Art generators are "fun" I wish they would have the attention span to sit down and watch all of this.

[@snacesib8729]

My favorite thing behind an artwork i like, is appreciating the artist and their ingenuity. I often wonder "wow, how did they come up with this?" or "how are they so skillful" or "why these colors", "i have to keep an eye for their next upload" e.t.c. AI images are void of reasoning, so it's a dead image you either like or not. Like a random pattern that happens to look like a cat. Sure it's a cat, but there's nothing more to discover or look forward to. I legit haven't find a way to be excited about an AI image. The closest thing i enjoy regarding AI, are videos that show a dozen of AI images that represent something, and i try to figure out which one was the best. Just like rolling the dice. But that's the most exciting it gets.

[@xhagast]

They are "good enough." Not pictures, nor art. But they are poison.

[@BlueGamingRage]

@@xhagast luddite

[@xhagast]

@@BlueGamingRageAnd proud of it.

[@bluenewtdragon]

Honestly to be fair, I'm an artist myself and AI is just much better than I am technically at a lot of things, even if it makes some weird visual hallucinations sometimes. The problem is that AI is using data from all of the greatest baroque/classical/romantic/modern/postmodern/anime/furry etc. artists to ever live, and that's what artists who want to make money have to compete with. No artist is competing for their bread with the AI itself... they're competing against mass-produced Beethoven. Can I do that? Hell no, if AI is capable of reproducing novel art based on the works of the greatest artists in history there's no point trying to make a living with it. Why would anyone pay me a commission, the bare minimum 70$ it takes for me to break even on food and rent for time I put into my full pieces? No, they would pay for mass-produced Beethoven for 1$ a generation, and the market would flood out artists like me. The AI doesn't have the talent, the GOATs that trained it do. There really is only 1 option. Put in enough time to become a Beethoven, or GTFO. This "democratization" of art is actually the opposite, it's the gentrification of art that will crowd out every single ok, average, good and great artist. Unless you are a GOAT, you will not succeed, and the only art that will largely survive are the hobbyists. This is fine, of course, as long as there's a way to live. Using the USA as a framework, unfortunately in the current system, aiming to do something as time-heavy as art/writing/etc. is a non-starter if there is no monetary incentive. There are 24 hours a day and we spend 3 hours doing chores/health maintenance/errands 2 hours relaxing/eating and 7 sleeping, leaving us 12 hours to put into work or hobbies. now take out 6-8 of those hours a day for work to support a living. 4 hours a day maximum to put into art is not going to make you the GOAT unless you're supremely talented. The reason Michelangelo was so good was he lived in his boots and barely took a shower, and had other people feed him. He absolutely maximized those 12 hours a day dedicated to just art, sometimes more. The real truth was that he was miserable and obsessed as a human being, and that's quickly going to become the necessity for people to compete monetarily with AI art. The benefits of AI art go solely to those with the resources to employ the most AI compute power at once, which would be corporations. The small time AI generators that get kicked out of anime conventions for selling AI art are not the enemy. I don't really care if people want to use AI art instead of me to generate their weird art or whatever, but I have a problem with the fact that the real winners in all of this are the people who make MidJourney and such things. Every well-made AI piece has that hidden tax of 1-5$ for a generation... and well, for every AI generator at a con selling AI-made commissions for 30$ a pop, they probably had to spend 20$ to get a good one. Now spread that across the entire draw-for-pay industry and MidJourney et al is making billions of $ and the AI generators can barely afford their ramen, and actual artists are left to find alternative employment. AI art looks great to be sure, because its sampling includes the best of the best human art. It's not practical to make a living off art anymore if this becomes mainstream, and that's fine, but there is literally no incentive to do it if the time required will cause you misery and death. Assuming you're okay with the literal death of pay-for-draw artists in the United States, even the new wave evolution of the genre of AI users who tell the AI to make art will not be the winners either, because MidJourney et al is taking most of that profit. AI art is not democratization, it's distilled capitalism and elitism.

[@leohuxtable439]

@@bluenewtdragon Michelangelo used data from the greatest artists that ever lived. As an apprentice he copied/analyzed contemporary masters and some works from previous generations. He was also personally interested in Ancient Greece. Later in life Michelangelo also had assistants and partners. He did a larger portion of his pieces by himself than most well known workshops at the time, but majority of the manual labor was done by others. With frescos that meant plastering, transferring the sketches, mixing paint and few other things. It hasn't been proven that he used others to paint backgrounds and "less important" parts at least earlier in his career, but that was a very common task for apprentices and a standard work practice with renaissance era workshops. Majority of his career he was under the patronage of the Medici family and Vatican was his biggest client. During that time capitalism wasn't as nice as it is today and elite played by a different set of rules. There is no modern day equivalent to House of Medici in the western world. If you're looking for an example of a hard working starving artist, old masters are an unlikely match. Now I don't personally consider anyone using just text prompts any more an artist than someone commissioning a piece from fiverr, but following any social media discussion about art it has become clear to me that most people have a very rose-tinted view of what it means to be an artist and especially how the old workshop system functioned.

[@cinderblockstudios]

Props for being one of the few people to explain how AI works without completely dismissing the plight of artists. This was a FANTASTIC watch! I would like to add one piece to the "it's just a tool" fallacy. If it was "just a tool" the creator behind it should be able to do the same or a similar work with a different tool. I can create a similar piece of art whether I'm using photoshop, graphite, or acrylic paint. If AI programs are just tools then I'd like to see what the people typing in prompts can do when they switch tools.

[@thelelanatorlol3978]

What? A hammer cannot be used to screw in a screw, does that mean the hammer isn't a tool? Not at all.

[@stardoogalaxie9314]

@@thelelanatorlol3978a hammer can hammer in a screw just fine

[@merchantarthurn]

@@thelelanatorlol3978 This is like saying "no photoshop and paint aren't the same, you can't use a paintbrush on a graphics tablet" Shocking, you have to change all the tools when you change medium but can achieve the same things.

[@petulantpeterturbo]

That's probably the dumbest argument I've ever heard, something does not become a fallacy because you explain it, not even in a good way mind you. People definitely said the same thing about type writers, because suddenly someone could write passable calligraphy without putting in the years of work, it didn't suddenly destroy calligraphy as an art form. And the same is going to be true with this. Prompts will never be enough to give studios exactly what they want, they'll need artists to feed art into the generators so they can get what they want. Even if they somehow get rid of artists in their studios, I'm surprised anyone can seriously tell me that artists would disappear. There will always be someone looking for that specific style, with that specific human element AI would have to reach humanity to achieve.

[@beth1979]

​@@petulantpeterturbo no one ever said that about calligraphy, stop making stuff up.

[@genxrants]

There's another problem with AI that I think no one is addressing. For the fun of it, I fed ChatGPT a plot idea to see if it would write it. It came out pretty generic. So I gave it a guided plot with several points and a word limit. Still quite generic. If I gave it a larger word limit, it probably would even come up with a love triangle. I suspect that even bad works are being fed into the AI and it averages out to "meh." If we rely too much on AI, we may be stuck with mediocrity.

[@fieryrebirth]

That's the issue: human society has already embraced mediocrity, which gives corporations a shit ton of leverage and power over the human element. Why? Because recent generations of people were raised to not recognize what "art" is, and thus have less standards.

[@nectarinn3]

​@@fieryrebirth More like capitalism has embraced mediocrity if you ask me. Humans can still recognize art they find mediocre from art that appeals to their tastes. Said tastes change from generation to generation and person to person but some sort of standard will always remain, so long as we have multiple other stories and othersuch to compare it to. That and there's always older works to go back to if what is currently in vogue is below your standards.

[@fieryrebirth]

@@nectarinn3 Yep. Ever since I learned what Ronald "For the corporations" Reagan did to make sure newer generations of kids would embrace corporate branding by killing art programs in schools, it started clicking.

[@thelelanatorlol3978]

@@fieryrebirth Tell me what ''art'' is and i'll see how much of a hypocrite you're being. Do you think about art in regards to artist emotion? Pish posh, that's bullshit and you know it, art is in the eye of the beholder and you will only try to understand the point of view of artists making art you personally relate to.

[@JustARedDesign]

I'm so glad I got 16 years to appreciate human art before all this started happening. Wonder what'll happen when the AI can do all the upper management work that these ceos do

[@dragondelsur5156]

I'd be funny if AI replaced CEOs, the world would be saved.

[@Bzerker01]

They already can

[@xhagast]

The Matrix. If we are LUCKY. Machines would recognize the need of keeping us busy, distracted. Happy(ish). Because when we are not we break things.

[@aff77141]

It probably already can, most ceos just sit there and do vibe checks before going for another round of golf

[@crepooscul]

I got 30. And 10 years of the internet not gradually becoming a bot infested shit hole