AI is cancer

[thickly_settled]

AI means the death of some fundamental part of what it means to be human. When you tell your computer to make you a picture, you're not expressing yourself, nor are you using a tool. You're just being a consumer, and so many of us have been so thoroughly trained to think of ourselves as consumers that we don't notice it. Getting AI to make you a picture and calling yourself an artist is like ordering food through GrubHub and saying you made dinner. You didn't do anything -- you just asked someone else to do it for you.

What we face right now is nothing less than the death of human creativity. A world in which all art is made by AI is a world that isn't worth living in.

 

[Kalista]

ai programs/software is a tool -- nothing more, nothing less. what people fail to see is it can be used in a way that doesn't eliminate human creativity or 'the human touch.' ai in general helps reduce the work load that otherwise would take hours upon hours of a group of people sweating and overworking their bodies for pay that doesn't justify the effort.
this becomes about adapting to new technology. ai is a convenience that allows time and energy to be spent on other things that the individual might see as more important.
let's not forget how cameras have advanced over time. it made a lot of the intricacies easier to deal with, yet you still need to know the fundamentals of how to take an appealing photo.

don't blame ai technology. you can probably blame the people that use it for purpose society might see as 'destructive' or 'damaging.' how it's being used and presented is what's questionable.

the way we interact with the world will change, as well as how we define things when technological advancement reaches a milestone -- but you also don't need to participate in it.

even with ai now being implemented in a lot of our day to day, there is still work to be done.

 

[A Dream of a Dream]

I’m a Luddite (and So Can You!) | The Nib

What the Luddites can teach us about resisting an automated future.

thenib.com

Fuck all the AI hype and all the theft and lies it's been built on.

 

[genoke]

Yeah that grok 2 shit I have absolutely no interest. It's as entertaining to me as chatting or sexting an AI girlfriend.

 

[Plentiful_Despair]

I don't say AI art is more beautiful than a humans, but I prefer it to human artists because I get the result in 10 seconds and it make the most funny or horrifying and absurd situations, far more effective than a human. I want the world to be this way, fast.

 

[EvisceratedJester]

I don't say AI art is more beautiful than a humans, but I prefer it to human artists because I get the result in 10 seconds and it make the most funny or horrifying and absurd situations, far more effective than a human. I want the world to be this way, fast.

Yeah, I feel like you are the type of person who doesn't hold much of an appreciation for art outside of its surface-level aesthetics. Ignoring the fact that AI art is typically riddled with issues, from issues with lighting to issues with its consistency, part of what makes art special is the work and thought put behind it. The meaning that comes from it and the time and skill that someone spent on perfecting it is part of the beauty of it. The best things in life generally tend to take time to create. This sort of "I want the world to be this way, fast" kind of mentality is indictive of a shitty capitalist mindset that prioritizes speed and quantity over craftsmanship and creativity. This feels like the type of mentality I would expect from someone who does temu shopping hauls on a regular basis.

 

[AbusedInnocent]

Here are my thoughts on generative AI.

Computers beat humans at chess in the 90s when IBM's deep blue beat former world chess champion Garry Kasparov, today computers can still beat everyone at chess yet we still have chess tournaments and people playing chess for fun, chess engines are only used as a helpful tool for analysis.

Using generative AI is not artistic expression, it's like running a chess engine and watching it play against itself, the fun of chess is in playing it yourself, nobody watches the computer chess tournaments even though they're the real champions of the game.

This is why I believe artists will be fine, creating art is fun and it's part of human nature, people will still value human art over AI and artists will still get commissions, people creating media in a corporate environment will most likely be replaced by AI but advertising for a company's product can hardly be considered art in the first place.

 

[ForgottenAgain]

ai programs/software is a tool -- nothing more, nothing less. what people fail to see is it can be used in a way that doesn't eliminate human creativity or 'the human touch.' ai in general helps reduce the work load that otherwise would take hours upon hours of a group of people sweating and overworking their bodies for pay that doesn't justify the effort.
this becomes about adapting to new technology. ai is a convenience that allows time and energy to be spent on other things that the individual might see as more important.
let's not forget how cameras have advanced over time. it made a lot of the intricacies easier to deal with, yet you still need to know the fundamentals of how to take an appealing photo.

don't blame ai technology. you can probably blame the people that use it for purpose society might see as 'destructive' or 'damaging.' how it's being used and presented is what's questionable.

the way we interact with the world will change, as well as how we define things when technological advancement reaches a milestone -- but you also don't need to participate in it.

even with ai now being implemented in a lot of our day to day, there is still work to be done.

AI art is built on human made stolen art. It searches the Internet and does an advanced mash up of several human made images to "create" a new image. It's nothing but theft since these artists don't get paid for their art being stolen and used in this manner.

No one was asked whether they wanted to allow their images to teach AI. Adobe when they added the setting for it, it was automatically ticked on.

Any artist will despise this "tool" as it is built and is profiting off of a lot of artists that never consented for their art to be used in this manner. And no, putting art online does not grant some random company the right to use it and profit off of it without consent from the creator.

We should have created AI to automate menial jobs, not automate the very thing that makes us human: paiting, writing, creativity.

Here are my thoughts on generative AI.

Computers beat humans at chess in the 90s when IBM's deep blue beat former world chess champion Garry Kasparov, today computers can still beat everyone at chess yet we still have chess tournaments and people playing chess for fun, chess engines are only used as a helpful tool for analysis.

Using generative AI is not artistic expression, it's like running a chess engine and watching it play against itself, the fun of chess is in playing it yourself, nobody watches the computer chess tournaments even though they're the real champions of the game.

This is why I believe artists will be fine, creating art is fun and it's part of human nature, people will still value human art over AI and artists will still get commissions, people creating media in a corporate environment will most likely be replaced by AI but advertising for a company's product can hardly be considered art in the first place.

An artist isn't just the one that makes pairings for galleries. There are a lot of artists in the cinema and videogames industries. From concept artist to 3D artists to UI artists to VFX artists etc. The big portion of artists won't be fine and the irony is that that AI is nothing without the artists that their works were stolen from.

I'm just hoping the legal side can catch up quickly because this whole world of Generative AI is built on stolen art work and that needs to be acknowledged. They're trying to do the same with coding but this time companies are very protective of using their own code base to teach AI. Why? Because a lot of their products are closed source, they're not keen on making that open source and potentially losing the market.

So things are already better shaped for programming but Art is usually the thing that gets shitted on...

 

[Plentiful_Despair]

Yeah, I feel like you are the type of person who doesn't hold much of an appreciation for art outside of its surface-level aesthetics. Ignoring the fact that AI art is typically riddled with issues, from issues with lighting to issues with its consistency, part of what makes art special is the work and thought put behind it. The meaning that comes from it and the time and skill that someone spent on perfecting it is part of the beauty of it. The best things in life generally tend to take time to create. This sort of "I want the world to be this way, fast" kind of mentality is indictive of a shitty capitalist mindset that prioritizes speed and quantity over craftsmanship and creativity. This feels like the type of mentality I would expect from someone who does temu shopping hauls on a regular basis.

Lol I'm not a capitalist, far from it. I never had a job, I can't stand being a wageslave for some billionaire. But that doesn't mean I have to celebrate art just because it's created by a human. Why do you think that that makes it inherently special? I don't think anything is worth more just because someone took a lot of time to make it. There's plenty of shit that takes years to make, like a ubisoft or EA game. Is that also art?

 

[EvisceratedJester]

Lol I'm not a capitalist, far from it. I never had a job, I can't stand being a wageslave for some billionaire. But that doesn't mean I have to celebrate art just because it's created by a human. Why do you think that that makes it inherently special? I don't think anything is worth more just because someone took a lot of time to make it. There's plenty of shit that takes years to make, like a ubisoft or EA game. Is that also art?

Yeah, not having had a job before doesn't mean that you don't necessarily have that sort of mindset. It just means that you have never had a job before. Why do I have a feeling that your idea of "anti-capitalism" stems from contrarianism or just a general lack of motivation to work, rather than it stemming from any actual critics of the system at hand?

There is no point in celebrating a practice that has no effort being put into it. You don't seem to have any real appreciation for art and that's just sad.

(Also, a lot of video games do in fact require art and creativity to be made, so I don't get what your point even is)

 

[sisyphean-nightmare]

While I don't think it's the death of human creativity because there are millions - if not billions - of people who genuinely have a need for a creative process and the use of AI just can't replace that, I do think it risks to create a skewed idea of what art actually is. I recently talked with someone who genuinely seemed to believe that writing prompts for an AI is an artform and I actually found it rather insulting. I create art, I've spent a good proportion of my life creating art and imo it can't even be compared to me telling a machine what I want it to do and get a random generated image in return.

At the risk of sounding completely insufferable: when I create art, it starts with an emotion. It can be a pleasant emotion, or a very painful emotion, or a mix of the two. The emotion leads to a mental image, which I then have to hold onto, to then be able to draw a concept off. Just that can take several days. Everything is thought out; proportions, placement, colour palette, materials. A teeny, tiny wrong choice of either of those and the entire piece can be thrown off balance (including me because let's face it I'm not very stable lol). Then I have to create it. Depending in whether I own the material or not, I may need to go shopping. Sometimes in several stores. Just that can also take days. While I create it, I have to hold on to the original emotion, I have to carefully make sure I don't commit any mistakes that cannot easily be fixed. Depending in what I'm doing, I may have to wait for it to dry between layers, which takes a minimum of 24 hours. Then there's taking breaks to clean the work space because it always turns into a fucking mess. I have to step aside sometimes to be able to look at the full picture because I always get stuck on details.

The entire process can take anywhere from a few hours to a month. It's nowhere near the seconds of having a vague idea and have something else do it for you and I genuinely hope humanity as a whole won't start to believe that.

 

[Plentiful_Despair]

Yeah, not having had a job before doesn't mean that you don't necessarily have that sort of mindset. It just means that you have never had a job before. Why do I have a feeling that your idea of "anti-capitalism" stems from contrarianism or just a general lack of motivation to work, rather than it stemming from any actual critics of the system at hand?

There is no point in celebrating a practice that has no effort being put into it. You don't seem to have any real appreciation for art and that's just sad.

(Also, a lot of video games do in fact require art and creativity to be made, so I don't get what your point even is)

I'll try to explain it in another way....

Your sentence "There is no point in celebrating a practice that has no effort being put into it" is exactly the opposite of what I think. I despise the (capitalistic) idea that everything must have 100 % effort, more and more, and especially in this example this reminds me of pseudo-psychology ala Jordan Peterson who says we must suffer to gain happiness. No, I don't want anyone to work dozens of hours just for me to look at a painting when an AI can do 90 % of that. Sure, it won't be perfect, but it reduces the time and effort spent on the creation of an artwork. I don't think effort-reduction is bad, I think it's good.

 

[EvisceratedJester]

I'll try to explain it in another way....

Your sentence "There is no point in celebrating a practice that has no effort being put into it" is exactly the opposite of what I think. I despise the (capitalistic) idea that everything must have 100 % effort, more and more, and especially in this example this reminds me of pseudo-psychology ala Jordan Peterson who says we must suffer to gain happiness. No, I don't want anyone to work dozens of hours just for me to look at a painting when an AI can do 90 % of that. Sure, it won't be perfect, but it reduces the time and effort spent on the creation of an artwork. I don't think effort-reduction is bad, I think it's good.

Putting effort into something doesn't equate to suffering. Also, putting effort into things tends to lead to us, whether we are conscious of it or not, appreciating it more. Hence why you have things, such as the Ikea effect. Either way, whether you like or not, your mindset towards art is similar to that of most capitalist hustling type dumb asses.

 

[enduringwinter]

I just think for all the unregulated scraping it's just not very good. The word vomits are painfully dumb (sorry to anyone who finds it good I have no way of telling you this truth without offending), the picture and video generators are even worse (to make it good I might as well make things myself, way less frustrating and time consuming), the translations are wrong. I do love it for streamlining data, softwares, statistics and coding stuff, but sometimes the solutions are still wrong, I have no idea why. Setting up machine learning is fun but it's still like, not working very well.

 

[ForgottenAgain]

Lol I'm not a capitalist, far from it. I never had a job, I can't stand being a wageslave for some billionaire. But that doesn't mean I have to celebrate art just because it's created by a human. Why do you think that that makes it inherently special? I don't think anything is worth more just because someone took a lot of time to make it. There's plenty of shit that takes years to make, like a ubisoft or EA game. Is that also art?

Please don't shit on videogame development. It is an art yes, with a lot of different departments involved: designers, 2D/3D/UI/VFX/concept artists, animators, riggers, programmers of all sorts (AI programming, architecture, networking, UI, gameplay, etc), writers, etc.

Some games may be bad for whatever reason, but I can tell you that the vast majority of the time, if not all the time, they're bad because of greed. Because upper management wants to make the most profit and spend as little time developing it as possible. The actual dev teams put so much passion and talent into the games.

Game dev in particular is such a creative field with unique challenges that vary from game to game. Some companies may make bad games but please don't shit on the dev teams as they're usually very talented with people that care a lot about those games and go the extra mile to make sure the game feels right.

 

[Plentiful_Despair]

Please don't shit on videogame development. It is an art yes, with a lot of different departments involved: designers, 2D/3D/UI/VFX/concept artists, animators, riggers, programmers of all sorts (AI programming, architecture, networking, UI, gameplay, etc), writers, etc.

Some games may be bad for whatever reason, but I can tell you that the vast majority of the time, if not all the time, they're bad because of greed. Because upper management wants to make the most profit and spend as little time developing it as possible. The actual dev teams put so much passion and talent into the games.

Game dev in particular is such a creative field with unique challenges that vary from game to game. Some companies may make bad games but please don't shit on the dev teams as they're usually very talented with people that care a lot about those games and go the extra mile to make sure the game feels right.

I agree that this comparison wasn't well choosen by me, the design teams certainly do much of the work. I'm just very angry at some companies (like EA and Ubisoft) because I got dissappointed by so many of their games. Same with Blizzard. The cinematics are a masterpiece, yes, but the rest of the game designs since 2018 seem to get worse and worse, only to maximize money or seem rushed (like Diablo 4 at release, or Warcraft 3 Reforged...so many things wrong with that)

 

[thickly_settled]

I agree that this comparison wasn't well choosen by me, the design teams certainly do much of the work. I'm just very angry at some companies (like EA and Ubisoft) because I got dissappointed by so many of their games. Same with Blizzard. The cinematics are a masterpiece, yes, but the rest of the game designs since 2018 seem to get worse and worse, only to maximize money or seem rushed (like Diablo 4 at release, or Warcraft 3 Reforged...so many things wrong with that)

But it gets you your vidya fast, and that's how life should be, right? The content must flow!

 

[ForgottenAgain]

I agree that this comparison wasn't well choosen by me, the design teams certainly do much of the work. I'm just very angry at some companies (like EA and Ubisoft) because I got dissappointed by so many of their games. Same with Blizzard. The cinematics are a masterpiece, yes, but the rest of the game designs since 2018 seem to get worse and worse, only to maximize money or seem rushed (like Diablo 4 at release, or Warcraft 3 Reforged...so many things wrong with that)

I understand that, I'm also very disappointed at the current state of videogames and I haven't played new games for years now. I only play old games. It's very sad to see such a creative industry constantly spitting out the same cash grabs for extortionate prices, filled to the brim with micro transactions and just repeating the same recipe over, and over and over again. Companies go where the money is. I vote with my wallet, never give money to games like that. I'm hoping if enough of us do that, things will change. We got Baldurs Gate 3 which is a breath of fresh air. I'm hoping we get more miracles like that.

Thank you for rethinking about the comment towards the dev teams, I appreciate it ❤

 

[Plentiful_Despair]

But it gets you your vidya fast, and that's how life should be, right? The content must flow!

Lol, I wish that would be the case with the companies I named. EA, Ubisoft and Blizzard all take years to develop games, just like others, in some cases even longer than usual. But at the end waits dissapointment. And I seriously don't understand why I get kinda mocked here for liking to receive content fast. Life is very short, if you want to wait weeks for some art you pay MUCH money for...okay. Thats pretty weird in my opinion if you could just use AI to have almost the same quality now. I think most people in this thread just don't know how to prompt the way they want it to look, midjourney can replicate at least 90 % of the stuff on artstation perfectly.

 

[username90493486]

Please stop the hostility. I get that it can get misused but to try to gatekeep all forms of art to what you consider acceptable causes a lot of harm to other people.

I really don't want to debate, but this is such an aggressive stance. This has been a going problem in art for a long time. When digital media was introduced, it wasn't real art. When hyper-realism was at its peak and impressionist came out, they were openly ridiculed, it's not real art. Style gatekeeping has been a huge problem since ever among artists and even different disciplines. We have learned nothing from our history and will repeat the same mistakes.

AI doesn't make me feel bad, but stuff like this does hurt.

I worked at a small place which used AI for code. If not for it, we could've never handled hundreds of requests. Mind that it was a small business, rejecting orders is not an option. And thanks to it, we could have a good schedule and we weren't overloaded by work, yet there was still a lot to do. I wouldn't find that job if not for AI. Does it make me a terrible person??? Is it really that bad???

Please understand the market and how you'd hurt people who don't even earn much from it. Mind all the jobs it created or allowed to exist, and understand that a company who treats artists like shit will do it without AI, it has ALWAYS been a job with huge instability. Think there are "real" artists who manually do almost all the work and only use AI for very minimal details. Aren't they artists either? Isn't that expression even if they literally caused the exact same output they intended?

So if instead if misdirecting all this anger and hatred to normal people, you called for better conditions to artists in first place, you'd do much more.

This is literally all black and all white. And many hand-drawing artists are aware of this and are talking about this. For many there's a lot of tedium too in the process and now you apparently can sightly accelerate it to make drawing even better because it makes you guilty. :(

 

[thickly_settled]

Lol, I wish that would be the case with the companies I named. EA, Ubisoft and Blizzard all take years to develop games, just like others, in some cases even longer than usual. But at the end waits dissapointment. And I seriously don't understand why I get kinda mocked here for liking to receive content fast. Life is very short, if you want to wait weeks for some art you pay MUCH money for...okay. Thats pretty weird in my opinion if you could just use AI to have almost the same quality now. I think most people in this thread just don't know how to prompt the way they want it to look, midjourney can replicate at least 90 % of the stuff on artstation perfectly.

Except it's not the same, and you're taking money out of the pockets of real human artists.

Please stop the hostility. I get that it can get misused but to try to gatekeep all forms of art to what you consider acceptable causes a lot of harm to other people.

People like Plentiful Despair do not care about art, which is something I hold to be very important, for myself and humanity at large. Yeah, I'm gonna be aggressive toward a fundamentally anti-human point of view.

 

[username90493486]

People like Plentiful Despair do not care about art, which is something I hold to be very important, for myself and humanity at large. Yeah, I'm gonna be aggressive toward a fundamentally anti-human point of view.

Then go against them. But leave other people who might care about art alone.

Also you haven't listened anything, you just hate a specific case you use to conflate everything else. It doesn't matter this happened or the consequences or how it might help in the right cases. You start from the conclusion that it can only be bad.

Edit: I realized @Plentiful_Despair was an user, and none here seems to imply they hate artists or don't care about them.

Except it's not the same, and you're taking money out of the pockets of real human artists.

Except that you don't, because an artist with skill and AI knowledge will always be worth more than a "mere" prompter. And it'd be perfectly possible to increase production in a way that they're still necessary. AI wouldn't be as "anti-artist" (whuch isn't even true and it's a conflation by the true few who don't care about their employees) if people were open to said products.

 

[thickly_settled]

Then go against them. But leave other people who might care about art alone.

Also you haven't listened anything, you just hate a specific case you use to conflate everything else. It doesn't matter this happened or the consequences or how it might help in the right cases. You start from the conclusion that it can only be bad.

Because it can only be bad.

 

[username90493486]

Because it can only be bad.

 

[thickly_settled]

Great post, thanks for contributing.

 

[ClownWorld2023]

AI is being ruined, because of corporate greed.

Also, AI will be used to make new powerful military weapons in the (near-)future, which will be exclusive to some countries.
They will be able to use that to enforce their tyranny without facing any resistance.

This is why I don't see any future in AI as it is being marketed right now.
Just more tools for the corporate overlords to enslave humanity.

 

[Mirrory Me]

Hm. Ai art could be fascinating ( At some point there will be a machine or system that can create everything, even objects that people can use) but it wouldn't kill humans' passion for creating something for themself.

 

[Plentiful_Despair]

Except it's not the same, and you're taking money out of the pockets of real human artists.


People like Plentiful Despair do not care about art, which is something I hold to be very important, for myself and humanity at large. Yeah, I'm gonna be aggressive toward a fundamentally anti-human point of view.

Before continuing with any argument I have to ask you: Are you seeing art as some form of religious worship? That would explain how you could see AI as anti-human. Which doesnt mean it's correct, but I'm really confused why so many people in this thread same to hate it, going as far as calling my view "anti-human". As if being human is some sacred status that can't be infringed by using technology instead of the brain lmao

 

[pyx]

honestly i see art today as being so repulsive and inane that the prominence of AI art seems unimportant to me. that's a personal opinion, though. i think that its developments will undermine a lot of human creativity, especially when image generation provides far more use

painting is of no concern to me. i would, however, be very worried if AI generated novels ever gained traction in the future.

 

[untothedepths]

the pros of ai:
it does stuff well enough, somewhat
can help find media you want to find
probably some other technical stuff

cons of ai:
creating blackmail/false evidence
devaluing artists, writers, musicians because people can now create mediocrity with a click of a button
job fraud
loss of jobs
using it to kick people off their insurance
using it to write court documents
using functions of it as permissible evidence in court
creating revenge porn and other bad stuff
responsible for massive copyright theft, with no techiebros held accountable
giving improper information
helping to scam people even easier
having it do people's homework
probably more stuff

unless ai will be able to give everyone on the planet a house, food, free medical, and wont put someone in prison for some bs, AI has way more cons than pros. it only benefits the ultra wealthy in the end and sucks the soul out of everything, to potentially proliferating abuse/crimes. scew AI.