Technology

59292 readers

4034 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

377

Redditors Vent and Complain When People Mock Their "AI Art" (futurism.com)

submitted 7 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

253 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Setting aside the usual arguments on the anti- and pro-AI art debate and the nature of creativity itself, perhaps the negative reaction that the Redditor encountered is part of a sea change in opinion among many people that think corporate AI platforms are exploitive and extractive in nature because their datasets rely on copyrighted material without the original artists' permission. And that's without getting into AI's negative drag on the environment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 17 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Well, the photo in question is: https://www.flickr.com/photos/cyberspace/53570370332/

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Not to be off topic... but... Your username... wirehead... its dark and disturbing and absolutely i love it!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

We, the people who all roughly simultaneously chose the same name at roughly the same time only to engage in endless wars over who gets it on a new site, actually exist in a diverse multi-gendered animal-loving book-reading population, of which I am only one example, merely the member of our tribe who happened to nab it here. I've actually talked with other Wireheads and the similarities are interesting.

All I know is that it somehow appeared in my brain before I read the Niven book that introduced it to me. And, also, at this point in history, I find Niven and many people who operated in his orbit deeply disgusting and disturbing examples of humanity, so it's good that I came up with it on my own.

[+] [email protected] -31 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (4 children)

Which is funny cuz I've seen better ai art generated in 10 min on my laptop via CPU trained ai. Why is your photo you generated any more valid than the pic I generated? It isn't. We both did the same thing. We used a machine to make art.

You're really just pissed because mines better.

Also only llms are trained on web content and it is not stealing under any definition of the word. Their AI just looked at work presented online for free like any other not or user. None of that is illegal. Using the training data to recreate similar works is also not illegal as of right now.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 7 months ago

Asking a computer to create an image is fundamentally different from constructing a scene and photographing it. One is using a machine, skill, talent and creativity to create art. The other is having a machine generate art for you.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Do you think art is maybe more about the process of creating and physically manifesting your thoughts and emotions? Like maybe art isn't just about the end product but the joy of creation?

[–] [email protected] 12 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

If you think this debate is about which one is "better" you have fundamentally missed the point. Disregarding the AI aspect entirely, art is subjective. "Better" is completely meaningless in that context. Is it more technically proficient? Better composed? Even if answers match, it could be for entirely different reasons between people. And then there are people who will disagree entirely. There is no objective measure. So then, what is the point of art?

It's different for everyone, and it just so happens that a significant portion find AI generated compositions hollow on top of being unethical.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I wrote a small bulk file management tool that I needed for my work. I wrote it in an easy language (javascript+nodejs). It got the job done and took maybe an hour. But I noticed its flaws and imperfections. So i made a new tool in a very hard to learn language (rust) its taken me months and is already moderately better. In ~2 weeks I will have a tool that I am satisfied with enough to post on the internet for anyone to use.

I could've posted my original (crude hammer of a) tool online months ago because, on a basic level they do the same thing regardless of how pleasant it feels to use. Have it posted online to be thrown into a pit full of other tools that do similarly wacky things that are interesting for all of 10 minutes. Tools that slowly break over time. Tools that are silently forgotten.