by Prof Sai » Tue Sep 12, 2023 10:06 pm
I've been searching around and I actually don't think that Shrunken Woman Board has an AI art thread. Searching for one has proven to be a problem because of how search on this forum works.
I'm hoping this thread doesn't get too angry, as others have, and sticks to observable and measurable facts. I'm interested in conversation where there seems like a chance I could learn something new, or help others understand the world better.
I'll start off with a new idea, and might quote from other threads later:
Using copyright as a tool to suppress AI generators could have a nasty unforeseen consequence, that is exactly the opposite of what AI opponents want:
If you say that an AI art databases must only be trained on art licenced for that specific purpose, what will be the effect? I expect that AI opponents are hoping that the whole field will just disappear as a result. But they are forgetting something very important:
Disney.
Disney owns enough work that they could easily create a powerful AI database. (
A few other media companies do too.). They could even hire a bunch of starving chinese artists in to imitate Miyazaki or any other non-Disney artist and teach their database to imitate that style. So big corporations like Disney would not be limited at all by such a ruling, and could hire dramatically fewer artists.
But what about artists like myself, or anyone else here willing to do SW or fetish art? Well none of us have money to hire anyone, so no artistic careers will be saved. We will however face huge limitations and be set back relative to what Disney can do. And with Disney owning the tools, they would also control who gets to learn how to use them. That will totally squash new innovation. The situation we have now is far more amicable to innovation. I hope we get reasonable accommodations for the hard work of artists, including AI artists. (Jackson Pollock, anyone?)
I've read some people honestly talking about jail time for AI users. I'm sure the US prison industry is looking forward to that.
HHunter1 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 11, 2023 12:28 pm
I don't fear AI I know what it is. A crutch that will become depended on even though its unnecessary
People said this about cars. No one who can walk really
needs one.
HHunter1 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 11, 2023 12:28 pm
Ai is art by committee without the committee. It'll be the cheap means for companies to pump out more and more cookie cutter products. Heck
cars all look the same now
There is an inherent paradox in many arguments against AI:
1) AI output is terrible, and no one will watch it.
2) Artists will suffer because everyone will be watching the AI.
Obviously one of those things needs to be false, or else you are just being elitist and dismissing the opinions of most people.
[size=85][i]I've been searching around and I actually don't think that Shrunken Woman Board has an AI art thread. Searching for one has proven to be a problem because of how search on this forum works.
I'm hoping this thread doesn't get too angry, as others have, and sticks to observable and measurable facts. I'm interested in conversation where there seems like a chance I could learn something new, or help others understand the world better.
I'll start off with a new idea, and might quote from other threads later:[/i][/size]
[b]Using copyright as a tool to suppress AI generators could have a nasty unforeseen consequence, that is exactly the opposite of what AI opponents want:[/b]
If you say that an AI art databases must only be trained on art licenced for that specific purpose, what will be the effect? I expect that AI opponents are hoping that the whole field will just disappear as a result. But they are forgetting something very important: [b]Disney[/b].
Disney owns enough work that they could easily create a powerful AI database. ([size=70]A few other media companies do too.[/size]). They could even hire a bunch of starving chinese artists in to imitate Miyazaki or any other non-Disney artist and teach their database to imitate that style. So big corporations like Disney would not be limited at all by such a ruling, and could hire dramatically fewer artists.
But what about artists like myself, or anyone else here willing to do SW or fetish art? Well none of us have money to hire anyone, so no artistic careers will be saved. We will however face huge limitations and be set back relative to what Disney can do. And with Disney owning the tools, they would also control who gets to learn how to use them. That will totally squash new innovation. The situation we have now is far more amicable to innovation. I hope we get reasonable accommodations for the hard work of artists, including AI artists. (Jackson Pollock, anyone?)
I've read some people honestly talking about jail time for AI users. I'm sure the US prison industry is looking forward to that.
[quote=HHunter1 post_id=33368 time=1694435312 user_id=5521]
I don't fear AI I know what it is. A crutch that will become depended on even though its unnecessary
[/quote]
People said this about cars. No one who can walk really [i]needs[/i] one.
[quote=HHunter1 post_id=33368 time=1694435312 user_id=5521]
Ai is art by committee without the committee. It'll be the cheap means for companies to pump out more and more cookie cutter products. Heck [i]cars[/i] all look the same now[/quote]
There is an inherent paradox in many arguments against AI:
1) AI output is terrible, and no one will watch it.
2) Artists will suffer because everyone will be watching the AI.
Obviously one of those things needs to be false, or else you are just being elitist and dismissing the opinions of most people.