Toggle sidebar

Fuck AI art

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cranesbill
  • Start date Start date
  • Views Views 21,440
  • Replies Replies 369
  • Likes Likes 34
Noctosphere said:
I still don't get it, and you know that your point doesn't stand because you didn't even MAKE A POINT!!! :rofl2::rofl2::rofl2::rofl2:
Wether it's a good or bad one, you should actually make a point for it to stand.
Click to expand...
And you should like, cherish the value of Human Work
Development
 
Noctosphere said:
I do, but I still don't get your point. (BTW, I'm pretty sure steam engine train were considered a treat to humanity back in the 1800's. Just like you consider AI a treat to human creativity)
Click to expand...
Uh no, they were considered as scary due to their complex designs

Before them it was horses carrying cargo, or these box tank engines
Neilson 0-4-0 Box Tank : r/CreateMod
 
Cranesbill said:
Uh no, they were considered as scary due to their complex designs

Before them it was horses carrying cargo, or these box tank engines
Neilson 0-4-0 Box Tank : r/CreateMod
Click to expand...
You know that for heavier weight, horses wouldn't do the job either? They would use other, stronger animals, like cattles or mooses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skv0ra
Noctosphere said:
I do, but I still don't get your point. (BTW, I'm pretty sure steam engine train were considered a treat to humanity back in the 1800's. Just like you consider AI a treat to human creativity)
Click to expand...

I mean yeah you can make that comparative with everything but it's kinda of a strawman you know, if that is the case you cannot complain about any sort of advancement because "well before people thought trains were gonna be bad and now we like trains"

We cannot predict the future but is not like the unregulated evolution of technology in the last two centuries hasn't put us in a lot of issues that we still have no answers for. We weren't prepared for a lot of things and we aren't prepared for this one either.

If I complain that AI generated art has a lot of issues with what we usually define as art, this is not me being against the future or being against tech, it is simply a matter of fact that we cannot ignore the obvious ramifications that appear when you can make a computer spawn in seconds something visually similar as a "pretty image" (even if lacking understanding, technique, intentionality, etc)

If there is demand for it, and there will be, doesn't make the problems we already have in the way we consume media and understand it less bad, it kinda worsens it actually

And I could go on and on and yeah, my point is that this tech has problems, has obvious problems that people are pointing out and whatever this stays or not, people need and have the right to point them out in the hopes of giving this a better purpose (even as futile as may seem, indiference is the death of change). The technology is not bad, technology by itself is not anything, but we have a record of engaging with it in very damaging ways
 
Magnus87 said:
As humanity progresses, technology constantly redefines the role of work. From the earliest mechanisms like levers and pulleys, a trend was already evident: each technological innovation displaced functions that previously required human intervention.

This pattern intensified with the first industrial revolution, when automation began to replace manual tasks en masse. Decades later, the emergence of media like television once again altered the labor landscape, impacting entire industries.
The evolution didn't stop there. In their early days, computers were enormous and required specialized equipment to operate. Today, that same capacity fits in your pocket, accessible to everyone.
Even in everyday life, the change is evident. Organizing a party used to involve hiring a DJ and a professional photographer. Now, a playlist on digital platforms is all it takes, and the images are shared spontaneously in the group created for the occasion.
In this context, artificial intelligence represents the next step. Does it have flaws? Of course. It's in its early stages, comparable to asking an Atari 2600 to reproduce graphics from an NES or Master System. But as with every previous advancement, its impact will be profound and transformative.
Click to expand...
No need to write out a whole history lesson for me as if we were in the 80's and I was saying "the internet won't ever take off". What you call artificial intelligence is still just machine learning, not something that replicates actual intelligence. Do you know what you are dealing with or are you just parroting the stuff Sam Altman says to get investors involved on his money burning scheme?
I'm not saying scientist will never be able to create something that you can truly call artificial intelligence, but boy are we far from that. And it sickens me that people like you hype up a statistical model that has no inherent ability to think for itself as some kind of revolution. If it was, it would not hallucinate as much, it would not require more than a few examples to gather new knowledge and it could connect pieces of knowledge to create new knowledge. I am talking logic. Instead it lacks any kind of logic and only spits out what the algorithm deems most likely to be correct. In terms of art, it only tries its best to replicate what it has already seen as part of its training data. But that training data is a million times more than the average human would need to learn the same thing. Those models learn for multiple human lifetimes and still produce stuff of lesser quality.

That being said, we have reached the point where training a model to do a decent job is basically a financial suicide. Not only that, but it takes with it natural resources that could have been put to better use. If you want me to believe that bs, make it 1000 times more efficient first and I may overlook the poor results.

Again, I do not say I am opposed to AI in general, but to the unfinished abomination they call AI right now. When chatGPT released I was in college, tried it out and said I would have given the technology 10 more years before releasing it to the masses. That was based on knowledge about the intricacies of machine learning that I received through lectured before. Today, despite the advances, I would correct my estimate to 20 years or more.

I hope that now you understand why I am not as hyped as you are. I just don't like unfinished products.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cranesbill
Axido said:
I hope that now you understand why I am not as hyped as you are. I just don't like unfinished products.
Click to expand...


At no point did I say I was hyped for AI, I just find it funny to see "artists" complaining because people prefer to use AI instead of paying them a commission.
 
Magnus87 said:
At no point did I say I was hyped for AI, I just find it funny to see "artists" complaining because people prefer to use AI instead of paying them a commission.
Click to expand...
They don’t have to pay us, just learn instead of being lazy, it’s gonna affect you real bad if you rely on it so much

Have you learned nothing from Mr.Rogers?
1762521119260.jpeg

1762521140991.jpeg

1762521155417.jpeg
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Magnus87
Magnus87 said:
At no point did I say I was hyped for AI, I just find it funny to see "artists" complaining because people prefer to use AI instead of paying them a commission.
Click to expand...
What I find funny is how people think you can get a perfect, finished result with some prompt, how it's easy to use AI to get whatever you want, when it's actually not that simple
Post automatically merged:

Cranesbill said:
They don’t have to pay us, just learn instead of being lazy, it’s gonna affect you real bad if you rely on it so much

Have you learned nothing from Mr.Rogers?
View attachment 537407
View attachment 537408
View attachment 537409
Click to expand...
ROFL, he just proved my point while I was writting
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Magnus87
Noctosphere said:
What I find funny is how people think you can get a perfect, finished result with some prompt, how it's easy to use AI to get whatever you want, when it's actually not that simple
Click to expand...
Yeah, it’s sooo haarddd trying to type a prompt

It’s soooo haaarrd using my fingers to type something
Magnus87 said:
I'm from the Art Attack era.

Click to expand...

The fuck that does mean???? You just gave me a comercial encouraging juman creativity
 
Noctosphere said:
They based their work off Einstein's work. My point was "Technology is not bad. It's how people use it that may be..."
Click to expand...
Well if you go that route you better include all other great physicists before Einstein, like Ernest Rutherford, Niels Bohr or Max Planck, because without their work / findings no one would get an atom bom.
 
Exnor said:
Well if you go that route you better include all other great physicists before Einstein, like Ernest Rutherford, Niels Bohr or Max Planck, because without their work / findings no one would get an atom bom.
Click to expand...
Alright then, "I don't think Newton or Planck or Kelvin or any of the other scientists from 11th century planed to kill people with nukes"
I hope you still get my point when I said "The tech is not good or evil, only what you do with it is"

Cranesbill said:
Yeah, it’s sooo haarddd trying to type a prompt

It’s soooo haaarrd using my fingers to type something
Click to expand...
Well, you told us this
Cranesbill said:
They don’t have to pay us, just learn instead of being lazy, it’s gonna affect you real bad if you rely on it so much
Click to expand...
You tell us to "learn instead of being lazy"
Again, typing prompt and expecting to get a perfect result is not how AI works (Unless you really want pure random stuff).
If you want specific stuff in an AI image, that is not how it works. You need to learn how to use them.
Checkpoint, Lora, ControlNet, Workflow, etc.
If all you do is "type prompt, get an image" then you are as good at generating image as this dude is to paint a house
1762540013375.jpeg
 
Noctosphere said:
Alright then, "I don't think Newton or Planck or Kelvin or any of the other scientists from 11th century planed to kill people with nukes"
I hope you still get my point when I said "The tech is not good or evil, only what you do with it is"
Click to expand...

Yes i did understand your point and a i fully agree. Technology is not evil or good. Evil people will use any technology to do evil things.
Even a simple rock can be used by evil people to do evil acts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Noctosphere
Karoi said:
I dont mind AI art as long as it is mentioned. Same with reproductions.
And yes, I work as a Graphic Designer and Audio, Video Designer/Editor.
Click to expand...
Yeah that's what they said back then with NFT's

Now look at this shit
https://www.npr.org/2025/11/06/nx-s1-5597971/electricity-bills-utilities-ai
Post automatically merged:

Noctosphere said:
Alright then, "I don't think Newton or Planck or Kelvin or any of the other scientists from 11th century planed to kill people with nukes"
I hope you still get my point when I said "The tech is not good or evil, only what you do with it is"


Well, you told us this

You tell us to "learn instead of being lazy"
Again, typing prompt and expecting to get a perfect result is not how AI works (Unless you really want pure random stuff).
If you want specific stuff in an AI image, that is not how it works. You need to learn how to use them.
Checkpoint, Lora, ControlNet, Workflow, etc.
If all you do is "type prompt, get an image" then you are as good at generating image as this dude is to paint a house
View attachment 537436
Click to expand...
What you describe is "thinking" and giving extra steps to a phrase "typing a prompt" as if it's a complex matter

+ don't call THE Mr.Rogers "dude" This man did more than the past 2 generations will ever do
 

Site & Scene News

Go to forum More news