Fuck AI art

[Cranesbill]

Some of what I've seen generated is extraordinary. But I wouldn't really call it art. Any of it. Art is supposed to be an original expression and created with emotion. This AI stuff is necessarily derivative and soulless. But still pretty cool stuff sometimes. I think we just need a new, universally adopted name for it. (not 'slop' lol)

I know the term "Third Party Thinkers" is for people who constantly use AI and chat GPT

 

[Viri]

Spoiler

EMPEROR URIEL SEPTUM, NO! NOT THAT PRISONER!

 

[Deleted member 535703]

Some of what I've seen generated is extraordinary. But I wouldn't really call it art. Any of it. Art is supposed to be an original expression and created with emotion and heart. This AI stuff is necessarily derivative and soulless. But still pretty cool stuff sometimes. I think we just need a new, universally adopted name for it. (not 'slop' lol)

If it was generated in printed form I would call it toilet paper.

 

[Deleted member 705600]

Some of what I've seen generated is extraordinary. But I wouldn't really call it art. Any of it. Art is supposed to be an original expression and created with emotion and heart. This AI stuff is necessarily derivative and soulless. But still pretty cool stuff sometimes. I think we just need a new, universally adopted name for it. (not 'slop' lol)

People are so used to just consuming that they often forget the reason we like art is because it says something about the person who created it

A machine has nothing to say, no vision to give, no reason behind anything, it just makes

 

[Sir Tortoise]

View attachment 531649

The absolutely wild thing is that this is being reported as a good thing.
This prediction isnt coming from Fortune, its coming from OpenAI themselves, who have shared it with the media. OpenAI want people to think this.
The idea that their product is going to require more than 30% of the entire US's energy supply, more than entire countries, is delicious to shareholders. That's a lot of money changing hands, a lot of infrastructure that will need to be built. So much growth. It is a level of power usage that implies their product has become critical to humanity, instead of just being an extremely inefficient bullshit generator.

...Its also a lie. Yes, OpenAI is consuming a silly amount of energy, but this is just more OpenAI marketing being repeated as fact. I called it an "idea" for a reason, OpenAI would love you to believe this is going to happen because the moment we stop shoveling money into them, the bubble is going to pop and we might have another global financial crash.

“It’s pretty amazing,” Chien said. “A year and a half ago they were talking about five gigawatts. Now they’ve upped the ante to 10, 15, even 17. There’s an ongoing escalation.”

Just another 17 gigawatts, just another trillion dollars, trust us it's gonna work. They just keep saying stupider and stupider numbers to fuel their own stock price, and the media blindly reports it like its guaranteed. The numbers left the realm of reality some time ago.

In fairness to Fortune, they do at least consult one person who is like "what? That seems impossible" but the headline still reports it as fact. They also note that the centers would cost about $850 billion, and that NVIDIA's pledged funding to build them totals... $100 billion. And the media still acts like this is 100% going to happen, because Sam Altman said so, and the guy selling AI is definitely a trustworthy source on AI.

For an outlet called Fortune, they really aren't very concerned by how Sam's wildest dreams are basically a trillion dollars short, and will be missing roughly 100% of the power he claims they'll need.

Ed Zitron's blog has looked at the deal in more detail, and its even more fucked. That $100M investment from NVIDIA isn't even upfront - OpenAI only get it after they build about $325 million of datacenter. Hey, wait a minute-

Wait, its okay, because OpenAi are also going to get Oracle to build $400M of datacenters! No, there's no actual progress on this, and Oracle is currently trying to fundraise $15 billion dollars, aka bugger all. Where is either of them going to get that money? Who the hell knows, I'm probably mixing some figures here, but Sam sure as hell doesn't know either, especially when he claims they're going to build an additional gigawatt of compute EVERY WEEK.

Over here in reality, it takes about two and a half years, and also YOU ARE A TRILLION DOLLARS SHORT, WHY ARE WE JUST REPEATING ANYTHING YOU SAY-

OpenAI's current revenue is about six (6) billion dollars. Revenue, not profit, they only ever report revenue because they burn it all in a massive pit and lose billions each year. They can totally fund all of this if they just magically grow to several hundred times their current size, and also figure out how to make pure profit from a business that currently makes negative profit on billions of dollars of investment.

so yeah, AI energy usage is horrendous and might screw any slim chance we had of mitigating climate change. But OpenAI want the situation to be orders of magnitude worse than that, because stock price go up. We are in the bad timeline.

I wonder if there's a single author who wrote about AI ending humanity without the AI even existing, simply because we all lose our minds and destablise the global economy trying to give one guy the money he says he needs. I don't know if there's a solution to this, but it is terrifying that this is what all our systems are building towards. We could be ending world hunger at a fraction of this price.

 

[MPRTwice]

AI art is not real art AI art is not real art AI art is not real art AI art is not real art

This is why AutoCAD now pays more than SpaceX, Elon Musk, etc. can afford; most find it "unbelievable" nowadays in the engineering sector to custom design 3D photorealistic homes. They are so used to pushing a few buttons and letting AutoCAD Civil 3D, Revit, etc. do all the work, and have zero of the innovation in the process.

I saw this happen with combat training a while back; from lethally effective ninteteen sixties six year old ROK Army tae-kwon-do kids to "oh my gosh; you train and spar bare-knuckled until one of you drops and throw to solid concrete on bare feet; that's super scary!" by UFC adoring people. I'm nearly surprised the coding and gaming organiziations required this long to finally go for lowest common denominator tactics like AI.

 

[lightwo]

One way generative AI training can be fought against is by telling administrators of websites you use to block AI scrapers:

https://github.com/ai-robots-txt/ai.robots.txt

It is not foolproof, because a) scrapers tend to ignore robots.txt (which the project addresses by also offering rules for web server configuration) and b) scrapers tend to spoof regular visitors with Firefox/Chrome/etc. user agents.

Regardless, it is a worthy step to take against this massive waste of electricity that destroys creativity and devalues real creative work, among many other things.

 

[MPRTwice]

One way generative AI training can be fought against is by telling administrators of websites you use to block AI scrapers:

https://github.com/ai-robots-txt/ai.robots.txt

It is not foolproof, because a) scrapers tend to ignore robots.txt (which the project addresses by also offering rules for web server configuration) and b) scrapers tend to spoof regular visitors with Firefox/Chrome/etc. user agents.

Regardless, it is a worthy step to take against this massive waste of electricity that destroys creativity and devalues real creative work.

I have to say, it is funny how the attempt to collapse society only makes it easier for me to be seen as "(Of whom the world was not worthy"; it is extremely easy at this point for SpaceX, Nintendo, "gym rats", UFC actors, etc. to see me as a "a god/spiderman/superman/batman/bane/obi wan", etc. and get all steamed about it; even the "top one percent" see me as more than an extreme annoyance because I see all of their work as pathetically underwhelming; the lazier their actions, the bigger that gap gets, and it _frustrates_ them, even this morning. So since they are trying to mock everyone by lowering standards, they in effect mock themselves by me being around as a reminder that I can do so much more and choose _not_ to.

They can lose all that power to me in a heartbeat and here I am laughing that they _know_ that, just as they _know_ I am fully content _not_ having it knowing where it leads.

"you could be the richest man in history!"
Me: I know.
"so why not!?"
Me: I saw where it leads; I'd rather have Eternal Life and inner peace that billionaires told me they could not find by doing things their way; I told them they are welcome to join me here at the Christianity table if they want; the offer is a limited time only, but right now it still stands.
"But that's you. I want to be rich."
Me: Yes, you already told me that, so here is my question: why does my choice to _not_ be rich and help people as a Christian bother _you_?
"..."
Me: you appear quite bothered that I get my satisfaction from helping others and asking for nothing in return; if you love your bugatti shiron so much, why be bothered to try to drive it in front of me? Are you yet lacking something important that I have, that a two million dollar car in your possession does _not_?
"I really want to break your neck."
Me: The green berets already tried that.
"!?"
Me: Training session, green beret, trained at a base camp with the ROK Army, went for breaking my neck immediately in Special Forces training, I countered with a double elbow upset; obviously he went full speed and we both agreed to stop just short of death or crippling, but I won. I have to yawn at your empty threat sir.
"Well [redacted] you!"
Me: Ooh, I did not expect you to rely on namecalling so soon sir; what's the matter? Ran out of skill? Is this a skill issue from a rich man behind closed doors? you gotta work on your skills; I am surpirsed you had nothing left in a debate with me so soon. Couldn't you have at least shown me your "accomplishments" in a multi-billion dollar business or something?
"..."

 

[MeowthBlep]

imo all generative ai is bad

 

[Magnus87]

Not everyone has the ability to draw, so I think it's good that they have a tool to help them with their projects.

 

[lightwo]

Not everyone has the ability to draw, so I think it's good that they have a tool to help them with their projects.

That leads to artists having fewer job opportunities. "No budget" indies who would be using these tools could lead to generations of high-budget developers dismissing artist roles entirely.

There's a huge difference between work "AI" replaces and what it complements. It could be used complementary such that, as an artist, you get a general idea for a pose, setting, etc. if you have trouble imagining fine details. However, if you tell it to do it all and outright replace an artist, all human touch disappears, and you end up with something that takes a lot of effort to remove all oddities, and lose all creativity in the process.

"AI" is a gateway drug that makes you feel very productive, when in reality you pave the way to sacrificing all control to the same companies and governments that were responsible for evolving these tools. Sweetening it with seemingly benign use cases doesn't help at all.

 

[Cranesbill]

Not everyone has the ability to draw, so I think it's good that they have a tool to help them with their projects.

You’re saying it like drawing references never existed

 

[Magnus87]

When photography appeared, many painters jumped in shouting, "This has no soul." The same thing happened when digital art emerged; veterans claimed that lacking the imperfections of traditional art, it took away the humanity of the work.

Let's face it, "artists" have always been ignored by society in general; now, thanks to the internet and commissions, a 15-year-old Venezuelan can earn a couple of dollars.

So if you weren't going to hire an artist, you're even less likely to do so now.

Be careful! I'm not saying that an AI is superior to an artist; that would be like saying supermarket food is better than your grandmother's, which isn't true.

Look at programmers; most of them copy and paste other people's code. Now, with AI, it's the same thing, but more specific, without having to browse multiple forums.

You’re saying it like drawing references never existed

Imagine you want to make a dating sim.
With AI, you have the code for Unity, Godot, Unreal, or even a third-party game engine without using it.
Then you ask the AI to design characters based on descriptions.
Finally, you ask the AI to design the backgrounds.

You now have your game ready to publish. Obviously, if the game is bad, it will be bad with or without AI.

 

[Cranesbill]

When photography appeared, many painters jumped in shouting, "This has no soul." The same thing happened when digital art emerged; veterans claimed that lacking the imperfections of traditional art, it took away the humanity of the work.

Let's face it, "artists" have always been ignored by society in general; now, thanks to the internet and commissions, a 15-year-old Venezuelan can earn a couple of dollars.

So if you weren't going to hire an artist, you're even less likely to do so now.

Be careful! I'm not saying that an AI is superior to an artist; that would be like saying supermarket food is better than your grandmother's, which isn't true.

Look at programmers; most of them copy and paste other people's code. Now, with AI, it's the same thing, but more specific, without having to browse multiple forums.



Imagine you want to make a dating sim.
With AI, you have the code for Unity, Godot, Unreal, or even a third-party game engine without using it.
Then you ask the AI to design characters based on descriptions.
Finally, you ask the AI to design the backgrounds.

You now have your game ready to publish. Obviously, if the game is bad, it will be bad with or without AI.

At least you have the Dignity to actually try, no one’s gonna defend you if you used it out of laziness

 

[lightwo]

When photography appeared, many painters jumped in shouting, "This has no soul." The same thing happened when digital art emerged; veterans claimed that lacking the imperfections of traditional art, it took away the humanity of the work.

Drawn art obviously can't be argued against. Photos are another art form that's a lot about finding the right moment and taking the photo right. AI isn't art, it is telling the computer to plagiarise the works of millions of people and merge them into something that is fundamentally not unique.

Let's face it, "artists" have always been ignored by society in general; now, thanks to the internet and commissions, a 15-year-old Venezuelan can earn a couple of dollars.

So if you weren't going to hire an artist, you're even less likely to do so now.

What? Doesn't that make it much more likely to hire an artist?

Look at programmers; most of them copy and paste other people's code. Now, with AI, it's the same thing, but more specific, without having to browse multiple forums.

Now it's about generating much larger chunks of code. What most (novice) programmers also do is not scrutinise the code they copy. "AI"-generated code had no eyes on it prior to being posted/generated, and there have already been many cases of "AI"-generated code causing problems because no person is the author, so a full understanding thereof is often unrealistic.

Imagine you want to make a dating sim.
With AI, you have the code for Unity, Godot, Unreal, or even a third-party game engine without using it.
Then you ask the AI to design characters based on descriptions.
Finally, you ask the AI to design the backgrounds.

You now have your game ready to publish. Obviously, if the game is bad, it will be bad with or without AI.

So vibe code the whole game from the ground-up and even generate all the art? What's even the point any more? The only skill you get is using "AI" to replace all specialised work, just to sell a story that could as well be written entirely in text...

If the story is supposed to be so great, why not pitch it to a team of competent artists and game developers instead? That way, they continue having work on their hands they can get paid for.

 

[slam2001]

Oh Booo Hooo, Someone get this Kid a WAAmbulance

 

[Skv0ra]

When photography appeared, many painters jumped in shouting, "This has no soul." The same thing happened when digital art emerged; veterans claimed that lacking the imperfections of traditional art, it took away the humanity of the work.

Let's face it, "artists" have always been ignored by society in general; now, thanks to the internet and commissions, a 15-year-old Venezuelan can earn a couple of dollars.

So if you weren't going to hire an artist, you're even less likely to do so now.

Be careful! I'm not saying that an AI is superior to an artist; that would be like saying supermarket food is better than your grandmother's, which isn't true.

Look at programmers; most of them copy and paste other people's code. Now, with AI, it's the same thing, but more specific, without having to browse multiple forums.



Imagine you want to make a dating sim.
With AI, you have the code for Unity, Godot, Unreal, or even a third-party game engine without using it.
Then you ask the AI to design characters based on descriptions.
Finally, you ask the AI to design the backgrounds.

You now have your game ready to publish. Obviously, if the game is bad, it will be bad with or without AI.

Typically, if you're that lazy and unresourceful otherwise, chances are that your writing and idea are both slops and shouldn't really see the light of day. If you have THAT much of a brilliant idea, it's always possible to pool in a willing crew to help realize it, and also acts as a great product lead testing ground. Also level of dedication - if you are willing to dump your "hard earned" resources into getting other folks on-board, your idea might be worth a damn vs just pure "vibe" slop.

Drawn art obviously can't be argued against. Photos are another art form that's a lot about finding the right moment and taking the photo right. AI isn't art, it is telling the computer to plagiarise the works of millions of people and merge them into something that is fundamentally not unique.


What? Doesn't that make it much more likely to hire an artist?


Now it's about generating much larger chunks of code. What most (novice) programmers also do is not scrutinise the code they copy. "AI"-generated code had no eyes on it prior to being posted/generated, and there have already been many cases of "AI"-generated code causing problems because no person is the author, so a full understanding thereof is often unrealistic.


So vibe code the whole game from the ground-up and even generate all the art? What's even the point any more? The only skill you get is using "AI" to replace all specialised work, just to sell a story that could as well be written entirely in text...

If the story is supposed to be so great, why not pitch it to a team of competent artists and game developers instead? That way, they continue having work on their hands they can get paid for.

Exactly! Mostly, from my being pretty code-allergic, most of what AI will scrub are Q/As from noobs without a set, finessed solution to a problem, so the entire thing becomes a compilation of slop that the lazy slob AI "vibing" it will never be able to debug.

And then when art style is lacking entirely due to the whole process fighting itself to avoid copyright likeness - you get the idea.


We'll absolutely see a return for coder and artist need, and soon, since AI already locked itself into a closed loop when it comes to making a profit by being unable to blatantly rip a style akin even to an ever-gray area of "fan-art clause," that isn't immune to copyright litigation either. Ever wonder why majority of fan art is either small as a whole or NOT on any major sales platforms online, especially today?

 

[Magnus87]

Typically, if you're that lazy and unresourceful otherwise, chances are that your writing and idea are both slops and shouldn't really see the light of day. If you have THAT much of a brilliant idea, it's always possible to pool in a willing crew to help realize it, and also acts as a great product lead testing ground. Also level of dedication - if you are willing to dump your "hard earned" resources into getting other folks on-board, your idea might be worth a damn vs just pure "vibe" slop.

Obviously, AI won't make you the best overnight. Not everyone can build a team; many projects start with just one person, and only when the project takes shape do others come forward wanting to collaborate.

Your idea will be bad with or without AI.

As for debugging code, it's the same as when you copied and pasted a piece of code from a forum. If you don't know what you're doing, it's much harder to correct it and adapt it to your needs.

When I studied Engineering back in 2006, one of the professors let us use the internet during exams, but if you hadn't prepared for the test, you certainly wouldn't find the answer online, much less modify or explain it.

 

[Skv0ra]

When I studied Engineering back in 2006, one of the professors let us use the internet during exams, but if you hadn't prepared for the test, you certainly wouldn't find the answer online, much less modify or explain it.

When I studied GIS, our intro to "programming" advanced course in geography dept had that as a feature, and while I adored that, guess what? That did not teach me to code, much understand, nor be able to properly debug per se. I learned the bare minimum to get very, very, very much by pertaining to the class and that was akin to real life, but I wasn't to push out a polished final piece of soft to a public i was charging for.

It was an excellent glimpse at how IRL works for lots of more tech-inclined jobs would likely go, but it wasn't proper learning if you could graze by. We had kids who could take that "google at the time base code" and by actually understanding how to, condense it to a single line. I've witnessed that, and realized that learning all of that was just not for me.

If you're gonna be a proper game dev, you absolutely should fully understand wtf you're making run your sub functions and vibe coding will never do that unless you......study and learn it.

Then we get back to presenting a retail product to public, for money - you absolutely want to avoid negative feedback there and knowing damn-well you can't do it yourself - you reach out to people who can and want to.

 

[Magnus87]

I completely agree that we need to learn how to do it!

However, AI can be part of that process, as it's just another tool at your disposal.

Should we teach math? Of course, but that doesn't mean we can't use calculators.

This is just the beginning and it's not going to stop, so we need to start adapting and evolving, because AI is here now and will be here long after we die.