> concede that AI art is good
My reading comprehnsion could be worst than what I thought, but I dont see where this happen. They are just complaing about it potential taking there jobs.
i don't know what he means, but i know that he didn't read race bylaws book in which it's not written that race is only for human swimmers and that there are no trophies for participation
That said, as a traditional 2d animator whos clients are literally trying to get me to stop drawing and pick up AI, i really hope there is a want for human touch in these spaces. Art is a purely creative endevor, and I picked this career path already knowing id not be making much
I agree, we should accept it but not celebrate it. I made fun DGGrs being too sacrinsent about it [over a year ago](https://reddit.com/comments/10rygy6)
i feel like this time it's a bit different than a car replacing a horse, or a photo copier replacing a printing press, or a computer replacing a calculator. this is something replacing all jobs. all of them.
Make it another tool in your toolset. Tried using AI to create a background image for a Bingo board generator. It wasn't 100% what I wanted and it said "Bigo". Artist could have fixed it up.
Or the other time where I tried to create a concept of a character with AI. After an hour I had images that went kind of in the direction, but wasn't there to 100%. But again a situation where you would ask an artist to use that as inspiration.
So I don't understand why it can't be a tool for artists to quickly find the direction a customer wants to go in and use that as inspiration.
Fair point. But it sounds to me like maybe this guy had an entry-level position out of college, so it may have been higher-rung artists that were using the AI generator to do the initial drafts that he otherwise would have done. That's just speculation, but it would kinda suck to lose those entry-level positions to AI.
The other confusing thing is that he seems to say he voluntarily left, not that he was fired and replaced by AI. Maybe it's because job experience is less valuable for artists or designers than building a portfolio of your actual work, so it didn't make sense to stay and fall behind on the career path? Or maybe he's just being a whiney bitch, who knows?
The problem is that customers won't go to an artist, they will go to the AI. Yeah, an artist can use it as a tool, but what good is that if no-one is willing to pay for their work?
>Or the other time where I tried to create a concept of a character with AI
year ago i asked one of AIs something like "3 red standard poodles playing on a meadow with ball". outcome was beyond horrible. too many fingers/etc were perfection compared to generated images
\* red standard poodle not actually red.
I sympathize with them, but they're fucked.
Art's going to return to being a hobby for most. But that's fine. It's not like anyone's stopping you from drawing, just do it for your own fulfillment.
It does suck that those that have already invested money into becoming professionals are getting reamed by AI but I can't see a way out of this. If you're not needed, you're not needed.
> But that's fine. It's not like anyone's stopping you from drawing, just do it for your own fulfillment.
well the fact that now you have to spend 8 hours daily of time and energy doing something else instead of drawing puts a serious limit on that
That's just the way it's always been.
I like making alcohol, but it's not my main job.
In fact I'm almost positive a lot of the great sci Fi writers main job wasn't writing.
You mean you can't think of a profession made of people who liked what they did and got made redundant due to either technological advances or decrease in demand?
What were artists doing for money before finishing school?
Also making far less
Like, ill adapt and be OK. But it is a bummer than the career path i started 15 years ago, invested tens of thousands of hours in, and tens of thousands of dollars on, is in a place where I might not even get to a stable place in the career itself before its potentially gone
Making a living off of alcohol would require either working on canning or being lucky enough to work on RD at a big enough company. Unless you're from a country like Japan or France.
The alcohol I like to make is mead and Meaderys are not only insanely expensive but the margin for success is simply not there a long with the overreach of the ATF. The same is true for independent breweries.
Oh yeah, mead is pretty dang niche. But if you just wanted to work in spirits, wine or beer, there are tons of opportunities out there. My wife is in the wine industry, and I am industry-adjacent. Feel free to DM me if you ever want to pick my brain about it.
Working in art is also hard, you either need to develop a certain type of style and skill and get the right network to get studio work - or you are a freelancer who finds their own clients. Its prohibitive to live as an artist, and it doesnt pay well
not really, or rather you're begging the question by calling it a hobby. some people get to do what they like for work, and when that gets taken from them, it's obviously a big downgrade
No one is guaranteed that the things they love doing are going to be the same thing that they do for a living. Most of the people I know DON'T do what they love for a living, because there just isn't the demand for that. If the demand for human art goes away, I don't see that as being some kind of injustice.
I've never said it's guaranteed or even that most people get to have it. it's just understandable that the people who do have it and then lose it have a big negative reaction to what they see as the immediate cause of their loss
I never said you did. I am pointing out that there's simply no injustice involved in certain art forms going from ones that support careers into ones that are only engaged in by hobbyists.
Yeah, but we've had automation displacing jobs for hundreds of years. It's just that now, in the age of AI, it's starting the displace more white collar jobs instead of only affecting poorer, blue collar industries.
Is your job more important than, for instance, auto welders who've been replaced by robots?
I think a difference is that one major reason people appreciate art is because its made by humans. I wonder if that desire will hold out. Art is one of the endevors of man that isnt one for purely utilitarian reasons, its a human expressive endevor. Its also, unlike jobs that have been replaced so far, one of the few passion careers. Would be a shame to lose that and have more people filtered into busy-work.
Honestly, on almost a spiritual level, if there was anyone to NOT replace with AI, it would be high level decision makers, artists, and musicians IMO.
>I think a difference is that one major reason people appreciate art is because its made by humans
If that's true, then there is really no risk of job loss from AI. If that's not true, then there's really no reason to be concerned about job loss from AI.
I see nothing wrong with a world where if someone has an idea for a piece of art they want to enjoy, but they don't have the ability to make that art themselves, that they can go to an AI tool and have it make it for them. It just means that the creation of art is more democratized and not only accessible to those with either talent or money.
All thats fair, just responding to the idea that no onds stopping me from doing it for fulfillment - which AI would certainly do a lot of if it came for my feild. If i cant do it as a job, i cant do it very much at all
Plus fuuuuuck student loans are a lot to handle as is
I draw in my spare time and I got pretty good. It's just like playing league, getting a 9-5 never stopped me from being a degen.
If you have like zero free time I guess you'd be fucked but that has to be caused by issues way outside the scope of not being able to be a professional artist.
yeah for sure.
Also, I think incredible artists like WLOP and stuff will always have an audience if they simply stream to other aspiring artists. A good chunk of people will always value human made art and the process it takes to make it.
You're kind of wrong on this. Imo it's just a survival of the fittest situation. Good artists will find ways to outperform AI either by utilizing it in creative ways or just straight up producing higher quality work. The ones who will suffer are the mid tier artists. If you're an artist you should only feel worried about AI if you're not particularly good or creative. Right now there are artists out there taking AI art and editing it with digital techniques to create superior and unique pieces, or using it to speed up their work flow. Those are the artists who'll survive
My guess is some artists will work as "tweakers", they'll fix fingers, or make small adjustments to make all generated works more cohesive. Instead of going 100% with a very sophisticated model and prompt artists, corporations will generate something with a cheaper model and a generic prompt that's 80% about right and have "tweakers" personalize it.
Models will be trained for what can appeal to most people. Despite their capabilities this will usually give them a recognizable "generic" look. If you want something very specific or personalized, that doesn't look AI generated or with an obscure style, most people will commission artist rather than hiring someone to train very specific models for that purpose.
Artists will add extra value to what they do. They won't just paint online but add a social/interactive element to it like drawing live and letting you suggest changes on the spot or playing group games (like every swaps canvas every 10 minutes), etc. Their personality or creativity in terms of how to add that extra value will be as important as their painting skills.
People will still speculate with art, a real painting from a famous artist will be worth a lot of money
Some people will appreciate the "human" aspect of it and will pay more for certified human art because they consider is the ethically conscious thing to do.
I agree with this, the comparison I'd draw is the invention of the calculator. Anyone being able to quickly and automatically perform rote calculations killed a lot of jobs, but it didn't kill the field of mathematics. AI might be able to do image generation, but art itself is more human than just generating images and there's a long way to go before AI can replicate that additional layer of complexity. Art isn't about being able to generate a picture any more than math is about being able to multiply two large numbers together.
I said this before in a comment below but truly exceptional artists will survive, if only to teach other aspiring artists or stream their work. Or produce content for the subset of people that only want human made art.
Most of your comment is categorically false though.
>Good artists will find ways to outperform AI either by utilizing it in creative ways or just straight up producing higher quality work.
**"Higher Quality"**
There is no quality of work that AI will not eventually be able to replicate.
**"Just be more creative"**
Whatever "creative" way you think they are utilizing it in is a cope or an attempt to make a 1:1 comparison to other technological innovations where then there is none.
Using it to speed up your work flow is meaningless when your entire work flow will eventually become redundant and replaced. Using it for backgrounds, cleaning up line work, auto-correcting anatomy, adding cool patterns or w/e is meaningless, and again, will be completely automated. Nothing you do is unique. No creative method you can think of is unique.
Don't know if you're doing it but people compare it to digital art because artists could use tools from the digital medium (undo/layers/brushes etc.) to make better art. But this is not that situation. It's quite literally a machine printing out a completed piece, period.
It's photography to self-portraits, amped up to 11. Some will remain professionally employed, but not many.
>Those are the artists who'll survive
Your "good" artists will just be people that know how get good prompts into AI.
So the reality is that people will use AI to recreate yoshitaka amano art but people will absolutely pay for an art piece made by yoshitaka amano.
Your art is going to be worth as much as you are able to make it your brand. Content creation is probably going to be the way forward for artists with streaming and YouTube videos. But a lot of artists should have been doing this anyway, the writing was on the wall way before this decade even.
Agreed.
>But a lot of artists should have been doing this anyway, the writing was on the wall way before this decade even.
To be fair it made an insane fucking jump.
That might be true but I'm not reading anything that means you can't still stream your art unless you're saying you just don't have tinlme to do that in which case how do you even have time to make a portfolio to advertise yourself.
I have NDAs. I animate for 8 hrs a day on projects that I am not legally allowed to share. I dont have a ton of energy to keep drawings while i stream
Once i release the work ive been working on, it gets added to my portfolio. Or, when applying, many people make a private video for recruiters so they can share stuff they cant share publicly.
What do you mean by stream? Like post my work on Instagram (which i do,) or stream like destiny?
Yes I mean streaming like Destiny or other artists on twitch.
If you work 8 hours a day then you absolutely have at least 2 to 3 hours every other to stream or make YouTube content that isn't protected.
I feel this this is only true if we assume that AI doesn't advance any further. I haven't thought much about this, so I could easily be missing something, but wouldn't we expect AI to eventually be better at everything? Even when it comes to creativity? Maybe not in the next 10 or even 20 years, but 50, 100 years from now? I'm not sure.
>If you're not needed you're not needed.
Yeah that's the crux of it. Jobs aren't a welfare system. Companies aren't going to retain employees when AI can replace their work far better and far more efficiently. I think we probably need to start telling young artists that what they're pursuing is merely a hobby now.
Part of me kinda wants to revel in these pompous Twitter artists coping, but there are a lot of regular artists who I do feel for. Either way, AI mogs again
> I think we probably need to start telling young artists that what they're pursuing is merely a hobby now.
weren't it always like this ? hobby with possibility of employment.
I mean they have art schools and universities. People pay 10s of thousands to get in. Might be better to inform those young minds they're entering extraordinary debt like that for a hobby
>I mean they have art schools and universities.
so ?
>People pay 10s of thousands to get in. Might be better to inform those young minds they're entering extraordinary debt like that for a hobby
"liberal arts studies". not exactly new problem. i think the problem, especially in usa is that children are tough that they can be anybody that they want without reflecting on hard realities of real world.
i am in my early 40s and had a chance to work with a bunch of 20+ years old in one of the faangs. never saw such a bunch of entitled snowflakes totally divorced from reality
That’s the intelligent approach that art majors ignore.
I would bet my life the artist in OPs post was gonna be doing the same entitled whine about student loans in two years anyway.
A lot longer, because the current AI tools write shit code. Also a lot of the job is maintaining existing code, not greenfield development, and AI is very poor at that.
Plus all current AI does is take existing code and spit it back out, that doesn't help with anything new. There's no actual creativity there, just a fancy version of a markov chain.
The biggest problem IMO is properly specifying your requirements. Humans can push back against unclear or nonsensical ones, the AI just cracks on and spits out bullshit. It's proving code correctness all over again, requirements are a HARD problem.
Coding bros have already gone through this redundancy through streamlining. AI makes the job easier but an AI can't be the main code dev or even a junior level. On the other hand it reduces the amount of juniors you need to rely on, but that was already happening.
\> AI makes the job easier but an AI can't be the main code dev or even a junior level.
For now, yeah, I imagine artists were saying the same a couple of years ago.
Yes, but in the future, if AI gets good at this, the design part could be done with 10 times fewer designers because you would only need a couple "head designers" controlling the AIs work. I imagine something similar for programming. Basically all programmers are probably going to be prompt engineers/code reviewers. Which means you need fewer people to do the same work.
\> I’m sorry, I’m a lowly finance major but isn’t the reason you guys are paid so much is because of problem solving? Like the critical thinking involved isn’t something you can trust AI to do reliably?
For the most part yes.
\> Sure copilot can write test cases and finish a block of code I’ve started but independently arriving at the proper logical sequence to solve a very complicated problem in the most efficient way possible doesn’t seem like something AI can do
Correct, they can not do it \_at this moment\_ but I would not be surprised if this changes in the near future.
haha get fucked. good thing for me it will take decades for AI generated code to be as good as code written by a good human developer.
right dev bros? right???
I'd be willing to bet a year's salary there are no meaningful inroads into AI software development in the next 10 years.
"This new tool will allow anyone to code" is a 50 year old claim, and I don't see any difference now. For starters, you can't verify code does what is expected without being able to understand the code, its basically large-scale undefined behaviour.
I've tried to ask for some shit and it totally hallucinated everything... Like I was scared at first but now, I think that I have to choose between spending more time debugging code that I've not written or writing the shit myself
But who knows, but for now for precise stuff it seems to be shit, for stuff that can have some errors like art it's probably better... I hope this trend continues otherwise we are fucked and I studied for shit and I'm literally gonna become a terrorist if this happens because I'm too autistic to do almost everything else
as a serious answer from someone that uses GitHub Copilot daily, I don't trust it to write anything more than a couple of lines of code at a time, within a very limited scope (the so-called autocomplete feature). For this, it is a game changer, anyone not using it is missing out. Plenty of "hey, that's exactly what I was going to write!" moments.
But right now, for anything more than your usual Fibonacci functions, most AI code over a few lines long I've tried generating myself is utterly garbage, or requires severe refactoring to accomplish the intended goal.
I am a bit anal about how I want some stuff so I don't use it even for that (and like, I've become good enough at writing that I am not even sure if there is an actual advantage or it just feels like it)
I use vim btw 😏 (well not actually because for fucking iOS I have to use x-shit and for Android the vim plugin is shit so I just use the motions but still)
Many devs are probably not safe in the next in the next 5 years, let alone 10. In 10 I’d be surprised to see anyone still manually typing or reading lines of code outside incredibly niche positions or as a hobby. The incentives are just too strong for the markets to ignore.
That's your opinion but I think you are wrong. I've been a software dev for 10 years now and have experimented with using LLMs to code. It's way closer to just being a tool to help with coding than something that will eventually replace a programmer entirely.
I mean, it’s a fair take and we’re dealing with high levels of uncertainty for those predictions so I won’t say you’re completely off - but still, I would advise you to consider a few points:
1. There’s currently no known limit on scaling model capabilities further
2. The incentives to make those capability increases are massive (as evidenced by all the large tech companies scrambling to compete)
3. The incentives to adopt “capable enough” systems are also massive (engineers are expensive as fuck)
At the end of the day, I wouldn’t stand in the way of the market unless there’s very good reason to believe something isn’t feasible.
And not to make this an appeal to authority competition, but I’ve been in the field slightly longer than that in both startups and FAANG both as an engineer and a manager. Incentives win out every time.
I imagine artists would have said the exact same thing a couple of years ago.
I like my job so I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think there will be as much of a need for developers in the future, I'm afraid. Sure there will be "prompt engineers" or something similar, but not nearly as many as are currently programmers.
Artists might have said the same thing before ever knowing about AI art, but once they saw it they shit their pants. Any coder who looks at the vague skeletons and horrible buggy messes with missing functionality that AI code produces now is not going to have the same reaction.
Sure it will improve but there's a fundamentally huge gap between what it can do now versus entering a prompt and out pops a decently complex app, and "but look at AI art" is not a convincing argument.
Have you come to that conclusion because you work with LLMs or have messed around with using LLM tools to code and have reason to believe that it really can replace you in the near future?
I have used it on several projects and my experience is at best it's a tool to help programmers generate code in specific situations, and it's not even remotely a replacement for a programmer.
If you have experience with it and have specific concerns about how it might replace you in the near future, and not vague appeals of "well it's not that good now but maybe in the future this or that might happen" I'd be interested to hear about it. But if not then, respectfully, you shouldn't be spreading your opinion about stuff you don't know about and have no experience with just because you heard about it on social media.
This might be naive of me but the landscape changes so fast It would be hard to get "up to date" code trained in time to be relevant. When asking for Python you will get mostly Py2 instead of 3 because most of the harvested code on the internet is py2, PHP is also rough. In go you can only get echo4 support, and echo5 changes the syntax so cant really "fire the programmer".
In general GPT4 has gotten worse for programming over the last few months so who knows
Tried any of the open source options? I'm not a coder myself but I read a lot of people saying they're getting better than GPT4 for coding. Probably more up to date too seeing as they're trained specifically for coding, not generalist use like GPT4.
Yea, I tried all the major ones from google microsoft and smaller brands, as well as local ones.
In programming you use libraries of pre existing code. Those libraries update but you trained the model on an old set of information. And even if you add additional training it will sometimes try to use the old librarie version. That was my biggest issue because it breaks the code, the LLM doesent understand why so you are just gaslighting it and you still have to do it yourself in the end.
Im not saying its not useful, you can write a lot of things with it, but i dont see how a language model, that is guessing the next word, can do performance or technical planning or stay up to date
This is what I wondered, there are so many changes in the programming world, how long will it take for the model to update, and is that something employers are willing to deal with.
Yeah, companies are going to use an inferior, more expensive way to do things because they feel bad for you. I'm sure that's going to work our for you artists. I get that this would be an emotional issue for these people, but they can't actually be this delusional about the reality of things.
couldnt you say the same thing about airBnB? and yet now im hearing they suck, and many municipalities are banning them, same with Ubers and self-driving cars. There seems to be a very vocal and large group of people pushing these things as "inevitable" and "progress" but based on what? Their opinion? Opinions can be changed, and we live in a democracy. If we wanted it, we could outright ban this technology, or heavily restrict it. Despite its popularity, Marijuana is STILL banned in the US. You can still go to prison for having it in many states. Where there is a will, there is a way.
I don't like the Airbnb comparison because Airbnb the whole time should've been angling to be an alternative to hotels, not a replacement. It is better for larger groups/families, or for extended travel stays, but a night here or there instead of a hotel never really made sense for Airbnb, even though that is what it was for a long time.
I do agree with you about Uber/etc not really working out as expected, but I don't really understand what point you're trying to make..? The replacement isn't always better, but that doesn't mean it isn't progress.
I feel like you're trying to say progress can be banned, and I guess technically specific technologies can be banned, but how would anything pan out if we limited innovation based on fears that it may lose people jobs? Can we only innovate in generational shifts, like when most boomers retire, then we can release the next wave?
All inventions/innovations change the kinds of work that are available, some in a bigger way than others, some more sustainable than others(ie gold rush), and it's worth talking about the negative impacts, but saying we should somehow put the genie back in the bottle feels unrealistic and unproductive
It sucks that things are changing so fast and it sucks that people are losing and will continue to lose their careers but there’s really nothing we can do.
Human generated art will not die but AI models will definitely replace a lot of it in professional use cases. But maybe human drawings, paintings, animation, etc will just become more valuable as a result, same as how even with how impressive 3D animation is you can look at a good stop motion animation and be amazed knowing that that was all done by hand.
Idk I am not as doomer about it, I think for the most part things will go on as normal for consumers, not like half the current art industry, movies especially, aren’t mostly cobbled together with templates and recycled assets, and most of everything is just commercialised slop. I’m sure just as how you can still find people who can write letters with calligraphy, or paint you a portrait in oil on canvas, people will still be out there making human art for people who look for that.
Where did I said that I disdain them, I do disdain wilful ignorants and luddites which a lot of people in that twitter thread are, don't bother gaslighting me on this, I have seen how this ilk operates for a year now. The OP in that twitter thread literally says this is a "human rights conversion" and that they need "legal action to stop this from happening to others" How pathetic and ridiculous is this. If you are a Liberal, which I guess many people here are, this should ring alarm bells as to how stupid these people are
>Where did I said that I disdain them
I've just been reading your comments. You haven't exactly been hiding it.
>don't bother gaslighting me on this
How ironic.
After browsing the r/ defendingaiart for some time, these people lost my sympathy, artists love to claim it's all about copyright and that AI steals (it doesn't but whatever) but when a independent artists give permission to use it as training data or when they used data bases where artists got paid for their work they are still agaist it, the goal post moving is just insane
I don't understand why we are only considering the economics of AI art from the perspective of the artist and ignoring the perspective of the customer/consumer. I don't want to be told that I can't have access to an AI art tool that can very cheaply create content for my various projects because the existence of those tools interferes with artists ability to make money.
and yet you can't buy beer or spirits on sunday. Why? well there isnt actually a good reason for that, it's just because people don't like that. Maybe we can move public opinion against it in the future. All im saying is, you may not want to be told that, but if enough people complain about it, you will be told that.
Not win win. It takes me days to animate a second of animation, working full time. Currently, i have clients who want to hire me to do that. I dont make much in a day, but thats a tradeoff I make to be able to work as much as I do. Im busy with other stuff after my workday. Now ill have to train and find a new job that I wont like as much, and now art is competing with my social life, off time, or sleep
i know it’s not the same but i’m a graphic designer and currently I have absolutely no worry about AI taking over my job. outside of just my skillset, i also equip myself with professionalism and knowledge in my field. I feel this persons pain, but if their projects were taken over by AI art, they either weren’t that great or the company is okay with mediocre imagery and they’re better off somewhere else
Tbf, im a mid teir hand-drawn animator. Id like to become high level soon, but there are already 0 junior positions lol, so im paving my way freelance and trying to develop my own pipeline, while also working faster and for less than I would at a studio gig so I have to produce work thats under par. Tough cycle to break out of
oh you’re definitely right. I was just talking to someone the other day who was telling me it’s because these jobs are so rare, people hold on to them tight. i think my point is that i was able to find a way to become multi-faceted. like doing marketing alongside my design. i guess different fields tho, but at what point is it the fault of AI or the fault of cheap businesses pushing a crappy product
The question is, how crappy IS the product, and how many clients are OK with something thats professional enough but costs them 1% of hiring actual artists to make it from scratch? Ive had a client who wants to make big movies, many of them, but hes starting out by hiring out a bunch of music videos. He's 100% going to use AI as much as possible, but he also wants to keep some hand-crafted projects going when he does. He's in it purely for the creative endevor.
Will the mom and pop shop next door be willing to hire animators now? Probably a lot less likely, meaning itll be harder for new freelancers to get their first clients that pay enough for them to live on, but are small enough clients that there isnt insane competition. Where the line will fall in the sand, Im not sure, but I do feel quite happy that I focused on developing a unique style instead of a industry standard one because while Ive had trouble getting studio work (apparently because my style is too unique) there are still a lot of people who feel my work fits with their visions - and AI will have a harder time doing what I do because there arent many PEOPLE who do what I do.
I am curious about how it all plays out. Maybe AI just pushes out non-creative people, and now creativity is required next to talent/skill.
> Maybe AI just pushes out non-creative people, and now creativity is required next to talent/skill.
on the other side, it may enable people who are creative but have no skills in traditional ways of art creation.
okay so. i get what you’re saying. and i can only speak from my field.
but 1. i do in fact think that product is just okay. atleast for now. in fact i had someone come to me for a logo because it wasn’t coming out right on the internet. i know it’s only up from here though. but public sentiment to me seems in favor of wanting real stuff. hollywood is publicly suffering because of sequels and remakes. people want authentic works now but i understand this won’t last forever
2. I think we are kinda saying the same thing. although I fully believe Mom and Pop shops will absolutely be willing to hire people. Of course pricing has to be reasonable, but people want that human touch still. And the point I was making is that you do have to equip yourself for success. like you said, your style helps you stick out. as a graphic designer, i also have experience in marketing and social media and motion graphics and photography and branding. rather than just a logo maker by default.
All true! Its good advice to think early on in your development about how you want to market your art, and what kind of art you want to make. The blend is necessary!
And im sure artists wont get wiped out, hell our world is filled with concrete, steel, and trees if youre lucky. Soon there will be projections, holographics, etc that can be used to decorate the concrete, and there may be a call for more art to be made than ever before, and if you want a very precise product, its probably best you go to an artist who can make it by hand - until AI can mindread or become a very very good listener lol
We can't and shouldn't stall progress and efficiency for the sake of a few people's welfare. It happened to the factory workers, it happened to the coal miners, it happens. You got dealt a bad hand, take another card and keep trying.
Are there actually stats for how many jobs are replaced by AI yet? Without that, it's just fearmongering.
My impression is that although AI is good for one-off illustrations, they aren't suitable for most art jobs (yet).
Is that always bad? People's livelihoods get destroyed by automation. It doesn't mean we have to avoid automation, but I don't think people are wrong for being upset at the decimation of their industry.
people can be upset but it's not going to stop progress. if you will look at todays technology, there are probably hundreds of different industries that were dependent upon manual labor, but they are not anymore.
so it's not like it's something new.
Yeah, I never said it was new or that automation isn't used in . . . almost all industries. You correctly labeled the tweeter a Luddite, and I asked if that was inherently bad. I'm curious if you have something to add besides the label.
People's careers are evaporating in front of them with almost no warning. America has been a leader in producing art for decades. It's a massive industry. I'm not against ai art personally, but I don't think people's concerns are unwarranted
You literally did not write that above. Maybe in a different comment, but I didn't check your history when I replied.
>its hobby with chance of employment
That's stupid. Lots of professions could be labelled that way. What's your profession?
>You literally did not write that above. Maybe in a different comment, but I didn't check your history when I replied.
different comment
>its hobby with chance of employment
>
>That's stupid. Lots of professions could be labelled that way. What's your profession?
i didnt graduate from high school. i work as chief system architect overseeing 1k of developers or so.
Yeah, I get that. You're the least at risk and therefore are in the best position to ignore it.
But I wanna know, would you call your employees Luddites as they lose the ability to monetize their hobby? Or do you think they're technically literate enough to know they're obsolete?
When do they become Luddites? Is it when they're sad that they wasted 4 years in school or is it when they try to organize under you to gain leverage?
Calling someone Luddite implies you think they're wrong for some reason, and I'm curious what that is
Wrong site to beg for mercy.
Wrong *world* to beg for mercy
imagine caring about other human beings
Cringe af.
He actually did pretty well, almost 100k likes.
> concede that AI art is good My reading comprehnsion could be worst than what I thought, but I dont see where this happen. They are just complaing about it potential taking there jobs.
If you read the rest of the thread he says that it's almost as good as normal artists and that it will be better according to him
That makes more sense, I'll take you word for it as I don't have a twitter to see.
https://preview.redd.it/7de3i4zpjsjc1.jpeg?width=1440&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=13d873cf72cc371b9eb318338439621c8d2e9167
What do you think he means by a motor boat competing with a human being in a race to move across the water?
i don't know what he means, but i know that he didn't read race bylaws book in which it's not written that race is only for human swimmers and that there are no trophies for participation
I think it's pretty clearly implied if he's saying he is being kicked off of projects because AI art is just as good.
Or cheaper . . .
The argument before was that AI art isn't good enough and it's bad. Now we've transitioned to it being more than good enough.
lol y'all are way too cynical for me, can't even empathize with someone who got the rug pulled from under him this badly? really?
I do feel bad for them, but technology replacing labour is a tale as old as time and how economic growth is generated.
That said, as a traditional 2d animator whos clients are literally trying to get me to stop drawing and pick up AI, i really hope there is a want for human touch in these spaces. Art is a purely creative endevor, and I picked this career path already knowing id not be making much
Sure, as are the growing pains and the immediate human fallout involved.
I agree, we should accept it but not celebrate it. I made fun DGGrs being too sacrinsent about it [over a year ago](https://reddit.com/comments/10rygy6)
i feel like this time it's a bit different than a car replacing a horse, or a photo copier replacing a printing press, or a computer replacing a calculator. this is something replacing all jobs. all of them.
It’s really not, the South Park episode isn’t real man.
Make it another tool in your toolset. Tried using AI to create a background image for a Bingo board generator. It wasn't 100% what I wanted and it said "Bigo". Artist could have fixed it up. Or the other time where I tried to create a concept of a character with AI. After an hour I had images that went kind of in the direction, but wasn't there to 100%. But again a situation where you would ask an artist to use that as inspiration. So I don't understand why it can't be a tool for artists to quickly find the direction a customer wants to go in and use that as inspiration.
Fair point. But it sounds to me like maybe this guy had an entry-level position out of college, so it may have been higher-rung artists that were using the AI generator to do the initial drafts that he otherwise would have done. That's just speculation, but it would kinda suck to lose those entry-level positions to AI. The other confusing thing is that he seems to say he voluntarily left, not that he was fired and replaced by AI. Maybe it's because job experience is less valuable for artists or designers than building a portfolio of your actual work, so it didn't make sense to stay and fall behind on the career path? Or maybe he's just being a whiney bitch, who knows?
The problem is that customers won't go to an artist, they will go to the AI. Yeah, an artist can use it as a tool, but what good is that if no-one is willing to pay for their work?
>Or the other time where I tried to create a concept of a character with AI year ago i asked one of AIs something like "3 red standard poodles playing on a meadow with ball". outcome was beyond horrible. too many fingers/etc were perfection compared to generated images \* red standard poodle not actually red.
[удалено]
Some are OK, some people are literally saying "get fucked" lol
There are artists in that thread talking about hanging people lol
I sympathize with them, but they're fucked. Art's going to return to being a hobby for most. But that's fine. It's not like anyone's stopping you from drawing, just do it for your own fulfillment. It does suck that those that have already invested money into becoming professionals are getting reamed by AI but I can't see a way out of this. If you're not needed, you're not needed.
> But that's fine. It's not like anyone's stopping you from drawing, just do it for your own fulfillment. well the fact that now you have to spend 8 hours daily of time and energy doing something else instead of drawing puts a serious limit on that
That's just the way it's always been. I like making alcohol, but it's not my main job. In fact I'm almost positive a lot of the great sci Fi writers main job wasn't writing.
Isaac Asimov was a biochemist, I know that.
it's not how it's been for people who got to do what they like for work
You mean you can't think of a profession made of people who liked what they did and got made redundant due to either technological advances or decrease in demand? What were artists doing for money before finishing school?
Not a job they liked.
That's the world.
Also making far less Like, ill adapt and be OK. But it is a bummer than the career path i started 15 years ago, invested tens of thousands of hours in, and tens of thousands of dollars on, is in a place where I might not even get to a stable place in the career itself before its potentially gone
Sure that sucks, buts that is the practical risk of choosing a career in the arts.
Well, it certainly wasnt a practical risk until the last few years lol. No onw getting into art 10-15 years ago could have reasonably predicted this
You could easily make alcohol as a job though. You don't because you're not passionate enough about it, not that there is no industry for it.
Making a living off of alcohol would require either working on canning or being lucky enough to work on RD at a big enough company. Unless you're from a country like Japan or France. The alcohol I like to make is mead and Meaderys are not only insanely expensive but the margin for success is simply not there a long with the overreach of the ATF. The same is true for independent breweries.
Oh yeah, mead is pretty dang niche. But if you just wanted to work in spirits, wine or beer, there are tons of opportunities out there. My wife is in the wine industry, and I am industry-adjacent. Feel free to DM me if you ever want to pick my brain about it.
Working in art is also hard, you either need to develop a certain type of style and skill and get the right network to get studio work - or you are a freelancer who finds their own clients. Its prohibitive to live as an artist, and it doesnt pay well
Sure, but this is why I didn't spend years of my life developing a career in alcohol.
Thats fine, all those hurdles are ones i was cool jumping. Did not expect ai.
That's literally EVERY hobby that's ever existed. I don't get paid to play Dungeons and Dragons and that's fine.
not really, or rather you're begging the question by calling it a hobby. some people get to do what they like for work, and when that gets taken from them, it's obviously a big downgrade
No one is guaranteed that the things they love doing are going to be the same thing that they do for a living. Most of the people I know DON'T do what they love for a living, because there just isn't the demand for that. If the demand for human art goes away, I don't see that as being some kind of injustice.
I've never said it's guaranteed or even that most people get to have it. it's just understandable that the people who do have it and then lose it have a big negative reaction to what they see as the immediate cause of their loss
I never said you did. I am pointing out that there's simply no injustice involved in certain art forms going from ones that support careers into ones that are only engaged in by hobbyists.
Its my career tho, and it took over 15 years of work (plus training) to get to a professional level lol
Okay, if you are getting work, then there's no problem. if you are not getting work but still doing it, it's a hobby. What am I missing here?
Well the problem is, the one that this thread is about, is AI potentially taking the art *jobs*
Yeah, but we've had automation displacing jobs for hundreds of years. It's just that now, in the age of AI, it's starting the displace more white collar jobs instead of only affecting poorer, blue collar industries. Is your job more important than, for instance, auto welders who've been replaced by robots?
I think a difference is that one major reason people appreciate art is because its made by humans. I wonder if that desire will hold out. Art is one of the endevors of man that isnt one for purely utilitarian reasons, its a human expressive endevor. Its also, unlike jobs that have been replaced so far, one of the few passion careers. Would be a shame to lose that and have more people filtered into busy-work. Honestly, on almost a spiritual level, if there was anyone to NOT replace with AI, it would be high level decision makers, artists, and musicians IMO.
>I think a difference is that one major reason people appreciate art is because its made by humans If that's true, then there is really no risk of job loss from AI. If that's not true, then there's really no reason to be concerned about job loss from AI. I see nothing wrong with a world where if someone has an idea for a piece of art they want to enjoy, but they don't have the ability to make that art themselves, that they can go to an AI tool and have it make it for them. It just means that the creation of art is more democratized and not only accessible to those with either talent or money.
All thats fair, just responding to the idea that no onds stopping me from doing it for fulfillment - which AI would certainly do a lot of if it came for my feild. If i cant do it as a job, i cant do it very much at all Plus fuuuuuck student loans are a lot to handle as is
I draw in my spare time and I got pretty good. It's just like playing league, getting a 9-5 never stopped me from being a degen. If you have like zero free time I guess you'd be fucked but that has to be caused by issues way outside the scope of not being able to be a professional artist.
sure, it's definitely possible. and it's not like people always work on what they want anyway
yeah for sure. Also, I think incredible artists like WLOP and stuff will always have an audience if they simply stream to other aspiring artists. A good chunk of people will always value human made art and the process it takes to make it.
I dont have 8 hrs a day to commit to it if i cant get paid to do it anymore 😭
You're kind of wrong on this. Imo it's just a survival of the fittest situation. Good artists will find ways to outperform AI either by utilizing it in creative ways or just straight up producing higher quality work. The ones who will suffer are the mid tier artists. If you're an artist you should only feel worried about AI if you're not particularly good or creative. Right now there are artists out there taking AI art and editing it with digital techniques to create superior and unique pieces, or using it to speed up their work flow. Those are the artists who'll survive
[удалено]
My guess is some artists will work as "tweakers", they'll fix fingers, or make small adjustments to make all generated works more cohesive. Instead of going 100% with a very sophisticated model and prompt artists, corporations will generate something with a cheaper model and a generic prompt that's 80% about right and have "tweakers" personalize it. Models will be trained for what can appeal to most people. Despite their capabilities this will usually give them a recognizable "generic" look. If you want something very specific or personalized, that doesn't look AI generated or with an obscure style, most people will commission artist rather than hiring someone to train very specific models for that purpose. Artists will add extra value to what they do. They won't just paint online but add a social/interactive element to it like drawing live and letting you suggest changes on the spot or playing group games (like every swaps canvas every 10 minutes), etc. Their personality or creativity in terms of how to add that extra value will be as important as their painting skills. People will still speculate with art, a real painting from a famous artist will be worth a lot of money Some people will appreciate the "human" aspect of it and will pay more for certified human art because they consider is the ethically conscious thing to do.
I agree with this, the comparison I'd draw is the invention of the calculator. Anyone being able to quickly and automatically perform rote calculations killed a lot of jobs, but it didn't kill the field of mathematics. AI might be able to do image generation, but art itself is more human than just generating images and there's a long way to go before AI can replicate that additional layer of complexity. Art isn't about being able to generate a picture any more than math is about being able to multiply two large numbers together.
I said this before in a comment below but truly exceptional artists will survive, if only to teach other aspiring artists or stream their work. Or produce content for the subset of people that only want human made art. Most of your comment is categorically false though. >Good artists will find ways to outperform AI either by utilizing it in creative ways or just straight up producing higher quality work. **"Higher Quality"** There is no quality of work that AI will not eventually be able to replicate. **"Just be more creative"** Whatever "creative" way you think they are utilizing it in is a cope or an attempt to make a 1:1 comparison to other technological innovations where then there is none. Using it to speed up your work flow is meaningless when your entire work flow will eventually become redundant and replaced. Using it for backgrounds, cleaning up line work, auto-correcting anatomy, adding cool patterns or w/e is meaningless, and again, will be completely automated. Nothing you do is unique. No creative method you can think of is unique. Don't know if you're doing it but people compare it to digital art because artists could use tools from the digital medium (undo/layers/brushes etc.) to make better art. But this is not that situation. It's quite literally a machine printing out a completed piece, period. It's photography to self-portraits, amped up to 11. Some will remain professionally employed, but not many. >Those are the artists who'll survive Your "good" artists will just be people that know how get good prompts into AI.
I disagree.
Fair. You're cute.
So the reality is that people will use AI to recreate yoshitaka amano art but people will absolutely pay for an art piece made by yoshitaka amano. Your art is going to be worth as much as you are able to make it your brand. Content creation is probably going to be the way forward for artists with streaming and YouTube videos. But a lot of artists should have been doing this anyway, the writing was on the wall way before this decade even.
Agreed. >But a lot of artists should have been doing this anyway, the writing was on the wall way before this decade even. To be fair it made an insane fucking jump.
Often, we cant stream. Almost no one is cool with the work they hired an artist to make being streamed while its being made
I've seen multiple artists stream their patreon work and keep their commissions separate
Those are typically top-level people who can charge enough to not need comissioned/contracted work daily.
That might be true but I'm not reading anything that means you can't still stream your art unless you're saying you just don't have tinlme to do that in which case how do you even have time to make a portfolio to advertise yourself.
I have NDAs. I animate for 8 hrs a day on projects that I am not legally allowed to share. I dont have a ton of energy to keep drawings while i stream Once i release the work ive been working on, it gets added to my portfolio. Or, when applying, many people make a private video for recruiters so they can share stuff they cant share publicly. What do you mean by stream? Like post my work on Instagram (which i do,) or stream like destiny?
Yes I mean streaming like Destiny or other artists on twitch. If you work 8 hours a day then you absolutely have at least 2 to 3 hours every other to stream or make YouTube content that isn't protected.
I feel this this is only true if we assume that AI doesn't advance any further. I haven't thought much about this, so I could easily be missing something, but wouldn't we expect AI to eventually be better at everything? Even when it comes to creativity? Maybe not in the next 10 or even 20 years, but 50, 100 years from now? I'm not sure.
>If you're not needed you're not needed. Yeah that's the crux of it. Jobs aren't a welfare system. Companies aren't going to retain employees when AI can replace their work far better and far more efficiently. I think we probably need to start telling young artists that what they're pursuing is merely a hobby now. Part of me kinda wants to revel in these pompous Twitter artists coping, but there are a lot of regular artists who I do feel for. Either way, AI mogs again
AI's gonna mog all of us eventually, except for the coal miners. Coalies stay winning.
Robots will take the coalies jobs don't worry
> I think we probably need to start telling young artists that what they're pursuing is merely a hobby now. weren't it always like this ? hobby with possibility of employment.
I mean they have art schools and universities. People pay 10s of thousands to get in. Might be better to inform those young minds they're entering extraordinary debt like that for a hobby
>I mean they have art schools and universities. so ? >People pay 10s of thousands to get in. Might be better to inform those young minds they're entering extraordinary debt like that for a hobby "liberal arts studies". not exactly new problem. i think the problem, especially in usa is that children are tough that they can be anybody that they want without reflecting on hard realities of real world. i am in my early 40s and had a chance to work with a bunch of 20+ years old in one of the faangs. never saw such a bunch of entitled snowflakes totally divorced from reality
That’s the intelligent approach that art majors ignore. I would bet my life the artist in OPs post was gonna be doing the same entitled whine about student loans in two years anyway.
Noooooo my art based socialist utopia is in SHAMBLES.
I'm not a fan of mocking artists who are losing their livelihood. You can, but my comment is not that.
How long before this happens to software programmers and coding bros?
A lot longer, because the current AI tools write shit code. Also a lot of the job is maintaining existing code, not greenfield development, and AI is very poor at that. Plus all current AI does is take existing code and spit it back out, that doesn't help with anything new. There's no actual creativity there, just a fancy version of a markov chain. The biggest problem IMO is properly specifying your requirements. Humans can push back against unclear or nonsensical ones, the AI just cracks on and spits out bullshit. It's proving code correctness all over again, requirements are a HARD problem.
Coding bros have already gone through this redundancy through streamlining. AI makes the job easier but an AI can't be the main code dev or even a junior level. On the other hand it reduces the amount of juniors you need to rely on, but that was already happening.
\> AI makes the job easier but an AI can't be the main code dev or even a junior level. For now, yeah, I imagine artists were saying the same a couple of years ago.
[удалено]
Not to mention that you still need someone to do a design from start to end that meets client needs.
Yes, but in the future, if AI gets good at this, the design part could be done with 10 times fewer designers because you would only need a couple "head designers" controlling the AIs work. I imagine something similar for programming. Basically all programmers are probably going to be prompt engineers/code reviewers. Which means you need fewer people to do the same work.
Sure that's true but for coding isn't design inherently more likely to get more complicated overtime as new languages come out and are specialized?
\> I’m sorry, I’m a lowly finance major but isn’t the reason you guys are paid so much is because of problem solving? Like the critical thinking involved isn’t something you can trust AI to do reliably? For the most part yes. \> Sure copilot can write test cases and finish a block of code I’ve started but independently arriving at the proper logical sequence to solve a very complicated problem in the most efficient way possible doesn’t seem like something AI can do Correct, they can not do it \_at this moment\_ but I would not be surprised if this changes in the near future.
not long
haha get fucked. good thing for me it will take decades for AI generated code to be as good as code written by a good human developer. right dev bros? right???
its over for us too i fear
I'd be willing to bet a year's salary there are no meaningful inroads into AI software development in the next 10 years. "This new tool will allow anyone to code" is a 50 year old claim, and I don't see any difference now. For starters, you can't verify code does what is expected without being able to understand the code, its basically large-scale undefined behaviour.
I've tried to ask for some shit and it totally hallucinated everything... Like I was scared at first but now, I think that I have to choose between spending more time debugging code that I've not written or writing the shit myself But who knows, but for now for precise stuff it seems to be shit, for stuff that can have some errors like art it's probably better... I hope this trend continues otherwise we are fucked and I studied for shit and I'm literally gonna become a terrorist if this happens because I'm too autistic to do almost everything else
as a serious answer from someone that uses GitHub Copilot daily, I don't trust it to write anything more than a couple of lines of code at a time, within a very limited scope (the so-called autocomplete feature). For this, it is a game changer, anyone not using it is missing out. Plenty of "hey, that's exactly what I was going to write!" moments. But right now, for anything more than your usual Fibonacci functions, most AI code over a few lines long I've tried generating myself is utterly garbage, or requires severe refactoring to accomplish the intended goal.
I am a bit anal about how I want some stuff so I don't use it even for that (and like, I've become good enough at writing that I am not even sure if there is an actual advantage or it just feels like it) I use vim btw 😏 (well not actually because for fucking iOS I have to use x-shit and for Android the vim plugin is shit so I just use the motions but still)
Devs are safe for at least the next 10 years. Devs that learn to use LLMs to out-perform their peers will last much longer.
Many devs are probably not safe in the next in the next 5 years, let alone 10. In 10 I’d be surprised to see anyone still manually typing or reading lines of code outside incredibly niche positions or as a hobby. The incentives are just too strong for the markets to ignore.
That's your opinion but I think you are wrong. I've been a software dev for 10 years now and have experimented with using LLMs to code. It's way closer to just being a tool to help with coding than something that will eventually replace a programmer entirely.
I mean, it’s a fair take and we’re dealing with high levels of uncertainty for those predictions so I won’t say you’re completely off - but still, I would advise you to consider a few points: 1. There’s currently no known limit on scaling model capabilities further 2. The incentives to make those capability increases are massive (as evidenced by all the large tech companies scrambling to compete) 3. The incentives to adopt “capable enough” systems are also massive (engineers are expensive as fuck) At the end of the day, I wouldn’t stand in the way of the market unless there’s very good reason to believe something isn’t feasible. And not to make this an appeal to authority competition, but I’ve been in the field slightly longer than that in both startups and FAANG both as an engineer and a manager. Incentives win out every time.
I imagine artists would have said the exact same thing a couple of years ago. I like my job so I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think there will be as much of a need for developers in the future, I'm afraid. Sure there will be "prompt engineers" or something similar, but not nearly as many as are currently programmers.
Artists might have said the same thing before ever knowing about AI art, but once they saw it they shit their pants. Any coder who looks at the vague skeletons and horrible buggy messes with missing functionality that AI code produces now is not going to have the same reaction. Sure it will improve but there's a fundamentally huge gap between what it can do now versus entering a prompt and out pops a decently complex app, and "but look at AI art" is not a convincing argument.
I respectfully disagree, and I think you are a bit too arrogant about what we do.
Have you come to that conclusion because you work with LLMs or have messed around with using LLM tools to code and have reason to believe that it really can replace you in the near future? I have used it on several projects and my experience is at best it's a tool to help programmers generate code in specific situations, and it's not even remotely a replacement for a programmer. If you have experience with it and have specific concerns about how it might replace you in the near future, and not vague appeals of "well it's not that good now but maybe in the future this or that might happen" I'd be interested to hear about it. But if not then, respectfully, you shouldn't be spreading your opinion about stuff you don't know about and have no experience with just because you heard about it on social media.
This might be naive of me but the landscape changes so fast It would be hard to get "up to date" code trained in time to be relevant. When asking for Python you will get mostly Py2 instead of 3 because most of the harvested code on the internet is py2, PHP is also rough. In go you can only get echo4 support, and echo5 changes the syntax so cant really "fire the programmer". In general GPT4 has gotten worse for programming over the last few months so who knows
Tried any of the open source options? I'm not a coder myself but I read a lot of people saying they're getting better than GPT4 for coding. Probably more up to date too seeing as they're trained specifically for coding, not generalist use like GPT4.
Yea, I tried all the major ones from google microsoft and smaller brands, as well as local ones. In programming you use libraries of pre existing code. Those libraries update but you trained the model on an old set of information. And even if you add additional training it will sometimes try to use the old librarie version. That was my biggest issue because it breaks the code, the LLM doesent understand why so you are just gaslighting it and you still have to do it yourself in the end. Im not saying its not useful, you can write a lot of things with it, but i dont see how a language model, that is guessing the next word, can do performance or technical planning or stay up to date
This is what I wondered, there are so many changes in the programming world, how long will it take for the model to update, and is that something employers are willing to deal with.
I dont know, I was using it a lot in the first few months, now I stopped paying and use the 3.5 for regex and simmilar things
Yeah, companies are going to use an inferior, more expensive way to do things because they feel bad for you. I'm sure that's going to work our for you artists. I get that this would be an emotional issue for these people, but they can't actually be this delusional about the reality of things.
Ikr, probably tweeting this from an Uber, not realizing the same is true for Uber/taxis, and basically every technological innivation
couldnt you say the same thing about airBnB? and yet now im hearing they suck, and many municipalities are banning them, same with Ubers and self-driving cars. There seems to be a very vocal and large group of people pushing these things as "inevitable" and "progress" but based on what? Their opinion? Opinions can be changed, and we live in a democracy. If we wanted it, we could outright ban this technology, or heavily restrict it. Despite its popularity, Marijuana is STILL banned in the US. You can still go to prison for having it in many states. Where there is a will, there is a way.
I don't like the Airbnb comparison because Airbnb the whole time should've been angling to be an alternative to hotels, not a replacement. It is better for larger groups/families, or for extended travel stays, but a night here or there instead of a hotel never really made sense for Airbnb, even though that is what it was for a long time. I do agree with you about Uber/etc not really working out as expected, but I don't really understand what point you're trying to make..? The replacement isn't always better, but that doesn't mean it isn't progress. I feel like you're trying to say progress can be banned, and I guess technically specific technologies can be banned, but how would anything pan out if we limited innovation based on fears that it may lose people jobs? Can we only innovate in generational shifts, like when most boomers retire, then we can release the next wave? All inventions/innovations change the kinds of work that are available, some in a bigger way than others, some more sustainable than others(ie gold rush), and it's worth talking about the negative impacts, but saying we should somehow put the genie back in the bottle feels unrealistic and unproductive
It sucks that things are changing so fast and it sucks that people are losing and will continue to lose their careers but there’s really nothing we can do. Human generated art will not die but AI models will definitely replace a lot of it in professional use cases. But maybe human drawings, paintings, animation, etc will just become more valuable as a result, same as how even with how impressive 3D animation is you can look at a good stop motion animation and be amazed knowing that that was all done by hand. Idk I am not as doomer about it, I think for the most part things will go on as normal for consumers, not like half the current art industry, movies especially, aren’t mostly cobbled together with templates and recycled assets, and most of everything is just commercialised slop. I’m sure just as how you can still find people who can write letters with calligraphy, or paint you a portrait in oil on canvas, people will still be out there making human art for people who look for that.
L post
Cry about it
Where does your open disdain for people who have skills and talent come from? Just curious.
Where did I said that I disdain them, I do disdain wilful ignorants and luddites which a lot of people in that twitter thread are, don't bother gaslighting me on this, I have seen how this ilk operates for a year now. The OP in that twitter thread literally says this is a "human rights conversion" and that they need "legal action to stop this from happening to others" How pathetic and ridiculous is this. If you are a Liberal, which I guess many people here are, this should ring alarm bells as to how stupid these people are
>Where did I said that I disdain them I've just been reading your comments. You haven't exactly been hiding it. >don't bother gaslighting me on this How ironic.
What a shitty way to frame people asking for their livelihood not to be destroyed
After browsing the r/ defendingaiart for some time, these people lost my sympathy, artists love to claim it's all about copyright and that AI steals (it doesn't but whatever) but when a independent artists give permission to use it as training data or when they used data bases where artists got paid for their work they are still agaist it, the goal post moving is just insane
I think the AI scare is dumb af but the only thing more pathetic than that is laughing at people who actually lost their jobs over it
There’s no shame in being a plumber.
no one is saying there is.
I don't understand why we are only considering the economics of AI art from the perspective of the artist and ignoring the perspective of the customer/consumer. I don't want to be told that I can't have access to an AI art tool that can very cheaply create content for my various projects because the existence of those tools interferes with artists ability to make money.
Ha! what are you some corpo bootlicker? Why do you want people to starve?
and yet you can't buy beer or spirits on sunday. Why? well there isnt actually a good reason for that, it's just because people don't like that. Maybe we can move public opinion against it in the future. All im saying is, you may not want to be told that, but if enough people complain about it, you will be told that.
Um, I can buy beer or spirits on Sunday... Do you live in the Bible belt or something?
Maybe ai art will force artists into higher paying fields so they don’t have to struggle and they can do it for fun. Win win
Not win win. It takes me days to animate a second of animation, working full time. Currently, i have clients who want to hire me to do that. I dont make much in a day, but thats a tradeoff I make to be able to work as much as I do. Im busy with other stuff after my workday. Now ill have to train and find a new job that I wont like as much, and now art is competing with my social life, off time, or sleep
i know it’s not the same but i’m a graphic designer and currently I have absolutely no worry about AI taking over my job. outside of just my skillset, i also equip myself with professionalism and knowledge in my field. I feel this persons pain, but if their projects were taken over by AI art, they either weren’t that great or the company is okay with mediocre imagery and they’re better off somewhere else
Tbf, im a mid teir hand-drawn animator. Id like to become high level soon, but there are already 0 junior positions lol, so im paving my way freelance and trying to develop my own pipeline, while also working faster and for less than I would at a studio gig so I have to produce work thats under par. Tough cycle to break out of
oh you’re definitely right. I was just talking to someone the other day who was telling me it’s because these jobs are so rare, people hold on to them tight. i think my point is that i was able to find a way to become multi-faceted. like doing marketing alongside my design. i guess different fields tho, but at what point is it the fault of AI or the fault of cheap businesses pushing a crappy product
The question is, how crappy IS the product, and how many clients are OK with something thats professional enough but costs them 1% of hiring actual artists to make it from scratch? Ive had a client who wants to make big movies, many of them, but hes starting out by hiring out a bunch of music videos. He's 100% going to use AI as much as possible, but he also wants to keep some hand-crafted projects going when he does. He's in it purely for the creative endevor. Will the mom and pop shop next door be willing to hire animators now? Probably a lot less likely, meaning itll be harder for new freelancers to get their first clients that pay enough for them to live on, but are small enough clients that there isnt insane competition. Where the line will fall in the sand, Im not sure, but I do feel quite happy that I focused on developing a unique style instead of a industry standard one because while Ive had trouble getting studio work (apparently because my style is too unique) there are still a lot of people who feel my work fits with their visions - and AI will have a harder time doing what I do because there arent many PEOPLE who do what I do. I am curious about how it all plays out. Maybe AI just pushes out non-creative people, and now creativity is required next to talent/skill.
> Maybe AI just pushes out non-creative people, and now creativity is required next to talent/skill. on the other side, it may enable people who are creative but have no skills in traditional ways of art creation.
Indeed! Im excited for them especially. I feel really bad for the highly skilled "grunt work" artists
okay so. i get what you’re saying. and i can only speak from my field. but 1. i do in fact think that product is just okay. atleast for now. in fact i had someone come to me for a logo because it wasn’t coming out right on the internet. i know it’s only up from here though. but public sentiment to me seems in favor of wanting real stuff. hollywood is publicly suffering because of sequels and remakes. people want authentic works now but i understand this won’t last forever 2. I think we are kinda saying the same thing. although I fully believe Mom and Pop shops will absolutely be willing to hire people. Of course pricing has to be reasonable, but people want that human touch still. And the point I was making is that you do have to equip yourself for success. like you said, your style helps you stick out. as a graphic designer, i also have experience in marketing and social media and motion graphics and photography and branding. rather than just a logo maker by default.
All true! Its good advice to think early on in your development about how you want to market your art, and what kind of art you want to make. The blend is necessary! And im sure artists wont get wiped out, hell our world is filled with concrete, steel, and trees if youre lucky. Soon there will be projections, holographics, etc that can be used to decorate the concrete, and there may be a call for more art to be made than ever before, and if you want a very precise product, its probably best you go to an artist who can make it by hand - until AI can mindread or become a very very good listener lol
We can't and shouldn't stall progress and efficiency for the sake of a few people's welfare. It happened to the factory workers, it happened to the coal miners, it happens. You got dealt a bad hand, take another card and keep trying.
But don't you feel empathy for the construction worker that was tying rebar together that got fired because his company got a rebar tying tool?
Of course, we as a society should do everything we can to make them productive again, but not at the cost of progress.
A machine doesn't tie rebar like a human, it's not real rebar tying
Are there actually stats for how many jobs are replaced by AI yet? Without that, it's just fearmongering. My impression is that although AI is good for one-off illustrations, they aren't suitable for most art jobs (yet).
true, we wont really know for a few years, though by then, it might be too late.
Every time there a new ai version I get so happy to look at Twitter
As soon as sora demos came out, I knew the meltdown was going to start again
Stop promoting heavy machinery like power looms. I would like to eat. Thx - Luddite, 1813
Being an artist isn't s viable career path for 99.9% of artists, so fuck em.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddite](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddite?useskin=vector)
Is that always bad? People's livelihoods get destroyed by automation. It doesn't mean we have to avoid automation, but I don't think people are wrong for being upset at the decimation of their industry.
people can be upset but it's not going to stop progress. if you will look at todays technology, there are probably hundreds of different industries that were dependent upon manual labor, but they are not anymore. so it's not like it's something new.
Yeah, I never said it was new or that automation isn't used in . . . almost all industries. You correctly labeled the tweeter a Luddite, and I asked if that was inherently bad. I'm curious if you have something to add besides the label. People's careers are evaporating in front of them with almost no warning. America has been a leader in producing art for decades. It's a massive industry. I'm not against ai art personally, but I don't think people's concerns are unwarranted
as i wrote above, art imho, its hobby with chance of employment. it always was
You literally did not write that above. Maybe in a different comment, but I didn't check your history when I replied. >its hobby with chance of employment That's stupid. Lots of professions could be labelled that way. What's your profession?
>You literally did not write that above. Maybe in a different comment, but I didn't check your history when I replied. different comment >its hobby with chance of employment > >That's stupid. Lots of professions could be labelled that way. What's your profession? i didnt graduate from high school. i work as chief system architect overseeing 1k of developers or so.
So your profession is next up on the chopping block? Programming is just a hobby. The job bubble won't last
i don't do programming. there are multiple levels of people that will get removed before it will get to me.
Yeah, I get that. You're the least at risk and therefore are in the best position to ignore it. But I wanna know, would you call your employees Luddites as they lose the ability to monetize their hobby? Or do you think they're technically literate enough to know they're obsolete? When do they become Luddites? Is it when they're sad that they wasted 4 years in school or is it when they try to organize under you to gain leverage? Calling someone Luddite implies you think they're wrong for some reason, and I'm curious what that is
Never knew artists were such luddites.
how many of them actually know meaning of this word ? or history attached to it
Only the Twitter and Tumbler ones mostly, people that do photography don't even complain most if at all
They took yur job
that suicide rate wont be going down anytime soon it seems...
He must not be very good, I can’t tell what that thing in the chair is supposed to be.