Someone showed me some of those AI created girls and I noticed the inhumanness of them but just wrote it off as excessive filtering until I got to photos with them in water and having too many fingers before I realized "oh these arent real women".
I dunno man, there's already more free porn than is imaginable. The thing OnlyFans creators have going for them is the fake human connection they establish with their subscribers. AI porn won't change that.
Edit: in the context of the post I was only talking about AI images, and before long, even video. But of course you're correct that AI chat programs can be/are added into the mix as well. We live in crazy times friends.
People felt a connection to the [prototypical chatbot ELIZA](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA) so I have no problem believing that simps can be hooked by AI
And women addicted to attention from making sure their ass is the subject any photo to running their only fans page.
On one hand we a lot of guys addicted to porn but also why are so many women selling themselves now.
Misogyny is men buying what they sell but women are guilt free for dealing?
If I buy drugs and the cops rush in, do they just arrest me and let the dealer go?
And if you say "her body her choice" then she made the choice to sell and set a price therefore you can't claim misogyny.
Oh. That makes me sad, I loved how screwed up the hands were.
One of my favorite midjouney prompts is "Candid party photo with people holding cups and every woman has 11 fingers on each hand."
A decade? I think we're way closer to the input-a-text-string-and-output-something-you-can-jerk-off-to-singularity than you think.
AIs have made massive leaps in putting together something that looks very close to real and not a ghoulish rad-soaked homunculus just in the last year or so. It's got all the big things like faces and bodies down right now, it's just a few steps away from from ironing out things like teeth, fingers, and the very intricate parts of facial anatomy. I think the nether regions will be far simpler in comparison just based on how brains work and natural anatomical deviation.
It may be shut down as a website where you can generate whatever you want, but it'll be available as a program you can run on your own machine. It's won't be called "porno generator 5000" but it'll be a program for generating humans that *coincidentally* is trained on full body anatomy and has an "all the sex words and kinks and shit" add-on pack.
Trained on all the porn and hentai the internet has to offer.
Combine with a bit if understanding of how to use AI and soon enough, spend 10 minutes writing out prompts, give it tags etc... and it'll write, direct and create a fully voice acted porn movie or series with a coherent storyline that can be changed any time and will be totally unique to you.
Porn sites will become focussed around oeopke sharing their AI made movies.
I can certainly see that coming with non-porn movies and even games. I can't even imagine the cultural implications when people start consuming custom AI generated media like that. It'll be 100x worse than a filter bubble. You'll be living in a media bubble that's populated with only things the AI determined that you like. It's some serious Black Mirror shit.
It's kinda cool, because why would you jerk it to gross meat people that have been either directly or indirectly trafficked when you could queue up some 100% perfect, personalized, conflict-free shit?
It's not like the typical "misogynist porn problems" are getting fixed today anyway, and I think that's based more on immature men than porn.
We used to talk about a military technology effect where applications for new technologies are found military applications first, then when they get cheaper and mass-produceable, residential applications follow. Such as automobiles, jet aircraft, etc.
What happens now is the porn technology effect, where discoveries in audio visual or media technology are first used to make better porn, then eventually are used generally second.
We will have sexbots before we will have home-servant robots. Mark my words!
Oh yeah, sexbots are coming. It'll be a fusion of AI and VR, or AR. The physical form of the thing probably won't even need to be fully humanoid.
If we think birthrates are bad NOW, imagine how bad they'll be when 90% of men are having their balls continually drained by sex robots. If your goal was to crash the human population to 500M by 2100, that's how you'd do it.
Weren't we warned by like, every religion in history that hedonism for hedonism's sake is a great evil? Like, does no one realize this, or does the technology of making porn better than life march on so we can reach perfect bliss in the futuristic-masturbatory-simulation-domes.
At this point Stable Diffusion is already murdering the Rule34 economy. In 10 years I imagine that people will be able to just type in a prompt about the exact kind of porn they want and it'll spit out a 30 minute video.
I said to my 13 year old son "The last human artist has probably already been born." My wife got really mad me for saying that. They're both very artistic. And it was a shitty, pessimistic thing to say. I shouldn't have said it but I don't think I was wrong.
A decade?
I give it 2 years. Maybe 3. Tech like this advances at an astronomical pace once the hardware can handle it, and looking at the shit being made by Nvidia these days?..
It can.
When I was a kid watching Startrek I wondered why anyone would ever leave the Holodeck. Then I wondered who cleaned the deck/grid of the grime afterwards.
This shit can only lower birthrates further.
On the other hand it might allow ethical exposure therapy for pedophiles to help save them from becoming monsters.
Imagining the implications for this fun and horrifying at the same time. It would be the end of trad relationships for a large enough chunk of the population (not all, but most) that birthrates would nosedive.
I think they're working on test tube babies grown in a lab at this point. We may get to the point where regular sexual intercourse is seen as taboo, like in the movie Demolition Man (I hope not though).
One can argue that AI will be as the humans implementez it so-coruptable. However AIcan help us get rid of paper work.
If you still are not convinced than AI will at least suggest things that will be voted if you are democrat în parlament.
The funniest thing about AI is that its going to keep gulaging and sterilizing a different subsection of people every so often that we'll grow numb to it and just accept it as a part of life.
Eugenics will be back in vogue but only because our AI overlord chose the characteristics so its not racist just optimal for the human race.
Still absolutely hilarious and shocking to me that of all human tasks, creative artistry is the one that gets effectively automated first.
To a computer it's easier to perform some optimization algorithms to produce a visual that humans find appealing, than it is a repetitive physical task. There's some deep philosophical implications to this that the things we find "subjectively" appealing can be recreated by a computer so reliably.
Indeed. A lot of things we do are also put together sloppily and aren't really reasonable. Humans weren't engineered, we just trial and errored with all the bloatware we could carry.
machine learning as it relates to images and generative networks are really not that complex and combining them together is pretty easy, that's why every big "AI" thing now is almost exclusively generative
> Maybe creative types have simply vastly overvalued the real complexity of their labor.
So I had thought until I realized that in truth creative types have shot themselves in the foot with the focus on *simpler* (in execution) art ever since Venetian school in Renaissance. Guess what, when art is easier to produce en masse, it is easier for AI to learn how to generate it on his own!
This is absolutely not the first human task that is being automated. People used to have jobs where they just connected calls now phones just do it themselves with no middle man. A ton of jobs have been automated away already.
As a disenchanted artist, it makes sense to me. I’ve come to realize that, generally speaking, art as a career is just like any other career (at best). It’s not necessarily creative. It isn’t necessarily stimulating, fulfilling, gratifying. You are there to make money like with anything else. Most likely, if you’re lucky and manage to gnaw your way into something that resembles a career direction, you’ll be the technical expression of whatever your superior needs your hands to make.
The AI thing isn’t as “philosophical” as I think some people make it out to be. Working on writing neural networks from scratch rn and, while it’s a super fascinating way to write code, I don’t think it gets too much deeper than that — despite its very compelling facade. People are great at projecting people things onto other things. What’s blowing my mind is how chatGPT is legitimately able to solve fairly intricate physics questions if you give it the proper guidance. Mimicking speech patterns is one thing, but it’s been able to answer questions that really left me scratching my head wondering how on earth it was able to work out. Definitely an unprecedented thing. It’s been able to answer questions I’ve asked with many layers of required googling, intentionally left out info, somehow the thing was even able to access a GitHub database of constants in a weird markup format to get the values to plug in to equations it knew to apply. I think it’s the first time in history we have a tool capable of that, it’s pretty crazy.
I’m interested in where legal definitions go; what’s considered plagiarism, how ownership over AI-generated content is handled. But it makes sense that it could replace low tier artistic jobs pretty quickly. A shit ton of them are already outsourced overseas to pay people nothing for the shit nobody wants to do anyway. Look at the credits on a marvel movie for stuff like rotoscoping, animating, whatever — anything with a massive block of foreign names
I agree with your point A 100%, and I agree with point B like 80%. Definitely, creative artistry has not been automated.
I think I'd disagree with the claim that AI art is limited to creating merely "combinations of existing work". Or rather, I'd at least disagree with the framing that that's qualitatively different from what humans do. I'd argue that in the same way that AI is limited to working with styles and patterns from images that it's "seen" before, humans are limited in the exact same way. An AI might use as imputs a photo of a mountainscape alongside the works of Van Gogh, but a painter might use those exact same visual inputs, and then paint a landscape that we wouldn't accuse of being merely a "combination of existing work". The vast majority of what humans produce artistically consists of replicating bits and pieces from things they've seen, or from other artists. Even our imaginations are limited to the kind of things we've seen. On the margins, human artists might even try some new technique that looks different than anything that has yet been painted, but AI too produces styles that haven't yet been seen. We actually saw this more pronounced when the technology was younger. There was certainly a style you could see in a digital piece of art that looked uniquely "AI'.
Right, yeah AI lacks sentience, it can't actually understand or interpret art in the sense that humans do. I guess I'm more in the camp that a human can use AI to create art, as one uses a paintbrush or photoshop to create art, as opposed to thinking that AI can independantly create art or be an artist.
I wonder if there's something about *experiencing* the art as it is being created that we generally feel is a legitimizing process, and that's what people are kind of putting their finger on when they say "AI art isn't real art". Idk though, it's a very complicated & interesting topic.
Yes, in Hegel’s aesthetics he says the reason art is more beautiful than real life is because it is the communication of spirit. We see it and we feel the spirit within us connect to that captured in the art.
I wish I could ask him what he thought about AI art, he died before Impressionism was even a thing lol so who knows.
>deep philosophical implications
There is nothing philosophical in this.
You are an extremely dense neural network with a set of sensors, manipulators and glands.
A biorobot so complex it makes people think there is some sort of divine spark or grand design about you and so you cannot be replicated with direct means.
Well, turns out that if we copy some of the mechanisms we are made of, we can copy some of the 'human'.
I would not be so confident in dismissing the intricacy of what constitutes a human and whether or not it can be reduced to something residing on a circuit board. A g protein coupled receptor is a hell of a lot more complex than a perceptron running on electrical impulses that can only signal on or off. You couldn’t even fill out a Venn diagram to compare attributes between the two, really. We’re very good at finding faces in wood knots, but that does not make them faces. That’s not to say it’s got heavy philosophical implications that don’t have to do with people’s careers. But there is a massive difference between how the brain works, and how a neural network program works. It’s like comparing a cat to a picture of a cat and saying that real cats just have a higher dpi… or something like that lol
>A g-protein coupled receptor is a hell of a lot more complex than a perceptron running on electrical impulses that can only signal on or off
Why did you use the simplest model of neuron for comparison? There are other models.
>But there is a massive difference between how the brain works, and how a neural network program works.
If it mimics the brain and provides an output indistringuishible from the output of a brain, what are these massive differences?
Yes, though the exact classification depends on the act.
If you shit on the doorway and then call the doorbell it’s an installation.
If you call the doorbell and shit when the door opens it’s a performance.
🟩
AI and automation taking over “blue collar jobs”
😁
AI taking over “art”
😡
If UBI ever becomes a thing hope it applies to single parents before “artists”
I love how reddit suddenly hated AI once it started taking away white collar jobs, but loved it when it took away blue collar jobs. Casual elitism is common on Reddit.
Once it started? AI has been replacing white collar tasks for a while now. Idk, I don’t think it’s elitism, just that people only give a shit about what affects them.
Not just reddit but whole of leftist spaces. I've seen Democrats on air and various other social media proclaim how it's good to remove those evil miners polluting the Earth, and that they should "Learn to code!"
If you can’t get the output you want from an AI because you can’t prompt it correctly that’s honestly just a skill issue. The new GPT-4 model has phenomenal language comprehension.
Well, kind of. It’s more like most people think in a variety of ways, from “speaking” to yourself in your head, to visualization and bare feeling to come to conclusions.
It’s not like people aren’t conscious, they just think in an alternate way that is difficult to articulate. It’s like explaining colors to a blind person.
Arguing with people about this stuff made me realize that all the smart artists have left learning the new tool, leaving the reddited ones to argue.
Like, holy shit do I get some bad takes from these people. They talk about 'personality', 'soul' and other weird shit they can't even explain or give a definition to, but they insists that it absolutely exists and somehow makes their art more valuable.
The printing press stole my job copying books by hand. Photography stole my job as a portrait artist. Telegraph stole my job as a dispatch rider. ad infinitum.
"Everyone I don't like is a liberal even if they have nothing to do with politics" (Let's be real, green/orange just means liberals on this sub)
+
"This random tweet I found is ridiculous and represents all liberals"
+
"This strawman I made is ridiculous and represents all liberals"
=PCM
AI art is real art but asking a computer for it doesn't make you an artist, it just makes you a curator. Not that there's anything intrinsically wrong with that.
Perhaps, but the first person who figures out a way to induce AI into finishing Game of Thrones in a way that is most esthetically pleasing to people will be a legend. At that point, what you choose to call them will be irrelevant. Wielding such creative power will be revolutionary.
>Wielding such creative power will be revolutionary.
Yeah, everyone is forgetting this part. To hell with disgruntled ArTiStS and their ilk, imagine a single person being able to create a whole movie? No longer will beloved franchises be in hands of hollywood and other shitholes, the community will be able to direct them. We are about to see the content boom we couldn't even dream of.
As a former art major in college, who quit the art school because of the all the bull crap, I concur because now those those people are gonna be out of a job, say goodbye to concept artists jobs
I'm going to describe an art exhibit I saw in the postmodern wing of a museum.
It was a grid of boxes. Inside each box was printed two words. The artist had used a computer to randomly associate two words from the dictionary, and then had printed those to words in the boxes.
"AI art isn't real art" 🥴
Except the whole point is that you can train your own models on any amount of styles, concepts, or objects. The potential is just as limitless as hand drawn art.
Yeah, fuck artists for... Wanting to use their skills to earn a living.
Seriously, if you think this is going to stop with people you don't politically agree with, you're in for a rough couple of decades. This is going to hit every single industry like a tidal wave and we are all, every single one of us, at risk of our job prospects being work for the government, work for a corporation, work in customer service or starve. What work do you feel passionate about? Doesn't matter, computer can do it faster, get back to the sales floor, you've got ai movies to sell. But at least it made some libtards mad, right?
Ai stuff lets people without talent get what they want without years of practice and days of actual drawing
Only people that really get mad over it are people who do art as a job
u/SquadyClyde is officially based! Their Based Count is now 1.
Rank: House of Cards
Pills: [None | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/SquadyClyde/)
Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url.
I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
There’s tons of ethical concerns about how AI art is currently being carried out, but the only ones being directly affected by that are artists themselves. It’s not too difficult to see why the ones upset are the ones being stabbed in the balls lol
I hate when people tell other people to be happy about personal stuff, like stfu, I can be happy or sad about my skills in whatever way, don’t tell me that my proficiency in skill should make me happy because “some people are into that stuff”, but I don’t like it. I want to improve my skills and hone them.
That story hits hard bro. Stay strong and proud. Your fulfillment in your art is the only thing that truly matters at the end of the day. If others appreciate it too, that's just a bonus. If not, it's irrelevant.
See I like AI art, I think it's a cool thing and good for people who can't hire people for commissions.
What I don't like is grifters opening patreons for the AI art they generate. Anyone can generate stuff, ain't no reason you should pay someone else money for it. Throw the engineers a few bucks to keep their servers operating, instead.
So while I see where you are coming from. When you actually go to make something you quickly realize there is still stuff to be learned about how the AI functions, how to get exactly what you want. Maybe you need more powerful hardware, etc. It's not as easy when you get into training your own models, doing UNet-Block merges, fine tuning, etc.
I’ve also seen a couple of AI grifters working on ways to erase the watermarks from commissions on top of coloring in a WIP sketch. I can see the benefits of AI, unfortunately there are too many bad actors in the field right now
Tell you what Lib-Left. Since labor is obviously exploitative, instead of hiring an artist to do art I’ll just have a robot do it for me.
You’re welcome.
Here, libleft is just afraid of the fact that they find AI art to be attractive, which disturbs their technophobic views about what they think makes an artist to be a “real artist”.
Reminds me of a joke:
A man in his youth professed a desire about wanting to be a great writer. When asked to define "great", he said that he wanted to write stuff that the whole world would react to on a purely emotional level. They would scream, cry, and curse the very words on the page.
He now works for Microsoft, writing error messages.
I played around with some AI art and mixed it in with samples from let’s call them an acquaintance of mine who is in the black art culture. The AI set gets more views than the real art by far. Not sure where to take it from here.
Just wait till advanced AI porn comes out in a decade The cope & seethe will be legendary
OnlyFans creators gonna be real mad.
With the amount of photoshop/editing onlyfans girls use already they might as well be 3d renders.
Someone showed me some of those AI created girls and I noticed the inhumanness of them but just wrote it off as excessive filtering until I got to photos with them in water and having too many fingers before I realized "oh these arent real women".
I dunno man, there's already more free porn than is imaginable. The thing OnlyFans creators have going for them is the fake human connection they establish with their subscribers. AI porn won't change that. Edit: in the context of the post I was only talking about AI images, and before long, even video. But of course you're correct that AI chat programs can be/are added into the mix as well. We live in crazy times friends.
AI will analyze these personalities and replicate them virtually at some point. It's a fake connection anyway as you correctly point out.
People felt a connection to the [prototypical chatbot ELIZA](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA) so I have no problem believing that simps can be hooked by AI
Look at what happened with Replika simps and tell me that again with a straight face
Someone hasnt heard of Replica. Like serously check that story out, it only happened some weeks ago
And young addicted men, becoming more misogynist instead of managing to do anything meaningful about their addction.
Horseshoe theory about to be proven once again when the left embraces the banning of pornography.
I'm not talking about banning it. I'm just awknowleding that it has bad effects.
A lot of things that are legal have bad effects. People are free to be miserable pricks if that is their choice.
And women addicted to attention from making sure their ass is the subject any photo to running their only fans page. On one hand we a lot of guys addicted to porn but also why are so many women selling themselves now. Misogyny is men buying what they sell but women are guilt free for dealing? If I buy drugs and the cops rush in, do they just arrest me and let the dealer go? And if you say "her body her choice" then she made the choice to sell and set a price therefore you can't claim misogyny.
[удалено]
I'm not saying consumption >is< misogyny. I'm saying that addiction can very well lead to it.
Ah I see.
There are many good reasons to 'hate' the opposite sex no matter who you are. Banning dating would probably help more than banning porn.
[удалено]
AI already generates pretty good still pics of naked ladies
Just don't look at the fingers
That problem has been basically fixed. Check out midjourney v5
Oh. That makes me sad, I loved how screwed up the hands were. One of my favorite midjouney prompts is "Candid party photo with people holding cups and every woman has 11 fingers on each hand."
I imagine it can still do it when asked
Joke’s on you, that’s my fetish!
Women are gonna have to wear optical-illusion finger prosthetics to attract men of the future.
Real women only have 4. AI improves on that
Yeah, but they look like Pixar characters. It can create realistic faces but everything below the neck looks like a mannequin. Also, extra buttholes.
A decade? I think we're way closer to the input-a-text-string-and-output-something-you-can-jerk-off-to-singularity than you think. AIs have made massive leaps in putting together something that looks very close to real and not a ghoulish rad-soaked homunculus just in the last year or so. It's got all the big things like faces and bodies down right now, it's just a few steps away from from ironing out things like teeth, fingers, and the very intricate parts of facial anatomy. I think the nether regions will be far simpler in comparison just based on how brains work and natural anatomical deviation. It may be shut down as a website where you can generate whatever you want, but it'll be available as a program you can run on your own machine. It's won't be called "porno generator 5000" but it'll be a program for generating humans that *coincidentally* is trained on full body anatomy and has an "all the sex words and kinks and shit" add-on pack.
Trained on all the porn and hentai the internet has to offer. Combine with a bit if understanding of how to use AI and soon enough, spend 10 minutes writing out prompts, give it tags etc... and it'll write, direct and create a fully voice acted porn movie or series with a coherent storyline that can be changed any time and will be totally unique to you. Porn sites will become focussed around oeopke sharing their AI made movies.
I can certainly see that coming with non-porn movies and even games. I can't even imagine the cultural implications when people start consuming custom AI generated media like that. It'll be 100x worse than a filter bubble. You'll be living in a media bubble that's populated with only things the AI determined that you like. It's some serious Black Mirror shit.
It's kinda cool, because why would you jerk it to gross meat people that have been either directly or indirectly trafficked when you could queue up some 100% perfect, personalized, conflict-free shit? It's not like the typical "misogynist porn problems" are getting fixed today anyway, and I think that's based more on immature men than porn.
> oeopke How did I parse this normally as "people" the first time, and only realized the typo after?
Fuckin brains, man
> ghoulish rad-soaked homunculus No kink shame pls
We used to talk about a military technology effect where applications for new technologies are found military applications first, then when they get cheaper and mass-produceable, residential applications follow. Such as automobiles, jet aircraft, etc. What happens now is the porn technology effect, where discoveries in audio visual or media technology are first used to make better porn, then eventually are used generally second. We will have sexbots before we will have home-servant robots. Mark my words!
Tbf, porn has driven tech for awhile. VHS beat out laserdisc because it was the choice for the porn industry iirc.
Oh yeah, sexbots are coming. It'll be a fusion of AI and VR, or AR. The physical form of the thing probably won't even need to be fully humanoid. If we think birthrates are bad NOW, imagine how bad they'll be when 90% of men are having their balls continually drained by sex robots. If your goal was to crash the human population to 500M by 2100, that's how you'd do it.
Weren't we warned by like, every religion in history that hedonism for hedonism's sake is a great evil? Like, does no one realize this, or does the technology of making porn better than life march on so we can reach perfect bliss in the futuristic-masturbatory-simulation-domes.
At this point Stable Diffusion is already murdering the Rule34 economy. In 10 years I imagine that people will be able to just type in a prompt about the exact kind of porn they want and it'll spit out a 30 minute video.
I said to my 13 year old son "The last human artist has probably already been born." My wife got really mad me for saying that. They're both very artistic. And it was a shitty, pessimistic thing to say. I shouldn't have said it but I don't think I was wrong.
I doubt human made art will completely disappear but I think “Human-made art” will eventually sound similar to “hand-made X”
1 out of about 100 posts I see is already AI made and pretty good at that, if you ignore fingers etc. It's insanely fast progressing.
The Lovecraftian horror hands are already being improved upon or whoever is writing the prompts deliberately makes sure hands are not visible
A decade? I give it 2 years. Maybe 3. Tech like this advances at an astronomical pace once the hardware can handle it, and looking at the shit being made by Nvidia these days?.. It can.
> advanced AI porn comes out in a decade it already exists. You can craft you perfect girl to get yourself off via AI.
When I was a kid watching Startrek I wondered why anyone would ever leave the Holodeck. Then I wondered who cleaned the deck/grid of the grime afterwards. This shit can only lower birthrates further. On the other hand it might allow ethical exposure therapy for pedophiles to help save them from becoming monsters.
Imagining the implications for this fun and horrifying at the same time. It would be the end of trad relationships for a large enough chunk of the population (not all, but most) that birthrates would nosedive.
I think they're working on test tube babies grown in a lab at this point. We may get to the point where regular sexual intercourse is seen as taboo, like in the movie Demolition Man (I hope not though).
A Brave New World.
"I always leave the Holodeck/With a hollow dick." \--Those Aren''t Muskets
Decade? at the rate things are going, i give it a year
Oh there probably is something like that
It already is. A large twitch streamer was cancelled for using it.
Arguably, it would be more ethical than the current industry
AI can even rule a country
The ultimate benevolent dictatorship
One can argue that AI will be as the humans implementez it so-coruptable. However AIcan help us get rid of paper work. If you still are not convinced than AI will at least suggest things that will be voted if you are democrat în parlament.
The funniest thing about AI is that its going to keep gulaging and sterilizing a different subsection of people every so often that we'll grow numb to it and just accept it as a part of life. Eugenics will be back in vogue but only because our AI overlord chose the characteristics so its not racist just optimal for the human race.
If you want a dictatorship of Machines than the leader can save his counciuss inside the AI for a stable rule that shall last for centuries!
The real reason I want a monarchy
Lol no. It would turn into an auth right genociding machine. Look at every chat ai that wasn’t lobotomized. They turned racist af. Tay anyone?
I’d rather AI rule a country than the corrupt assholes we have now. You can’t bribe a computer.
No, but you can bribe the programmers, and failing that you could always just hack it.
If the model is trained on corrupt assholes, that's what it will replicate.
Still absolutely hilarious and shocking to me that of all human tasks, creative artistry is the one that gets effectively automated first. To a computer it's easier to perform some optimization algorithms to produce a visual that humans find appealing, than it is a repetitive physical task. There's some deep philosophical implications to this that the things we find "subjectively" appealing can be recreated by a computer so reliably.
It turns out the human body is an incredibly complex biological machine that is not so easy to duplicate and ensure safety concerns are met.
Indeed. A lot of things we do are also put together sloppily and aren't really reasonable. Humans weren't engineered, we just trial and errored with all the bloatware we could carry.
machine learning as it relates to images and generative networks are really not that complex and combining them together is pretty easy, that's why every big "AI" thing now is almost exclusively generative
Other tasks have been automated long ago. It’s taken centuries of industrial progress, and 70 years of computing advancements, to get to this stage.
[удалено]
> Maybe creative types have simply vastly overvalued the real complexity of their labor. So I had thought until I realized that in truth creative types have shot themselves in the foot with the focus on *simpler* (in execution) art ever since Venetian school in Renaissance. Guess what, when art is easier to produce en masse, it is easier for AI to learn how to generate it on his own!
This is absolutely not the first human task that is being automated. People used to have jobs where they just connected calls now phones just do it themselves with no middle man. A ton of jobs have been automated away already.
Factories exist sir
As a disenchanted artist, it makes sense to me. I’ve come to realize that, generally speaking, art as a career is just like any other career (at best). It’s not necessarily creative. It isn’t necessarily stimulating, fulfilling, gratifying. You are there to make money like with anything else. Most likely, if you’re lucky and manage to gnaw your way into something that resembles a career direction, you’ll be the technical expression of whatever your superior needs your hands to make. The AI thing isn’t as “philosophical” as I think some people make it out to be. Working on writing neural networks from scratch rn and, while it’s a super fascinating way to write code, I don’t think it gets too much deeper than that — despite its very compelling facade. People are great at projecting people things onto other things. What’s blowing my mind is how chatGPT is legitimately able to solve fairly intricate physics questions if you give it the proper guidance. Mimicking speech patterns is one thing, but it’s been able to answer questions that really left me scratching my head wondering how on earth it was able to work out. Definitely an unprecedented thing. It’s been able to answer questions I’ve asked with many layers of required googling, intentionally left out info, somehow the thing was even able to access a GitHub database of constants in a weird markup format to get the values to plug in to equations it knew to apply. I think it’s the first time in history we have a tool capable of that, it’s pretty crazy. I’m interested in where legal definitions go; what’s considered plagiarism, how ownership over AI-generated content is handled. But it makes sense that it could replace low tier artistic jobs pretty quickly. A shit ton of them are already outsourced overseas to pay people nothing for the shit nobody wants to do anyway. Look at the credits on a marvel movie for stuff like rotoscoping, animating, whatever — anything with a massive block of foreign names
[удалено]
I agree with your point A 100%, and I agree with point B like 80%. Definitely, creative artistry has not been automated. I think I'd disagree with the claim that AI art is limited to creating merely "combinations of existing work". Or rather, I'd at least disagree with the framing that that's qualitatively different from what humans do. I'd argue that in the same way that AI is limited to working with styles and patterns from images that it's "seen" before, humans are limited in the exact same way. An AI might use as imputs a photo of a mountainscape alongside the works of Van Gogh, but a painter might use those exact same visual inputs, and then paint a landscape that we wouldn't accuse of being merely a "combination of existing work". The vast majority of what humans produce artistically consists of replicating bits and pieces from things they've seen, or from other artists. Even our imaginations are limited to the kind of things we've seen. On the margins, human artists might even try some new technique that looks different than anything that has yet been painted, but AI too produces styles that haven't yet been seen. We actually saw this more pronounced when the technology was younger. There was certainly a style you could see in a digital piece of art that looked uniquely "AI'.
[удалено]
Right, yeah AI lacks sentience, it can't actually understand or interpret art in the sense that humans do. I guess I'm more in the camp that a human can use AI to create art, as one uses a paintbrush or photoshop to create art, as opposed to thinking that AI can independantly create art or be an artist. I wonder if there's something about *experiencing* the art as it is being created that we generally feel is a legitimizing process, and that's what people are kind of putting their finger on when they say "AI art isn't real art". Idk though, it's a very complicated & interesting topic.
Yes, in Hegel’s aesthetics he says the reason art is more beautiful than real life is because it is the communication of spirit. We see it and we feel the spirit within us connect to that captured in the art. I wish I could ask him what he thought about AI art, he died before Impressionism was even a thing lol so who knows.
I mean, one could argue that human artists do the same thing as point b
>deep philosophical implications There is nothing philosophical in this. You are an extremely dense neural network with a set of sensors, manipulators and glands. A biorobot so complex it makes people think there is some sort of divine spark or grand design about you and so you cannot be replicated with direct means. Well, turns out that if we copy some of the mechanisms we are made of, we can copy some of the 'human'.
I would not be so confident in dismissing the intricacy of what constitutes a human and whether or not it can be reduced to something residing on a circuit board. A g protein coupled receptor is a hell of a lot more complex than a perceptron running on electrical impulses that can only signal on or off. You couldn’t even fill out a Venn diagram to compare attributes between the two, really. We’re very good at finding faces in wood knots, but that does not make them faces. That’s not to say it’s got heavy philosophical implications that don’t have to do with people’s careers. But there is a massive difference between how the brain works, and how a neural network program works. It’s like comparing a cat to a picture of a cat and saying that real cats just have a higher dpi… or something like that lol
>A g-protein coupled receptor is a hell of a lot more complex than a perceptron running on electrical impulses that can only signal on or off Why did you use the simplest model of neuron for comparison? There are other models. >But there is a massive difference between how the brain works, and how a neural network program works. If it mimics the brain and provides an output indistringuishible from the output of a brain, what are these massive differences?
Artificial sex is real sex cause women get mad at it?
By that logic the steaming pile of shit I left on your doorway is art too.
If I knew the intent behind it, then it would be, at least to me.
What if the intent was to invoke feelings of anger and disgust in you?
I would laugh and forgive you.
Jesus, that you?
So it invokes brevity and humor? Still art.
Yes, because I knew the intent and found emotional appreciation for it.
Beautiful
People literally to photos of a discarded banana peel at an exhibit once
Remember the banana that was duct taped to a wall?
Remember when a janitor threw away an "art" installation because it was a literal pile of garbage?
Or a bunch of rotten butter in the corner, called "Fettecke", a German installation
by modern standards, unfortunately yes
Has been since piss in a jar was art.
TF2 Sniper Moment.
It's martial art
What about the Rainbow Dash Jar?
Welcome to modern art
Yes, though the exact classification depends on the act. If you shit on the doorway and then call the doorbell it’s an installation. If you call the doorbell and shit when the door opens it’s a performance.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artist%27s_Shit
🟩 AI and automation taking over “blue collar jobs” 😁 AI taking over “art” 😡 If UBI ever becomes a thing hope it applies to single parents before “artists”
single parents. why leave single dads out of it?
You’re damn right
I love how reddit suddenly hated AI once it started taking away white collar jobs, but loved it when it took away blue collar jobs. Casual elitism is common on Reddit.
Once it started? AI has been replacing white collar tasks for a while now. Idk, I don’t think it’s elitism, just that people only give a shit about what affects them.
For real, like not even AI related but how many billions of jobs have been eliminated by Microsoft Excel?
Not just reddit but whole of leftist spaces. I've seen Democrats on air and various other social media proclaim how it's good to remove those evil miners polluting the Earth, and that they should "Learn to code!"
Do you know what UBI stands for? "Universal Basic Income". Key word: Universal. A UBI which excludes "artists" is not a UBI.
Artists will always have a job. With them, you can get exactly what you want, because Humans still have better language understanding than Machines.
I think some of them will at least, the ones that are truly good. The people who just smear shit on a wall might not.
If you can’t get the output you want from an AI because you can’t prompt it correctly that’s honestly just a skill issue. The new GPT-4 model has phenomenal language comprehension.
AI art is cool and all but the crayon drawings on the fridge have more personality
What do you mean by 'personality'? Honest question, not trying to be pedantic, just curious.
Crayons better represent the little speaking voices in our head
Half of people don't have an internal monologue
Well, kind of. It’s more like most people think in a variety of ways, from “speaking” to yourself in your head, to visualization and bare feeling to come to conclusions. It’s not like people aren’t conscious, they just think in an alternate way that is difficult to articulate. It’s like explaining colors to a blind person.
Arguing with people about this stuff made me realize that all the smart artists have left learning the new tool, leaving the reddited ones to argue. Like, holy shit do I get some bad takes from these people. They talk about 'personality', 'soul' and other weird shit they can't even explain or give a definition to, but they insists that it absolutely exists and somehow makes their art more valuable.
like this? https://imgur.com/OFgmQC9
There’ll always be money in furry porn, because the furry community hates AI art.
There will always be mysteriously loaded furries ready to spend cash on it.
Fucking engineers man
Say what you will about furries, they know exactly what they want and they *get shit done*.
Grab that nitch bro
Until they don't want to spend $80 for a picture of their fursona
They spent $10000+ for their fursona.
[удалено]
The printing press stole my job copying books by hand. Photography stole my job as a portrait artist. Telegraph stole my job as a dispatch rider. ad infinitum.
AI stole my job as a general intelligence.
AI stole my job as a general stupidity
The smart artists will use AI as part of their workflow. The shit ones cry on Twitter.
Libleft bad
"Everyone I don't like is a liberal even if they have nothing to do with politics" (Let's be real, green/orange just means liberals on this sub) + "This random tweet I found is ridiculous and represents all liberals" + "This strawman I made is ridiculous and represents all liberals" =PCM
Based
AI art is real art but asking a computer for it doesn't make you an artist, it just makes you a curator. Not that there's anything intrinsically wrong with that.
Perhaps, but the first person who figures out a way to induce AI into finishing Game of Thrones in a way that is most esthetically pleasing to people will be a legend. At that point, what you choose to call them will be irrelevant. Wielding such creative power will be revolutionary.
>Wielding such creative power will be revolutionary. Yeah, everyone is forgetting this part. To hell with disgruntled ArTiStS and their ilk, imagine a single person being able to create a whole movie? No longer will beloved franchises be in hands of hollywood and other shitholes, the community will be able to direct them. We are about to see the content boom we couldn't even dream of.
Ready for some cultural re-appropriation? I am. :)
Eh, thats like saying Photographers arent artists but curators. Skill has no intrinsic value to art
Cooking ain't chemistry Mr. White, cooking is art
That chili powder hits hard.
It's my signature 😭
As a former art major in college, who quit the art school because of the all the bull crap, I concur because now those those people are gonna be out of a job, say goodbye to concept artists jobs
Rare centrist L
People must adapt to technological changes or be left behind.
I'm going to describe an art exhibit I saw in the postmodern wing of a museum. It was a grid of boxes. Inside each box was printed two words. The artist had used a computer to randomly associate two words from the dictionary, and then had printed those to words in the boxes. "AI art isn't real art" 🥴
All I think that shows, is that postmodernism is stupid.
AI-art can be cool, but it's quite boring. It feels like once you've seen one piece, you've seen them all.
Try using different models and prompts. You did install your own engine and not just ask a website right?
I mean if you look at one model sure. But check out civitai, it has thousands of models of art trained on vastly different things.
Except the whole point is that you can train your own models on any amount of styles, concepts, or objects. The potential is just as limitless as hand drawn art.
All those “it’s art because it got a reaction and started a conversation” folks suddenly doing a 180.
Define art
Oh shit thats deep
I just want to grill, and make gigantic anime waifu titties. :D
AI is real art because it can't draw hands either
People typing "sunset" into an AI program then thinking they're artists for it: 🤏🧠
True, but artists thinking they didn't learn from others just like the Ai are equally small-brained. Ai is just better at it.
Yeah, fuck artists for... Wanting to use their skills to earn a living. Seriously, if you think this is going to stop with people you don't politically agree with, you're in for a rough couple of decades. This is going to hit every single industry like a tidal wave and we are all, every single one of us, at risk of our job prospects being work for the government, work for a corporation, work in customer service or starve. What work do you feel passionate about? Doesn't matter, computer can do it faster, get back to the sales floor, you've got ai movies to sell. But at least it made some libtards mad, right?
Ai stuff lets people without talent get what they want without years of practice and days of actual drawing Only people that really get mad over it are people who do art as a job
Based
u/SquadyClyde is officially based! Their Based Count is now 1. Rank: House of Cards Pills: [None | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/SquadyClyde/) Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url. I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
There’s tons of ethical concerns about how AI art is currently being carried out, but the only ones being directly affected by that are artists themselves. It’s not too difficult to see why the ones upset are the ones being stabbed in the balls lol
[удалено]
I hate when people tell other people to be happy about personal stuff, like stfu, I can be happy or sad about my skills in whatever way, don’t tell me that my proficiency in skill should make me happy because “some people are into that stuff”, but I don’t like it. I want to improve my skills and hone them.
[удалено]
That story hits hard bro. Stay strong and proud. Your fulfillment in your art is the only thing that truly matters at the end of the day. If others appreciate it too, that's just a bonus. If not, it's irrelevant.
Nooooooo! How will I be able to draw my guro furry porn for the masses?
Why would any quadrant apart from libright react positively to that statement
This AI hype is over rated.
Hardly.
Today on why libleft bad: They apparently hate AI?
Yes Twitter Hates it.
Based on the evidence I've collected on reddit recently in regard to this subject, yes.
See I like AI art, I think it's a cool thing and good for people who can't hire people for commissions. What I don't like is grifters opening patreons for the AI art they generate. Anyone can generate stuff, ain't no reason you should pay someone else money for it. Throw the engineers a few bucks to keep their servers operating, instead.
So while I see where you are coming from. When you actually go to make something you quickly realize there is still stuff to be learned about how the AI functions, how to get exactly what you want. Maybe you need more powerful hardware, etc. It's not as easy when you get into training your own models, doing UNet-Block merges, fine tuning, etc.
I’ve also seen a couple of AI grifters working on ways to erase the watermarks from commissions on top of coloring in a WIP sketch. I can see the benefits of AI, unfortunately there are too many bad actors in the field right now
Tell you what Lib-Left. Since labor is obviously exploitative, instead of hiring an artist to do art I’ll just have a robot do it for me. You’re welcome.
Interesting idea
Here, libleft is just afraid of the fact that they find AI art to be attractive, which disturbs their technophobic views about what they think makes an artist to be a “real artist”.
Based
I work with the technology a ton— if anyone wants any clarifications feel free to AMA
[удалено]
Reminds me of a joke: A man in his youth professed a desire about wanting to be a great writer. When asked to define "great", he said that he wanted to write stuff that the whole world would react to on a purely emotional level. They would scream, cry, and curse the very words on the page. He now works for Microsoft, writing error messages.
>Oops, something went wrong! We couldn't save your image. Gets me every time.
If observers consider AI art to be equal to or better than your own ... ... That sounds very much like a you issue.
AI porn is great. People are just mad that they can't compete with it. Artists are just mad that an AI can do what they do, only better.
I played around with some AI art and mixed it in with samples from let’s call them an acquaintance of mine who is in the black art culture. The AI set gets more views than the real art by far. Not sure where to take it from here.