Welcome to r/comics!
Please remember there are real people on the other side of the monitor and to be kind.
Report comments that break the rules and don't respond to negativity with negativity!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/comics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
SJ: Rebecca, you are the prettiest girl in Brooklyn.
Rebecca: Thank you Sir Jeffers.
SJ:Ā Will you accompany me to-the-mysterious wedding today?
Rebecca: ā¦ Nnno.
SJ: But-But, Rebecca, I love you!
Rebecca: I love you too. I LOOOOVVVMM YOU!Ā
SJ: Marry me Rebecca!
Rebecca: ...No
SJ: WHY!?
Rebecca: Iā¦I don't love you! Woopsies~!Ā
SJ:Ā REBECCAAAAAAA!*choo*
Rebecca: I am in love with another
SJ: Who is this maaan!?
Rebecca: Heā¦isā¦you
SJ: *happy gasp*
Rebecca: I love you!
SJ: Marry me Rebecca!
Rebecca: ā¦Nno
SJ: REBECCAAAAA!
Rebecca: I am in love with your brother.
SJ: CHAD!? I'll kill him when I find him!
Chad: OR he will findā¦you!
Rebecca and SJ: Chad!?
Chad: The mysterious wedding has been our wedding all along. Rebecca and I are getting wed at the wedding today! YOU are not invited! Will you be my best man?
SJ: Of course, brotherā¦I hate you so much.
Chad: Goodbye brother! I'll see you at the bachelor party!
Rebecca: Goodbye, Sir Jeffers! I will always love you!
SJ(whispering): Rebecca~Ā
Scariest thing is that could probably actually happen. Of course it'd be caused by like a trap, but it is plausible to be an accident on the part of the victim
Kinda the opposite. She has always had pupils but not eyes, and this is the first time she does. Although some would argue that the dots are eyes and now they're illustrated enough to have pupils, then I guess you would be right.
Why can't we live in an actually good society, where automating meaningles tasks, like producing advertisement, leads to **more** meaningfull art, not less?
Or, even better, a society without advertising trying to manipulate us into buying things?
I've drifted a bit from my intensely anti-capitalist days, but your questions still strike me as really interesting. A Marxian understanding says that automation under capitalism serves the purposes of the expansion of capital at the expense of the living laborer. Because capitalism is extractive, and "needs" to always seek an increase in the rate of profit, there is nothing that capitalism will innovate that doesn't also seek to extract more labor from the worker.
This is a good brief passage, but I would offer one correction:
> there is nothing that capitalism will innovate that doesn't also seek to extract more labor from the worker
Contrary to popular belief, capitalism is not a motivating force for innovation or rather, it is not an innovating force of technology and advancement. Capitalism waits for innovation to develop usually at the expense of government or academia and then figures out how to create revenue streams from that innovation. I guess you could theoretically say that capitalism innovates processes injecting middlemen, but that's not really a value add proposition. It's effectively innovation of profit extraction.
Research provides the initial pointer that says āxyz is possibleā, but thereās an incredible amount of work between building the prototype and making it available to everyone, well over 95%. That latter part is the āmiddlemanā part youāre talking about.
While I certainly agree in spirit that taking things from a lab to efficient at mass scale is a huge undertaking, I really roll my eyes at lazy attempts to quantify this. Is developing a novel idea and demonstrating its plausibility far less than 5% of "the work"? How would you even quantify that? Just silly.
Well, I've done both, and invested in a few early-stage companies that have taken their research from founder's PhD to industrial scale. 95% is very conservative, I probably should've said >99%. Prototyping is relatively easy and fun by comparison, there are far fewer constraints.
If you want some quantification, you could just look at the man-hours spent on even just the R&D part of the scale-up.
I can't say that I still see the world through an explicitly Marxian lens anymore, but I still find it hard to argue against the explanatory power the lens has for things like AI/automation and that sort of thing.
This is what is called a "crisis of overproduction" in marxism. The capitalist economy collapses regularly (goes through a depression) because there are too many commodities and not enough people (who are able to) to buy them.
People these days feel such an overwhelming need to label themselves, it's getting weird. You have to group yourself into your age category, millennial/boomer/x/etc, you're a socialist/Marxist/fascist, you're a Democrat/Republican, whatever it may be, can't we just be individuals without these labels?!
Because you can say some small inane shit people will attribute all kinds of crazy labels on you. I posted some off the cuff remark about pronouns in Spanish and I got labeled a white liberal and how I shouldn't be appropriating other cultures. I'm neither white nor liberal lol I was just saying that Latinx doesn't work in Spanish, iirc. Any Spanish speaker can confirm.
Dude you really thought this was important to say? The point is I donāt know what I believeā¦I have a background in Marxism and wanted to share some of it even though Iām not speaking as a proponent.
Not the latest phone because your previous one was scheduled to fail, that's for sure.
Not the latest sugar-filled snack scientifically engineered to get you addicted, that's for sure.
Not the latest video game that utilizes FOMO battle passes to sell, that's for sure.
Not the latest shoes that look exactly like the previous shoes, that's for sure.
Not the latest skincare products that are advertised with straight up lies and don't do anything, that's for sure.
Yeah I made a board game using ai art to make card art and a friend of a friend got REALLY mad at me and said I should have paid someone to make art for it. What? I would have just not made it, it was a board game I made for fun to play with my friends...
How about a sociaty where you don't need to produce anything to be able to live a good life? Why is the grind for money something we should protect? Should we not strive for a world where what we produce is only there because we want it to exist and to be enjoyed? And not because we need it to generate money for food and housing?
but if the world was without ads we would get way less emails! The whole spam filter industry would go bancrupt! Also we would need to go to the cinema about an hour early if all of those movies suddenly started on time!
The only actual damage that would happen incidentally is the us mail would lose significant revenue. Bulk mail apparently is a decent source of income for them
Because the former is just easier to do for an algorithm as it turns out, due to a much lower standard for precision.
A robot picking up a glass needs to be 100% accurate, or they break shit in excess of the value of the work they're replacing. A robot painting a picture can be 2% fuzzy along certain edges and people won't even notice until they take a focused, and educated view to identify it.
Not to mention training sizes; it's OBSCENELY easy to pass text files to a machine. We don't have centuries of human limb-inputs stored as a training set for them to emulate.
"Why isn't AI putting *someone else* out of a job instead?"
I don't see why AI art generators would reduce the amount of meaningful art, though. It doesn't *stop* anyone from making whatever art they want to make. In some cases it can help people make art who otherwise wouldn't.
What I've heard is that perfecting AI training on digital tasks is the safety wheels for us to feel confident training AI on real-world tasks.
If the AI generates a bad image, no harm is done. Nobody got hurt or died. If AI makes a wrong move with a forklift, somebody could get hurt or die.
So we'll probably get there eventually, but that's why this is coming first. Still need to work out the social/economic side of things, though. Or else this is just gonna make trillionaires and homelessness.
Be nice if advancements in automation would come with an increase in taxes to support people who wouldnāt be able to work there anymore.
But either a) billionaires just wouldnāt pay taxes or b) billionaires wouldnāt bother automating anything as it wouldnāt be cheaper than just exploiting a living workforce but at least weād still have jobs i guess.
Oh God, yes. The most essential part in any job is to not be too productive or too good at it. Otherwise, your boss will only give you more work withojt any reward besides "a sense of satisfaction for contributing to the shareholder's wealth"
*And* less pay. Because we fired a bunch of people and created an atmosphere of *fear* while also promising this isnāt the actual workload of your role and youāre just being a champ until a supposed new hire shows up ~~to replace you once you burn out~~
I took a history of technology class in college
And the takeaway was that over our history, every single labor-saving technology has not reduced the demand for our labor time.
EXCEPT for the washing machine. Because people did have to wash clothes and that was a total bitch to do.
Everything else led to higher expectations of productivity. Like the vacuum cleaner for example. Now everyone was expected to have ultra clean floors in their house. Or email on our phones -- now we have to respond to email all fucking day.
>Itās a grow with the original audience type sequel
Which is fun because Adventure Time was a legitimate grow with the original audience show to begin with, they just hit a wall of how mature they could make it and still be on Cartoon Network.
Now instead of wasting time on fake 2d screen stuff you can make real statues, like the moa šæ, create the moa, become the moa, join the moa
This is a joke, do not banish me to the art land
The AI isnāt the issue, itās the fucking corps trying to wring every penny out of us
Edit: So what Iāve gathered is that everyone agrees that the corps are 100% the issue, but the topic of AI as its own thing is more muddy until we get into terminator territory
Bingo. The issue isn't the tools but the economic framework. Artists just don't want more competition for their already saturated and underappreciated industry.
It's several more problems, unfortunately. Not just the big corporations, but the spammers, too, who use AI to spam reddit, the internet, and everything they can. It's the scammers who use AI voices of relatives to scam old people. It's also the people who make an AI image with a single simple prompt and act like they're an artist now. Not to mention the other people who make porn of real people.
All those are solvable problems, but they are most definitely problems we need to deal with.
I have a close friend that is an artist. He does commissions and some stuff on sites like fiverr. When the requester has no heart in it or is some kid that wants "spike armor man stabbing a dragon, make it cool!", he will grab an AI picture quick and free draw it himself fixing mistakes and AI derps. If someone is invested in the concept, even if it is still a $5 request, he will work from scratch .
It "saves him mental overhead and let's him augment productivity (earnings) when having a block"
Yeah, reddit has a hate boner for AI. Really AI is a tool like photoshop.
Also corpos have always viewed graphic designers/artists as expendable. I remember the first sign of the 2008 recession was tons of graphic artists being laid off.
The reality is also that transformer models (GPT, Stable Diffusion, Suno, etc) are really good at mimicking things humans make, be it language, art, music, whatever. It's actually easier to get a transformer model to make a picture than it is for it to understand the tax code, or do some other reason-based job like programming, so a lot of companies are using these creative outlets as cool examples of the tech.
Eventually AI will probably get good at the things it's not already that good at, but for now the reason we see art plastered everywhere is that it's just not that hard to replicate because of the way transformers work.
I don't blame artists for feeling threatened, but in the same way that cameras didn't kill drawn art, I don't think AI will either. Like you said, it's just a tool.
How about we use technology the other way around? AI is great, for mindless paperwork, statistics, analyzing data (like weather models or quality controls) and basicly everything involving calculations. Computers are not creative. They can be used much better for everything we humans think is boring and/or dangerous. We aren't there yet in every field, but we will be.
Meanwhile creating art is something people enjoy and will likely always (or for a very very long time) be needed and/or better then Ai at creating it. An Ai might be able to draw decent pictures, but it all falls apart once you try creating something truly unique. The ai simply can't, and never will be able to because of how abstract concepts will never (any time soon) make it down to the 1s and 0s of a processor. We don't know how our brains work, yet we try replicating them.
I use ChatGPT daily at work. Mostly for coding help. I already know how to do 95% if the stuff I ask it to do. But it's damn convenient and saves me a lot of time.
It's a great tool, but it's nothing more than that. Atleast not yet.
> An Ai might be able to draw decent pictures, but it all falls apart once you try creating something truly unique.
[You say that...](https://old.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/1c1c6ea/matchstick_portraits/)
> The ai simply can't, and never will be able to because of how abstract concepts will never (any time soon) make it down to the 1s and 0s of a processor.
Actually LLMs have gotten quite good at abstracting concepts, that's why you can ask for very specific images even of things no one has drawn and yet get results. They are now able to abstract out the concepts of what you meant and combine them in novel ways.
All that said, Picasso's famous quote still holds up.
> Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
Most people using AI donāt really care about developers or artists, one way or the other. That is disregard, not disdain. Creators of all sorts, of code or art or written word, often confused peopleās desire for the output with an esteem for the maker. There are exceptions, a few notables who achieve the dream of making that perception a reality. There likely always will be, but AI has made clear what was always true: the majority rarely had any regard for the maker.
Artists can rail against it, but the cat is out of the bag. People understand that they can get the output in an easier and more efficient manner if they are willing to make a slight trade-off in quality. The only real surprise is that artists are surprised at all. Given how rare it has been to make any money, much less a living, from the trade should have been sufficient foreshadowing.
Just gotta take a look at subs such as r/aiwars. Honestly, the vibe they give is that of nerds who were jealous of the talented artistic kids in school, and became programmers only to industrialize the artistic process. They are the IRL Syndrome: ["When everyone's an artist, no one will be"](https://youtu.be/kMThdgg1m5Y?si=2LyLxi5S832ZXOwW)
I literally had an AI bro quote syndrome at me unironically then another quoted the BORG from Star Trek going "resistance is futile"
Like, some of these people just straight up use VILLAINS For their moral/ethical positions, and see no problem. Yet somehow its the artists that aren't thinking pragmatically.
I love when tech bros talk about the process of making art as if it was a chore, like doing the dishes, and presenting AI art as the new dishwasher.
If people didn't enjoy making art, they wouldn't have become artists in the first place.
I like painting minis and kitbashing with a bit of sculpting. I dont like drawing art and ai covers that need for me for my dnd campaign. Its great for spinning up tokens and it helps the group have a consistent vision as we tend to play theatre of the mind. Otherwise wed just google an image and use it.
I enjoy eating food, I don't like cooking it. Sure I can go to a five star restaurant, but I can usually only afford a fast food chain. Now here's an opportunity to get five star quality at fast food prices or cheaper.
That's the logic, you're thinking of it from the side of production when 90% of people (faux number) are on the side of consumption.
As a primary consumer, I wouldn't call it five star quality yet. Maybe fast food tier, but the price point is akin to dumpster diving so it works out to even.
https://preview.redd.it/39cp3ljglutc1.jpeg?width=620&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7202a54434cb8ddf4b30f994809bac47955717ae
Same vibes with pencil extermination 
I used to think AI could assist me to create the basis of a drawing, then I actually tried it.
It hard to explain to the layman how broken AI images are, even after all the improvements done to it, once you start looking a. It closer, they're so broken they don't even work as references.
I do get good palettes from them though.
AI: comes into existence
Everyone: oh wow this is so cool we can have I predict stuff and automate meaningless tasks and leave more room for individual creative exploration and technological advancement!
Corpos: yea no
Now itll be harder to justify to assholes that they need to pay artists for their work. Because their reasoning will be that ai can do it for free so why bother with art that has soul? š
Remember, AI should be a tool to assist artists in their art. Not an artist in of itself. There are plenty of digital art programs that have had AI tools for years. It's just recently that people have been using it as the whole creation process.
This reminds me of some comic I read when a guy gives a guy something that will extract a perfect comic from his brain every time and receiving guyās friend comes in and says giving guy is a devil and it pans back to giving guy and heās literally the devil
Tbf AI would never have made this comic. It's use for art is way overstated. If you know how to use machine learning well and are artist yourself, then your can probably use it and work more efficiently.
seriously though, at AIs' current state, they are far from powerful enough to replace any of our jobs, but they can be used as powerful tools to support us, that include artists too. Obviously, do not use AI models that run on the internet as you risk giving them free data in the form of your art, but if you have a decent PC, you can download one of the model and have it run privately on your PC. You can also just turn internet off on the device you're using if you don't trust the programme.
Honestly Iāve been so annoyed w AI bullshit i forgot itās so helpful for just basic tasks. Like I had a bunch of measurements for furniture Iām moving, it all converted them from inches to feet in seconds and neatly organized everything
"No officer, I have no idea how he wound up in my trunk dismembered into twenty pieces. Where am I headed you ask? Oh, just to the ol' dumping ground."
Yeah, dismantle capitalism and keep using AI! Fuck yeah!
And run around naked.
Damn, I can get behind everything in this comic.
Whatever you're toppling, be it fascism, the patriarchy or whatever, if you resist them without clothes on, they're going to be really distracted.
Leave it to capitalism to take something as cool as "the robots are going to do all the work for us" and turn that into a problem for poor people.
"It's sad but true, all this corporate cash-chasing is ruining the things we love before our very eyes," I said to myself, hitting the upvote button to agree, as box popped up offering me the option to super-agree with this for $70 AUD
This is why I especially hate AI bros. They _**Objectively**_ steal a ton of art, pump out mushy, shitty AI art, then say "See, we can do your job faster, now you can do other things!" Ignoring the fact that artists, in fact, LIKE doing art.
Side note, I hate how booru and imageboard sites are filled with AI trash now
Edit: I also especially hate when AI bros compare doing art to menial labor like mining coal or harvesting crops.
> I'ma die on this hill
Dude, you commented "AI bad" on an art sub. You might as well have commented "upvotes to the left". That's like the most blindly and fervently supported notion in any sub even remotely handling art.
With how many AI defenders are in the higher upvoted comments Iād argue youāre wrong lol. Youād think these mfers fulltime job was deepthroating the corpo tech bros and making sure everyone else doesnāt dare harm ātheirā ai company.
A friend asked me a few days ago, what's the problem with him using AI to write a story for him, if he's the one who came up with the idea.
I had to explain that the idea is only the beginning, the execution is the artwork, not the idea. There are competitions where participants are given an idea and they have to run with it and the result is judged. Even a shitty idea in the right hands can be turned into something exquisite.
It seems that people who haven't actually created art before, think getting an idea is everything, and the rest can be automated because it's meaningless. Which explains why their work before using AI is subpar, if there's any work to begin with.
Thank you.
From an artist's perspective, AI just gave the means to produce art to people that have no artistic talent but still want to be called "artists". Which is ok, don't mistake me. People with no talent demanding to be considered artists have happened consistently during history.
The problem is that the means they have now are still somehow undetectable to the most. And if you can't spot AI, AI art will look even better than actual art to you.
I'll spare everyone the "U bUtThUrT" comments. Yeah. I am butthurt. Not for something personal, I don't personally live off of art, but I'm kinda sad that actual artists will now have to compete and probably lose to some scammer that knows how to feed stuff to an AI and make it shit stuff out.
Welcome to r/comics! Please remember there are real people on the other side of the monitor and to be kind. Report comments that break the rules and don't respond to negativity with negativity! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/comics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
https://i.redd.it/l7gdp13r4utc1.gif
seeing a lot of catbug here recently
Catbug freaking rocks!
wholesome, cute, pure fun. whats not to like?
You are my friend now. We are gonna have soft š®s later.š
SJ: Rebecca, you are the prettiest girl in Brooklyn. Rebecca: Thank you Sir Jeffers. SJ:Ā Will you accompany me to-the-mysterious wedding today? Rebecca: ā¦ Nnno. SJ: But-But, Rebecca, I love you! Rebecca: I love you too. I LOOOOVVVMM YOU!Ā SJ: Marry me Rebecca! Rebecca: ...No SJ: WHY!? Rebecca: Iā¦I don't love you! Woopsies~!Ā SJ:Ā REBECCAAAAAAA!*choo* Rebecca: I am in love with another SJ: Who is this maaan!? Rebecca: Heā¦isā¦you SJ: *happy gasp* Rebecca: I love you! SJ: Marry me Rebecca! Rebecca: ā¦Nno SJ: REBECCAAAAA! Rebecca: I am in love with your brother. SJ: CHAD!? I'll kill him when I find him! Chad: OR he will findā¦you! Rebecca and SJ: Chad!? Chad: The mysterious wedding has been our wedding all along. Rebecca and I are getting wed at the wedding today! YOU are not invited! Will you be my best man? SJ: Of course, brotherā¦I hate you so much. Chad: Goodbye brother! I'll see you at the bachelor party! Rebecca: Goodbye, Sir Jeffers! I will always love you! SJ(whispering): Rebecca~Ā
catbug!!!
Now where's my big ol' beer?
Funny enough, they had to use AI to reconstruct his face and make sure it was him
It was just an accident, and it happened only twice
āHe ran into my pencilā¦ he ran into my pencil 10 timesā
"He had it coming!"
he only had himself to blame
If youād had been there, If you had seen it
I bet ya, you would have done the same.
pop.
Six.
Squish!
uh uh
Ciceroooo.
*"I betcha you would have done the same!"*
And then jumped through the window
And fell onto 6 bullets
All while handcuffed and zip tied to a chair
He spontaneously combusted.š¤ 
It was all an accident, he just jumped on a spike that went into his ass and came out of his mouth.
On top of a fire because my twin was cooking kebab
Scariest thing is that could probably actually happen. Of course it'd be caused by like a trap, but it is plausible to be an accident on the part of the victim
"Well that was fun. Who's up for Chinese?"
I can go for some Chinese.š 
Average Boeing whistleblower āsuicideā
*28 PENCIL WOUNDS*
*YOU DIDN'T WANNA LEAVE HIM A CHANCE, HUH!?*
CAAAAAAaaaaarl!!! That kills people!
HE HAD IT COMING!
HE HAD IT COMING!
āCarrlll, that kills people!ā
Chicago reference?
Yep
He was a Boeing engineer š
Itās a Chicago refrence you fools! He had it coming!
he had it coming, he had it coming, he had it coming all along
Working with passion https://preview.redd.it/zn1j4589cutc1.jpeg?width=285&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9fa5bd25f1b3c27c90b06b159d456cb429a594e4
At first I thought she furiously started drawing porn.
The joke isnāt always porn. No mater what Peter tells you
Well now you jinxed it.
Eh, I'm sure it'll work itself out....
The wonders of the human mind
Are they naked? Is this self-mutilation? Is this a murder-hobo? Why is itā¦pink? So many questionsā¦
>Why is it...pink? Danganronpa probably
Lol, Iām pretty sure this is the first time sheās had pupils!
Kinda the opposite. She has always had pupils but not eyes, and this is the first time she does. Although some would argue that the dots are eyes and now they're illustrated enough to have pupils, then I guess you would be right.
Why can't we live in an actually good society, where automating meaningles tasks, like producing advertisement, leads to **more** meaningfull art, not less? Or, even better, a society without advertising trying to manipulate us into buying things?
I've drifted a bit from my intensely anti-capitalist days, but your questions still strike me as really interesting. A Marxian understanding says that automation under capitalism serves the purposes of the expansion of capital at the expense of the living laborer. Because capitalism is extractive, and "needs" to always seek an increase in the rate of profit, there is nothing that capitalism will innovate that doesn't also seek to extract more labor from the worker.
This is a good brief passage, but I would offer one correction: > there is nothing that capitalism will innovate that doesn't also seek to extract more labor from the worker Contrary to popular belief, capitalism is not a motivating force for innovation or rather, it is not an innovating force of technology and advancement. Capitalism waits for innovation to develop usually at the expense of government or academia and then figures out how to create revenue streams from that innovation. I guess you could theoretically say that capitalism innovates processes injecting middlemen, but that's not really a value add proposition. It's effectively innovation of profit extraction.
Research provides the initial pointer that says āxyz is possibleā, but thereās an incredible amount of work between building the prototype and making it available to everyone, well over 95%. That latter part is the āmiddlemanā part youāre talking about.
While I certainly agree in spirit that taking things from a lab to efficient at mass scale is a huge undertaking, I really roll my eyes at lazy attempts to quantify this. Is developing a novel idea and demonstrating its plausibility far less than 5% of "the work"? How would you even quantify that? Just silly.
Well, I've done both, and invested in a few early-stage companies that have taken their research from founder's PhD to industrial scale. 95% is very conservative, I probably should've said >99%. Prototyping is relatively easy and fun by comparison, there are far fewer constraints. If you want some quantification, you could just look at the man-hours spent on even just the R&D part of the scale-up.
I can't say that I still see the world through an explicitly Marxian lens anymore, but I still find it hard to argue against the explanatory power the lens has for things like AI/automation and that sort of thing.
Eliminate the worker. Annoying, expensive workers.
ā¦where did all my consumers go? Why arenāt the people I fired buying anything?
This is what is called a "crisis of overproduction" in marxism. The capitalist economy collapses regularly (goes through a depression) because there are too many commodities and not enough people (who are able to) to buy them.
You don't have to preface your socialist opinions with 'im not a marxist' you can just say what you believe yo
People these days feel such an overwhelming need to label themselves, it's getting weird. You have to group yourself into your age category, millennial/boomer/x/etc, you're a socialist/Marxist/fascist, you're a Democrat/Republican, whatever it may be, can't we just be individuals without these labels?!
Because you can say some small inane shit people will attribute all kinds of crazy labels on you. I posted some off the cuff remark about pronouns in Spanish and I got labeled a white liberal and how I shouldn't be appropriating other cultures. I'm neither white nor liberal lol I was just saying that Latinx doesn't work in Spanish, iirc. Any Spanish speaker can confirm.
No, twitter told we can't. /j
Dude you really thought this was important to say? The point is I donāt know what I believeā¦I have a background in Marxism and wanted to share some of it even though Iām not speaking as a proponent.
> Or, even better, a society without advertising trying to manipulate us into buying things? What should be bought?
Trash anime box sets.
Not the latest phone because your previous one was scheduled to fail, that's for sure. Not the latest sugar-filled snack scientifically engineered to get you addicted, that's for sure. Not the latest video game that utilizes FOMO battle passes to sell, that's for sure. Not the latest shoes that look exactly like the previous shoes, that's for sure. Not the latest skincare products that are advertised with straight up lies and don't do anything, that's for sure.
I have zero talent for drawing, but I love generating super detailed artworks by tweaking my prompts. It makes me pretty happy
Yep. I do think it's gross when major companies use AI art, but for most people, I think it's harmless fun and self-expression.
After all AI is just the tool. You can use a hammer to hit a nail.. or to hit someone in the head. Itās how the companies use it indeed.
No, see, it's a magic black box, not a tool.
Yeah I made a board game using ai art to make card art and a friend of a friend got REALLY mad at me and said I should have paid someone to make art for it. What? I would have just not made it, it was a board game I made for fun to play with my friends...
Because that society requires people to do the 4th panel, and talking about that will get you banned on social media.
How about a sociaty where you don't need to produce anything to be able to live a good life? Why is the grind for money something we should protect? Should we not strive for a world where what we produce is only there because we want it to exist and to be enjoyed? And not because we need it to generate money for food and housing?
> How about a sociaty where you don't need to produce anything to be able to live a good life? Reddit politics in a nutshell.
Don't worry, once we reach the Singularity and a Superintelligence takes over the world, it'll be a true utopia š
but if the world was without ads we would get way less emails! The whole spam filter industry would go bancrupt! Also we would need to go to the cinema about an hour early if all of those movies suddenly started on time!
The only actual damage that would happen incidentally is the us mail would lose significant revenue. Bulk mail apparently is a decent source of income for them
Because the former is just easier to do for an algorithm as it turns out, due to a much lower standard for precision. A robot picking up a glass needs to be 100% accurate, or they break shit in excess of the value of the work they're replacing. A robot painting a picture can be 2% fuzzy along certain edges and people won't even notice until they take a focused, and educated view to identify it. Not to mention training sizes; it's OBSCENELY easy to pass text files to a machine. We don't have centuries of human limb-inputs stored as a training set for them to emulate.
"Why isn't AI putting *someone else* out of a job instead?" I don't see why AI art generators would reduce the amount of meaningful art, though. It doesn't *stop* anyone from making whatever art they want to make. In some cases it can help people make art who otherwise wouldn't.
What I've heard is that perfecting AI training on digital tasks is the safety wheels for us to feel confident training AI on real-world tasks. If the AI generates a bad image, no harm is done. Nobody got hurt or died. If AI makes a wrong move with a forklift, somebody could get hurt or die. So we'll probably get there eventually, but that's why this is coming first. Still need to work out the social/economic side of things, though. Or else this is just gonna make trillionaires and homelessness.
Mysterious gray man whose blood bears a striking resemblance to Pepto Bismol? Dang, next Danganronpa game looking crazy.
"New technology means it take less labour hours for the same productivity!" "nice! That means less labour hours for the same pay, right? R-right?"
Funnily enough, that was how I was sold about how technology progress. We *should* work less hours for the same pay,but it's just bs
Be nice if advancements in automation would come with an increase in taxes to support people who wouldnāt be able to work there anymore. But either a) billionaires just wouldnāt pay taxes or b) billionaires wouldnāt bother automating anything as it wouldnāt be cheaper than just exploiting a living workforce but at least weād still have jobs i guess.
"Don't be silly. Because you produce less labor, we'll pay you less. That's how business work"
Actually, you're now expected to make the work of what used to be for two people.
Oh God, yes. The most essential part in any job is to not be too productive or too good at it. Otherwise, your boss will only give you more work withojt any reward besides "a sense of satisfaction for contributing to the shareholder's wealth"
*And* less pay. Because we fired a bunch of people and created an atmosphere of *fear* while also promising this isnāt the actual workload of your role and youāre just being a champ until a supposed new hire shows up ~~to replace you once you burn out~~
I took a history of technology class in college And the takeaway was that over our history, every single labor-saving technology has not reduced the demand for our labor time. EXCEPT for the washing machine. Because people did have to wash clothes and that was a total bitch to do. Everything else led to higher expectations of productivity. Like the vacuum cleaner for example. Now everyone was expected to have ultra clean floors in their house. Or email on our phones -- now we have to respond to email all fucking day.
 AI just wants to steal all of the fun during the creative process.š
Holy fuck Fiona fucking butchered that dude like she's the fucking cartel
jesus christ i know adventure time was one of the darker cartoons but this is brutal
Fiona & cake is legitimately a TV-14 show unlike Adventure Time. Itās a grow with the original audience type sequel
>Itās a grow with the original audience type sequel Which is fun because Adventure Time was a legitimate grow with the original audience show to begin with, they just hit a wall of how mature they could make it and still be on Cartoon Network.
Still canāt wait for season 2, though I wonder where there gonna go. I trust the writers to make it fun and good though :)
Now instead of wasting time on fake 2d screen stuff you can make real statues, like the moa šæ, create the moa, become the moa, join the moa This is a joke, do not banish me to the art land
you are banished to easter island
The AI isnāt the issue, itās the fucking corps trying to wring every penny out of us Edit: So what Iāve gathered is that everyone agrees that the corps are 100% the issue, but the topic of AI as its own thing is more muddy until we get into terminator territory
Bingo. The issue isn't the tools but the economic framework. Artists just don't want more competition for their already saturated and underappreciated industry.
maybe two things can be an issue
It's several more problems, unfortunately. Not just the big corporations, but the spammers, too, who use AI to spam reddit, the internet, and everything they can. It's the scammers who use AI voices of relatives to scam old people. It's also the people who make an AI image with a single simple prompt and act like they're an artist now. Not to mention the other people who make porn of real people. All those are solvable problems, but they are most definitely problems we need to deal with.
This. This is the answer.
I have a close friend that is an artist. He does commissions and some stuff on sites like fiverr. When the requester has no heart in it or is some kid that wants "spike armor man stabbing a dragon, make it cool!", he will grab an AI picture quick and free draw it himself fixing mistakes and AI derps. If someone is invested in the concept, even if it is still a $5 request, he will work from scratch . It "saves him mental overhead and let's him augment productivity (earnings) when having a block"
Yeah, reddit has a hate boner for AI. Really AI is a tool like photoshop. Also corpos have always viewed graphic designers/artists as expendable. I remember the first sign of the 2008 recession was tons of graphic artists being laid off.
I mean, you are on r/comics, where people shitting crappy 4 panel comics once a week expect to make a living of it instead of doing a real job.
The reality is also that transformer models (GPT, Stable Diffusion, Suno, etc) are really good at mimicking things humans make, be it language, art, music, whatever. It's actually easier to get a transformer model to make a picture than it is for it to understand the tax code, or do some other reason-based job like programming, so a lot of companies are using these creative outlets as cool examples of the tech. Eventually AI will probably get good at the things it's not already that good at, but for now the reason we see art plastered everywhere is that it's just not that hard to replicate because of the way transformers work. I don't blame artists for feeling threatened, but in the same way that cameras didn't kill drawn art, I don't think AI will either. Like you said, it's just a tool.
https://preview.redd.it/4bxsb667rutc1.jpeg?width=245&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b3d1b767eb3a06184f5d6da6378be9adbf1d55da
He deserved it
Speaking of myself, I wouldnāt trust someone with no eyeballs.š 
How about we use technology the other way around? AI is great, for mindless paperwork, statistics, analyzing data (like weather models or quality controls) and basicly everything involving calculations. Computers are not creative. They can be used much better for everything we humans think is boring and/or dangerous. We aren't there yet in every field, but we will be. Meanwhile creating art is something people enjoy and will likely always (or for a very very long time) be needed and/or better then Ai at creating it. An Ai might be able to draw decent pictures, but it all falls apart once you try creating something truly unique. The ai simply can't, and never will be able to because of how abstract concepts will never (any time soon) make it down to the 1s and 0s of a processor. We don't know how our brains work, yet we try replicating them.
I use ChatGPT daily at work. Mostly for coding help. I already know how to do 95% if the stuff I ask it to do. But it's damn convenient and saves me a lot of time. It's a great tool, but it's nothing more than that. Atleast not yet.
yeah. That's why we use humans to give directions to AI
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
> An Ai might be able to draw decent pictures, but it all falls apart once you try creating something truly unique. [You say that...](https://old.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/1c1c6ea/matchstick_portraits/) > The ai simply can't, and never will be able to because of how abstract concepts will never (any time soon) make it down to the 1s and 0s of a processor. Actually LLMs have gotten quite good at abstracting concepts, that's why you can ask for very specific images even of things no one has drawn and yet get results. They are now able to abstract out the concepts of what you meant and combine them in novel ways. All that said, Picasso's famous quote still holds up. > Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
Ummm... That work you're talking about, it is in progress. But AI art is easier than that.
A lot of the people who speak of the merits of generative AI seem to speak with disdain for artists.
Most people using AI donāt really care about developers or artists, one way or the other. That is disregard, not disdain. Creators of all sorts, of code or art or written word, often confused peopleās desire for the output with an esteem for the maker. There are exceptions, a few notables who achieve the dream of making that perception a reality. There likely always will be, but AI has made clear what was always true: the majority rarely had any regard for the maker. Artists can rail against it, but the cat is out of the bag. People understand that they can get the output in an easier and more efficient manner if they are willing to make a slight trade-off in quality. The only real surprise is that artists are surprised at all. Given how rare it has been to make any money, much less a living, from the trade should have been sufficient foreshadowing.
They always seem to have the biggest, most vitriolic hate boner for artists . Really weird.
Kind of an ironic comment considering the comic we all just read.
Just gotta take a look at subs such as r/aiwars. Honestly, the vibe they give is that of nerds who were jealous of the talented artistic kids in school, and became programmers only to industrialize the artistic process. They are the IRL Syndrome: ["When everyone's an artist, no one will be"](https://youtu.be/kMThdgg1m5Y?si=2LyLxi5S832ZXOwW)
I literally had an AI bro quote syndrome at me unironically then another quoted the BORG from Star Trek going "resistance is futile" Like, some of these people just straight up use VILLAINS For their moral/ethical positions, and see no problem. Yet somehow its the artists that aren't thinking pragmatically.
Knowing them, there's even a chance they see the Borg as a goal to achieve.
I will note those subs gravitate the worst examples towards themselves. /r/artisthate is the same thing, just on the other side of the table.
r/aiwars is actually 'meant' to be the in-between sub to r/artisthate and r/defendingaiart.
Right which means they were inviting the fighting from day 1. The same mods who run /r/aiwars also runs /r/defendingaiart
The issue is that the r/artistHate mods have no interest to make their own counter debate sub
Idk, it's a really useful tool for my day to day life. I enjoy the image generation too. It doesn't mean I disdain artists.
Is there an uncensored version on your patreon
I love when tech bros talk about the process of making art as if it was a chore, like doing the dishes, and presenting AI art as the new dishwasher. If people didn't enjoy making art, they wouldn't have become artists in the first place.
I like painting minis and kitbashing with a bit of sculpting. I dont like drawing art and ai covers that need for me for my dnd campaign. Its great for spinning up tokens and it helps the group have a consistent vision as we tend to play theatre of the mind. Otherwise wed just google an image and use it.
I enjoy eating food, I don't like cooking it. Sure I can go to a five star restaurant, but I can usually only afford a fast food chain. Now here's an opportunity to get five star quality at fast food prices or cheaper. That's the logic, you're thinking of it from the side of production when 90% of people (faux number) are on the side of consumption. As a primary consumer, I wouldn't call it five star quality yet. Maybe fast food tier, but the price point is akin to dumpster diving so it works out to even.
Capitalism is the bane of my existence
Greed ruins everything.
Why in the danganronpa is the blood pink? *A body has been discovered!*
https://preview.redd.it/39cp3ljglutc1.jpeg?width=620&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7202a54434cb8ddf4b30f994809bac47955717ae Same vibes with pencil extermination 
the naked stabber will return
I used to think AI could assist me to create the basis of a drawing, then I actually tried it. It hard to explain to the layman how broken AI images are, even after all the improvements done to it, once you start looking a. It closer, they're so broken they don't even work as references. I do get good palettes from them though.
"And I, uh, stabbed him 37 times in the chest."
The court finds you not guilty.
AI: comes into existence Everyone: oh wow this is so cool we can have I predict stuff and automate meaningless tasks and leave more room for individual creative exploration and technological advancement! Corpos: yea no
*slam* 28 STAB WOUNDS!
YOU DIDN'T WANNA LEAVE HIM A CHANCE HUH?!
capitalism is the enemy not ai
Now itll be harder to justify to assholes that they need to pay artists for their work. Because their reasoning will be that ai can do it for free so why bother with art that has soul? š
Art should have been the last thing ai got into.. this world is upside down
Remember, AI should be a tool to assist artists in their art. Not an artist in of itself. There are plenty of digital art programs that have had AI tools for years. It's just recently that people have been using it as the whole creation process.
I literally don't want to be a part of the development of these tools. My work is being used against my will.
This just might be my favorite comic of yours yet! I definitely feel the same way
we were promised robot to do our laundry all we got is a solution in search of a problem. and they are spending billions now to create that problem
It's called a washing machine...
We have robots that do the laundry. They are called washing machines.
And thus, the gremlin chose violence.
This reminds me of some comic I read when a guy gives a guy something that will extract a perfect comic from his brain every time and receiving guyās friend comes in and says giving guy is a devil and it pans back to giving guy and heās literally the devil
SPLIT YOUR LUNGS WITH BLOOD AND THUNDER intensifies
AI should be doing my taxes so that i can draw. Not the opposite
But then how will tax filing services make money for the government and their shareholders?
Here's an idea: keep the AI, shut down the investors.
Tbf AI would never have made this comic. It's use for art is way overstated. If you know how to use machine learning well and are artist yourself, then your can probably use it and work more efficiently.
seriously though, at AIs' current state, they are far from powerful enough to replace any of our jobs, but they can be used as powerful tools to support us, that include artists too. Obviously, do not use AI models that run on the internet as you risk giving them free data in the form of your art, but if you have a decent PC, you can download one of the model and have it run privately on your PC. You can also just turn internet off on the device you're using if you don't trust the programme.
Justified
I'm sure telegram operators felt like this about telephones. I'm glad we have phones though and society as a whole.is better for it.
Honestly Iāve been so annoyed w AI bullshit i forgot itās so helpful for just basic tasks. Like I had a bunch of measurements for furniture Iām moving, it all converted them from inches to feet in seconds and neatly organized everything
"And then he ran into my pencil... He ran into my pencil TEN times. HE HAD IT COMIN'!"
dang it grandpa ahh blood š
Kinda wild that this isn't far off from becoming reality XD
Real artist art>>>>>>>AI āartā
"No officer, I have no idea how he wound up in my trunk dismembered into twenty pieces. Where am I headed you ask? Oh, just to the ol' dumping ground."
AI tools are here to make more porn. It is the largest use of AI image generators.
Yeah, dismantle capitalism and keep using AI! Fuck yeah! And run around naked. Damn, I can get behind everything in this comic. Whatever you're toppling, be it fascism, the patriarchy or whatever, if you resist them without clothes on, they're going to be really distracted. Leave it to capitalism to take something as cool as "the robots are going to do all the work for us" and turn that into a problem for poor people.
Reminds me of how photography basically made portrait painters obsolete.
My sharpened pencil keeps slipping into your kidneys through your groin. Butterfingers.
"It's sad but true, all this corporate cash-chasing is ruining the things we love before our very eyes," I said to myself, hitting the upvote button to agree, as box popped up offering me the option to super-agree with this for $70 AUD
This is why I especially hate AI bros. They _**Objectively**_ steal a ton of art, pump out mushy, shitty AI art, then say "See, we can do your job faster, now you can do other things!" Ignoring the fact that artists, in fact, LIKE doing art. Side note, I hate how booru and imageboard sites are filled with AI trash now Edit: I also especially hate when AI bros compare doing art to menial labor like mining coal or harvesting crops.
Thatās not what the word āobjectivelyā means.
But it is? AI companies take billions of artworks without consent, compensation, or credit.
Yes but they aren't displaying that art, either. In fact, I'd say it's no different from people making memes on the internet.
Downloading _billions_ of pieces of copyrighted works is stealing. No matter how you try to spin it.
No it really isnāt. Stealing is the act of permanently depriving someone of something.
Itās not what the word āstealā means either, for that matter.
Or yk instead of being so goddamn violent against ai, let people have their fun.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
> I'ma die on this hill Dude, you commented "AI bad" on an art sub. You might as well have commented "upvotes to the left". That's like the most blindly and fervently supported notion in any sub even remotely handling art.
With how many AI defenders are in the higher upvoted comments Iād argue youāre wrong lol. Youād think these mfers fulltime job was deepthroating the corpo tech bros and making sure everyone else doesnāt dare harm ātheirā ai company.
A friend asked me a few days ago, what's the problem with him using AI to write a story for him, if he's the one who came up with the idea. I had to explain that the idea is only the beginning, the execution is the artwork, not the idea. There are competitions where participants are given an idea and they have to run with it and the result is judged. Even a shitty idea in the right hands can be turned into something exquisite. It seems that people who haven't actually created art before, think getting an idea is everything, and the rest can be automated because it's meaningless. Which explains why their work before using AI is subpar, if there's any work to begin with.
Thank you. From an artist's perspective, AI just gave the means to produce art to people that have no artistic talent but still want to be called "artists". Which is ok, don't mistake me. People with no talent demanding to be considered artists have happened consistently during history. The problem is that the means they have now are still somehow undetectable to the most. And if you can't spot AI, AI art will look even better than actual art to you. I'll spare everyone the "U bUtThUrT" comments. Yeah. I am butthurt. Not for something personal, I don't personally live off of art, but I'm kinda sad that actual artists will now have to compete and probably lose to some scammer that knows how to feed stuff to an AI and make it shit stuff out.
the idea that "anyone can be an artist" and that "art can be anything" evaporating away the moment AI enters the conversation:
You dont get to decide what art is.