• Pennomi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      3 months ago

      Engaging with bait like this is 90% of why the world is in the mess it’s currently in.

      • deeferg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 months ago

        Counterpoint, but CREATING content like this is 90% of the reason, and these people should be remembered in history as the cockroaches they are. I can at least understand people who get mad at bait.

      • ameancow@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        Our brains were never meant to be so over-exposed to so many conflicting messages all day, every day, and a lot of powerful people are exploiting this fact to an absurd degree.

    • Xerxos@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      Obviously. I mean, even when AI could not do fingers (and today they are mostly fine), you could simply recreate the picture until you had something usable.

      Having a picture like this and the over the top “negative/positive points” is done deliberately.

    • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’m not sure, in its early days, generative AI slop was kind of promoted like that. Then anyone left of Margaret Thatcher rejected it, and almost only the Curtis Yarvin type techbros embraced it, so it slowly became the “anti-woke” alternative to real art.

  • Sentient Loom@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    3 months ago

    “Anarchist” lololol

    Yeah, using the corporate product that stole all individuals’ work to regurgitate abortions from billionaire oligarch’s algorithms is totally “anarchist.”

    • Comrade Spood@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      3 months ago

      Exactly. I remember in Conquest of Bread when Kropotkin talked about freeing up more time by automating creative and intelligent pursuits so we can focus more on menial labor.

      Obviously /s

      • Sentient Loom@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        There are rules. But rich people don’t have to follow them. It’s domination. Not anarchy/anarchism.

        Edit: Okay now I see the /S. Not deleting though lol.

    • nialv7@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Uhhh I will get downvoted but I have to say, anarchocapitalism is still anarchism. And obviously disrespecting property rights is a very anarchist thing to do, so.

      And many AI models you can run completely on your own hardware, no billionaire oligarchies have a say in what you do.

      • ameancow@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        anarchocapitalism is still anarchism

        Sounds more like people who want to have luxuries and comforts and money but don’t want to have anyone telling them what they can and can’t do.

        Sounds about right for the current fascist techbro community.

      • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        Most anarcho-capitalists, especially the Curtis Yarvin types, just want fascism, but with Inc. at the end, and call their dictator “Chief Executive Officer”.

    • anomnom@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      What classic art is transphobic. Lots of renaissance artists were LGB, the T came out when many of them painted themselves into biblical characters of different genders. It gets written off as because using themselves as models was more available than models, or vanity, but transphobic is far from the first description I’d come up with for the art history I learned.

    • niktemadur@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      bOtH pArTiEs ArE tHe SaMe LoL aMiRiTe… i’M sUcH aN aNaRcHiSt HyUcK hYuCk HyUcK!!!

      It’s like these mentally lazy ignorant people look all around themselves, see how the horizon is basically at the same distance all around them, therefore conclude that they must be the center of the universe, then sprinkle in a few fashionable internet soundbites and catchphrases to “make themselves sound interesting” and “with it”.

  • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    3 months ago

    -More Creative
    -Creates the same thing over and over
    -Cannot create new things like an overfull wine glass without reference images

    • daannii@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      The only thing it can do is regurgitate.

      I think it has some value. I’ve been enjoying political deep fakes. Like that one of trump sucking musk toes.

      I also think AI has some value for artist to use as a tool. Not to fully create pieces but to help.

      If it’s used in that way it’s more ethical.

      In contrast I’ve been using software in a similar way for at least 20 years. For instance, if I’m working on a painting, I often start with a real photograph. (My own or free to use reference image from a source giving permission).

      I put it in Photoshop and use filters to increase edge contrast. Then I create a sketch over it. I print the sketch to scale and then transfer it to my canvas or paper. Or use it to make digital painting.

      Another thing I do is use filters in Photoshop (the cutout one) to help me better able to see blocks of color changes. Because human perception makes it difficult for us to actually perceive these.

      I then reference that image during the painting process.

      Now that’s not using AI. But I am using software. Ai can be used similarly though.

      With a specific AI you can apply a painting style of one image to another. This was actually the first free AI type art. It was called deep dream or something like that. About 5 years ago. The website is still up but doesn’t offer this anymore. But I found one that does.

      So yeah you upload two images. A photo you took. And a painting you made. And set the percentage of change.

      And it can help you plan a painting by making a version that will have your painting style applied. It’s actually kinda awesome.

      But as you can imagine you could upload someone else’s photograph. And someone else’s art piece.

      Stealing their style.

      I still think this specific AI tool has the most value for artist to use.

  • AnimalsDream@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    3 months ago

    To be fair, sourcing vegan-friendly art supplies is often significantly more frustrating than finding vegan food. But as others have said, doing - do I call it ‘traditional digital’ art? - is going to have a much smaller environmental impact than AI generation systems that are dependent on servers. A used Thinkpad x230 > Midjourney?

    • AnimalsDream@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      3 months ago

      Also wanna add that in theory I’m not against AI art generation, only the way it’s usually implemented. All creativity is derivative, and as long as the user is remixing free and public domain content, I think the gained accessibility for far more people to bring their expressions to life where they otherwise would not have been able to, is worth far more than the perceived threats felt by a stagnant copy monopolist industry.

      But the key thing here is proper implementation. It’s like every time we get a new toy, we forget all over again that software freedom is a moral imperative in all forms of software.

      • mutual_ayed@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        3 months ago

        Freedom relies on consent and mutual reciprocity, otherwise it’s exploitation. AI art diffusion models that scraped digital art portfolios and did not gain the consent of the artists nor did the artists get compensation is exploitation full stop. There is no freedom in exploitation.

                • AnimalsDream@slrpnk.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  I haven’t looked into it too much, because I don’t bother to use these things myself. But if I remember, there are some systems that are open-source, can be run locally, and then a person could train those systems on only public domain and freely licensed works. That is the kind I’m talking about, so bringing up the systems I’m not talking about is just a strawman.

  • MNByChoice@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Don’t create or spread bait.

    Most people are too stupid to know the difference. Not you of course. You know what is up.

    • spujb@lemmy.cafeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      sorry consider the bait spread i personally have the opinion that bait inoculation is possible

  • 2ugly2live@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    3 months ago

    What art are they looking out? Artists have been making powerful pieces with hidden messages and symbols since forever. Even graffiti can be used to disrupt and inform. Yes, there is garbage, but there’s garbage everywhere.