3 ms·

People get so upset about ai art. They are going to look like luddites in 20 years.

snakeyjake 3y ago
I do not care if AI art eventually becomes both objectively and subjectively better than human art. Chess engines have been better than humans for over 20 years. I will never watch two computers play chess and I will never like AI art.
- BizarroLand 3y ago
  I think AI imagery is a fun toy to play with, but I would never try to pass it off as art. Also, I think they ruled that anything made by AI cannot be copyrighted, so that would mean that WOTC is dabbling in making parts of their game Public domain, right? I'm sure it will come to the court system to find out, but it is a risky position to be in!
- LargeTomato 3y ago
  Humans cheat at chess using computers and often times the only way we can tell is using statistical analysis. It's not always apparent from their games that their cheating. Humans will use ai to aid their art and most people will never have a clue. If I'm playing video games I couldn't care less if some of the artwork is ai generated.
hmcq6 3y ago
No, this is genuinely an issue. I'm 100% pro-AI, I think it's inevitable. But there is no ethical difference between a company downsizing (or not continuing to grow) because they replace human jobs with AI and a company outsourcing work to the cheapest vendor when the vendor uses AI. Allowing companies to shift the blame just leads to a cacophony of shell companies popping up to fence AI art to major corporations. Wizzards failed to do their due diligence and should be treated as if they made this mistake themselves.
mplewis 3y ago
In 20 years, they’ll still be correct. The AI art will still look like shit, though.
- LargeTomato 3y ago
  I disagree entirely. In 20 years ai art will be pervasive and we won't be able to tell in the nominal case. Art has already been augmented beyond human abilities many times over (Photoshop) but we stopped worrying about that decades ago.

I do not care if AI art eventually becomes both objectively and subjectively better than human art. Chess engines have been better than humans for over 20 years. I will never watch two computers play chess and I will never like AI art.

BizarroLand 3y ago
I think AI imagery is a fun toy to play with, but I would never try to pass it off as art. Also, I think they ruled that anything made by AI cannot be copyrighted, so that would mean that WOTC is dabbling in making parts of their game Public domain, right? I'm sure it will come to the court system to find out, but it is a risky position to be in!
LargeTomato 3y ago
Humans cheat at chess using computers and often times the only way we can tell is using statistical analysis. It's not always apparent from their games that their cheating. Humans will use ai to aid their art and most people will never have a clue. If I'm playing video games I couldn't care less if some of the artwork is ai generated.

hmcq6 3y ago

No, this is genuinely an issue. I'm 100% pro-AI, I think it's inevitable. But there is no ethical difference between a company downsizing (or not continuing to grow) because they replace human jobs with AI and a company outsourcing work to the cheapest vendor when the vendor uses AI. Allowing companies to shift the blame just leads to a cacophony of shell companies popping up to fence AI art to major corporations. Wizzards failed to do their due diligence and should be treated as if they made this mistake themselves.

mplewis 3y ago

In 20 years, they’ll still be correct. The AI art will still look like shit, though.

LargeTomato 3y ago
I disagree entirely. In 20 years ai art will be pervasive and we won't be able to tell in the nominal case. Art has already been augmented beyond human abilities many times over (Photoshop) but we stopped worrying about that decades ago.