6 ms·

On the same topic from another webcomic: https://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2024/01/03/terminarter https://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2024/01/03/terminarter (t

On the same topic from another webcomic: https://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2024/01/03/terminarter https://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2024/01/03/terminarter (text commentary below the comic, in case your OS has decided to conceal the scroll bar from you and you didn't notice the page is longer)

rideontime 3y ago
This would explain why I find midjourney art so hideous.
- Minor49er 3y ago
  I think a better explanation is that the vast majority of users don't try any prompt parameters or different styles and just rely on its default settings
  - rideontime 3y ago
    Sorry, this was a joke about the decline of "Gabe's" artistic output. I'd find midjourney's output repulsive no matter what it looked like.
    - Minor49er 3y ago
      Got it. Though Midjourney can certainly be pushed beyond its fingerprint, so you might not be aware that a given image you've seen was generated by it or not
      - rideontime 3y ago
        Let me be clear: it is the knowledge that an image was created with midjourney that repulses me, not the visual appeal of the image itself.
        Minor49er 3y ago
        That is unfortunate
        rideontime 3y ago
        It is also not an uncommon opinion, which you should keep in mind if you intend to use AI-generated imagery in your products.
        Minor49er 3y ago
        Actually, it's an opinion that's going to dwindle as AI tooling becomes more commonly available. I am not worried about it
  - thaumaturgy 3y ago
    Nah. Even the "good" stuff feels cheap. It's the art version of ho-hos and twinkies. Every once in a while I see one and think, "oh, neat, wonder how they got it to do that?", but usually I'm just left slightly queasy and with a bad taste.
    - nightski 3y ago
      Then it's no problem right? Or are you just in a minority.
      - s1artibartfast 3y ago
        That is a non-suitor. A lot of people like hohos and Twinkies. That doesn't mean they arent stolen and that doesn't mean they are fine cuisine.
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - acdha 3y ago
        Price and volume mean it still has impact. We’re already seeing that with online marketplaces and forums filling up with high-volume AI excreta, and a lot of businesses love replacing positions with software so regardless of the relative merits of the output anyone who lives in a society should be thinking about what it’ll look like as millions of jobs disappear.
    - Minor49er 3y ago
      I've been using Midjourney to generate assets and textures that I Photoshop into new images, such as album covers, banners, and flyers. It has been excellent for speeding up my workflow. My small audience has found a high amount of visual appeal in the results
ineptech 3y ago
> I'm always reticent to fully engage in "The Dialogue," regardless of its momentary configuration. It's a smoothie made from shibboleths; you have to be able to detect them at only a few parts per million because once these things metastasize, they stop being about whatever they were about and instead become increasingly loud recitations of various catechisms and loyalty oaths. Boy does that ring true.
- CharlesW 3y ago
  Yes, the entire post (it's short) is well worth a read.
  - ineptech 3y ago
    And from the following day, their paraphrasing of https://www.theverge.com/2023/11/4/23946353/generative-ai-copyright-training-data-openai-microsoft-google-meta-stabilityai https://www.theverge.com/2023/11/4/23946353/generative-ai-co... is succinct: > Meta: We stole so much stuff that, actually, we didn't steal any stuff > Google: If things were different, things would be totally different > Andreeson Horowitz: But we already spent so much money > Microsoft: Think about how this would hurt the little guys, like us > Anthropic: Fucking shut up about it > Hugging Face: It's super legal but honestly it might not be idk > StabilityAI: It's legal in places that aren't here
    - ineptech 3y ago
      This is a little oblique, but isn't there a parallel to the music piracy debates of the 90s here? The defense of those who steal training data, "It's not stealing because I'm only taking a little tiny piece from a whole bunch of people", seems like a neat inversion of the defense offered by people torrenting mp3s in their dorm rooms. It's worth noting that, back when it suddenly became technically feasible to copy all songs for free, the response from the rightsholders of music was, essentially, to demand that we all collectively pretend it isn't. It might make sense for the rightsholders of training data to try to do the same, if they could speak with one voice and if they had lobbyists, but I guess the fact that they can't and don't settles that.
enjo 3y ago
I'm curious if Gabe over at penny-arcade would be upset if his comics were used in an art class to train a new generation of artists.
- davemp 3y ago
  >> If my interlocutor isn't prepared to make any distinctions between a human being and a machine designed to mimic one, I think that I can't meaningfully discuss this with them. I hate that this is the case; it must be seen as a personal failing. I can't do it, though. These models aren't people. They don't know anything. They don't want anything. They don't need anything. I won't privilege it over a person. And I certainly won't privilege its master. Perhaps if you read Gabe's post you could have saved yourself the trouble of making this comment.
  - whamlastxmas 3y ago
    Seems lazy to differentiate between types of intelligence without providing any substance as to why you believe one type is more worthy of learning than another and criticizing others for the same laziness
    - romwell 3y ago
      >Seems lazy to differentiate between types of intelligence without providing any substance as to why you believe one type is more worthy of learning than another and criticizing others for the same laziness Seems lazy to call a genAI model "intelligence" without providing any substance as to why one should believe that, but OK. The model isn't an "intelligence" because it's not making a choice about which data you train on and be "inspired by", as people here say. The humans that operate those models do. It's those humans that are exploiting the artists. The AI, as many have said here, is just a tool. Funny how it's "just a tool" when a human uses it to create art, but it's "intelligence" that gets "inspired" by art when a human uses it to create a software product.
      - lokjhfvvv 3y ago

rideontime 3y ago

This would explain why I find midjourney art so hideous.

Minor49er 3y ago
I think a better explanation is that the vast majority of users don't try any prompt parameters or different styles and just rely on its default settings
- rideontime 3y ago
  Sorry, this was a joke about the decline of "Gabe's" artistic output. I'd find midjourney's output repulsive no matter what it looked like.
  - Minor49er 3y ago
    Got it. Though Midjourney can certainly be pushed beyond its fingerprint, so you might not be aware that a given image you've seen was generated by it or not
    - rideontime 3y ago
      Let me be clear: it is the knowledge that an image was created with midjourney that repulses me, not the visual appeal of the image itself.
      - Minor49er 3y ago
        That is unfortunate
        rideontime 3y ago
        It is also not an uncommon opinion, which you should keep in mind if you intend to use AI-generated imagery in your products.
        Minor49er 3y ago
        Actually, it's an opinion that's going to dwindle as AI tooling becomes more commonly available. I am not worried about it
- thaumaturgy 3y ago
  Nah. Even the "good" stuff feels cheap. It's the art version of ho-hos and twinkies. Every once in a while I see one and think, "oh, neat, wonder how they got it to do that?", but usually I'm just left slightly queasy and with a bad taste.
  - nightski 3y ago
    Then it's no problem right? Or are you just in a minority.
    - s1artibartfast 3y ago
      That is a non-suitor. A lot of people like hohos and Twinkies. That doesn't mean they arent stolen and that doesn't mean they are fine cuisine.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
    - acdha 3y ago
      Price and volume mean it still has impact. We’re already seeing that with online marketplaces and forums filling up with high-volume AI excreta, and a lot of businesses love replacing positions with software so regardless of the relative merits of the output anyone who lives in a society should be thinking about what it’ll look like as millions of jobs disappear.
  - Minor49er 3y ago
    I've been using Midjourney to generate assets and textures that I Photoshop into new images, such as album covers, banners, and flyers. It has been excellent for speeding up my workflow. My small audience has found a high amount of visual appeal in the results

ineptech 3y ago

> I'm always reticent to fully engage in "The Dialogue," regardless of its momentary configuration. It's a smoothie made from shibboleths; you have to be able to detect them at only a few parts per million because once these things metastasize, they stop being about whatever they were about and instead become increasingly loud recitations of various catechisms and loyalty oaths. Boy does that ring true.

CharlesW 3y ago
Yes, the entire post (it's short) is well worth a read.
- ineptech 3y ago
  And from the following day, their paraphrasing of https://www.theverge.com/2023/11/4/23946353/generative-ai-copyright-training-data-openai-microsoft-google-meta-stabilityai https://www.theverge.com/2023/11/4/23946353/generative-ai-co... is succinct: > Meta: We stole so much stuff that, actually, we didn't steal any stuff > Google: If things were different, things would be totally different > Andreeson Horowitz: But we already spent so much money > Microsoft: Think about how this would hurt the little guys, like us > Anthropic: Fucking shut up about it > Hugging Face: It's super legal but honestly it might not be idk > StabilityAI: It's legal in places that aren't here
  - ineptech 3y ago
    This is a little oblique, but isn't there a parallel to the music piracy debates of the 90s here? The defense of those who steal training data, "It's not stealing because I'm only taking a little tiny piece from a whole bunch of people", seems like a neat inversion of the defense offered by people torrenting mp3s in their dorm rooms. It's worth noting that, back when it suddenly became technically feasible to copy all songs for free, the response from the rightsholders of music was, essentially, to demand that we all collectively pretend it isn't. It might make sense for the rightsholders of training data to try to do the same, if they could speak with one voice and if they had lobbyists, but I guess the fact that they can't and don't settles that.

enjo 3y ago

I'm curious if Gabe over at penny-arcade would be upset if his comics were used in an art class to train a new generation of artists.

davemp 3y ago
>> If my interlocutor isn't prepared to make any distinctions between a human being and a machine designed to mimic one, I think that I can't meaningfully discuss this with them. I hate that this is the case; it must be seen as a personal failing. I can't do it, though. These models aren't people. They don't know anything. They don't want anything. They don't need anything. I won't privilege it over a person. And I certainly won't privilege its master. Perhaps if you read Gabe's post you could have saved yourself the trouble of making this comment.
- whamlastxmas 3y ago
  Seems lazy to differentiate between types of intelligence without providing any substance as to why you believe one type is more worthy of learning than another and criticizing others for the same laziness
  - romwell 3y ago
    >Seems lazy to differentiate between types of intelligence without providing any substance as to why you believe one type is more worthy of learning than another and criticizing others for the same laziness Seems lazy to call a genAI model "intelligence" without providing any substance as to why one should believe that, but OK. The model isn't an "intelligence" because it's not making a choice about which data you train on and be "inspired by", as people here say. The humans that operate those models do. It's those humans that are exploiting the artists. The AI, as many have said here, is just a tool. Funny how it's "just a tool" when a human uses it to create art, but it's "intelligence" that gets "inspired" by art when a human uses it to create a software product.
    - lokjhfvvv 3y ago