7 ms·
The number of people who are going to be able to produce high fidelity art with off the shelf tools in the near future is unbelievable. It’s pretty exciting.
by r3trohack3r 3y ago
The number of people who are going to be able to produce high fidelity art with off the shelf tools in the near future is unbelievable.
It’s pretty exciting.
Being able to find a mix of styles you like and apply them to new subjects to make your own unique, personalized, artwork sounds like a wickedly cool power to give to billions of people.
- __loam 3y agoAnd we only had to alienate millions of people from their labor to do it.
- DennisAleynikov 3y agoYeah, sadly those millions of people don’t matter in the grand scheme of things and were never going to profit off their work long term
- r3trohack3r 3y agoWhat a bummer of a thing to say. Those millions/billions of people matter a great deal.
- DennisAleynikov 3y agoThey matter but not under the current system. Artists are a rarely paid profession, and there are professional artists out there but there’s now a huge amount of people that will never contact an artist for work that used to only be human powered. It’s not personal for me. I understand that desire to resist the inevitable but it’s here now. For what it’s worth I never use midjourney or dalle or any of the commercial closed systems that steal from artists but I know I can’t stop the masses from going there and inputting “give me pretty picture in style x”
- __loam 3y agoResistance is important imo. If this happens and we, who work in this industry, say nothing, what good are we. It's only inevitable if it's socially acceptable.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- easyThrowaway 3y agoWhere the "grand scheme of things" are the quarter reports of a few AI-invested companies?
- mensetmanusman 3y agoIs this utilitarianism?
- r3trohack3r 3y agoAbsolutely agree we should allow people to accumulate equity through effective allocation of their labor. And I also agree that we shouldn’t build systems that alienate people from that accumulated equity.
- BeFlatXIII 3y agoWorth it.
- 23B1 3y agoIt'll be about as wickedly tool as the ability to get on the internet, e.g. commoditized, transactional, and boring.
- sebzim4500 3y agoI know this is an unpopular thing to say these days, but I still think the internet is amazing. I have more access to information now than the most powerful people in the world did 40 years ago. I can learn about quantum field theory, about which pop star is allegedly fucking which other pop star, etc. If I don't care about the law I can read any of 25 million books or 100 million scientific papers all available on Anna's Archive for free in seconds.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- r3trohack3r 3y agoAs Jeff Bezos recently said on the Lex podcast: one of the greatest compliments you can give an inventor is that they’re invention will be taken for granted by future generations. “It won’t be any more wickedly cool than the internet” - saying something won’t be any more wickedly cool than the most profound and impactful pieces of infrastructure human civilization has erected is a pretty high compliment.
- kredd 3y agoIn terms of art, population tends to put value not on the result, but origin and process. People will just look down on any art that’s AI generated in a couple of years when it becomes ubiquitous.
- MacsHeadroom 3y agoNope, but I already look down on artists who refuse to integrate generative AI into their processes.
- mplewis 3y agoCan you share some of the art you’ve made with generative AI?
- _svoh 3y agoCool, who are you?
- MisterBastahrd 3y agoPeople who use generative AI in their processes are not artists.
- password54321 3y agoThis is true. They are just taking a sample from a generated latent space, just like taking a photo of something doesn't make you an artist.
- blacklion 3y agoSo, there is no artists in, for example, street photography? Picture must be altered to become art, or staged? Was it irony? :)
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- falcolas 3y ago> Being able to find a mix of styles you like and apply them to new subjects to make your own unique, personalized, artwork sounds like a wickedly cool power to give to billions of people. And in the process, they will obviate the need for Nightshade and similar tools. AI models ingesting AI generated content does the work of destroying the models all by itself. Have a look at "Model Collapse" in relation to generative AI.
- password54321 3y agoNot really. There is a reason why we find realistic painting to be more fascinating than a photo and why some still practice it. The effort put in by another artist does affect our enjoyment.
- dartharva 3y agoThe word "we" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. A large majority of consumers can't even tell apart AI-generated from handmade, let alone care who or what made the thing.
- password54321 3y agoYeah, that's just information you made up on the spot.
- wruza 3y agoFor me it doesn’t. I’m generating images, realistic, 2.5d, 2d and I like them as much. I don’t feel (or miss) what you described. Or what any other arts guy describes, for that matter. Arts people are different, because they were trained to feel something a normal person wouldn’t. And that’s okay, a normal person without training wouldn’t see how much beauty and effort there is in an algorithm or a legal contract as well.