7 ms·
AI is not our future
- ChrisMarshallNY 1y agoNicely said. For those who don't know, iPad Pro + Apple Pencil Pro + Procreate == awesome art tool
- neepi 1y agoYeah happy customer here for that combo. There is nothing that even gets close to it.
- ChrisMarshallNY 1y agoRemember when Wacom tablets were supposed to deliver that? The iPad/Pencil combo knocks it into a cocked hat. The kicker is that the Cintiq is around the same price (or more), and is less ergonomic.
- neepi 1y agoYeah. Cintiq isn’t much use when you’re sitting in a field in the middle of nowhere sketching.
- jsheard 1y agoiPads can be a bit more ergonomic than Cintiqs, but if you can deal with the pen-screen disconnect then classic non-screen tablets are significantly more ergonomic than either, on top of being significantly cheaper. YMMV though, some people need that pen-screen connection.
- criddell 1y agoFor me, Procreate is the killer app that made me want an iPad and my 7 year old iPad Pro is my favorite computer. I can't believe it's only $13 (I think I paid $10 many years ago). It's one of those rare apps that I wish was more expensive because a $13 purchase doesn't feel sustainable. I should probably sign up for a Procreate course. The app is so deep that I know I'm only using the most basic features. If anybody has books or courses to recommend, I'm all ears.
- ChrisMarshallNY 1y agoWell, people who make a lot of money, do so, by selling lots of cheap, as opposed to few expensive, and I think that Procreate may be one of the best-selling apps ever. I remember Corel Painter. It was about $400, and did many similar things. I think it may no longer be around.
- Tomte 1y agoLast release in 2022, so probably still alive.
- svantana 1y agoThe marginal cost of selling software is so small that with enough customers, almost any price is sustainable. They are estimated to earn $2M/month from this app [1], which should be more than enough to cover their costs. 150k new customers per month is pretty incredible, when you think about it. [1] https://app.sensortower.com/overview/425073498?country=US https://app.sensortower.com/overview/425073498?country=US
- Kichererbsen 1y agoas someone who's eyeing this combo (for a beginner) - does it need to be the iPad Pro or will i be able to get away with an iPad Air?
- alienreborn 1y agoAir works fine
- ChrisMarshallNY 1y agoAnd there's a big Air (same size as the Pro). I do suggest splurging for the more expensive Pencil Pro, though. If you want to go the other way, the Mini works with the Pencil Pro (I have both).
- spking 1y agoYou will be fine with the Air. https://www.creativebloq.com/buying-guides/best-ipad-for-procreate https://www.creativebloq.com/buying-guides/best-ipad-for-pro...
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- neepi 1y agoAbout the same. The 120Hz on the pro feels very slightly better and has slightly lower latency. This does help a tiny bit for detail work. But you get used to not having it after about 30 mins.
- criddell 1y agoYou will probably be very happy with the Air. I'd recommend the big one. I use a 2018 13" iPad Pro and I love that size because it's basically the same size as a sheet of 8.5x11 (or A4) paper. It's the perfect size for reading and marking up PDFs too. Last year I bought and returned the M4 iPad Pro because they didn't make a Smart Keyboard Folio for it which I prefer to the more heavy duty Magic Keyboard. So I'm still using my 7 year old iPad worrying about what I'm going to do when it dies. I thought for sure somebody would make a knock off, but nobody has made anything that I think is as good as the Apple product. For me, Procreate and GoodNotes are a killer combination that justify owning the device.
- rollcat 1y agoI say this to everyone who keeps telling me that an iPad would make a better jailbroken Linux computer than what it currently is today. A close friend of mine (art college degree) has switched from oil / acrylic / watercolor to iPad - after trying it once.
- criddell 1y agoThere seems to be demand for a general purpose tablet computer and stylus similar to an Apple iPad and Pencil. I wonder why nobody makes one?
- ChrisMarshallNY 1y agoNot enough demand to make it worth the effort. Making a screen tablet is really hard. The iPad is general-purpose enough (and does not require a stylus) to make it worth the effort (and price -they ain't cheap), but a specialized one would likely fizzle, due to a limited customer base.
- intended 1y agoFor artists theres many options and you end up paying for those products, quite a bit.
- rollcat 1y agoI keep wondering. Is there even a decent FOSS tablet (as opposed to desktop) environment? There are plenty of reasons why iPads and Macs have vastly different UIs. KDE seems strictly desktop-focused. Gnome seems to be pulling in both directions, but a considerable amount of functionality is only accessible thru crammed menus and buttons. What about the apps? I've heard really good things about Krita, but what's the killer app?
- queenkjuul 1y agoKDE actually has the best tablet interface I've tried, but it's still a long way behind iOS and Android
- 1y ago
- efilife 1y ago[flagged]
- nindalf 1y agoIt's ok to click.
- tonyneufeldblog 1y agoThey aren’t the first, and certainly won’t be the last to reject AI.
- dmbche 1y agoRead the title as an order to reproduce myself
- pb060 1y agoI had the same interpretation and in fact there's some truth in it. I recently did procreate and realized how primitive AI is compared to human beings and how long it might take for it to catch up.
- sshine 1y agoThe rate of learning for infants is rapid, but unlike LLMs. Every day there are very small steps that eventually add up. The size and quantity of each step is often not that impressive, but the number of tries from first random attempt at something to consistent behaviour is impressively low.
- dev0p 1y agoFor a second there I thought it was a think piece by Shinzo Abe.
- danesparza 1y ago... Shinzo Abe who was assassinated in 2022???
- rusty__ 1y agoI think he means Kobo Abe?
- terrib1e 1y agoSame
- protoster 1y agoThe " – Procreate" is absolutely not necessary in the title, the submitter knew what they were doing.
- GaggiX 1y agoThe post was made on August 19, 2024 to give a bit of a context given the evolution of the technology and response to it.
- jsheard 1y agoAlso for context, a year-ish later Procreate and its animation counterpart Dreams are still the first and second most popular paid iPad apps. https://apps.apple.com/us/charts/ipad/top-paid-apps/36 https://apps.apple.com/us/charts/ipad/top-paid-apps/36 Their target audience seems pretty happy with their decision.
- GaggiX 1y agoBefore the post where Procreate was positioned? I imagine it was pretty much in the same spot, it's just a good software. I'm sure the target audience is pretty happy about the post but I don't think it made a particular difference on the store.
- RcouF1uZ4gsC 1y agoI have produced multiple neural networks through procreation, and am working on training them. Training these neural networks that I procreated is very fulfilling. They already have intelligence beyond the best models from OpenAI, Anthropocene, and Google. I definitely encourage everyone who can on here to procreate.
- b3lvedere 1y agoI do wonder if they will ever learn how to clean up their rooms though...
- xeonmc 1y agoThe Butlerian Jihad will soon be upon us.
- formerly_proven 1y agoInshallah my friend.
- pydry 1y agoOne prerequisite of the Butlerian Jihad is a model that doesnt absolutely shit the bed when given a non trivial coding task.
- GolfPopper 1y agoI suspect that ubiquitously forcing people to use models that do reliably shit the bed (on coding and everything else) is an excellent way to get a real world Butlerian Jihad.
- mhh__ 1y agoI don't think we'll go quite that far but I can easily imagine a revival of a world in which the Internet is just a box in the corner of your office, and the church, driven by AI slop everywhere.
- intended 1y agoYeah that article was the first time I heard of the Butlerian Jihad not being used outside of the context of Dune, and as an actual thing. And since we can talk about it without engaging with the article points, and talk about the words “Butlerian Jihad” I foresee many posts coming forth, decrying the luddites of the world
- mrdoornbos 1y agoAmen.
- selfselfgo 1y ago[dead]
- raincole 1y agoI don't know. On one hand, it's noble to see apps (CSP, Procreate, Krita) rejecting AI at this era. On the other hand, I can't help but feel it's mental gymnastics when Krita is implementing a neutral network based linework filter [0] while very vocally being against AI. I understand the technical details, and I still fail to see the nuances here. [0]: https://krita-artists.org/t/introducing-a-new-project-fast-line-art/94265/100 https://krita-artists.org/t/introducing-a-new-project-fast-l...
- criddell 1y agoIs the Krita filter trained on the work of thousands of artists?
- spookie 1y agoIt is trained on works of artists that fully knew it was being used for this.
- russianGuy83829 1y agoI don't see the mental gymnastics here, the post you linked pretty clearly delineates the differences to AI in the sense it is used today. As major differences I'd highlight: local and offline, so drawings not sent anywhere trained on artist work with explicit consent In Krita's case, they claim the AI isn't generative so it doesn't add detail. Whereas the AI today is trained on stolen work and often on the inputs as well.
- raincole 1y agoWell, first of all, I don't buy the idea that there is a clear line between 'filter' and 'generative' AI. Even in the example Krita dev posted [0], you can see the 'filter' AI made up a bit detail (the way the girl's eyes look became different), it's just not as smart as so-called generative AI. And about the privacy and copyright concern, what we currently have are: Stable Diffusion: local and offline, but not copyright-clean. Adobe Firefly: online, but copyright-clean (if we believe Adobe's claim). So if we combine the better sides of both, it suddenly becomes okay? [0]: https://krita-artists.org/uploads/default/original/3X/1/4/1427f148ad15f5525b42c233680cb9217fadb350.jpeg https://krita-artists.org/uploads/default/original/3X/1/4/14...
- imaginationra 1y ago"AI" is just a tool like any other- creatives will use these tools to make things they couldn't make before because of the limits of their budget and/or scale- I just made an original animated feature film where I sang %75 of the roles by using an AI tool(audimee.com) to convert my voice into others- I couldn't do that before- we're now creating Portuguese and Russian language versions of the songs with a tool that has a $20 usd/month subscription! Couldn't do that before! For creatives/artists- As long as we don't use AI to generate ideas we're good, human generated ideas are a must- bring on all the AI tools! The whole built on theft thing- as a human film director I could rattle off endless examples just in cinema of human directors "stealing" premises, sequences, shots, styles etc from other filmmakers with no consequences- so why stop the AI now? I see the "theft" as being democratized now- large studios/entities with large resources have always been able to legally "steal" so with these AI tools I guess we all can now? I make original animated films, games, music, art etc etc and I feel no "threat" at all from AI- I feel the opposite as I'm excited to see what things they will allow me to do next as a micro-studio with limited budgets but unlimited creativity. Aesthetics are dead now imo because of generative AI as anyone can be any "style" so now it is all about ideas- original human ideas.
- rollcat 1y agoThe capabilities are interesting and useful, but the wider practical impact is that we're already being flooded with cheap cookie-cutter slop, while original artists' copyrights are completely disregarded. If you're building tools to empower artists, this is antithetic to your mission, and simply unethical.
- imaginationra 1y agoI do agree with the original artists work being disregarded but I think that has more to do with the aggregation and the lack of curation that is not motivated by $- as an unknown artist creating original work for 20+ years I'm optimistic about permission-less donation supported AI curators digging up unknown creative works and sharing them with humans.
- kumarvvr 1y ago
- guerrilla 1y agoI don't want to get into the subject right now but I have to say I love the design of that site. It's relaxing. Reminds me of Apple's site way back when.
- SuperV1234 1y agoGreat marketing strategy (that's all it is).
- criddell 1y agoIt's more of a business or product strategy.
- t0bia_s 1y agoMore like call for attention, but terrible strategy. Who would buy a software that is proud for lack of features?
- doright 1y agoI think this is a new paradigm shift only just getting underway within the past decade. In the past we used to be able to look forward to the future to solve obvious limitations of technology back then. Example is how limited and expensive it was to capture photos on rolls of film. Within the past 20 years we can now take effectively unlimited photos digitally on a device that can do much more than just take photos, and that limit has been abolished forever. It is this forever that is starting to loom on us. Most of us can't imagine a life without Facebook, smartphones, addictive feeds and the like even if we don't directly use them. It is not possible to go back to a state of life untainted by this technology. So now a fancy new technology that promises to paint your end-products for you comes out and in the span of just a few years threatens to change the whole landscape of art that has been repeated in cycles for thousands of years, forever. It is only natural that some would loudly object. But the same wheels driving human progress that removed the limitations of the disposable camera will not slow down at the stage of generative AI either. I don't see how this would happen given our intelligence has already gotten us far in many other domains. Progress is like a wildfire that eats up dry bushes. If enough of the medium is there it will spontaneously occur and not much can be done to prevent it. Except with technology, it is not dry timber but "what ifs." "What if art doesn't have to be defined by the journey to get there, but by a satisfying end product?" "What if a computer program could replicate the motions of a paintbrush, and create art indistinguishable from a human's?" Any one of us can come up with the next "what if."
- testfrequency 1y agoThis needs to be a path more companies take. Procreate knows their target users are skilled humans, and it’s been consistently refreshing to see them align their morals and beliefs to how much AI has stolen from the creative world. I think unless you are a creative yourself, you’ll never be able to fully grasp just how sickening it’s been to watch and see centuries of artists blood, sweat, and tears all be garbled into a slop smoothie with no credit or citation. Any creative who enjoys AI was most likely never a creative for the right reasons to begin with.
- Closi 1y agoMore cynically, they probably also know that the AI path is one that they can't win.
- whynotminot 1y agoI love the attitude, I really do. But it feels a little like the Charge of the Light Brigade. Bold, beautiful, and ultimately a devastating and inevitable loss.
- aaron695 1y ago[dead]
- spking 1y agoIf you use Procreate on an iPad, I highly recommend a Sketchboard to save your posture and wrist! https://sketchboardpro.com/ https://sketchboardpro.com/
- Giorgi 1y ago[flagged]
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- mcpar-land 1y ago> Like you click the button and now you have 43243 new games just like one you finished couple of hours ago. You fell for it if you think this is ever going to happen.
- Giorgi 1y ago[flagged]
- px43 1y ago[flagged]
- par 1y agoYou're a gyatt dang poet my friend :)
- criddell 1y agoWhy? For the same reason any story floats to the top. We are clicking through to read the linked article, up voting, and (like you) participating in the discussion. Put all this stuff together, and the story will trend highly for a while. HN doesn't have the kind of purity filter you are looking for.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- ummonk 1y agoYou can have whatever dislike of Apple products and their walled garden that you like (I certainly don’t own an iPad myself), but at the end of the day Procreate is one of the most popular digital art apps and many artists perceive generative AI as stealing their art, so the anti-AI stance Procreate is taking is definitely discussion-worthy on HN.
- tomhow 1y agoIf a submission seems inappropriate according to the guidelines, please just flag it or email us - hn@ycombinator.com. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- par 1y agoThis feels more like grand standing to sell more copies of their app than any meaningful communication or guidance.
- john_alan 1y agoShock: company selling quills says printing press bad for humans.
- michaelbuckbee 1y agoTron (1982) which was disqualified from Oscar contention as they had heavily used computers for the graphics and this was considered "cheating". I feel like we're at a similar spot today with AI. There's a big YouTube channel that does special fx challenges that proudly proclaims "No AI" but the winner of the challenge used tons of physics and crowd simulators. Is that not cheating?
- cosiiine 1y agoThat’s not cheating according to the definitions within this article that you’ve commented on. Procreate is against gen AI on the grounded that it was unethically trained, and has become a vehicle of theft away from artists. They make a distinction between that and machine learning which is a very useful tools.
- dostick 1y agoEasy for them to say that. The product is about manual drawing. It’s difficult to imagine where would you insert the AI in that process. And maybe a smart strategy? If they add AI that will learn how you draw, and after couple of drawings will be able to draw for you, that may kill the product because artists will lose interest or reason to spend time with their product. Maybe they realise that and just want to push away inevitable for as long as possible. I wonder, they probably have same stance about AI coding, and have no need for that either.
- teeray 1y ago> It’s difficult to imagine where would you insert the AI in that process. “Sketch me a wireframe of a person running” “Can you add a flowing cape to my character in a similar art style?” “Add stippling for the shadows on these objects assuming the light comes from the left of the scene”
- JohnKemeny 1y ago> ’s difficult to imagine where would you insert the AI in that process. Then you don't use your imagination. Obviously one can "snap" a sketch into a car or an owl or a house or whatever, keeping the style similar. You could use your reasoning similarly to spell checkers.
- acdha 1y agoI think there are two key differences: a spell checker doesn’t write the document for you or change your style (grammar checkers are closer to that) so your work is still your style and something you can claim copyright on. If you sell your work, that last part can be important. If you’re an artist, customers are paying you for your skills and the more you say a tool can do, the less they’re going to think your time is worth. They also have a bit of a different market: their customers are people whose work has been used commercially without compensation to endanger their future livelihoods. It may be futile in the long run but I’d imagine there is a substantial market of people who don’t want to contribute to the problem or worry whether Adobe’s terms of service give them rights to screw you.
- 1y ago
- johnny_________ 1y ago[flagged]
- ivape 1y agoSome people just need to face fate. Maybe it was true that for a very long time true artistic talent like singing and drawing were god-gifted. Maybe something wants every living person to have access to it now. Let's not be so selfish.
- mapcars 1y agoThere was a time factory workers protested against automatisation too. You can't stop it, you have to adapt.
- ecocentrik 1y agoYou also can't really stop the protests. People will be displaced from highly specialized skills that some spent a lifetime developing. Jobs that gave their lives meaning, financial security and a sense of community and accomplishment. You can't fault them for being angry or even hostile if they aren't presented with a dignified alternative. When you're building any disruptive technology, you should be prepared for hostility.
- squidbeak 1y agoThis is an important point. Modern man is conditioned to find purpose through employment. The notion of the heroism of work isn't as cartoonish as it was in communist societies, but it's implicitly there - in the centrality of work to every part of culture and customs like that go-to ice-breaker, "What do you do?" The psychological shift of moving past that will be every bit as challenging as the economic adjustments of full automation.
- ecocentrik 1y agoIt's not just communism that celebrates the heroism of work. Providing for your family is viewed as a heroic act across civilizations. People speak of the sacrifices they make for their families. For most children, parents are their first superheroes and some of that is the safety and security they provide through their income, their sense of professional pride and success and participation in communities. We can build a bleak dystopian AI driven future where we all work in service to the machines or we can build one that pays dividends by continuing to give humans an inflated sense of their potential. The later is preferable.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- 1y ago
- diego_moita 1y agoI compare the debate of AI in art with the rise of photography and fall of realistic painting at the end of 19th century. Back then, the work of painters had one among many functions: to preserve people's image. When photography arrived the market for painted portraits vanished. Painters then went to do what photography couldn't do well: colorful landscapes, elegant distortions, etc. But, above all, they explored ways of looking at reality that the photography couldn't do: impressionism, expressionism, abstract art, cubism, etc. I wonder what will artists do now. They'll need to create an art that AI can't create. Perhaps more interactive art, like video games?
- gchokov 1y agoUh.. this sounds desperate.
- sharemywin 1y agoNot what I thought that site was going to be about.
- ninetyninenine 1y agoAi is the future. Face the truth. Human creativity is cheapened by AI because AI can produce work faster, equal and at many times superior to human output. This isn’t something that can be changed. It’s reality and it’s not necessarily a good reality but it’s something you have to accept. The procreate title, the whole marketing idea, even the article itself could have been generated by AI and we would be none the wiser. I can use ai generated art and bullshit and say I used procreate and no one would know. This ad reads like an ad for typewriters at the dawn of ms word. It’s just everything is happening 10x faster and it’s all much more tragic as humanity is losing much more here.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- shubhamjain 1y agoDisappointing to see all the snarky remarks here. Let me tell you, it's not easy to ignore the AI wave. The fear of being left behind is very, very real. AI-based tools are quadrupling their revenues in a matter of months, even on a very high base (Cursor famously going from $100M to $300M in 3 months). Reading "it's all over", "graphic design is dead" all over social media doesn't help either. I am an author of a Desktop App [1] myself. More often than I like to admit, I find myself wondering how I can integrate AI, because that's all the rage these days and gets views, clicks, and potentially revenue. Taking a firm stance like this and standing up for creativity is not an easy stance. Kudos to Procreate team for taking it! [1]: https://textquery.app/ https://textquery.app/
- glimshe 1y agoIf you were judging based on HN comments, you'd think that AI is failing miserably. In reality, people are using generative AI more and more - even if they do so silently or while criticizing it. The jury is still out on AI-centric workflows, but AI augmented workflows are here and won't go anywhere irrespective of what the Internet mob says.
- ecocentrik 1y agoThis is not a new product. This is new marketing targeting the segment of graphic designers that continue to work without the use of generative AI and are concerned about their intellectual property rights being violated. They're just trying to sell legacy software.
- kypro 1y agoDumb. I was at an old mill recently and was learning about how workers protested when weaving jobs were being replaced by machines and they were losing their jobs due to human weavers being less efficient than the new steam-powered weavers. This is why business with any financial sense wouldn't pay an artist for artwork anymore because it will be far far more expensive and take longer... Mills which didn't change with the time, according to the guy I was talking to failed and all the workers lost their jobs anyway. The good news here is that like during the industrial revolution, soon loads of unproductive work will be automated away – coders, artists, accountants, lawyers, etc. And like during the industrial revolution this will result in huge profit increases and competitive advantages for businesses which adopt quickly. This isn't something any company should be sitting on the fence about. While it's unfortunate people will lose their jobs we should remember that humans are still uniquely qualified for work where human interaction is valued – like service work. It's really only the inefficient knowledge work that will be automated away by AI, like how inefficient factory work was automated and outsourced out of developed economies over the last century.
- sanex 1y agoWhile I agree that we should procreate, I disagree with the entire premise of this post. I have always been garbage at the visual arts. Art classes in school were my worst class every year, I just could not get the pictures in my head down on to paper. I accepted that I just wasn't "creative". This mentality persisted through my school years and I ended up getting a business degree because it's not "creative". I was miserable. Eventually saw the light and got into web dev. I believe this is a creative pursuit, and the issue is the medium. Everyone is inherently creative and the general act of creation is one of the most fulfilling things you can do to occupy your time. As a web dev AI allows me to be creative in my ideas and prompting, generating pictures that I would otherwise not have the ability to create myself. Before you say I'm taking the job of graphic designers, I assure you none of these uses would have ended in me spending any money or even someone else's time if AI image gen didn't exist. AI lowers the bar for people to pursue the act of creativity in a medium they otherwise struggle in.
- fatata123 1y ago[dead]
- raincole 1y agoAs a (I dare to say) rather advanced hobbyist digital painter, I don't want generative AI. I want a good image search engine + database. When I say "a woman looking outside from her seat on a train" I don't want it to generate such an image for me. I want it to literally give me existing images that more or less fit the description, with full credit. If it's from a movie I'd like to know the movie's name and timestamp and the actor's name and everything. I know the difference between referencing and plagiarism. And if I'm going to cross the line, at least I know I am the one who makes this decision and takes the legal risk. With the current generative AI I don't even know who holds accountability. Likely nobody, or worse, an unaware me. This is why I think the copyright law is very broken. If someone made the database I described above, their pants, house and first-born would be sued off. But I'd argue it's a not just more useful, but also more ethical product than generative AIs.
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 1y ago"I want a good image search engine + database." One could hire a software developer to write such a program. But, in general, software developers can be untrustworthy and prone to stealing ideas for their own selfish purposes. Before Mark Zuckerberg dropped out of college, he answered a classified ad from someone in the real world^1 who wanted to create a website that could search a database of images. Nothing to do with "social media". IIRC the target market was the auto insurance industry (I could be wrong). 1. Not Winklevoss brothers. That is another story. Zuckerberg never finished the job but he did create his own website which searched and served up images of students at Harvard. He was of course sued by this person after Facebook became popular.
- cwsx 1y ago> One coulld hire a software developer to write such a program. But, in general, software developers can be untrustworthy and prone to stealing ideas for their own selfish purposes. Ehhhh? Yes there are examples of that, as there are for any arbitrary group of humans you could select, but [anecdotally] I've noticed the opposite... it's not uncommon to find a passionate developer that's only interested in the challenge/problem solving aspect - it's a lot less common for say.. real estate agents. I don't really get the point you're making beyond "people be greedy sometimes" (which I do agree with, don't get me wrong).
- textlapse 1y agoAI/GenAI is unfortunately a loaded word. Does Content-Aware Fill count as "AI"? Does using trained data to fill content count as generative AI? There is some nuance here that will be filled in by the courts and companies over time - just like other technologies that allowed creative mix-n-match. I do agree that the current crop of "let's get all your YT videos and all your photographs to train our models and we will pay you peanuts by running ads" is objectively and morally wrong. However, progress requires aligning the incentives and forcing some legal framework to compensate for training - not outright stop the generative AI train as that's simply not possible in this day and age.
- lxdlam 1y agoReally happy to see some company that plays a key role that publish such a statement. Creativity comes from humanity, from our experience, our work, our connection. AI may be not a theft, but it just sophisticated combinations from our wisdom. Until it can really create, the human will always win.
- SpaceNoodled 1y agoWell, it's also theft if it's trained on stoled data.
- t0bia_s 1y agoIm curious who would buy software that lack of features? As an artist, who use generative AI daily to speed up job done, those ideological statements looks more like call for attention.
- ramblerman 1y agoDo you think more efficiency = better art? Genuinely curious. When you say as an artist I believe u are speaking as a professional digital designer. Or are you really producing “art”
- t0bia_s 1y agoIt depends how you define art. I might not allways produce an art, but task that I'm payed for required work with aesthetic. For example when I design cover for book, AI helps with sketching multiple ideas that I of course need to edit for specific tasks. Few years ago I needed to do it manually which was more time consuming and expensive. There is, however, field that AI would never help. Documentary photography that I do mostly. Any artificial interference that shifts captured reality contradicts this genre itself.
- spankibalt 1y ago> Im curious who would buy software that lack of features? I will only use software that lacks AI for the profoundly simple reason that I don't need such "features". Non-artists on the other hand need AI for they're not competent (enough). At what stage of the process is irrelevant. And competency in matters of sentient cultural expression manifest, the only one possible (as opposed to a mere simulacrum), is what defines an artist, after all; non-competency obviously doesn't.
- t0bia_s 1y agoI know many artists that are not thirsty for competition. Actually I don't know any passionate artist who would create with competition in mind. It might be some weird "influencer" trend of thinking you talking about. If that is your definition of "artists" than you are talking about content creators.
- delichon 1y ago> Built on a foundation of theft Theft here means that AI learns from our content and benefits from it when generating new content. I'm not clear on why this is theft when an artificial intelligence does it but it is not when a natural one does. These guesses are an effort to understand this: 1. It's a matter of scale, AI does it faster and cheaper, and that quantitative difference is qualitatively different, and therefore morally different. 2. When my enemies learn from me it is theft, regardless of the physiology of their intelligence, and AI is an enemy. 3. A human intelligence requires far more friction to transmit what they learn, making their learning functionally more local, and less likely to be used to supplant me. When my content is used to supplant me it becomes theft, as in copyright infringement. 4. ???
- derekp7 1y agoThe courts have ruled in several cases that a work someone created was too close to another work and therefor infringing. If you are looking at someone's painting or photograph, and then paint your version of that subject based on what you are looking at, you then have created a derived work which may infringe.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- dmonitor 1y agoWatching a movie and "recording it" with my brain is legal, and remembering scenes + dialogue is legal, but recording it with a camcorder and watching it whenever isn't. When the artist gave you the work, it was under the pretense that you wouldn't train a robot to recreate those images. Humans are divine beings. Deal with it.
- cosiiine 1y agoAs an artist the frustrating thing is I was never asked about whether two decades of my work could be used by for-profit companies to create tools that make my market harder.
- qustrolabe 1y agoEasiest marketing farm for any creative company right now. Say "we won't add AI" and continue doing nothing as before
- tmaly 1y agoProcreate is an amazing app. I actually like it a bit more than Photoshop because of how well it works with the Apply pencil. I wonder if any of the developers there are using AI to code?
- popalchemist 1y agoThis is a great marketing strategy for their niche, but to deny's eventual ubiquity AI long-term is foolish. While there will always be value in the human hand-made stuff, SO many tasks can and will benefit or be made entirely unnecessary through AI and automation. Tired of this take. It's not virtuous nor is it based in deep principled thought, it's calculated. As are all such stances made by companies.
- spankibalt 1y agoGood on them, even if the iPad/Procreate-combo is not my future.
- maria4151 1y ago[flagged]