#ai art debate | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

jessiarts · 1 year

Text

Too many people are willfully misunderstanding why artists are protesting AI art right now.

All they hear is "Artists are mad at fun new tool and scared it will replace them, so they're trying to take it away from us!!"

Artists are not protesting the tool itself. Many even like the concept of the AI tools, believe it or not.

We are protesting that it takes and uses our work without our consent and without any compensation, all while the companies behind the tool are making loads of money off this practice.

We're fighting for regulation of the tool. Not only does it scrape work created by artists into it's database without the artist's permission, private medical photos have also been found in these datasets. None of that is ok.

From the start this tool should have only been fed images in the public domain, and any artist work fed to it should have come from artists who have consented to it and who were then also compensated whenever their work was used by the AI tool. There's also other issues like:

Sites like ArtStation and DeviantArt refusing to place AI in it's own category to separate it from human made art. Just like traditional and digital art get separate categories, so should AI generated art. (Also some are trying to hide when they generated something from AI and try to pass it off as done by their own hand??? If you believe it's 'just another tool,' why are you trying to hide it???);

How DA tried to pull a fast one and first made AI scraping an opt-out function and said that dead artists work would be scraped because they weren't alive to tell them no;

How the companies behind the tools are knowingly making money off the AI scraping artist work without artist consent;

People are selling AI art with no regard that their generated image likely contains work that another artist created;

Etc.

"But humans take inspiration from other artists all the time! The AI is just doing the same thing!"

First off, it's not. And I don't even mean that in a "AI art is soulless and can never be the same as Human Art!" way or anything.

I just mean these "AI" tools aren't 'true AI' like how you're thinking. They're no Hal3000 that actually make decisions on their own. They're algorithms programed by humans to search the acquired database and photomash together a product based on a prompt. They're not actually becoming 'inspired' by anything. (And it's not insulting the tool to say this either!)

And that's not even the point, but let's pretend for a just minute that what AI Art programs do is the same as a human taking inspiration- Even humans are not allowed to take too much of another artists idea/work with the intent to profit without getting in trouble. Even if that 'profit' is just internet clicks, people very much still do get mad at other humans for copying another artist's work and trying to pass it off as their own.

And that is what's happening with a lot of generated art. It will spit out pieces very similar or nearly identical to another artist's work and will often even include artist's signatures or watermarks in the product. Because it just photomashes, essentially. (Again, not a dig!)

And I'm not knocking photomashing, it is used in the industry. And I bet most artists are actually fine with the concept of a photomashing tool. However, even when humans in the industry use photomashing, they have to use their own photos, public domain photos, or have permission of the owner to use the photos they intend to photomash with. And we sure as hell are not allowed to use someone's private medical photos in our work either.

We're only asking that the work generated by AI Art programs follow these same standards. Again, we're only fighting for regulation, not to take this "new fun tool" from you.

But unfortunately that's all some who are already enamored with the idea of AI Art are willing to hear from our arguments.

It's easier to just believe that artists are simply "afraid of change" or "afraid of being obsolete" and are trying to rain on your fun than to look at our arguments and concede that, "Hey, maybe this tool was implemented in a bad way. Maybe artists do deserve the basic respect of being allowed to consent to their work being used to train AI, and to being compensated by the company behind the tool if their work is used. Maybe we should look into more ethical ways of implementing this new tool."

No one seems to realize that artists would not be fighting this tool if it was done right from the start and didn't just outright take our work to train the AI without our permission. Hell, artists release stuff to help teach/'train' other human artists all the time! We release full tutorials, stock images, even post finished art for people to use for free sometimes!

The difference is that when we do, we consented to do so. It wasn't just ripped from our hands by people who felt entitled to our labor for their own gain.

We're not trying to take away your fun new tools! We're only asking that your new tool does not come at the expense of abusing us!

I really don't think that's a hard ask.

#I'm worried that the link will hide this in the tags #so maybe reblog to spread this?#ai art debate #art theft #ai #ai art #no ai art #noai #ai art generation #stable diffusion #ai art generator #anti ai art #do better ai #support human artists #photomash

2K notes · View notes

lets-all-calm-down-a-bit · 8 months

Note

wiat can someone explain to me why chat ai is bad, im so ootl on this /gen

Yes, of course!

So, If you are familiar with the ethical debate around AI art, you should know that today's "AI" is not actually AI. The AI we have now is not artificial intelligence. It is merely a program cobbling together things fed into the machine to produce a new image or piece of writing. However, what is created is not actually NEW. "AI" art and Character "AI" scrapes artists' and writers' original works from the internet without their consent, then mushes it all together to create the desired outcome of the prompt it was given. These artists and writers are not consulted or compensated before their art is used. This means that your favorite fanfic writers and artists' work is regularly stolen and used to create someone's "AI" art image or Character "AI" conversation without them knowing or being able to stop it.

Along with this, there is a more culturally relevant reason to not support Chat "AI." As the writers' strike continues, it is becoming increasingly more worrying that large film companies might replace human writers with "AI." This would not only put immense amounts of people out of work. It would also almost completely erase creative job options. They aren't only trying to start using "AI" to write scripts. Due to the recent SAG-AFTRA strike, they have proposed scanning the likeness of an actor to be used indefinitely without that actor's long-term compensation. And the elimination of artists in the graphic design field is self-explanatory. Why would a company pay twice as much money to commission an artist for their work, when they could get a result for half the price in mere seconds?

Capitalism is literally trying to eliminate the need for creatives in the workforce. This is disgusting. From the beginning of time, people have created art. They have sold art. They have bought art. Large corporations are trying to make that obsolete.

If you care at ALL about the creative community and the future of art itself, do NOT feed the "AI." It is actively working against you.

#colby rambles #ai art #sag afra strike #writers strike #ai art debate #chatgpt #fuck ai everything #support human artists #support human writers

204 notes · View notes

joshua-beeking · 1 year

Text

" You artists are panicking over nothing! No one is gonna steal your job just like photography didn't kill it! It's just a tool!"

....

-living struggling artists have their specific art made into AI and people are already buying AI reproductions of their style.

-There are already popular youtubers using AI pictures to illustrate their videos instead of hiring an artist.

- Publishing companies are making statements about having bought AI pictures for bookcovers without knowing.

But yeah sure, we are "worried for nothing."

#ai art fail #ai artwork #ai art debate

767 notes · View notes

batcavescolony · 10 months

Text

I didn't think if have to explain this, Human mediocrity is hundreds of times better then ANYTHING an AI could come up with.

391 notes · View notes

ohnoitstbskyen · 1 year

Text

The Robot That Makes Houses For Free

I have built a robot which creates new houses entirely for free. It's an amazing new innovation, a huge leap forward in robotics and it's going to solve homelessness, probably.

The way it works is the robot goes around to hundreds or thousands of other houses all over the town, and rips out the construction materials it needs from each of them.

But don't worry! It only rips tiny little pieces out of each house, completely insignificant bits which they would never miss, and then it makes this entirely new house for free out of all the little bits and pieces it took. Free houses! How amazing is that!

You just type into the computer what kind of house you want, what style of architecture, how many floors, what kind of floor plan, and it'll just do it - like magic! Out of nothing! For free! What amazing technology, it's incredible what we can do with modern advancements.

Anyway, this recent plague of houses collapsing is really worrying. Apparently they're falling down because they're being slowly worn away by some kind of mysterious erosion? Huh, that's weird.

But it's kind of a blessing, really, because it means now there's a huge market for new houses, so we're going to build even more robots to make those houses, and so long as the traditional old construction companies keep making new houses for us to sample, we can make new houses totally for free forever!

Wait, what do you mean the constant supply of free houses is crashing the market and driving them all out of business?

#this is a post about AI art #ai artwork #ai art debate #ai art discourse #ai art is stolen labor by definition - it cannot exist without the work of real artists to feed its algorithms #and it repays them by driving down the value of their labor and devaluing their work #you wanna play with your AI art toys then institute a classless and money-less post scarcity society where it can't hurt anyone first

732 notes · View notes

iinkbones · 1 year

Text

My thoughts on AI "art"

Today a youtuber who I've been following for years started giving his perspective/argument towards the usefulness of AI image generators for content creators. It really put into perspective for me how, outside of the art sphere (with the exception of a handful of outliers), the general public has absolutely no concept of the value of art and artists, much less the damage being created by these AI "art" generators. The accessibility of art on social media and the mentality of content creation have completely commodified art, rendering the figure of the artist just another worker to purchase a service or a product from. For years, I've tried to hold onto the hope that a large amount of people still have some semblance of appreciation towards art. Hypebeast imagery, NFTs, and AI "art" have completely shattered any hope I had left.

One of this youtuber's arguments was that, for just $15, an AI could make you hundreds of images to choose from, in varied styles. That it's much more efficient than searching for an artist whose style you enjoy and then going through the back and forth of concept sketches and then the rest of the artist's process. This argument feels like a slap to the face; to completely disregard the artistic process as an inconvenience, to act like the soulless images produced by AI are of equal standing as art made by an artist's hands, born from a creative mind- it hurts.

As artists, every day we are met with a world that continues to lose artistic literacy; we create for audiences that no longer give themselves the time or do the self reflection needed to form emotional connections and intellectually explore the messages of a piece.

Art isn't a commodity, it's a necessity. It's the most human form of self expression. Art has been a fundamental part of humanity since the very birth of our species. There will never be a single line of code in this world that can replicate the all-encompassing complexity of the human experience contained within every piece of art.

It's completely soul-crushing to think that art could be in its dying days. AI "art" is not art. It is the culmination of the death of the artist.

#if you support ai art unfollow me right now #anti ai art #ai art debate #i'm so. so fucking tired of the world

443 notes · View notes

viktoriamagrey · 5 months

Text

Frustrating that few people talk about the fundamentally demoralizing and disrespectful aspect of AI "creations" for an individual person's identity. Voice actors have had to put up with their literal voice being stolen like some kind of horror story with no regard whatsoever for their personal autonomy. I can't even imagine how horrifying it must feel on a primal level, to hear your voice used without you being able to have a say in it. When AI discussion so often gets entangled with talk about laws and rationalizations about how "the process is very complex" (as if that changed anything about it ethically or mattered at all when technology is constantly changing anyway), it's important to remember the ways in which all these non-consenting people were abused and deprived of their rights as individuals, not a collective, theoretical group like some AI supporters like to see artists from all fields. These people have a unique voice, figuratively and literally, that feels special to them because it's theirs. It doesn't come just from training, or talent. It's a fundamental part of who they are as a human being because it is a result of their lived experiences. There is a reason making art is so important to so many people - it's an extension of who they are.

Having someone forcefully take something so personal to you to make a forgery of it as they see fit, and most of all, to hand out random people the ability to use what is rightfully yours, without your consent, is humilliating, dehumanizing, and vile. Going through entire databases of stolen art should make you sick. Hearing the voices of people saying things they didn't say should make you sick. Watching people make entire tools dedicated to copying someone's specific art style and themes like it's a sheet of paper you can pass around, should make you sick. You are not "copying" a mass of concepts, you're not "referencing" something, and what is just "harmless fun" to you shouldn't matter if it's a violation to the individuals involved. You're robbing the intent, and fingerprint of individuals to churn out what you want out of something you alone decided was fine for you to take. AI "art" is an ethical nightmare.

#And that's why AI art is at its core plagiarism especially when employed as a means to copy a specific person.#I absolutely despise how normalized it became to use AI to make blorbo say funny things #As if that's not an actual person talking who did not consent to any of this.#That's THEIR voice. Get out of your fictional world for two seconds.#voice actors I am so so sorry #anti ai #anti ai art #ai art is theft #ai art debate #anti ai voice #my text post #text post #discourse #my text

42 notes · View notes

piinfeathers · 1 year

Text

i keep trying and failing to come up with an informed post about why you really shouldn't be using ai generators that basically consist of a database of pictures stolen from working artists, but it all boils down to me just screaming and begging literally anyone to just give a shit about us

i see photosets reblogged CONSTANTLY of very obvious ai art, but no one really seems to be able to recognize it anymore except artists. these posts get tens of thousands of likes on mass produced, soulless prompts that use exclusively works stolen from artists who have no say in the matter and absolutely no protection or power to stop it

every time i see ai ‘art’ now, all i see it stolen art, stolen time and stolen money. it hurts

also please just consider that this wont stop with us. fanfic writers are already discovering that their works are being trolled for content by ai farms. and from a security standpoint, if you’re uploading pictures of yourself to ai generators, they now just have an image of your face to use however they want, since legality isn’t really a huge issue for them

please just care, please just research

please just give a shit

#anti ai art #ai art debate #i’m just really tired #probably delete this later

322 notes · View notes

fluffielox · 1 year

Text

please don’t feed the ai

#illustrator #procreate #human artist #don’t feed the ai #ai art debate #ai sucks #artists

236 notes · View notes

alcorian · 9 months

Text

seeing AI covers of a character from a tv show on my dash so im gonna say it

if you want a character to say or sing something, pay their fucking VA to do it. these people make a living (well, often not because VA work already pays poorly) making that character say or sing things. dont use a machine to steal their voice and make the machine do it for free.

#alv posts #ai art discourse #ai art discussion #ai art debate #ai voice cover

61 notes · View notes

jessiarts · 1 year

Text

I once saw someone try to say that Ai art was anti-capitalist and I just-

Ai art is straight up capitalism!

Literally can't get more capitalistic than outsourcing the most basic form of human expression to a machine that is only able to produce anything because it devoured the work that human artists spent hours, days- months even- creating, all without their consent!! All just so the company behind the tool can rake in a ton of money from the users who pay to use the tool to generate their images!!!

The companies behind the Ai tools straight up profit off the labor of human artists to train their Ai, without consent of or compensation to those artists, for the company's own profit.

That's 100% capitalism. Profiting off of the labor of others is capitalism.

Hell world. We're in hell.

#anti ai art #anti capitalism #ai #ai art #no ai art #ai art debate #ai art theft #ai is theft #support human artists #artists on tumblr #art

373 notes · View notes

letrune · 2 months

Text

"ai"s, another rant

Consider: what is the product? Most of these "ais" (large language models) are "free", but you get only a few rounds for free. It's like a casino, you ask a thing, get images, and you can roll again if you liked it enough.

There are many of these LLMs that say in their TOS that they may save, sell and base their new generations on the images you produced. That they will access your computer data, save it, may even sell it. Some even proposed to use your own computing power, CPU and GPU for these.

But the money comes from somewhere - namely, bitcoin, nft sales and now, premium generation with ai, and lending them out for rent to companies. This is where the LLM companies get their money. The way they can replace artists, and get whatever they want, even if it breaks the law or worse.

Many articles rely on fake news dreamt up by a LLM textparser. Fake images circulate. Many dictators love to doctor images, and now thry got it even faster. Truth is being harder to find when it is easier to fake.

The product is you. Your gambling addiction. Your artistic efforts. Your truth. Everything the internet was meant for. All of it is now for rent, for sale, and to be reimagined by techbros who don't understand the systems they want to ruin as long as it makes them money.

Consider again: bitcoin ruin the economy of the little people and make a few rich. Nfts ruin online markets and videogames, and make a few rich. "Ai" ruin art and text and news, and make a few rich.

There is nothing to be gained in it. It is a toy for a bunch of gambling addicts in the 5% who want to be the 1%, and now, thanks to many big companies taking these, the tool for megacorps to get even richer by spending even less.

Imagine, Warner Brothers gets their own. They can start producing a movie, announce it, then can it, delete it and start anew. No spending beyond paying the energy and water bill and the server costs, but there are no people involved. They can produce for anyone, remove any piece, use any bodies, living and dead, for anything, from selling slop to playing the big bad. They have to spend less and you got to pay the same or more. Why would they even finish any movie? Just produce a slop, toss on a streaming service, then remove and make more, half of them go for tax refunds anyway.

It is a tool for instant gratification for you, and then more cash for the top? Yes. It is.

#ai art is art theft #ai generated slop #ai art debate #ai generated #ai is theft #Ai is awful #ai art debate? Hah! No debate here

19 notes · View notes

glitchphotography · 1 year

Text

If u think losing a gig to an AI is hard, try losing gigs because your bosses are racist or xenophobic or homophobic or sexist, or try not getting gigs at all because bosses dont think your work is as legitimate as the dude who can draw 100 identical spidermans.

There are serious structural issues with pay-to-play AI services like Dalle2 and it’s centered on how these companies data laundered copyrighted works using fair use laws and research institutions to privatize a tech that should be considered public infrastructure for everyone.

But AI Art itself isn’t evil, its a tool that has been used by new media artists for at least a decade. There’s obviously ethical ways to create AI art: train your own models, create outputs based out of your own works, attribute the artists you use in your prompts, etc.

But suddenly caring about copyright like you are now team disney and team nintendo is weak. And seriously, most of your artstation works aren’t original either. Yall living off of borrowed aesthetics from 100 years of comic books and cartoons and illustrations.

AIs can’t plagiarize the way humans do. You are seeing a calculated average of images. The reason shit looks like your favorite illustrators is because a lot of these illustrators make similar art, and most people writing AI prompts have similar basic tastes. Making great AI Art from prompts takes time and patience and a keen sense of poetics.

But seriously, y’all don’t hate new tech, you hate capitalism and the corpos and bosses who are out to expropriate you.

AI Art, if anything, is the new folk art. Same repeated motifs made by anyone with a clue. This is a wonderful mingling of collective creative energies. Embrace it!

Addendum for all the reactionary responses out there:

~~~~~~~~ Artists should be getting royalties from OpenAI, Midjourney, et al. And they should be able to opt in or out of having their work included in training models. This is a given and I would never argue against compensating artists! ~~~~~~~~

This isn’t about defending these corpos either, but machine learning tech has been around before these companies started their thing and experimental artists from around the world have been using machine learning to make great art.

Another thing: the moment you post your digital art to a platform, you sign away much of your consent w/r/t how your art is used. Thats what those really long TOS are about. ArtStation and istock were scraped for data under the pretext of Fair Use, which allows or mass scraping internet data for research purposes. Fair Use is like the one law that for the most part, protects artists from the disneys and nintendos of the world. I wouldn’t be able to glitch video games without it. Emulated videogames wouldnt exist with out it either So the question is, why are corporations allowed to use Fair Use as a cover for developing privatized pay-to-play services? People who know a thing, will point out that Stable Diffusion is open source, and that’s great, but why are privatized services allowed to be built on open source infrastructure? Especially when this tech hasn’t been properly vetted for racial biases, pr0nography, etc

Yes its shitty, but these arent arguments against AI tech but against juridical structures under capitalist regimes.

#ai art #aiartcommunity #ai art debate #ai art is not art

257 notes · View notes

the-irreverend · 1 year

Text

It's not often you see some yahoo use a Calvin and Hobbes comic to rant about machine-made art.

#irreveRANTS #autistic artist #fuck ai art #anti ai art #support artists rights #support human artists #ai artwork #ai art is not art #ai art #no ai art #no to ai art #no to ai generated art #ai art is art theft #ai art debate #ai art generation

151 notes · View notes

ohnoitstbskyen · 1 year

Note

Hey TBskyen, what's your opinion on AI taking over, or at least really hurting the creative field. Like say taking over writing, art etc etc.

Sorry if this was asked before, AI just makes me wary of my own aspirations as a writer cause if an ai can just do what I do a lot better and faster is there a point in trying to publish that work?

What AI art and writing is a threat to is your professional career first and foremost. It is automation, and the function of automation is to drive down labor costs and outcompete artisans by sheer volume. I can't promise you that you'll be able to earn a living from writing in the future, this technology could genuinely destroy the commercial market, but if your worry is that the AI is going to simply be better than you, then let me put your fears to rest.

The AI cannot and will never be better than you.

These machine learning algorithms (which are not actually even AI, I should say), can only ever do one thing, which is reproduce the data that is fed into them. They can mix and remix that data in a hundred billion different configurations according to whatever parameters are specified, but they can't actually create anything.

Algorithms have nothing to add, they don't invent anything. They have no experience, they have no perspective, they have no intent. Algorithms will never write a story to express anything, they'll only reassemble parts of other stories to fit a desired output.

This is not to say that algorithm art won't pass the Turing test, that's a fairly low bar, just that fundamentally, algorithms will never, ever generate something that is of higher quality than what's fed into them. And they will never invent anything new, or add anything to the conversation.

Something which is true and will remain true forever is that somewhere out there, there is someone who needs the thing that you create. And they need that thing from you, in your voice, from your perspective and informed by your experiences. This isn't poetic fancy, this is observed experience. Humans tell stories and create art because we fucking need to. And we need these things to connect with one another.

That is always going to matter.

You might only have an audience of one. You might never make any money doing it. You might not even be alive when the person who needs your work finally finds it, or if shit goes really bad, it might be lost to time and they never find it.

But it fucking matters that you tried. Algorithm art is the mechanisms of capital trying to suck the soul out of one of the few areas of human existence that they haven't managed to drain completely yet, and to keep writing and creating while under this assault is a form of resistance that we sorely need.

#ai art #ai art discourse #ai art debate #chatgpt #gpt3 #machine learning #writing #art #poetry #tb answer

539 notes · View notes

feyresdaughter · 1 year

Text

Feyre would judge y'all so hard for using AI art

#a court of thorns and roses #acotar #feyre archeron #feyre archeron supremacy #feyre cursebreaker #feyre darling #high lady feyre #feyre #feyre acotar #feyre supremacy #ai art #ai art debate #ai art is stolen art

71 notes · View notes