I don't really like how so many people who were previously agreeing that AI art is theft are alright with palworld because it's kinda-theft but from a big company. I also think palworld sets a pretty bleak precedent.

edit at the top so I'm not misunderstood: palworld is not made by AI, but the dev Takuro Mizobe is very open about his support for it, and is morally on the side of borrowing heavily from what is popular. (link to his words further down)

I think people are missing the point with the arguments. The problem isn't that it's plagiarizing from Nintendo, which I also don't care about, but that the dev doesn't really mind about originality and about mimicking what's popular ( https://www.siliconera.com/how-does-the-palworld-ceo-feel-about-ai/ ). his other planned games are heavily inspired by others too (from hollow knight, for example). It isn't about who is plagiarized from, but the precedent set.

And I'm also seeing 'but it's really fun/I don't care because it's much more fun than pokemon'. Also not really the point - and possibly even the moral challenge here. If a bit of fun in a game is more important to you than the moral principle of avoiding financially supporting ai tech bros, I can't tell anyone not to - and if it turns out that enough people are totally okay with it and will give them money despite some hang ups, that's the win to them and they'll continue - and I suspect it will be!

For me, the dev's opinions and value of other people's creations is obviously little, and I want nothing to do with that. I also accept I seem to be in the minority with it; ultimately, you vote with your wallet with this kind of stuff.

FURTHER EDIT: I do kind of have to respect Takuro Mizobe for his honestly though LMAO. "I don't really care about originality, I'm just going to take what's popular so lots of people play it" I mean he's playing with legal fire isn't he, as long as he walks the tightrope of plagiarizing pokemon in-game models and changing them JUST ENOUGH to avoid being sued

Ultimately he is not really evil, realistically no company will lose money at this stage, but personally I'd rather play original games that aren't purposefully mashed up and regurgitated versions of others

I am so tired of AI shit. I hope all ai tech bros and supporters and CEOs curl up and die and explode into 100000000000000000000000 flaming pieces of morally bankrupt meat confetti.

I am convinced that people who use ai are either ignorant of the way it exploits people or just plain assholes. A well-known voice actor got bullied off Twitter for asking that an ai cover using her voice without her consent be taken down. And I’ll be fair, it seems the person who posted it originally did take it down, but people were PISSED that they weren’t able to enjoy this woman’s voice being stolen and manipulated without her knowledge, so they harassed her and reuploaded the video multiple times.

Do people not see what a massive privacy violation is it to have a machine copy someone’s voice and make it sound like they said or sang things they never did? This technology allows deepfakes to ruin lives. It poses the risk of shitty people attempting to steal a voice actor’s voice and use it in official content because it’s “good enough” and they don’t have to pay anyone.

It is exploitive and wrong and bad. There is a massive moral failing here. I wish all ai bros a very get fucked, and all ai companies that built models that can only function by exploiting people a very go bankrupt.

My brother is a morally bankrupt gamer dude bro who loves “innovation” and refuses to understand how I think ai is any different then the invention of cars or the television which is kinda funny but anyways for anyone who thinks that bot writing makes art more accessible somehow I would like to encourage you to just make art badly with your own two hands. Bad but earnest and handmade (made by humans not bots) art has made people money before and will always be better then the most sophisticated chatgpt plagerism website

Make bad art please just make it yourself

honestly the part abt ai art is that separates it from other technological advancements in art is 1. large data sets scraped from the internet with absolutely 0 care or consent given (including private medical records) and 2. a lot of the tech bros pushing it do not care about genuine artist advancements on the technological front, they are lazy and wanna make a quick buck.

like you can see it in their discussions. artists are “elitists” who need to be “taken down a peg” and they need to “make art more accessible” when art has never been more accessible. you can look at millions of pictures for free. there are thousands of tutorials online for free, and many professional level courses for very modest fees. good drawing software is available on the ipad. free drawing software is available on your computer. actual physical art mediums can be expensive but there are budget options and many people willing to teach you how to mix them. but the issue is these tech bros resent the fact it takes time and dedication to make something. the act of creation is a hindrance to them. they think artists are pompous for not working for free for their shitty start ups and scams.

this isnt to say every ai diffusion art model has had bad intentions behind it. many havent. or that any artist who uses it for inspiration or a part of the process is morally bankrupt and hates all art. its just that this is being pushed currently by people who genuinely hate artists and want to see them phased out of society. “why should i pay you when i can have a computer do your job FOR me? you’re obsolete. i’m in control now”. i don’t think artists will ever genuinely be ‘replaced’ with an ai, but these guys sure act like we will be all because some artist told them they have to practice to get better or “no i wont join your nft scam”.

eventually when they realize the diffusion model will never be super wide spread and has many limitations that will require humans to fine tweak they will give up and move on to the next grift. because thats all this is for them: they don’t care about actual improvements to human society, just making the next quick buck. if they cared, they would be upfront about the current limitations of ai art and actual projected improvements and real biases in diffusion models across all professions. like actual, responsible developers do.

i think people rushing to both expand copyright protections AND people who buy into the hype of “artists will be replaced and they are throwing massive tantrums about it what entitled brats” are both jumping the gun and missing the larger points about ai and being kinda stupid about it. there are definitely more ethical questions to be asked outside of the realm of illustration (deepfakes being used for sexual harassment and propaganda, using ai to reject job applications, etc etc), as well as real limitations and ways we have to adapt to this new technology besides “throwing your drawing tablet out the window human being you are now obsolete go get a real job”.