#my ai-generated thing I guess | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

lesbiancarat · 1 month

Text

want to give my two cents on the AI usage in the maestro trailer--

i think seventeen doing a whole concept that is anti-AI is very cool, especially as creatives themselves i think it's good that they're speaking up against it and i hope it gets more ppl talking about the issue. i also understand on a surface level the artistic choice (whether it was made by the members, the mv director, or whoever else), to directly use AI in contrast to real, human-made visuals and music in order to criticize it. i also appreciate that they clearly stated the intention of the use of AI at the beginning of the video

however, although i understand it to an extent, i do not agree with the choice to use AI to critique AI. one of the main ethical concerns with generative AI is that it is trained on other artists' work without their knowledge, consent, or compensation. and even when AI generated images are being used to critique AI, it still does not negate this particular ethical concern

the use of AI to critique also does not negate the fact that this is work that could have been done by an actual artist. i have seen some people argue that it's okay in this context because it's a critique specifically about AI, and it is content that never would have been done by a real artist anyway because it doesn't make sense for the story they're trying to tell. but i disagree. i think you can still tell the exact same story without using AI

and in fact, i would argue that it would make the anti-AI message stronger if they HAD paid an artist to draw/animate the scenes that are supposed to represent AI generated images. wouldn't it just be proof that humans can create images that are just as bad and nonsensical and soulless as AI, but that AI can't replicate the creativity and beauty and basic fucking anatomy that's in human-made art?

it feels very obvious this was not just a way to cut corners and costs like a lot of scummy people are using AI for. ultimately it was a very intentional creative decision, i just personally think it was a very poor one. and even if some ethical considerations were taken into account before this decision, i certainly don't think all of them were. at the very least i feel like the decision undermines the message they want to convey

i would also like to recognize that i myself am not an artist, and i have seen some artists that are totally on board with the use of AI in this specific context, so clearly this is not a topic that is cut and dry. but generative AI is still new, and i think it's important to keep having these conversations

#melia.txt #also want to add that as musicians svt are more directly threatened by AI generated audio than they are by AI generated images #and yet AI generated images is what was used in the video #and i guess the MV director/production company are the ones directly responsible for putting that in there #whether it was their initial idea or not #and they work in a visual medium so perhaps that makes it more 'fair' but idk it just feels like #the commentary is around music. which makes sense. and using human produced music/sound #but then taking advantage of AI images #idk just feels weird #i mean i don't like it either way #like i said in the main post i understand the intention behind the creative decision #and i'm still happy svt are speaking against ai at all i do think overall they're doing a good thing here #i just don't agree with the creative decision they/the production company/whoever made #edit: deleted the part about not boycotting svt over this bc ppl were commenting about boycotting bc of the 🛴 stuff #i meant specifically /I/ am not calling for a boycott because of specifically the ai stuff #was just trying to make a general point that im not making this post bc i want to sabatoge svt or whatever #bc kpop fans love to pull that catd whenever u criticize anything #so yeah just removed that bit bc i dont want ppl getting confused what im talking about #respect ppl boycotting because of scooter/israel stuff but thats not what this post was intended to be about #edit 2: turning off reblogs bc im going to bed and having asomewhat controversial post up is not gonna help me sleep well lol #may or my not turn rb's back on in the morning

48 notes · View notes

dwtdog · 3 months

Note

if all this is such an "open secret" then fine. someone leak what happened then. or what? scared dream will debunk you with the receipts he has? like all of these ccs are just as terrible for holding onto that information for so long and now teasing us with that information without the victims consent(assuming there is a victim) all for fucking morality points.

my guess would be that dteam r men who like to fuck around with a variety of women, and realistically some of the women they fuck around with expect more, or don't appreciate dismissal after the fact. obviously total speculation, but it does seem like the kind of baseline douchebaggery that would give them a reputation behind the scenes with nothing concrete to really 'cancel' them for

#cq.asks #saying dteam in general bc they're being dealt with as a group rn i guess #as unfair as ai think that might end up being #and yeah. there are underlying problems with being men in power who can fuck around with little to no repurcussions #but this kind of thing potentially being leveraged at the same time as abuse/sa is just. dumb #but obviously I could be wrong!#but with the lack of info rn this is just my current hypothesis

21 notes · View notes

lunarharp · 1 year

Photo

scribbly first date type affair (continuation of my modern au stuff)

#witch hat tag #orufrey #idk when the next modern au thing will be so i'll just post this by itself. hehe #that art was one of qifrey's first drawings. it was of a creepy eye. (it was around the time he got glasses as a kid)#(and was told that he might lose his sight completely one day so he became an emo because he already wanted to be an artist #like beldaruit who ran his foster home where he encouraged kids to draw art to express their feelings.)#and an insidious deviantart group called The Brimhats idk stole it & reposted it. he never got to the bottom of who exactly did it.#but one day. they will fucking suffer.#(he believes their goal was to develop AI art as they said stuff like 'all art should belong to everyone anyway' & 'there shouldnt be rules'#but actually they were probably just regular mean ppl who have moved on to new things in life than stealing kids' art on deviantart.#who knows though.) i want people to retain their disabilities or general tragedies like beldaruit would be in a wheelchair #and coco's mum is in a coma. but its just so funny if qifrey just has regular bad eyesight #and it's so cute that he would say he doesnt think of beldaruit as a dad & is distant with him but now basically runs a foster home too #where he doesnt just encourage like he was encouraged but actively teaches kids from sad backgrounds to become wonderful artists one day #anyway i am so fucking hungry now goodbye #P.S. BELDARUIT IS NOT OLD !!!!!!! i mean if qifrey is late 20s or older in canon like i want... i guess he..but.... NO !!!!!! 😭#*edits in some follow-up drawings*#oru: i couldn't c-c-confess my feelings bc it always seems like he's worried about something..i shouldnt bother him..#qif: *always worried about how to confess his feelings*#ive decided meeting at 7 on da is kind of ridiculous actually. i think they probably meet at like age 10 in canon..not immediately =_=#since beru-sama is like 'he finally found a friend'. whatever... this'll be my last art post for a while probably so see ya <3

135 notes · View notes

scarletfasinera · 1 year

Text

This was said by someone who confidently declared that a hand-painted sci-fi art piece from the 70s made by a human artist was AI art and therefore bad, and then was proven wrong about it being AI-generated. I wonder what this says about your views of artists and art in general as a subject actually.

#txt #In case it isn't clear I think OP is stupid #Don't pretend to care about artists if you're just going to insult them #and don't pretend to care about artists if you're just going to try to “gotcha” every single artist you see #especially if it's just on the basis of “I don't like this art so it MUST be AI generated” which seems to be most people's basis #from what I've seen #and is just...such a stupid and cynical way to engage with art.#but also like there's NO REASON to get so mad about random peers on the internet using AI as the tool that it is meant to be #Like get over it #You're not actually great at recognizing “real human soul” or whatever because souls don't exist #So. Deal with that I guess.#“No war but class war” and all that you know?#You will soon realise that the problem is Capitalism and not your working class peers. If you take my hand you will see #⌨️#EDIT (Feb 2024): “Stupid” isn't a good thing to call someone who disagrees with me. I think OP is *silly.*

69 notes · View notes

mayordoi · 3 months

Text

teeny tiny announcement but i am on sheezy. im very slowly making it through my backlog due to the daily posting limit, but i look forward to this place being my new portfolio-hosting ish site. plus i might use it to post sketches and oc stuff in the future once i catch up and get more used to it

(ill still be updating my artfol for similar purposes since that place will have more of my art, plus i have heard that this website has had financial troubles in the past and no sure guarantee it will be around for long)

its still in a beta-testing phase and registration is limited for now, so no pressure to join if youve never heard of it (i know it’s art posting platform 5 billion that ppl are dispersing to in light of tumblr’s newest policies). however ive been keepin my eye on this place for a while, so me joining around this odd time in tumblr history is more or less a coincidence 😅

its still a bit dry for now, but just wanted to get this out there regardless :>

#not art #regarding the whole tumblr and ai thing…… to be honest im sort of ambivalent compared to most #dont like how out of nowhere it was and how it was opt out rather than the other way around #but idk the chicken is already in the nugget as they say so c’est la vie #ive had a feeling my art has already been scraped for ai anyway and i wont lie i guess im a little curious to see how its affected #the outputs if at all #i doubt its done much since i dont think its categorized/ labeled in a way that would be helpful for generators #which is further reason why i kind of dont care that much. lol #i still opted out anyway but still. wont let this lower my morale ^__^ i dont plan on leaving tumblr any time soon!#apologies for the ramble. just needed to get that out of my system

4 notes · View notes

myrfing · 5 months

Text

i cant even just commission random artists for Drawing I Want it always has to be specific artist with their specific style and specific sensitivities. this is the problem i open skeb fp & I’m like no…no….backing away. none of these

#in my brain it’s like dont you commission artists FOR their particular style and their way of interpreting things.#but maybe this is just because i can make images with my hands to some extent #like those commission horror stories where someone asks a random artist to draw for them but theyre like #hoping for a completely different more generic higher sex appeal style than the artist draws in #so they keep asking for changes that are basically like. dont draw in your style.#i guess ai is filling that niche now

5 notes · View notes

buildarocketboys · 1 year

Text

Ugh the woman on the table next to me at nandos is talking about writing a book with AI, like she sounds like she's actually writing a book with AI and planning to try and publish it (lol good luck with that), meanwhile, I'm sat here like 😡😡😡

#she's also never been to a nandos before and didn't know that it was mainly famous for its chicken 🙄#how middle class can you get #she also keeps saying really dumb things and the guy who's with her is patiently explaining things to her #she was like 'I love my job but I have other interests as well' (hence the AI novel I guess)#like me too bitch maybe try writing a book the old fashioned way? If you actually like writing??#that way you've actually put your own effort and ideas into it and aren't just stealing other people's words/#putting together something really generic

13 notes · View notes

lesflaya · 8 months

Text

The "there are no more original ideas" crowd has really messed with people's perception of fiction huh

#im going to explode #yea ok whatever theres no original ideas sure but like u cant just say that sentence as if that's all and there's nothing that comes after #like im specifically talking about other creatives here especially this one post i saw a few days ago abt ai and how using it to generate #ideas is no different from doing that urself #its like no. it's just harder to do it urself #the brain is infinitely more complex than any machine we could make (especially ones so primitive in design like MJ etc) that you can't #possibly make something as cool in an ai that you can in your own brain #the reason its so hard is because the software you're using (your brain) is so complex.#anyway tho like #there's no original ideas sure but that's why making something that feels original despite it not being is so special #atla makes you feel like bending isn't magic when - yeah its literally just magic everyone has magic #madoka magica doesn't feel like it was based off of an old european play. bc it was mixed with a material soooo different from it #i hate it pls creatives if you want to make things that are good and interesting you can't cut corners you can't hate the process!!#do smth else then like. or just do it as a hobby i guess. u cant make interesting art if you aren't interested enough in it to give -#it any thought or time #uhg #madi.txt #grinds my damn gears bro im screaming crying throwing up

3 notes · View notes

witchern · 1 year

Text

i didn't realize complete and utter fucking dipshits were allowed to write for forbes magazine these days

#*t #like. i don't even know where to begin with this one.#it starts with the concept of the 'side hustle' and ends with 'wait for the royalties to roll in'#like lmao bitch. tell me you don't know a thing about publishing without saying you don't know a thing about publishing.#'cash in on this opportunity' GIRL DO YOU THINK ALL WRITERS ARE MAKING MILLIONS #ALSO something about the casual 'you can hire ghostwriters and editors to complete and polish your work'—#my gal you are one ill-placed step away from flat-out saying 'let an AI do the writing'#like. idk man. i don't want it to come across like i'm gatekeeping or some stupid shit like that #so lemme put it this way: i will ALWAYS have INFINITELY more respect for a mediocre writer who puts their passion and heart into their work #than for some 'perfectly marketed' book generated by a soulless tech asshole who plugged some keywords into an AI and hit 'send'#people who write from the heart and put their work out there for hundreds to see #are braver than any silicon valley fuckstain at any startup on any given day. change my mind. you can't.#ANYWAY. sorry. here's gabby's rant of the day i guess aklsjdfha

5 notes · View notes

neon-moon-beam · 2 years

Photo

Giratina Goes To KMart

#Pokemon #Giratina #I think KMart is pretty much dead now...there's very few locations left #Giratina goes to the KMart in the Distortion World #tw: unreality #dalle mini #my ai-generated thing I guess

7 notes · View notes

jaeharu26 · 1 year

Video

youtube

#If this loses as transformative this can do just as much damage to artists and art as if it wins #it's very interesting #will the copyright laws have to go under reform of what transformative qualifies as and specifically exclude ai generated imagery?#but how can that even be upheld?#still don't think everything throwing hissy fits like they were and clogging up feeds with banners does shit besides be annoying #and i doubt those people have thought once about the law around copyright that currently protects them #very interesting #guess we'll see how this all plays out #either way ai is still done and here #and it could still be a very good thing for a pipeline #but yeah #it really does feel like it's a matter of the lesser evil #in case of this lawsuit #either win is still a bit of a loss and a risk to open up doors on either side #i remain neutral #the nerd in me thinks it's cool as shit that they got it to do guesswork so well with the noise #and the artist in me appreciates good art #so meh #the driving point in my own art has always been to learn #not to make money anyway #not like my finances will change either way #or my desire to make art #or learn it #but it is absolutely fascinating from a legal standpoint #and oh so tricky

2 notes · View notes

furrama · 1 year

Text

*glares at clip studio like one would a dog that is lifting its leg to pee on the carpet*

#they're going to put an AI image generator in the next update #It uses a model that scraped the internet for images without permission #Same as DeviantArt's tool #they're all Oh but we didn't steal or scrape #Yeah dA said the same thing and now it's a bigger ghost town than ever #And rightly so #Guess I'm never getting that last free update #Maybe I should seriously think about traditional again #Because what am I supposed to do when my computer gets old

4 notes · View notes

pumpkinspiceshiplover · 2 months

Text

If you're ever bored, be a jerk to an AI. (Like chat.gpt,etc) I promise the responses will be a little a little entertaining 😉

#original #have a good day #i was bored #random post #chatgpt #ai generated #things to fo when bored #boredom #fun ideas #funny shit #idk what to tag this as #just a chill Friday #i guess #low-key my mental health sucks right now #calling everybody #my posts #tumblr fyp

0 notes

phantomrose96 · 3 months

Text

The conversation around AI is going to get away from us quickly because people lack the language to distinguish types of AI--and it's not their fault. Companies love to slap "AI" on anything they believe can pass for something "intelligent" a computer program is doing. And this muddies the waters when people want to talk about AI when the exact same word covers a wide umbrella and they themselves don't know how to qualify the distinctions within.

I'm a software engineer and not a data scientist, so I'm not exactly at the level of domain expert. But I work with data scientists, and I have at least rudimentary college-level knowledge of machine learning and linear algebra from my CS degree. So I want to give some quick guidance.

What is AI? And what is not AI?

So what's the difference between just a computer program, and an "AI" program? Computers can do a lot of smart things, and companies love the idea of calling anything that seems smart enough "AI", but industry-wise the question of "how smart" a program is has nothing to do with whether it is AI.

A regular, non-AI computer program is procedural, and rigidly defined. I could "program" traffic light behavior that essentially goes { if(light === green) { go(); } else { stop();} }. I've told it in simple and rigid terms what condition to check, and how to behave based on that check. (A better program would have a lot more to check for, like signs and road conditions and pedestrians in the street, and those things will still need to be spelled out.)

An AI traffic light behavior is generated by machine-learning, which simplistically is a huge cranking machine of linear algebra which you feed training data into and it "learns" from. By "learning" I mean it's developing a complex and opaque model of parameters to fit the training data (but not over-fit). In this case the training data probably includes thousands of videos of car behavior at traffic intersections. Through parameter tweaking and model adjustment, data scientists will turn this crank over and over adjusting it to create something which, in very opaque terms, has developed a model that will guess the right behavioral output for any future scenario.

A well-trained model would be fed a green light and know to go, and a red light and know to stop, and 'green but there's a kid in the road' and know to stop. A very very well-trained model can probably do this better than my program above, because it has the capacity to be more adaptive than my rigidly-defined thing if the rigidly-defined program is missing some considerations. But if the AI model makes a wrong choice, it is significantly harder to trace down why exactly it did that.

Because again, the reason it's making this decision may be very opaque. It's like engineering a very specific plinko machine which gets tweaked to be very good at taking a road input and giving the right output. But like if that plinko machine contained millions of pegs and none of them necessarily correlated to anything to do with the road. There's possibly no "if green, go, else stop" to look for. (Maybe there is, for traffic light specifically as that is intentionally very simplistic. But a model trained to recognize written numbers for example likely contains no parameters at all that you could map to ideas a human has like "look for a rigid line in the number". The parameters may be all, to humans, meaningless.)

So, that's basics. Here are some categories of things which get called AI:

"AI" which is just genuinely not AI

There's plenty of software that follows a normal, procedural program defined rigidly, with no linear algebra model training, that companies would love to brand as "AI" because it sounds cool.

Something like motion detection/tracking might be sold as artificially intelligent. But under the covers that can be done as simply as "if some range of pixels changes color by a certain amount, flag as motion"

2. AI which IS genuinely AI, but is not the kind of AI everyone is talking about right now

"AI", by which I mean machine learning using linear algebra, is very good at being fed a lot of training data, and then coming up with an ability to go and categorize real information.

The AI technology that looks at cells and determines whether they're cancer or not, that is using this technology. OCR (Optical Character Recognition) is the technology that can take an image of hand-written text and transcribe it. Again, it's using linear algebra, so yes it's AI.

Many other such examples exist, and have been around for quite a good number of years. They share the genre of technology, which is machine learning models, but these are not the Large Language Model Generative AI that is all over the media. Criticizing these would be like criticizing airplanes when you're actually mad at military drones. It's the same "makes fly in the air" technology but their impact is very different.

3. The AI we ARE talking about. "Chat-gpt" type of Generative AI which uses LLMs ("Large Language Models")

If there was one word I wish people would know in all this, it's LLM (Large Language Model). This describes the KIND of machine learning model that Chat-GPT/midjourney/stablediffusion are fueled by. They're so extremely powerfully trained on human language that they can take an input of conversational language and create a predictive output that is human coherent. (I am less certain what additional technology fuels art-creation, specifically, but considering the AI art generation has risen hand-in-hand with the advent of powerful LLM, I'm at least confident in saying it is still corely LLM).

This technology isn't exactly brand new (predictive text has been using it, but more like the mostly innocent and much less successful older sibling of some celebrity, who no one really thinks about.) But the scale and power of LLM-based AI technology is what is new with Chat-GPT.

This is the generative AI, and even better, the large language model generative AI.

(Data scientists, feel free to add on or correct anything.)

#chrissy speaks

3K notes · View notes

imsobadatnicknames2 · 1 month

Note

How can you consider yourself any sort of leftist when you defend AI art bullshit? You literally simp for AI techbros and have the gall to pretend you're against big corporations?? Get fucked

I don't "defend" AI art. I think a particular old post of mine that a lot of people tend to read in bad faith must be making the rounds again lmao.

Took me a good while to reply to this because you know what? I decided to make something positive out of this and use this as an opportunity to outline what I ACTUALLY believe about AI art. If anyone seeing this decides to read it in good or bad faith... Welp, your choice I guess.

I have several criticisms of the way the proliferation of AI art generators and LLMs is making a lot of things worse. Some of these are things I have voiced in the past, some of these are things I haven't until now:

Most image and text AI generators are fine-tuned to produce nothing but the most agreeable, generically pretty content slop, pretty much immediately squandering their potential to be used as genuinely interesting artistic tools with anything to offer in terms of a unique aesthetic experience (AI video still manages to look bizarre and interesting but it's getting there too)

In the entertainment industry and a lot of other fields, AI image generation is getting incorporated into production pipelines in ways that lead to the immiseration of working artists, being used to justify either lower wages or straight-up layoffs, and this is something that needs to be fought against. That's why I unconditionally supported the SAG-AFTRA strikes last year and will unconditionally support any collective action to address AI art as a concrete labor issue

In most fields where it's being integrated, AI art is vastly inferior to human artists in any use case where you need anything other than to make a superficially pretty picture really fast. If you need to do anything like ask for revisions or minor corrections, give very specific descriptions of how objects and people are interacting with each other, or just like. generate several pictures of the same thing and have them stay consistent with each other, you NEED human artists and it's preposterous to think they can be replaced by AI.

There is a lot of art on the internet that consists of the most generically pretty, cookie-cutter anime waifu-adjacent slop that has zero artistic or emotional value to either the people seeing it or the person churning it out, and while this certainly was A Thing before the advent of AI art generators, generative AI has made it extremely easy to become the kind of person who churns it out and floods online art spaces with it.

Similarly, LLMs make it extremely easy to generate massive volumes of texts, pages, articles, listicles and what have you that are generic vapid SEO-friendly pap at best and bizzarre nonsense misinformation at worst, drowning useful information in a sea of vapid noise and rendering internet searches increasingly useless.

The way LLMs are being incorporated into customer service and similar services not only, again, encourages further immiseration of customer service workers, but it's also completely useless for most customers.

A very annoyingly vocal part the population of AI art enthusiasts, fanatics and promoters do tend to talk about it in a way that directly or indirectly demeans the merit and skill of human artists and implies that they think of anyone who sees anything worthwile in the process of creation itself rather than the end product as stupid or deluded.

So you can probably tell by now that I don't hold AI art or writing in very high regard. However (and here's the part that'll get me called an AI techbro, or get people telling me that I'm just jealous of REAL artists because I lack the drive to create art of my own, or whatever else) I do have some criticisms of the way people have been responding to it, and have voiced such criticisms in the past.

I think a lot of the opposition to AI art has critstallized around unexamined gut reactions, whipping up a moral panic, and pressure to outwardly display an acceptable level of disdain for it. And in particular I think this climate has made a lot of people very prone to either uncritically entertain and adopt regressive ideas about Intellectual Propety, OR reveal previously held regressive ideas about Intellectual Property that are now suddenly more socially acceptable to express:

(I wanna preface this section by stating that I'm a staunch intellectual property abolitionist for the same reason I'm a private property abolitionist. If you think the existence of intellectual property is a good thing, a lot of my ideas about a lot of stuff are gonna be unpalatable to you. Not much I can do about it.)

A lot of people are suddenly throwing their support behind any proposal that promises stricter copyright regulations to combat AI art, when a lot of these also have the potential to severely udnermine fair use laws and fuck over a lot of independent artist for the benefit of big companies.

It was very worrying to see a lot of fanfic authors in particular clap for the George R R Martin OpenAI lawsuit because well... a lot of them don't realize that fanfic is a hobby that's in a position that's VERY legally precarious at best, that legally speaking using someone else's characters in your fanfic is as much of a violation of copyright law as straight up stealing entire passages, and that any regulation that can be used against the latter can be extended against the former.

Similarly, a lot of artists were cheering for the lawsuit against AI art models trained to mimic the style of specific artists. Which I agree is an extremely scummy thing to do (just like a human artist making a living from ripping off someone else's work is also extremely scummy), but I don't think every scummy act necessarily needs to be punishable by law, and some of them would in fact leave people worse off if they were. All this to say: If you are an artist, and ESPECIALLY a fan artist, trust me. You DON'T wanna live in a world where there's precedent for people's artstyles to be considered intellectual property in any legally enforceable way. I know you wanna hurt AI art people but this is one avenue that's not worth it.

Especially worrying to me as an indie musician has been to see people mention the strict copyright laws of the music industry as a positive thing that they wanna emulate. "this would never happen in the music industry because they value their artists copyright" idk maybe this is a the grass is greener type of situation but I'm telling you, you DON'T wanna live in a world where copyright law in the visual arts world works the way it does in the music industry. It's not worth it.

I've seen at least one person compare AI art model training to music sampling and say "there's a reason why they cracked down on sampling" as if the death of sampling due to stricter copyright laws was a good thing and not literally one of the worst things to happen in the history of music which nearly destroyed several primarily black music genres. Of course this is anecdotal because it's just One Guy I Saw Once, but you can see what I mean about how uncritical support for copyright law as a tool against AI can lead people to adopt increasingly regressive ideas about copyright.

Similarly, I've seen at least one person go "you know what? Collages should be considered art theft too, fuck you" over an argument where someone else compared AI art to collages. Again, same point as above.

Similarly, I take issue with the way a lot of people seem EXTREMELY personally invested in proving AI art is Not Real Art. I not only find this discussion unproductive, but also similarly dangerously prone to validating very reactionary ideas about The Nature Of Art that shouldn't really be entertained. Also it's a discussion rife with intellectual dishonesty and unevenly applied definition and standards.

When a lot of people present the argument of AI art not being art because the definition of art is this and that, they try to pretend that this is the definition of art the've always operated under and believed in, even when a lot of the time it's blatantly obvious that they're constructing their definition on the spot and deliberately trying to do so in such a way that it doesn't include AI art.

They never succeed at it, btw. I've seen several dozen different "AI art isn't art because art is [definition]". I've seen exactly zero of those where trying to seriously apply that definition in any context outside of trying to prove AI art isn't art doesn't end up in it accidentally excluding one or more non-AI artforms, usually reflecting the author's blindspots with regard to the different forms of artistic expression.

(However, this is moot because, again, these are rarely definitions that these people actually believe in or adhere to outside of trying to win "Is AI art real art?" discussions.)

Especially worrying when the definition they construct is built around stuff like Effort or Skill or Dedication or The Divine Human Spirit. You would not be happy about the kinds of art that have traditionally been excluded from Real Art using similar definitions.

Seriously when everyone was celebrating that the Catholic Church came out to say AI art isn't real art and sharing it as if it was validating and not Extremely Worrying that the arguments they'd been using against AI art sounded nearly identical to things TradCaths believe I was like. Well alright :T You can make all the "I never thought I'd die fighting side by side with a catholic" legolas and gimli memes you want, but it won't change the fact that the argument being made by the catholic church was a profoundly conservative one and nearly identical to arguments used to dismiss the artistic merit of certain forms of "degenerate" art and everyone was just uncritically sharing it, completely unconcerned with what kind of worldview they were lending validity to by sharing it.

Remember when the discourse about the Gay Sex cats pic was going on? One of the things I remember the most from that time was when someone went "Tell me a definition of art that excludes this picture without also excluding Fountain by Duchamp" and how just. Literally no one was able to do it. A LOT of people tried to argue some variation of "Well, Fountain is art and this image isn't because what turns fountain into art is Intent. Duchamp's choice to show a urinal at an art gallery as if it was art confers it an element of artistic intent that this image lacks" when like. Didn't by that same logic OP's choice to post the image on tumblr as if it was art also confer it artistic intent in the same way? Didn't that argument actually kinda end up accidentally validating the artistic status of every piece of AI art ever posted on social media? That moment it clicked for me that a lot of these definitions require applying certain concepts extremely selectively in order to make sense for the people using them.

A lot of people also try to argue it isn't Real Art based on the fact that most AI art is vapid but like. If being vapid definitionally excludes something from being art you're going to have to exclude a whooole lot of stuff along with it. AI art is vapid. A lot of art is too, I don't think this argument works either.

Like, look, I'm not really invested in trying to argue in favor of The Artistic Merits of AI art but I also find it extremely hard to ignore how trying to categorically define AI art as Not Real Art not only is unproductive but also requires either a) applying certain parts of your definition of art extremely selectively, b) constructing a definition of art so convoluted and full of weird caveats as to be functionally useless, or c) validating extremely reactionary conservative ideas about what Real Art is.

Some stray thoughts that don't fit any of the above sections.

I've occassionally seen people respond to AI art being used for shitposts like "A lot of people have affordable commissions, you could have paid someone like $30 to draw this for you instead of using the plagiarism algorithm and exploiting the work of real artists" and sorry but if you consider paying an artist a rate that amounts to like $5 for several hours of work a LESS exploitative alternative I think you've got something fucked up going on with your priorities.

Also it's kinda funny when people comment on the aforementioned shitposts with some variation of "see, the usage of AI art robs it of all humor because the thing that makes shitposts funny is when you consider the fact that someone would spend so much time and effort in something so stupid" because like. Yeah that is part of the humor SOMETIMES but also people share and laugh at low effort shitposts all the time. Again you're constructing a definition that you don't actually believe in anywhere outside of this type of conversations. Just say you don't like that it's AI art because you think it's morally wrong and stop being disingenuous.

So yeah, this is pretty much everything I believe about the topic.

I don't "defend" AI art, but my opposition to it is firmly rooted in my principles, and that means I refuse to uncritically accept any anti-AI art argument that goes against those same principles.

If you think not accepting and parroting every Anti-AI art argument I encounter because some of them are ideologically rooted in things I disagree with makes me indistinguishable from "AI techbros" you're working under a fucked up dichotomy.

2K notes · View notes