This guy hit the nail on the head in regards to this whole AI art kerfuffle.
(media.kotakuinaction2.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (52)
sorted by:
Where are all the artists backing factory workers put out of the job by machines?
Where are the artists backing ship crew put out of the job by better propulsion devices?
Where are the artsts...And so on.
Oh wait, they don't give a fuck, because they have no integrity.
Yup. They thought they would be “creating” indefinitely while every other occupation was put out of work by automation and AI. Turns out that the “creator” class is probably going to lose their jobs first. It’s hilarious.
Where were the ship crews when factory workers were put out of a job? Were they actually stolen from? You have no consistency.
Not to mention that these are examples of industries that were replaced by superior quality implementations - AI is not superior to the artists that it feeds upon, but it does pose a threat to industry standards and imperatives as stated above with sweeping societal implications, since art is such a broad field to be controlled and monopolized by one demographic of overgrown toddlers in programmer socks.
Artists, in this regard, have the right to protect themselves and I think that the zeigeist should be wary of the longterm implications of their entire psycho-socio-aesthetic biome being delegated by bunker pinkos, especially considering that kotaku in action was about gamergate - you are giving the creative seed to the people who ruined videogames AGAIN (videogames are born of concept art and writing as much as programming). You seem angry at the fact that they're actually succeeding in turning this around, even stranger, no one infringed upon you or asked for your help.
For the aforementioned "junk art" crowd, it is. Because it produces a similar enough product to satisfy the need for a fraction of the cost and time. Digital art was always going to end up devalued like this because it lacks the scarcity value a physical piece has to create an inherent worth.
This was always going to happen eventually, and you will never be able to stop technological progression over some huffing about ethics. So its an entirely moot point regardless.
I concern myself with how these things look further down the line, and I without a doubt think that establishing certain protections is absolutely necessary. I have warned my peers for years but nobody listened - they got off on platitudes "oh our work has soul!" - turns out, good work isn't as in demand as they thought. Cat is mostly out of the bag and they have been Johnny Come-Latelys' about it. I welcome the death of the casual smut artist.
Maybe. I think there are other ways to protect your work, or even collaborate in some way to feed a machine within one's own art collective and lease its use. As for junk art, I fear that junk art is king - it will continue to be king and the world will be uglier for it and I have my reasons for hating this.
I do sincerely believe that aesthetics have an effect on cohesion, and by proxy, epigenetics. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5599588/
Above is a study done adjacent to the rat utopia to give you a picture of what I mean, in that spiteful mutations when introduced to homogenous populations ruins social hierarchies - and likewise has numerous biochemical repercussions, such as the lowering of testosterone. It's a terrifying thing to know how these things interconnect and how little people actually care. Aesthetics make no small difference either because they are what we collectively value, we are in this sense under the indelible influence of our surroundings. Art is the thing that all kingdoms and empires have left behind as their greatest treasures - what succeeds us? Trash. I plan to dig up some papers on that tonight because there is something to be said about it in relation to this - namely the affect that hierarchies can have on the biochemistry of the individual. Context creates people, and I fear the affects of hierarchy created by a constant bombardment of junk and misappropriated skill. I fear the collective culture of art as a profession in the hands of an even nastier commercial gatekeeper.
It's just going to get worse.
About as much as a photo - which also have considerable legal protections and royalties behind them depending on where it is acquired. Also contributing to the inherent worth of a digital piece is the skill and demand of the artist himself, and this sets the stage for how you would arrange a contract. But by in large I think it is just as important to the value of your work that you protect your intellectual property - yet, artists have been foolhardy, posting their shit everywhere and wantonly skimming past the end user agreements. Fools, all of them.
Something like Discord could tomorrow pull the rug out from under them and say "hey, all this shit belongs to us - we're gonna use all of it to create promotional work and you won't see a red cent. Good'ay!" Facebook can do that with family photos if they had the itch, and I think everyone would feel weird about that.
Retard, support everyone or support no-one.
Its called being consistent, something a handshake wouldn't understand.
It's called a false equivalency. Retard. Protecting your intellectual property is very different from the examples given on its own, not only that but no one is asking for your support? Perhaps the argument can be made that it should concern you from my own perspective, but I reiterate, no one infringed upon you or asked for your help. The amount of kvetching your discord group does over this is priceless.
And again with the HURRRRR HANDSHAKE GOYS! I already slapped your shit on this. Keep downvoting pussy, I ain't looking for reddit gold.
Handshake.