So is 99% of all so-called art anyway. The internet has been stuffed to bursting with mediocre scribblers demanding hundreds of dollars for "commissions" for years now, and it's the kind of crap middle schoolers can draw. And they are also the exact same damn people who deride, derogate and destroy real art all across the planet.
AI grinding those people to dust? Good. Bring on the tears. These wannabe Bohemian fucks might finally get real jobs for once.
This is the real Pandora's box that most people aren't considering, but then they weren't thinking creatures to begin with. Anyone with two brain cells to rub together should be alarmed at the prospect of what this is going to do in terms of destroying our ability to record history and accurately model reality.
These days teachers prepare their lessons using AI tools. Students cheat, and hand in homework generated by AI tools. Then Teachers use AI tools to assist in their marking and detect the use of AI tools.
We wrote prose and essays in high school so we could learn the skills of being able to read, apply critical analysis and then write well crafted and coherently on the subject.
Now we can have AI voices read it to us, then fat finger a prompt to have a large language model write about it.
AI is just about at genius level for rationalization. If you give it a set of absolute facts, it will craft everything it produces around those fixed points. Those immutable assumptions can be anything: George Washington was a proud black man; Austin Texas is the greatest city on earth. Islam was right about women.
Students outsourcing the labor of learning facts and skills will catch on faster than viral Tic Tock videos. We will be raising a generation of drooling morons that believe anything their phone tells them. History will be whatever our silicon valley overlords say it should be.
I mean we already are there. Half the gay shit the people on this entire website believe is fake. And it doesn't even need AI, people believe what supports their opinions.
Do you know how many times I've heard conspiracy faggotry about the Vegas shooting that uses an argument like "OMG are we supposed to believe he removed hurricane grade windows by himself"?
Hurricane grade glass isn't a rating. In order to determine how strong the glass was youd need to actually source the glass contractor and what was purchased and get the technical specifications for it.
Do you think even one fucking person, anywhere, ever, has even attempted to find out what sort of glass was on the Mandaly Bay? Lol fuck no. These people just invent gay fucking shit and they think "hurricane grade" sounds right, and it fools similar idiots who also 'want to believe', and just like that it becomes "fact".
They even released the video of him in the lobby and elevator pushing a luggage cart with like twenty giant bags on it.
And he was paying for an expensive room, they aren't going to question it.
And it's Vegas, a city with tons of industrial conventions all the time, it's entirely within reason for a guy to have tons of bags if it contains product for a trade show.
Am I saying something about him didn't stink? No, if his whole plan was a shooting, to a rational person, his setup made no sense. Too many rifles all with odd configurations (no irons or optics on many, like they come from the factory). But again we're talking "to a rational mind".
But I've always been skeptical of nearly all conspiracy theories, and it really is as simple as this: Treat every conspiracy theory with the same level of detail and skepticism as the theorists treat the official story.
Remember Harrison Deal, the guy in Georgia? If the official story was that his car was blown up by a bomb, everyone would be talking about how the damage on the car doesn't look like a bomb, there was no debris field, there was strange damage that "folded" the Jeep, and the bodywork was still attached. People would compare it to pictures of real vehicle bombings showing pieces of bodywork sprayed all over the place.
In other words "nothing about this looks like a bomb". But because the official story was a car crash, suddenly it became a bomb even though the damage makes no sense for it to be a bomb (along with other things like inventing the lie that "the engine was 300 yards away", but you can see the front end of the vehicle was basically intact).
Conspiracy: "GARY WEBB WAS KILLED BECAUSE HE BROKE IRAN-CONTRA!"
Reality: Congress is who broke Iran Contra. Webb wrote a book years later. And he died years after the book. Also you can still buy the book... Who the fuck covers up a story that's already public?
Conspiracy: "MICHAEL HASTINGS WAS KILLED BECAUSE HE WAS GOING TO TELL THE TRUTH ABOUT THE IRAQ WAR!"
Reality: Hastings was a shitlib who sandbagged a very popular General who was critical of Obama and the Iraq war and got him fired. Both Congress and the British Parliament broke the story of the Iraq Dossier. And just like Webb, he wrote the books after the story was already public, he died long after they were written, and you can still buy them.
Also in the cases of both, not a single person who knew them really doubted the official narrative. Webb was in a downward spiral for years and his life was falling apart. Everyone who knew Hastings suggested he had a substance abuse problem.
The dumbest is "Chris Cornell was going to write a story exposing Hollywood pedophiles". Lmao literally never, not once, did he ever even suggest that that was anything he was doing.
it's another method of creating a vision you have in your head.
Except when it's a literal copy of something that previously existed. Tools actually allow you to express anything. These models, by virtue of how they're built, can't.
and the entire idea that reality wasn't like that will be erased
Except for all the primary and secondary evidence that runs counter to it. As if forgeries are a new problem.
Or do you mean literally erased. Which you'd have to do because people aren't as simple as you portray them to be. In which case the hallucinations of "AI" don't matter, it's just the erasure of history. Why is why that's the centerpiece of Orwell's 1984.
In 30 years, everyone will believe
You're confusing what we have now as AI. You have a weak grasp on the technology if you think a 30 year timeline is realistic to get from here to there. You've been beguiled and stultified by bad technology and have fallen into this midwit's trap. You mispredict the future badly and entirely at your own peril.
This is why the spend billions on the technology. Is so that you self select yourself out of a job and cede ground to them. They've won your slavery without even a fight.
Except when it's a literal copy of something that previously existed.
It isn't a copy. That isn't how that works. Deep Learning Neural Networks don't contain a library of images.
They are trained with a library of images, which is then taken away.
Convolutional Neural Networks play the Hot and Cold game for head-pats.
The training environment gives the Neural Network a prompt. For example "Draw a squid."
The NN does its best to draw a squid. The result is compared to one of the training images from the library of squid images. The NN is awarded head-pats accordingly.
This repeats thousands or millions of times.
A well trained AI can do things like drawing a well known character as though they were a squid which will combine their ability to satisfy both sets of criteria at the same time.
Like it or not, that image has never been created before.
That's not a serious description and demonstrates a poor grasp on the underlying technology. It's guided recursive perturbation of noise. Until that noise looks enough like something it's seen before to become classified as the same.
Anyone else would call this copying with a little bit of randomness added in. You should really dig a little deeper here.
Anyways try the exclusive case. Have it draw something that has never been classified before. You can look around for items of antiquity or lost cultures and see how it fares. Since it can't do these things it obviously only can do things it has seen and have been classified. So it can only reproduce what it has been trained on. This is obvious.
which will combine their ability to satisfy both sets of criteria at the same time.
Wow, so it combined two copies into one thing? That's still copying.
It is vaguely impressive that preturbative systems are effective at quickly finding approximate solutions. Which is why "satisfying both sets of criteria" means you get 7 fingered hands and other oddities expressed in the image. Add more criteria for more fun.
You're really just playing Monte Carlo on a stolen deck of classifications. To be fair, Google did pay a bunch of africans $2/day to tag the images, so there is some originality in the database, but very little.
that image has never been created before.
Fortunately that's now how copyright works or how copying is defined in the eyes of the law.
AI image creators are fantastic for whipping up character icons for RPG's. I don't care if they're kind of wonky, search engines fucking suck now, and I'm not paying hundreds of dollars and waiting several weeks to commission anything.
On purpose. The same companies that own this technology own search engines. They broke the algorithm and destroyed result quality on purpose. Their only metric now is "time spent on Google." They don't care about the rest anymore.
and I'm not paying hundreds of dollars and waiting several weeks to commission anything.
For your.. rpg character icon? Is that like a huge market or something?
For your.. rpg character icon? Is that like a huge market or something?
No clue. Just listing what my options are if I want artwork for something. It's either steal it online, commission it, use AI... or learn to draw myself. Of those, AI is the easiest.
Legal wages for a twelve year old are about $8 an hour around here. She was paid for about two and a half hours of her time, which is about what I estimate she spent.
But thanks for implying that I am a exploitive jerk.
AI art is soulless and derivative, I find nothing it makes to be of much interest at all.
But I'm willing to pretend otherwise to piss artists off, as a group they come across as wholly petulant and entitled.
So is 99% of all so-called art anyway. The internet has been stuffed to bursting with mediocre scribblers demanding hundreds of dollars for "commissions" for years now, and it's the kind of crap middle schoolers can draw. And they are also the exact same damn people who deride, derogate and destroy real art all across the planet.
AI grinding those people to dust? Good. Bring on the tears. These wannabe Bohemian fucks might finally get real jobs for once.
This is the real Pandora's box that most people aren't considering, but then they weren't thinking creatures to begin with. Anyone with two brain cells to rub together should be alarmed at the prospect of what this is going to do in terms of destroying our ability to record history and accurately model reality.
Rewriting history is truly the real peril.
These days teachers prepare their lessons using AI tools. Students cheat, and hand in homework generated by AI tools. Then Teachers use AI tools to assist in their marking and detect the use of AI tools.
We wrote prose and essays in high school so we could learn the skills of being able to read, apply critical analysis and then write well crafted and coherently on the subject.
Now we can have AI voices read it to us, then fat finger a prompt to have a large language model write about it.
AI is just about at genius level for rationalization. If you give it a set of absolute facts, it will craft everything it produces around those fixed points. Those immutable assumptions can be anything: George Washington was a proud black man; Austin Texas is the greatest city on earth. Islam was right about women.
Students outsourcing the labor of learning facts and skills will catch on faster than viral Tic Tock videos. We will be raising a generation of drooling morons that believe anything their phone tells them. History will be whatever our silicon valley overlords say it should be.
This is truly a Pandora's box.
I mean we already are there. Half the gay shit the people on this entire website believe is fake. And it doesn't even need AI, people believe what supports their opinions.
Do you know how many times I've heard conspiracy faggotry about the Vegas shooting that uses an argument like "OMG are we supposed to believe he removed hurricane grade windows by himself"?
Hurricane grade glass isn't a rating. In order to determine how strong the glass was youd need to actually source the glass contractor and what was purchased and get the technical specifications for it.
Do you think even one fucking person, anywhere, ever, has even attempted to find out what sort of glass was on the Mandaly Bay? Lol fuck no. These people just invent gay fucking shit and they think "hurricane grade" sounds right, and it fools similar idiots who also 'want to believe', and just like that it becomes "fact".
AI hardly changes fuck all in that regard.
They even released the video of him in the lobby and elevator pushing a luggage cart with like twenty giant bags on it.
And he was paying for an expensive room, they aren't going to question it.
And it's Vegas, a city with tons of industrial conventions all the time, it's entirely within reason for a guy to have tons of bags if it contains product for a trade show.
Am I saying something about him didn't stink? No, if his whole plan was a shooting, to a rational person, his setup made no sense. Too many rifles all with odd configurations (no irons or optics on many, like they come from the factory). But again we're talking "to a rational mind".
But I've always been skeptical of nearly all conspiracy theories, and it really is as simple as this: Treat every conspiracy theory with the same level of detail and skepticism as the theorists treat the official story.
Remember Harrison Deal, the guy in Georgia? If the official story was that his car was blown up by a bomb, everyone would be talking about how the damage on the car doesn't look like a bomb, there was no debris field, there was strange damage that "folded" the Jeep, and the bodywork was still attached. People would compare it to pictures of real vehicle bombings showing pieces of bodywork sprayed all over the place.
In other words "nothing about this looks like a bomb". But because the official story was a car crash, suddenly it became a bomb even though the damage makes no sense for it to be a bomb (along with other things like inventing the lie that "the engine was 300 yards away", but you can see the front end of the vehicle was basically intact).
Conspiracy: "GARY WEBB WAS KILLED BECAUSE HE BROKE IRAN-CONTRA!"
Reality: Congress is who broke Iran Contra. Webb wrote a book years later. And he died years after the book. Also you can still buy the book... Who the fuck covers up a story that's already public?
Conspiracy: "MICHAEL HASTINGS WAS KILLED BECAUSE HE WAS GOING TO TELL THE TRUTH ABOUT THE IRAQ WAR!"
Reality: Hastings was a shitlib who sandbagged a very popular General who was critical of Obama and the Iraq war and got him fired. Both Congress and the British Parliament broke the story of the Iraq Dossier. And just like Webb, he wrote the books after the story was already public, he died long after they were written, and you can still buy them.
Also in the cases of both, not a single person who knew them really doubted the official narrative. Webb was in a downward spiral for years and his life was falling apart. Everyone who knew Hastings suggested he had a substance abuse problem.
The dumbest is "Chris Cornell was going to write a story exposing Hollywood pedophiles". Lmao literally never, not once, did he ever even suggest that that was anything he was doing.
Except when it's a literal copy of something that previously existed. Tools actually allow you to express anything. These models, by virtue of how they're built, can't.
Except for all the primary and secondary evidence that runs counter to it. As if forgeries are a new problem.
Or do you mean literally erased. Which you'd have to do because people aren't as simple as you portray them to be. In which case the hallucinations of "AI" don't matter, it's just the erasure of history. Why is why that's the centerpiece of Orwell's 1984.
You're confusing what we have now as AI. You have a weak grasp on the technology if you think a 30 year timeline is realistic to get from here to there. You've been beguiled and stultified by bad technology and have fallen into this midwit's trap. You mispredict the future badly and entirely at your own peril.
This is why the spend billions on the technology. Is so that you self select yourself out of a job and cede ground to them. They've won your slavery without even a fight.
It isn't a copy. That isn't how that works. Deep Learning Neural Networks don't contain a library of images.
They are trained with a library of images, which is then taken away.
Convolutional Neural Networks play the Hot and Cold game for head-pats.
The training environment gives the Neural Network a prompt. For example "Draw a squid."
The NN does its best to draw a squid. The result is compared to one of the training images from the library of squid images. The NN is awarded head-pats accordingly.
This repeats thousands or millions of times.
A well trained AI can do things like drawing a well known character as though they were a squid which will combine their ability to satisfy both sets of criteria at the same time.
Like it or not, that image has never been created before.
That's not a serious description and demonstrates a poor grasp on the underlying technology. It's guided recursive perturbation of noise. Until that noise looks enough like something it's seen before to become classified as the same.
Anyone else would call this copying with a little bit of randomness added in. You should really dig a little deeper here.
Anyways try the exclusive case. Have it draw something that has never been classified before. You can look around for items of antiquity or lost cultures and see how it fares. Since it can't do these things it obviously only can do things it has seen and have been classified. So it can only reproduce what it has been trained on. This is obvious.
Wow, so it combined two copies into one thing? That's still copying.
It is vaguely impressive that preturbative systems are effective at quickly finding approximate solutions. Which is why "satisfying both sets of criteria" means you get 7 fingered hands and other oddities expressed in the image. Add more criteria for more fun.
You're really just playing Monte Carlo on a stolen deck of classifications. To be fair, Google did pay a bunch of africans $2/day to tag the images, so there is some originality in the database, but very little.
Fortunately that's now how copyright works or how copying is defined in the eyes of the law.
AI image creators are fantastic for whipping up character icons for RPG's. I don't care if they're kind of wonky, search engines fucking suck now, and I'm not paying hundreds of dollars and waiting several weeks to commission anything.
On purpose. The same companies that own this technology own search engines. They broke the algorithm and destroyed result quality on purpose. Their only metric now is "time spent on Google." They don't care about the rest anymore.
For your.. rpg character icon? Is that like a huge market or something?
No clue. Just listing what my options are if I want artwork for something. It's either steal it online, commission it, use AI... or learn to draw myself. Of those, AI is the easiest.
Art is cheap. I think your estimate was way off.
Furry commissions and the prices they pay for OCs are completely deranged.
Eh. I paid a local twelve year old twenty bucks for original character art for a TTRPG.
It was the daughter of a friend. She spends all her free time drawing anyway. She got paid to practice her art. It was win/win.
It was not museum quality, but it was $20 worth.
If I had the connections to exploit child labor at sub-minumum wage, I'd take advantage of that. Sadly, I do not.
Legal wages for a twelve year old are about $8 an hour around here. She was paid for about two and a half hours of her time, which is about what I estimate she spent.
But thanks for implying that I am a exploitive jerk.
I am in the same boat. The people whining about this (with reason) are the most vicious, cruel people in any hobby.
Grey DeLisle is a genuinely evil woman. Were she not famous, she'd have definitely murdered a couple people by this point.
Everyone just uses Cal Arts style anyway. Nothing much has changed.