-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2024 Smog Awards!
Media Artificial Intelligence's place in creating art?
- Thread starter MiniorHasFallen
- Start date
I specifically didn't put a name link on this because I'm not trying to call this person out, and I explicitly don't want to strawman them. I have seen this "stolen" wording a lot, and I think a lot of the people who use it have some very incompatible opinions about fanart featuring copyrighted characters. If there's a desire to turn that into legislative action, that will be a real monkey's paw moment.
Last edited:
Coming back to this discussion briefly, there's a number of questions I'd like to ask myself to try and gain a better understanding of the situation. Feel free to quote specific questions you'd like to voice your opinions on:
On an unrelated note, something else I've come to realize about generative artificial intelligence specifically is that, in theory, generative AI information outputs for any topic wouldn't be anything a human can't do on his or her own. The AI's advantage, of course, comes from their "ability" to perform these tasks much, much faster on account of not having the physical limitations of a human body. A post that is roughly this length, for example, could probably be written dozens, perhaps hundreds of times faster than it took for me to use my hands and fingers to type this into my laptop's keyboard. I mention this about the speed of AI's work because of what many of you have already pointed out about modern-day capitalist economic trends. The main fear that most people have seems to be that artificial intelligence has the highest risk of replacing everyday worker jobs within employers looking to save as much money as they physically can within their budget plans, which includes how much employees may need to be paid. Quite frankly, I think the "Capitalism Vs. The Alternatives" conversation would be better saved for other threads such as the Politics thread, but as far as the artificial intelligence itself is concerned, I do think there will be ways that develop over time for humans to live sustainably in this, quote, "new economy dominated by AI", assuming things even play out that way over the next decade or two.
- How much of this AI controversy comes from owner's likeness controversies as much as it does the technology itself?
- For people who would want to become artists, would this theoretically mean they should give up on their dreams?
- What would be the advantages and disadvantages of hypothetical legislative changes mandating AI-generated artwork being demonetized?
- By extension, what are some ways we could help differentiate the two art "styles" so human artwork isn't accidentally demonetized?
- What all counts as "artwork" for the sake of this thread and this discussion?
On an unrelated note, something else I've come to realize about generative artificial intelligence specifically is that, in theory, generative AI information outputs for any topic wouldn't be anything a human can't do on his or her own. The AI's advantage, of course, comes from their "ability" to perform these tasks much, much faster on account of not having the physical limitations of a human body. A post that is roughly this length, for example, could probably be written dozens, perhaps hundreds of times faster than it took for me to use my hands and fingers to type this into my laptop's keyboard. I mention this about the speed of AI's work because of what many of you have already pointed out about modern-day capitalist economic trends. The main fear that most people have seems to be that artificial intelligence has the highest risk of replacing everyday worker jobs within employers looking to save as much money as they physically can within their budget plans, which includes how much employees may need to be paid. Quite frankly, I think the "Capitalism Vs. The Alternatives" conversation would be better saved for other threads such as the Politics thread, but as far as the artificial intelligence itself is concerned, I do think there will be ways that develop over time for humans to live sustainably in this, quote, "new economy dominated by AI", assuming things even play out that way over the next decade or two.
NEVER give up on your dreams!!!!!!!!
as myzozoa said AI's best function for the consumer will be that we will be more accurately targeted in AlGore-itms so we spend more money on things more removed from human interaction
the application of machine learning in the arts will pacify consumers as they have their worldviews and beliefs uncritically reinforced by regurgitated works, never challenging them with unique story structures or confrontational, difficult stories and styles, or radical politics, or anything outside of their pre-existing frame of reference. AI will not usher in a great age of creativity but instead subjugate authentic styles and expression to technology finetuned to maximize profit while culling the public's critical consciousness. to me, the beauty of the arts is exactly that it expands such consciousness, as it requires interacting and grappling with the artist's expression. it is pertinent that the artist creates this themselves, because the act of creation is inherently shaped by sociopolitical, personal & spiritual contexts. i'm afraid that AI will dominate the art and entertainment industry because its so profitable and most people aren't as discerning. i'm really surprised about the people who say "if you could transpose your thoughts onto the screen as a 'movie' wouldn't AI be great?" no it is the conflict that arises in creation and finding ways of expression that is part of what makes it important, otherwise seeing your own thoughts is just self-therapy
the application of machine learning in the arts will pacify consumers as they have their worldviews and beliefs uncritically reinforced by regurgitated works, never challenging them with unique story structures or confrontational, difficult stories and styles, or radical politics, or anything outside of their pre-existing frame of reference. AI will not usher in a great age of creativity but instead subjugate authentic styles and expression to technology finetuned to maximize profit while culling the public's critical consciousness. to me, the beauty of the arts is exactly that it expands such consciousness, as it requires interacting and grappling with the artist's expression. it is pertinent that the artist creates this themselves, because the act of creation is inherently shaped by sociopolitical, personal & spiritual contexts. i'm afraid that AI will dominate the art and entertainment industry because its so profitable and most people aren't as discerning. i'm really surprised about the people who say "if you could transpose your thoughts onto the screen as a 'movie' wouldn't AI be great?" no it is the conflict that arises in creation and finding ways of expression that is part of what makes it important, otherwise seeing your own thoughts is just self-therapy
This is literally already happening and has been for the better part of a decade. In fact, it’s arguably been happening in one form or another for pretty much the entirety of human history. AI might be the next revolution in marketing, but let’s not pretend like manipulating people into buying shit is some new phenomenon. Corporations have been using algorithms and all the information they steal from you to target you with ads for a while now.
hmm let me try to explain a bit better what my concerns are about AI in the arts then:
advertisements have been that forever, and my concern is that the cost-cutting potential of AI, by removing actual people from production and optimizing storytelling through algorithms, will greatly contribute to effective advertisements superseding actual artistic expressions, thereby limiting expression and the power of art rather than expanding it. these inauthentic pieces of work undermine the sociopolitical value and power that art can hold, reducing it to yet another capitalist feature to spend money on rather than something to expand consciousness, to learn from, to share a positive community sentiment, etc.
AI cannot create, it can only regurgitate, and art that does not have the capacity to confront, illuminate, or engage in an authentic manner will always be meaningless. how many movies, games, albums do you love that could've been (or in the future could be) made by an AI? none
advertisements have been that forever, and my concern is that the cost-cutting potential of AI, by removing actual people from production and optimizing storytelling through algorithms, will greatly contribute to effective advertisements superseding actual artistic expressions, thereby limiting expression and the power of art rather than expanding it. these inauthentic pieces of work undermine the sociopolitical value and power that art can hold, reducing it to yet another capitalist feature to spend money on rather than something to expand consciousness, to learn from, to share a positive community sentiment, etc.
AI cannot create, it can only regurgitate, and art that does not have the capacity to confront, illuminate, or engage in an authentic manner will always be meaningless. how many movies, games, albums do you love that could've been (or in the future could be) made by an AI? none
Isn't this just an extension of fanfiction?
Speaking as someone who very recently (I’m talking, like, over the past week recent) started thinking about my old interests in free writing again, I can confirm this is true. As far as copyright laws are concerned, feel free to correct me if I’m wrong but it doesn’t seem like there is separate legislation for human-written and AI fanfics respectively for most I.Ps just yet. Same deal for most fan art from what little I know. Again, feel free to correct me if I’m wrong about any of this.
AI art is flawed i'll Prefer.human art. Wait i Dont have money NVM
I don't know if I'm allowed to post an AI art piece I generated considering it has a watermark, but I can say that AI is able to generate some cool stuff. I don't want it to completely replace artists, but generating concepts would be a good use for it. I won't delve too far into my opinion on AI art, but it is certainly an interesting tool. I used it in a video game art class where I generated some things. My protagonist concept didn't turn out the best (it looks like his sword is going through him...), but other concepts turned out splendidly. (I didn't read too many posts on here, but I feel like AI being abused is an issue, but it does have potential for good usage. I should also mention I am not an expert.)
I agree with pretty much every anti-AI sentiment already stated, so I'll try to add something novel here. There's something that separates the conversation of ai image generation from every other case of mass data theft. Far-and-away, it's the most flashy, vapid, and tantalizing abuse of machine learning at this moment and appeals the most to the lowest common denominator. One of the most prominent groups that I see using ai image generators, outside of techbros, are teenagers making memes/shitposts and implying that it's a harmless use of the technology. It hurts to see my generation immediately latch onto something without taking a second to think critically about what they're supporting, where it comes from, and the real-world effects that their interest will manifest in. It's been an awful pattern that persists over generations of this vapid consumerism that feeds this capitalist machine that we so often beguile. It's easy to feel powerless, like your individual actions don't matter at all, and all of these things are at the whims of big business. It's not, and I think everyone can and should hold themselves accountable for their own choices and their impact on society. Keep striking, keep adding "before:2022" to your search bar, keep boycotting ai shit. You never know, it might end up working.
AI is nothing but good for Art. Right now it isn't because companies and stupid people are hoarding the data, but eventually.
Artists, people with skill, dedication, talent, aka basically blessed by God, don't deserve to hoard art itself.
Art is for everyone, the consumer and the artist. For too long the Artist has held art hostage. Now we have capitalists holding art hostage but thats another issue entirely.
Basically.
Art = Bad unless everyone can access it, which AI allows.
With that all said, AI is trash because all technology (especially computers) are trash and worthless. They promote a lifestyle where you are tied to one position mentally, physically and emotionally. It takes away a part of your physical agency the more you're around computing systems.
So I dislike AI, and while I'm at it, I dislike ART too. Because Art, creativity, exploration of the mind. All of that is crap. Determination and honing your craft? That is all crap too.
I dislike Art because only smart people can enjoy art. Only the skilled can create Art. Even with AI for everyone, only the most creative will create Art worth remembering. It's unfair to the people who aren't smart, who aren't creative. Those people are losers not through any fault of their own, but just because they don't possess the same stats as the smart and creative people.
Fuck art and fuck AI. Thats what I say.
Artists, people with skill, dedication, talent, aka basically blessed by God, don't deserve to hoard art itself.
Art is for everyone, the consumer and the artist. For too long the Artist has held art hostage. Now we have capitalists holding art hostage but thats another issue entirely.
Basically.
Art = Bad unless everyone can access it, which AI allows.
With that all said, AI is trash because all technology (especially computers) are trash and worthless. They promote a lifestyle where you are tied to one position mentally, physically and emotionally. It takes away a part of your physical agency the more you're around computing systems.
So I dislike AI, and while I'm at it, I dislike ART too. Because Art, creativity, exploration of the mind. All of that is crap. Determination and honing your craft? That is all crap too.
I dislike Art because only smart people can enjoy art. Only the skilled can create Art. Even with AI for everyone, only the most creative will create Art worth remembering. It's unfair to the people who aren't smart, who aren't creative. Those people are losers not through any fault of their own, but just because they don't possess the same stats as the smart and creative people.
Fuck art and fuck AI. Thats what I say.
It's kind of impossible to give a real response to this, because I legitimately can't tell what part of that is genuine versus satire. For the purpose of this, I'm going to assume you were being ironic, and already understand the contradiction I'm gonna discuss.
For ai apologists, their argument always boils down into a few different perspectives.
1. Insisting that Ai is healthy for all that it affects, and that it's an untouchable positive for society.
2. Acknowledging Ai's bad impacts, but dismissing it as some sort of inevitability, rather than a conscious agenda driven by people's actions.
3. Acknowledging Ai's impact, and abusing the sheer power dynamic that is held over those that it negatively affects in order to feel untouchable.
Each of these takes is flawed in its own way, and serve only to shirk responsibility from all that Ai has hurt. I still can't tell if your post was entirely satire or not, but I'm glad you were able to remind me of how companies use that first argument I mentioned.
I see this rhetoric of this all of the recent ai development to be for "democratization", inclusion, and accessibility. It's that specific wording that's parroted among a lot of devs that really irks me. There is no unfair barrier to entry to art and the attainment of art skills. It is not a craft that is possible to make more accessible without completely destroying the fundamental definition of an artist. It's also not a skill that people are born with, and thus isn't worth discussing in the context of equity or whatever.
For ai apologists, their argument always boils down into a few different perspectives.
1. Insisting that Ai is healthy for all that it affects, and that it's an untouchable positive for society.
2. Acknowledging Ai's bad impacts, but dismissing it as some sort of inevitability, rather than a conscious agenda driven by people's actions.
3. Acknowledging Ai's impact, and abusing the sheer power dynamic that is held over those that it negatively affects in order to feel untouchable.
Each of these takes is flawed in its own way, and serve only to shirk responsibility from all that Ai has hurt. I still can't tell if your post was entirely satire or not, but I'm glad you were able to remind me of how companies use that first argument I mentioned.
skill issue
I'm no fan of corporations or capitalism, in case my other posts didn't give that away, but art is one of the few fields that isn't really dominated by corporate interests, because creation and consumption of art is extremely difficult to gatekeep (as NFTs should have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt). The majority of transactions involving art are individuals or small-scale projects commissioning art from other individuals or small-scale collaboratives; larger companies generally hire their own dedicated artists, and while corporatized graphics companies do exist, they don't have nearly as much of an economic stranglehold on art as exists in other kinds of material goods.
In fact, freelance artistry is one the few ways to escape from "low-skill job hell" if you aren't in a position to get a degree or learn a trade skill. While some people do have a degree of natural talent when it comes to creating art, it's also absolutely a skill you can learn and develop. It's not something you either have or you don't. It isn't only smart or naturally talented people who can create art; you can too. It takes practice, but so does everything else.
I don't really have a problem with the creation of art being made more accessible. Most of my misgivings about AI art are economic in nature and only apply under the current global economic paradigm. That being said, even with AI, there's still an amount of creativity involved in creating prompts and filtering through the produced art to select the best examples. There always will be; it's impossible to fully eliminate that disparity, and I question whether or not we would really want to if we could. Do we want to live in the world of The Giver?
uppababy earl Divine Retribution
If you guys want to live in a world where the strong rule over the weak, the smart rule over the stupid, the creative rule over the bored... then be my guest.
But don't complain to me when someone like me (stronger, smarter, more creative) runs you all over.
If you guys want to live in a world where the strong rule over the weak, the smart rule over the stupid, the creative rule over the bored... then be my guest.
But don't complain to me when someone like me (stronger, smarter, more creative) runs you all over.
I don't think generative AI is particularly good at creating anything. It's not even particularly good at creating Original Corporate Logos, the lowest form of "art." I think tech hype is simply causing economic actors to behave irrational about tech they don't understand. Once the AI bubble bursts those positions will be filled again.
I don't think deviantart will be affected much though. It's really crazy that at some point the only original art in the future will be sonic vore and spongebob 9/11 tributes.
Yes, this is a fair and accurate representation of what I said and very indicative of your high level of intelligence.
hello i draw things sometimes
this of course contrasts with image-generating models, which everyone cares about now. it's honestly pretty funny watching the humanists in this thread talk about ai art and how "illegitimate" it is. these people have already given far more ground than they know. if current generative models weren't a threat, there would be no reason to do all this posting about the essential wholesome 100 indivisible human soul.
so my personal take about ai art is that it's art but i personally dont really care about it. what i care about is people i like putting effort into things, even if the end result is lacking in technical skill or whatever. if they're able to use ai image generation to fill a specific niche or go for a specific look? good for them, honestly
the only thing i havent discussed is the art industry for which i have to say that the professional artists will probably be exploited in any way possible lol idk i havent read marx
this of course contrasts with image-generating models, which everyone cares about now. it's honestly pretty funny watching the humanists in this thread talk about ai art and how "illegitimate" it is. these people have already given far more ground than they know. if current generative models weren't a threat, there would be no reason to do all this posting about the essential wholesome 100 indivisible human soul.
so my personal take about ai art is that it's art but i personally dont really care about it. what i care about is people i like putting effort into things, even if the end result is lacking in technical skill or whatever. if they're able to use ai image generation to fill a specific niche or go for a specific look? good for them, honestly
the only thing i havent discussed is the art industry for which i have to say that the professional artists will probably be exploited in any way possible lol idk i havent read marx
can’t stop thinking about this. the horrors of a meritocracy
AI art is not art. it's AI art and it should be differenciated
It is objectively speaking art. AI art programs are tools used by people to produce an idea. The AI can't do anything without a human telling it what to do.
What you're trying to say is that AI art doesn't require much skill, which is true. But it's still just a tool as much as pasting some images together on Photoshop and applying a filter is art. Or taping a banana to a wall is art. Or dancing on a street corner while pouring milk on yourself is art. Competitive Pokemon teams are art. Pretty much anything done with intent to create is art.
A person's skill at using a particular medium is another discussion entirely.
