Home
Artists
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register
Partychan Matrix ThePornDude
Home Artists Posts Import Register
The Offical Matrix Groupchat is online! >>CLICK HERE<<

How AI Takes The Artist Out Of The Art (The Jimquisition) (Patreon)

Published:
2023-02-27 22:32:28
Imported:
2023-03

Content

AI generated art is all the rage right now, but have you noticed it's been sold with the same techbro evangelicalism that tried to shove NFTs down our throats? I'm hardly surprised, as both of these grifts have the same endgame - cutting artists out of the commercialization of art. 

Let's look at AI art, the people pushing it, and the moves to sell creativity without paying creators. With special guest editor NEON 35-2! 

Files

How AI Takes The Art Out Of The Artist (The Jimquisition)

http://www.patreon.com/jimquisition http://www.twitch.tv/jimsterling http://www.thejimporium.com AI generated art is all the rage right now, but have you noticed it's been sold with the same techbro evangelicalism that tried to shove NFTs down our throats? I'm hardly surprised, as both of these grifts have the same endgame - cutting artists out of the commercialization of art. Let's look at AI art, the people pushing it, and the moves to sell creativity without paying creators. With special guest editor NEON 35-2!

Comments

Lakstoties

The whole AI sham thing is rumbling around the writing communities. It's every week someone starts talking about AI, and sure enough some AI fanboy shows up well within the Dunning-Kruger effect of the tech they are shilling. At this point, I've started calling anyone being Pro-AI in this way a "GPTBro". It's just the next incarnation of the CryptoBro.

Andrew L Butula

I can't help feeling there's going to be a lot of formerly blue collar workers watching this unfold and thinking "Thanks for finally giving a shit now that it affects you."

alexander gaitan

The black mirror episode of the jimquisition.

Anonymous

I'm glad you pointed out, though a bit too briefly, that AI needs to base its art generation on the existing work of human artists. Thousands, if not millions, of artists' work that is fed into a data model that informs how art is to be generated. Do you think the owners of these AIs have compensated the artists that created the original art? Yet they charge a pretty penny for people to use their service. Did every artist give their consent? The answer is no. All AIs are based on rampant intellectual property theft by big corporations. AI Generated visual arts is just one example. Another example is Microsoft's Github Co-pilot. They created an AI to generate programming source code by training the AI on the millions of lines of Open Source code hosted on GitHub. Most of that open source code has a license that says that if you create derivative work from open source code, you also have to distribute your code as open source. But Github Co-pilot offers corporations to generate code from that and they can keep it closed and proprietary. It's theft, plain and simple.

Crissa Kentavr
>>102898997

Did the aspiring artists that viewed art in their studies compensate the artists?

Matthew Parmeter
>>102895939

There was a major scifi magazine that had to shut down their submissions last week due to being overwhelmed with garbage AI stories. It had all the markings of a bot attack. I don't wonder if that's going to be the next avenue of misinformation attacks.

Lakstoties
>>102895939

Yeah, that was a big surprise to a lot of people. Thankfully, there's efforts like ZeroGPT to start detecting AI works.

MadOvid
>>102898997

That's a nonsensical argument. They paid to view that art by paying for college. You pay to view art by contributing to their patreons, paying the admission fees for the art gallery, paying for the comic book or poster, etc. Artists who post on the internet do so in the expectation that they will either get money through ad revenue or that the art will not be used outside of fair use without their permission. Hell, these artists aren't even getting "exposure".

jimquisition
>>102897779

I’d be surprised if they thought that about me, considering how much I talk about workers in general. I’ve long argued in the necessity of a basic universal income. Things like automation are a big reason for that.,

James Rule

This is how the world ends... not with a bang... not with a whimper... but with SHODAN JOI...

Kav
>>102897779

Can definitely see both sides. Industrial workers have been dealing with this issue since before we were born but I don't think that's in any way an indictment on Steph (not that I think that's how it was intended), who absolutely has been way ahead of the curve as it pertains to the issue becoming near universal. I'd add that, even in companies (or at least smaller teams within companies) like mine where I genuinely do believe the people (or in my case person) making the big money (i) still works at least as hard if not harder than any of his employees, and; (ii) does so far more to ensure that he can justify creating new jobs and giving current employees promotions and raises than for himself, the AI issue is still ill-thought through. (I'm as cynical about the executive class as anyone but, anomalous as he may be, my boss earned his place at the table by working his way up and has never forgotten the value of throwing down ropes for everyone else.) His idea is that automation, though, will take away the "mundane" work and leave people "free" to do the more "interesting" stuff. To me, though, it translates to only leaving people the work that's most mentally taxing because it requires the most creative thought and, honestly, not everyone's cut out to do that kind of thing all the time. Only speaking for myself, I like to be good at what I do and, while I'll push myself hard and try new things when the team needs me to, the idea of not having a solid base of work where I know exactly what I'm doing and that it's useful is important to me. That's to say nothing of people with generalised anxiety who will really suffer if every job constantly mutates into stuff they never signed up for as the stuff they've learned to do gets automated.

Kav

On the porn thing, it boggles my mind that I, an extremely asexual person, will happily say that an independent producer of adult material would make my clichéd, "dream dinner party," list because they're a supremely interesting person and I'd find their insights into both sexuality and asexuality fascinating while the people who spend their lives jerking off to their work so often treat them with nothing but contempt.

Stormy K.

The porn thing is bizarre. Like...will there ever be a lack of demand for porn? Even if you could push a button/type a sentence and get an AI image, I can't see it running actual human beings out of the game.

Anonymous

I think there is an interesting discussion to be had here about the essence of intelligence. You could probably make an argument that humans are just very complicated machines and that any heuristic that is sufficiently sophisticated is indistinguishable from human intelligence. Thus, I would be careful with any arguments based on human exceptionalism. They might turn out to be false. Other than that, I hope we'll deal with capitalism and copyright law rather than regulate AI to the point where only big corporations can afford to use it.

Anonymous
>>102898997

You're comparing a computer programs owned and by big corporation to human beings. Apples and oranges.