If maintained by the right people
That’s a very big if
ai would actually reduce exploitation
In an ideal world maybe. In reality, I can only see it being used as a reason to pay animators even less or where animators become proof checkers. The real exploitation is animators not being paid enough, not the amount of time they put in. AI would not solve this.
Ai opens up animation to new voices, that wouldn’t be able to animate
Like? People that don’t want to put in the effort to get good? Unless you’re disabled, anyone can animate. It just takes a lot of effort to get good at it. But if anyone puts in that effort that means you’re passionate about it and they’re precisely the kind of you want in animation.
This is almost starting to look like the Photoshop doomsday all over again.
Not remotely the same imo. One is a new tool that doesn’t try to replace the creator, the other does try to replace the creator.
If you support minorities having a chance at jobs, you should also support the potential for more animators having new opportunities to create animations.
What a weird equivalence. How does supporting minorities equate to supporting more AI-gen? It implies they wouldn’t get the job without AI, which is much more problematic.
Ai also means you might actually get more content of a show made in an official means
I don’t see how that’s a good thing. Let’s not milk existing IPs any more than we already do. It’s just an opportunity for more slop.
ninjabard@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
AI steals jobs from animators, illustrators, writers, and voice actors. It has no place in a creative space.
riskable@programming.dev 4 weeks ago
On the contrary, AI enables voice actors to change their voice in ways that biology won’t let them. If a voice actor can act, AI will give them the power to play more parts than they would have been able to previously.
It’s just a tool. It’s not the magic, “replace humans” thing people think it is.
RIPandTERROR@sh.itjust.works 4 weeks ago
Pro capitalism regressive take.
rob400@ani.social 4 weeks ago
Actually, the take was really just talking about preventing monopolies, closest thing to anything about related to capitalism.
I just don’t see where you got ‘Capitalism regression’ from, my post or from the comments. In this comment thread, the op, is just saying the usual anti ai stance. It doesn’t (I don’t think) have anything to do with changing anything from capitalism to socialism.
Although having one person almost exclusively using ai, could risk creatig a monopoly for voice actors. But realistically, just don’t leave it to one person, the issue is greedy people trying to nickel and dime as much as possible and spending less and less, not the ai tech itself.
RIPandTERROR@sh.itjust.works 4 weeks ago
“AI steals jobs from lists jobs.”
If you want to discuss ideal fantasies, then discuss dismantling the need to hitch artistic talent to survival in a post scarcity world. To dismantling the need to be paid for created art. It’s more achievable than stopping capitalism from preying on the utility of low effort profit. Otherwise it’s history repeating every other job replaced by machine advancement. Artists are just big mad at ai because it’s now their turn to face the chomping maws of endless profit. This is what comes for every job the moment a way is found to automate or do it better. If you dont like it, then push for progressive changes. Otherwise it’s just people trying to create a moral issue around AI instead of acknowledging capitalism as the culprit.
rob400@ani.social 4 weeks ago
Wrong, i’m anti capitalist, I use Peertube. I’m on the Fediverse. I didn’t say anything about ‘procapitalism.’ Are we assuming? I was specifically talking about ai. Dislike the take, but don’t put words in my mouth.
ninjabard@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Pro artist anti theft take. Try harder.