Comment on Release the kraken

• webghost0101@sopuli.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  I’d go as far as ai is completely fine tool to create art with.

  What bothers me is that these are unlabeled oneshots, the model does not allow creative user input nor a direct prompt and the user posted it without disclaimer.

  Here on shitposts thats sort of ok but i saw this one elsewhere first.

  source

  • SeekPie@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    Please don’t call AI slop “art”.

    source

    • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

      Please don’t call of ai “slop”

      source

      • msage@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

        Yes, everything coming from contemporary generative AI is a slop.

        source
      • FourWaveforms@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

        I saw a famous youtube guy talking about “AI slop garbage.”

        He was mad because he had bought AI-generated music to use it in the background of one of his videos, and he wound up getting a copyright strike for it. He knew it was AI at the time he bought it. It didn’t occur to him that admitting this was a self-own. (If it’s garbage, why did you pay for it, and why would you put it on your own video?)

        He then went on to claim what a big problem AI music is because someone can sell him AI stock music and then get Content ID on it, thereby causing him to get a strike. It apparently didn’t occur to him that anybody can produce stock music with a synthesizer and zero AI at all, and do exactly the same thing.

        The thumbnail read something like “Copyright claimed by Suno AI.” Suno had not done any such thing.

        Despite being thoroughly self-contradictory, the comment section was full of supportive words by people who copy their opinions uncritically from whatever people are saying on Twitter and Reddit. When you see someone typing “ai slop” in the form of issuing a judgment about something, what you are seeing is just that, an opinion copied uncritically from others, and never examined.

        source