Have you ASKED artists to draw these things they’re supposedly incapable of?
Comment on Pika Labs new generative AI video tool unveiled — and it looks like a big deal
Lmaydev@programming.dev 8 months agoI quite like AI art.
It’s capable of generating things that we’ve not seen before because as hard as we try what we create always has a human filter on it.
If people don’t like it it won’t catch on anyway.
Custodian1623@lemmy.world 8 months ago
zazo@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Ah yes, because the favorite part of the process for every artist is the hours spent going back and forth with their client touching up the most minor details instead of creating art they actually want to make…
Idk, I feel AI art only affects commercial artists who first and foremost care about making money off their art form. The ones that actually make art for the love of the craft (without expectation of getting anything in return) aren’t really affected in any way.
TL;DR Let UBI free artists from the capitalistic yoke and let the oligarchs use AI to automate the soulless part of art creation that nobody enjoys anyways.
Sasha@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 months ago
In what world is it a bad thing for someone to get paid for their skills? That’s a bizarre spin to put on it.
And yes, UBI should definitely happen, but we shouldn’t start painting the world with crap to do it.
zazo@lemmy.world 8 months ago
It’s fine to get paid for your skills, but from experience I can say that developing skills just to get paid is also rather soulless.
Since, sure, I can bet there’re furry artists that love drawing sexy tigers to bits, but I can guarantee there’s a not-so-small percentage that would much rather draw something else, but the yiffing money is too good to pass up on.
Mango@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Being paid for your skills is service, not art. It can be art when your audience’s money isn’t the director.
Mango@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Yeah, service isn’t art. If you’re making “art” for someone else’s money, you’re performing a service. You’re not an artist. Remember when YouTube was mostly just people getting their ideas out and going viral was because something was awesome instead of being designed to spread? Now it’s every kid and their grandma trying to be an influencer so they can have fun with other people’s money for a living.
When what you’re doing isn’t for the clients’ money, it can be art. There’s no constraint this way.
Womble@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Exactly, personalised art should only be for those who can afford to pay for it. Expanding that privilege to more people is very bad.
Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 months ago
It’s literally a luxury, and trying to yank the rug out from under the artists who actually made the art the plagiarism machine runs on isn’t going to change that. You don’t need personalized art, and if you REALLY REALLY want personalized art super bad then that just underlines the value that artists give to society.
Womble@lemmy.world 8 months ago
It’s literally a luxury to have your own copy of a book, and trying to yank the rug out from under the scribes who actually made the books the plagiarism press runs on isn’t going to change that. You don’t need your own book and if you REALLY REALLY want one super bad then that just underlines the value that scribes give to society.
Lmaydev@programming.dev 8 months ago
As a human I can’t imagine them so how would I. Also money
Sasha@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 months ago
I do not like theft laundering machines.
I like people.
AI actually has good uses when embedded within technology, a great example being natural language processing, it’s capable of so much good especially the disabled. But so much effort is being focused on creating junk, using stolen data. People are not being paid for their work which is then being used to replace their jobs.
zazo@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Do you think the software engineers who are developing the AI models (which have been trained on freely given away code) are just stupid and are willingly creating a machine that will take away their jobs because they don’t understand the impacts? Or could it be that they do understand the stakes, but continue on despite that because of (as you mention) the unfathomable good the technology can bring? I would hope most people would be willing to sacrifice their wellbeing now for the betterment of everyone else in the future.
If you’re still understandably worried tho - just start a garden and begin building tightly knit communities now, since you never know when a solar flare will wipe all our technological progress away…
Sasha@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 months ago
Do you understand that there’s a choice about what purpose to make these for?
That yeah, you can just ignore all the harm you’ll do? That people do just ignore all the harm they are doing?
No, I’m not one to call people stupid. I’m calling people and corporations greedy, there’s an insanely long history of that and I’m sick of it ruining this world.
People do choose to make good AI, ones that will and currently are benefiting people. This is not one of them, I’m not calling all AI bad, I’m calling theft and soulless art generation bad.
What if a solar flare hits? What if the world was made of pudding?
Lmaydev@programming.dev 8 months ago
You can say that about all software.
As a programmer my job is to automate tasks and make people obsolete.
You have to make your piece with it.
Should we ban excel and calculators and make everyone do calculations by hand? Hehe
Even_Adder@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 months ago
You should read this article by Kit Walsh, a senior staff attorney at the EFF. The EFF is a digital rights group that recently won a historic case: border guards now need a warrant to search your phone.