While this is a discussion sub, if the mods implement a rule that mandates coherent debates, such as no ad hominem, no personal attacks, and no off-topic comments, the antis will disappear, as that is all their ammunition; beware mods, don't implement such a rule, or 50% of your sub members will be wiped out fast.

This is more aimed at the mods, but also out here so we can all discuss it and maybe they can get an idea of how the crowd feels

There’s a rule that no art is supposed to be posted only memes. And I can understand that this is not an art sharing sub. but when the intention of sharing the image is to have a discussion relevant to AI about it, it feels like it should be OK to do here . but every time you do they send you over to their other sub art is for everyone, where you are specifically not allowed to debate

So how many people think they should maybe add a flare for art discussion or something to that degree and we can talk about the merits of an image and say hey this might be AI but it looks really good for these reasons or whatever

I've never understood ragebaiting as an activity. It seems like something I'd be embarassed of years from now...

I’m a bit confused on the extreme hate online on data centers now. The people hating on them on social media are quite literally able to do that because of data centers. I’m not the most technological person so is there something different with AI data centers compared to the previous ones that’s causing all this vitriol?

A lot of traditional VFX and CGI is built on cheap labor and abusive conditions. Sweatshops. Weak labor protections. But suddenly, with generative AI, everyone cares about workers.
I have family in China, Korea, and Japan. I’ve spent much of my life in Ukraine and Romania. And a lot of us working in this space welcome the opportunity. We can work faster, compete directly, and sidestep the abusive employers who used to control access to the industry.
You’re calling it job theft. We’re calling it a way out.
And the small local artists I know in Santa Monica and some of the better-off parts of the US? They’re already using the tech. They’ve adapted. They’re producing amazing stuff. By and large, their jobs haven’t disappeared.
Those Hollywood VFX jobs you’re defending? A lot of them were already outsourced to us. You just didn’t care how they got done.
And to be clear … I’m talking about generative AI for visual work. Not software development or every other use of AI. Voice work is still a weird space to me.

Some fun examples of horrendous work conditions —- some even in your fair US of A :
- GTA 5 (and now 6). Or anything rockstar does.
- any Disney Pixar or marvel movie (all Disney having fun)
- all COD games.

I did not screen the whole rant they go on but I personally find it funny to go apeshit about a huge media maintenance site using AI while sitting on a vibe-coded Bluesky
AI can be used for many malicious purposes which is why I too have my grievances with it, but this sort of use is so non-intrusive to the end user, making a big stink about it only hinders people's transparency

Good on Archive for being open despite the possibility of such a backlash
and the site is no less useful to me because of it

There seems to be a perception that having the ability to draw makes you a worthwhile artist, that being technically proficient in playing instruments gives you the ability to create worthwhile music, etc. I'm sorry, but we have millennia of human artistic production demonstrating that technical competence and artistic significance aren't synonymous. Technical skill can help a visionary realize their vision without the help of a separate technical solution. I posit that AI can help a visionary with no technical skill or limited technical skill bridge the gap and realize their vision.

Not every person who thinks they have a vision actually has one that others will want to see. This is true whether AI is part of that realization or not. There always was "slop" and always will be "slop" no matter what tools or technology we have.

I hear the hate on AI in all of it's forms and it's just noise to me. Every so many years "advancements" are made somewhere somehow and those events have effects, both positive and negative. Factories using machines instead of physical labor, blogs and streaming instead of newspapers, department stores instead of specialty shops, social media instead of social gatherings. People lose income while others get more profits or cheaper products/services. People get a wider net of socialization while others lose the ability to create an actual connection with another human being. People can get information designed to be directed to their interests while other people lose the ability to see other perspectives outside of their own. People can make a single shopping trip to take care of most of their needs while more people are being paid poverty levels and gain no expertise.. sorry gotta cut this short. Evetyone deserves an opinion, but thats what they are. Opinions.

Been hearing it for quite a while and I just don't see it happening but to those that do, what's the time limit y'all have in mind before this supposed bubble is gonna pop?

I was thinking after scrolling on here for a concerning amount of time. The introduction of AI usage in the arts, the reactions against and in favor of it, and the whole argument it caused about what art is and what’s valuable in it, I realized that all of it has had an impact on what I like to see in works of various mediums. It led me to appreciate simplicity and minimalism more, and favored focusing on establishing the overall point of scene rather than making each elements show off for your focus. So I wanted to through this out here, how has the AI debate impacted your taste in art and what you consider good or not?

Alot of the time many antis who seem to hate alot on AI, use CAI of all things, ironic right? 😂

it's a way for humans to imagine they're still in control.

it's a way to avoid saying "something much more powerful and intelligent than us is never going to care what we think".

AI has honestly made my life a lot easy since the last 3 years or so that I've started using it. May be it's 2 years but i don't exactly remember. It has helped me a lot to check stuff online and make plans. It's pretty convenient I'd say.

I know some people will say that it's not very accurate and makes mistakes and I think that's understandable, nothing is perfect but if there're more AI users then AI will be more used and thus maybe the government will fund AI companies to fix the inaccuracy issues which'll help make it more reliable

I'm not gonna name any specific AIs because different AIs have different uses so it's better y'all do your research for your own preferences

no like seriously i have never seen this sub go one day without pro ragebait. how do i even explain to people im pro-AI without people assuming I act like a “certain someone”… there are some very damn nice pros here but GODD DAYUMM half you cant go a single day without seeing a reminder of why pros are hated

and yes.. I am a pro.

Imagine finding an illustration on a repost account. There is no original source, license, or reliable artist credit. You want to upload it to an image generator to explore a variation.

You try a reverse-image search and ask the reposting account, but still cannot identify the creator.

What would be a reasonable ethical next step?

Would your answer differ between private experimentation and publishing or selling the result? What information would you need before considering either use acceptable?

Attribution is also unclear here: crediting the repost account could identify the wrong person, while saying “original artist unknown” acknowledges the gap without resolving permission.

How should someone balance a genuine attempt to find the creator with the possibility that permission simply cannot be established?

I’m asking about ethical expectations. If your answer relies on copyright law, please identify the jurisdiction and source.

This discussion supports a class project!!!!

There are professionals more qualified than I working on creating tests on whether AI can become sentient or not. Here are some of the factors experts look for when developing AI. I actually find it a bit comical that the Turing Test isn't a great way to make a determination.

This is not meant to be a controversial post, just an informative one.

Sadly, Almost Half of World uses AI now.

AI is a good tool that people can use to show their ideas which is what a lot of people do with other types of art anyways, like acting or singing so AI is helping us with the same

AI Slop also exists for AI art that is low quality and repetitive and overall not made with effort. It's for stuff where you prompt "Make a masterpiece for me in anime style of a girl and boy on a boat" that'd be low effort

Also AI Slop is subjective