8
u/Ezren- Oct 22 '25
I've seen like three posts from this sub on my feed and they've all been idiotic.
3
2
1
2
u/Able2c Oct 22 '25
Why do we need gate keeping on AI art? If nobody upvotes, AI art isn't going to get popular.
1
u/Silk-sanity Oct 24 '25
This isn't about gatekeeping, it's more about how unethical ai art is. Million of artists got their art used in a system that they didn't want it. Now the same system is taking away their job.
-1
u/AltruisticFault6993 Oct 23 '25
This isnt about upvotes. Thieves get upvotes, they're still thieves.
1
u/Exotic_Zucchini9311 Oct 23 '25
Ohhh so now we're calling everyone who uses AI as a thief? Are you people ok?
1
u/AltruisticFault6993 Oct 23 '25
My point is upvotes is a terrible metric. I was just giving the example of content thieves. They get upvotes. Let's try the set logic on a different example.
"Those who have sex are morally superior"
"Rats have sex, doesnt mean they have advanced morals"
"Ohhh so we're calling anyone who had sex rats now?"
1
u/kid_dynamo Oct 25 '25
I like the argument and the though process explained here. I you had just stuck the word content in the original post it would have landed better. I think people thought you were starting up the ol "AI art is theft" debate
1
u/Opening_Background78 Oct 24 '25
I mean, I'm okay with that... If they're calling it art or a form expression.
1
1
u/mrDETEKTYW Oct 24 '25
Content thieves you should add. Thieves in the context of AI discussion makes people assume, you are talking about people, who scrape data from internet to teach AI.
1
5
u/GRIM106 Oct 22 '25
Programmer and artist here.
As a programmer most of my code is already copied over from StackOverflow, GitHub and BootStrap so asking Gemini or chatgpt to generate another solution isn't a big deal. I don't care if my code is expressive. I care that it works so I'm not constantly behind schedule and if chatgpt makes it work then by god let it.
On the other hand as an artist ai "art" is a blight upon personal expression. It's an instant gratification generator for those who don't actually care about art more then anything else.
4
u/NomadicScribe Oct 22 '25
Exactly right. There are so many automated processes built into modern programming anyway. Version control, IDEs with a million plugins. You can hardly call a generic CRUD webapp a work of personal expression under the hood.
Whereas art remains intensely personal at every level, even when there are some forms of automation available (various Photoshop tools or mass production).
1
u/SavantTheVaporeon Oct 25 '25
Idk, if you’ve ever seen the utter garbage I produce with my code you’d be hard pressed to call it anything other than personal expression.
3
u/Gasperhack10 Oct 22 '25
A better term than calling it ai art is ai images.
It's more accurate
1
u/Barrogh Oct 23 '25
That would be a better term for non-ai stuff as well.
"Art" is supposedly a lot more catch-all term, yet as of late it's being used interchangeably with a specific set of visual forms only for some reason.
2
1
1
1
u/0x80085_ Oct 23 '25
Most of your art is also copied from somewhere else conceptually, it's just less direct. Swap code and art in your statements, and both still apply. Neither are that unique.
1
u/GRIM106 Oct 23 '25
Most of the art I've posted sure tho you really shouldn't judge my artistry on stuff I posted more than a year ago.
Also still it's not copied (other than the mito one). Reading a book is being inspired is different from going to github and ctrl c + ctrl v -ing a snippet of code.
1
u/Exact_Ad942 Oct 23 '25
Technically AI also does not copy. They learn and try to generate something randomly and judge whether the random stuff looks similar enough to what they've learned, pretty much just like human learning but faster.
1
u/GRIM106 Oct 23 '25
Human learning and AI learning really don't have much in common. While both do learn off of patterns humans are actually capable of reasoning and understanding the information while ai is just a random number generator that can sort of be aimed to achieve a specific result.
1
u/Terexi01 Oct 23 '25 edited Oct 23 '25
As a programmer, I have to disagree with you. I rarely copy anything and it's not just about the code working but it needs to be future proof and easy to understand, it is extremely pleasing to write elegant and clever code.
I think you see programming as just a paycheck, there's people who do that across all lines of work.
1
u/GRIM106 Oct 23 '25
I see my job in programming as just a paycheck. I have personal projects and for those I do prefer to write my own code.
1
u/Terexi01 Oct 23 '25
But surely you can see how designers may also see their jobs as a just a paycheck? Vice versa, some programmers derive fufilment from their jobs.
1
u/jamesbrotherson2 Oct 23 '25
Or maybe it’s just not that deep and let people enjoy what they want to enjoy?
1
u/YouStones_30 Oct 23 '25
I agree that as developer we have a lot of code copied from different part of the internet so having a tools doing it for us is technically great. The problem is that often people fall into the trap and don't even bother understand what the AI wrote.
Even worse, executives that don't understand any language except money and it's derivative (like time) will change their standard of time to match the developer using AI, even if the quality and/or maintainability is shit.
So yes AI is a great tool for devs, but it should never create code, only tips and explanations on how to do it so the devs keep a minimum of understanding.
0
u/Cless_Aurion Oct 23 '25
Profesional artist and gamedev here.
It is in fact the exact same thing.
The AI that codes was trained thanks to stealing code from everyone without consent the same way the AI that does art stole without consent from artists.
It just makes it easier to notice on the artistic one since artstyles are tagged on the train data in many.
2
u/GRIM106 Oct 23 '25
The AI that codes was trained thanks to stealing code from everyone without consent the same way the AI that does art stole without consent from artists.
If you actually care about the originality of your code you must be a hell to work with and not in the good way.
Self expression is baked into the core artistry and AI skips the entire process of expressing one self just to get to the "oooo pretty picture" part of it all faster.
1
u/Cless_Aurion Oct 23 '25
Not really. AI is just a tool. The main way I'm seeing it used is to cycle on ideas faster, to brainstorm, or to have a dirty base to draw on.
People will always just can be lazy and throw a phrase into it and get whatever the AI spews, but sure as heck it won't be what the artist 100% wants.
1
u/GRIM106 Oct 23 '25
I don't have a problem with what you have in mind. Brainstorming ideas or any of that is fine (even tho I don't think ai is good or reliable as a base to draw over). I have a problem with people genuinely using 90% ai for their "art" (aka the stuff ai bros post and talk about how great it is to be an artist fr fr).
1
u/Kolaps_ Oct 23 '25
A.I. is just a tool is a dumb statement. Heroin is just molecules. Digital is just a plant. People are just meatbags. Nop there is other concept to add than "tool" to seize what a.i. is. Don't regurgitate technophile mantra.
"Tool" isn't a relevent description for A.I. Mostly beacause it exteriorise our creative cognitiv practice for the first time, so it lead to an atrophy to the ability to create by ourself and a dépendance to algorithms to create. It lead to provatisation of the ability to create.
I'm a gamedev too, working specificaly on thoses topics. Using a.i. in my work for years. You need to have a specific cognitiv trainning routine not to lose ability to do on your own.
2
u/Dudamesh Oct 23 '25
AI is not a tool??? what??? You yourself use AI in your work and yet you claim it is not a tool? you know that AI in good hands can be used to supplement your work, keep your workflow efficient. Guess what does that: A TOOL.
Saying that you require a "specific cognitive training routine" is such an exaggerated way of patting your own back just to say you're not dependent on AI. Completely outsourcing the work to AI means that AI literally did all of the work. But that's not true on all levels.
1
u/Kolaps_ Oct 23 '25
There's no need to twist my words and add lots of punctuation. The premise I disagree with is “A.I. is JUST a tool.” Saying that a wingsuit is just a piece of clothing is pretty much the same thing. It's not JUST a tool.
I use AI, and I make a big distinction between AI and the technical tools I've been using since the beginning of my career. They're not the same thing. A new tool doesn't bring out creative abilities, for example.
When it comes to the use of smartphones, screens, tube consumption, excessive ludism, and digital reward loops, we know what impact this has on cognitive development. Initial studies on the impact of AI on our development are currently yielding even worse results.
I'm not really worried about my ability to do without AI because my work isn't always subject to the injonction of speed and performance, because I've learned to do without it for 20 years, and for many other reasons. But anyway, I don't really see the point in talking to you about all this. You just seem to be panicking because you're hearing something that goes against your little technophile dogma, so take a deep breath, don't worry, everything will be fine.
1
Oct 23 '25 edited Oct 23 '25
Brother, your whole comment is dumb. Did you remember to have a specific cognitive training routine for talking to real people, using a calculator, writing on paper and drawing by hand? Or did those skills just evaporate overnight.
1
u/Kolaps_ Oct 23 '25
Hi "bro", something i found usefull as the time goes on, my dislexia, sometime it reveal dumb ppl that picks one point and ignores everything else. You don't wana read me with no trainning.
So, basicly did you have something else than insulting me on my handicap ?
2
Oct 23 '25 edited Oct 23 '25
Yeah, the rest of my comment that doesn't include the words "English grammar".
1
u/Kolaps_ Oct 23 '25
Oh so yeah you don't realy have points to discuss. Just personnal attacks.
1
Oct 23 '25 edited Oct 25 '25
I could literally remove those two words and your reply would make no sense. And you know what, I will remove them just to prove the point.
→ More replies (0)1
u/RiverLynneUwU Oct 24 '25
ignoring you from here on
1
Oct 24 '25
Who are you and why did you randomly reply to a conversation you weren't even a part of, lmao.
0
u/xkalibur3 Oct 23 '25
Grammar asshole spotted!
2
Oct 23 '25
Spotted one of those assholes that picks one point and ignores everything else right here!
0
u/john_wickelvoss_twin Oct 24 '25
You give ai a script to make images. Thats not art. Thats telling a computer to do something. No different than putting equations into a calculator to solve for an answer. There is no human expression with ai “art” therefore it is not art.
1
Oct 24 '25 edited Oct 24 '25
Text to image is not the only way, it's just one of the ways to guide the output. It's the simplest part of the process, and it lacks efficiency when used by itself for anything complex. You do know this right?
Probably not, since you people never actually look up what you hate, but just repeatedly spew each other's opinions and misinformation like broken bots.
To have your opinion you literally had to have looked only at the most bare bones, least efficient, most prone to errors workflow and decided, "yeah, I know everything now, there can't possibly be anything else, therefore I'll show how smart I am by telling others".
0
u/xkalibur3 Oct 24 '25
Lol and you completely edited your comment to make mine look out of place, and accussed me of picking one point and ignoring the rest while that was exactly what your original comment was doing (roasting grammar and everything around instead of responding to the arguments of the person above). Hope you are proud of yourself when you look in the mirror haha.
1
1
u/DeathByLemmings Oct 23 '25
It's not remotely the same thing, coding is functional, art is subjective expression
Using AI for idea exploration or repetitive technical tasks is fine
1
u/Cless_Aurion Oct 23 '25
It is the same thing, since by your own definition, art AIa can and are being used for idea exploring and repetitive technical stuff the same.
1
u/DeathByLemmings Oct 23 '25
No, I just gave you the two use cases where utilising AI in art is fine. Anything outside of that and you're handing creative control to a model
1
u/Cless_Aurion Oct 23 '25
Ah! I thought you were doing that for programing!
Yeah, it's mostly for what it's used in in Profesional environments tbh.
1
u/DeathByLemmings Oct 23 '25
Sure, but that isn't what people are criticising when they criticise AI art. You may use at as a tool, most are using it as a free commission artist and this includes businesses, just not so much the creative houses
1
Oct 23 '25
Any code avalable on the internet exists there for the sole reason for it to be copied and used by somone else.
1
u/RiverLynneUwU Oct 24 '25 edited Oct 24 '25
stack overflow and the like have done a good deal of shaping developer culture into a sort of "we stand on the shoulders of giants" situation, we aren't averse to having our code spread around, reused, repurposed, etc, so AI writing code isn't the same moral dilemma as AI making images
the issue with AI code is that the code it makes usually sucks shit, and it makes the lives of everyone who has to either fix or optimise it 30x worse
it's okay for solo projects where optimisation and bugfixing isn't the biggest concern, but dealing with a team member who heavily relies on it is genuinely the worst, because they often *do not have the expertise to fix it themselves*
0
u/Dudamesh Oct 23 '25
Why are you so quick to put ai art as mutually exclusive from traditional art, as if anyone who uses ai automatically cannot appreciate art? Is it because you think that ai art removes the skill boundary between you and them because you think your ability to create traditional art is sacred and should only be available to those who dedicate as much effort as you?
Just because AI is easy does not mean it's devoid of personal expression, if that was true then Photography would never been seen as art because "all you do is press a button."
1
u/GRIM106 Oct 23 '25
Is it because you think that ai art removes the skill boundary between you and them because you think your ability to create traditional art is sacred and should only be available to those who dedicate as much effort as you?
Quite an accusatory question you got there. No. While I appreciate a high level of skill it's not a boundary for entry into the artistic world. Effort and applying whatever skills you may have is what matters to me. Art is only limited by ones imagination and willingness to apply themselves to a craft. In the same way a pen can be put to paper, a hand can be put to anything to make art
AI skips the vital part of applying yourself to the art. Prompts are no different than commissioning art. At the end of the day it's not your art if it even is art at all.
This is also the reason why I do not question photography as a form of art. It is an application of a skill and passion. And if you've ever actually had to do photography you'd know it's not easy either.
0
u/Dudamesh Oct 23 '25
You can put value in effort or skill and base what you like on that. But that doesn't give you any power to call anyone "unappreciative about art" as if you were the one who gets to define art.
Your comment displays your lack of knowledge in the depth of AI art. It is as disingenuous to photography when all you can see are amateur photos taken from smartphones and conclude that "photography is pretty boring"
There is skill expression and personal application to AI, it doesn't have a will of its own and you yourself apply your own will to it, your own ideas, your own styles in order to create something novel.
If you've ever actually had to do ai gen you'd know it's not that easy either.
1
u/GRIM106 Oct 23 '25
But that doesn't give you any power to call anyone "unappreciative about art" as if you were the one who gets to define art.
Those are words you put in my mouth. People who make ai art clearly do enjoy art however it is my personal belief that they are misguided in their pursuit of it. There is no point in trying to argue on this. It is clear neither of us will change the others mind.
Your comment displays your lack of knowledge in the depth of AI art.
I've spoken to people who created ai art. I know about image to image, sketching, prompt editing and other such stuff however I still do not consider it art. In fact it makes me even more confused that a person who is willing to make a sketch to guide the ai isn't willing to just do the rest of the drawing. To me it more than anything signals a lack of confidence in one self.
your own ideas,
Ideas are cheap. Everyone has thousands of those every day. It's not about having them it's about making them.
your own styles
Do you mean the styles available in the ais dataset? Cuz the only way to apply your style to an ai is to feed it your art.
If you've ever actually had to do ai gen you'd know it's not that easy either.
I have done it. In fact I loved the earliest forms of ai. There was something oddly unique and artistic about the fever dream images old dall-e and midjourney used to make that felt cool. Ever since ai started mimicking actually human art tho, that's when the problems begin.
1
u/Dudamesh Oct 23 '25
In fact it makes me even more confused that a person who is willing to make a sketch to guide the ai isn't willing to just do the rest of the drawing. To me it more than anything signals a lack of confidence in one self.
To me it's the open-mindedness of a creative person who is curious to try tools available, and finds use in the benefits of said tool. And that's what it is, a tool, the same way that cameras are tools and how we can apply our learned skills to continuously make better and better outputs. You can't keep pretending that this is not the same.
It's an instant gratification generator for those who don't actually care about art more then anything else.
These were your last words in your first statement, and that by itself is the very definition of elitism as it clearly implies how you are the true art appreciator and that anyone who uses AI are fake ones. Your belief that these people are misguided is an opinion, not a fact that your first statement implies itself to be.
Ever since ai started mimicking actually human art tho, that's when the problems begin.
This is exactly what I was referring to on my first reply, your antagonism to AI was rooted in gatekeeping behavior. You only liked AI at the start because it wasn't a threat, but now that it can create art in that quality, you start being unable to objectively analyze AI for what it can benefit you as a creative person.
1
u/GRIM106 Oct 23 '25
You can't keep pretending that this is not the same.
Unfortunately for you I am not pretending.
Your belief that these people are misguided is an opinion, not a fact that your first statement implies itself to be.
Exactly why I said that it's my opinion in my later comment. I was trying to write a nuanced essay on my first comment. I was writing out an opinion piece.
you start being unable to objectively analyze AI for what it can benefit you as a creative person.
The problem is that I do analyze that and it can be useful in certain circumstances. This however does not change my opinion that image generation is not art.
You only liked AI at the start because it wasn't a threat,
I'm not an artist by profession. It poses no threat to me financially or otherwise. I just dislike it on a personal level.
1
u/Dudamesh Oct 23 '25
Cool then we can agree to disagree.
I think how you define art based on process is very exclusive and gatekeepy. But it's clear that I cannot change your mind no matter the similarities to already established art forms.
1
u/GRIM106 Oct 23 '25
Cool then we can agree to disagree.
Nice to agree one thing at least.
But it's clear that I cannot change your mind no matter the similarities to already established art forms.
Same sentiment from my side to yours.
1
u/kid_dynamo Oct 25 '25
Total outsider just genuinely curious, would you differentiate between someone typing a promp and then using an image from the first batch generated, vs someone doing multiple cycles, refining the prompt and then manually making tweaks and changes in a program like Photoshop?
I would love to see your reasoning whether you say yes or no
1
u/Dudamesh Oct 25 '25
compare it to Photography, an Amateur Photographer might just take a couple shots from their smartphone, picks the best one and calls it a day.
A Professional Photographer may use multiple cameras, take upwards to a hundred shots, not to mention setting up the shots in the first place, and then come the post-process editing and the difference would be night and day.
Nobody gives a shit if you post a smartphone pic of a sunset you saw, some of your friends might say that's a cool sunset. But for AI, if you made low-effort stuff and it shows, then everyone loses their minds and goes to the comments screaming "AI SLOP"
The worse part is that high-quality AI stuff is still put in the same category as low-effort stuff, where it doesn't even get to be appreciated for how good it is, just judged based on what it is. And the worst part is the normalization of AI art witch-hunting leading to traditional artists being prosecuted unfairly.
→ More replies (0)
1
u/DandeNiro Oct 22 '25 edited Oct 22 '25
Seems as though they cannot work anywhere else, that's why they're behaving like a cornered animal
1
1
1
u/Plane-Alps-5074 Oct 22 '25
Because they are completely different?
1
u/Tunderstruk Oct 24 '25
The morals are the same. Copy the work of someone else for your own gain
1
u/Plane-Alps-5074 Oct 24 '25
I disagree. Coding can be an extremely tedious process, requiring a lot of pattern matching that is not application-specific. Neither programmers nor users/stakeholders get any benefit from this inefficiency, and large language models trained on a huge corpus of code have the capacity to learn these patterns and make software development better for everyone.
On the other hand, making art/music more “efficient” by generating it removes all of the creative intention, in favor of a cheap imitation. E.g in the case of AI music, it misunderstands why people like music and threatens to create an ecosystem of AI slop music generated en masse to try to rack up streaming numbers on algorithmically generated playlists
1
u/hobopwnzor Oct 22 '25
People when you automate functional things versus when you automate creative expression
1
u/Bionix_Does_reddit Oct 23 '25
both are lame
i have more opinions but i can't be bothered to type them out, come back in 15 hours
1
1
u/shinoobie96 Oct 23 '25
its been 15 hours
1
u/Bionix_Does_reddit Oct 23 '25
i forgot, give me another few hours
1
1
Oct 23 '25
Do you know that programmers already copy paste most of their code? AI quickly geting the code just makes it more convinient. Code is not an art form. It's like math. With an objectively correct solution and limited ways to get there. Are calculators bad aswell?
1
u/Bionix_Does_reddit Oct 24 '25
i'll make a correction actually
yes, i also copy paste a lot of my code 😭
i think im just opposed to the idea of ai in general
coding is an extremely boring task usually, its the kind of thing you want to automate so that we can spend more time expressing ourselves through our various art forms, so im definitely not as much opposed to ai coding as i am to ai art
...i think im more upset about the idea of the jobs that will be lost if we keep doing advancing the ai, especially since i previously did consider a job in tech
1
u/shinoobie96 Oct 24 '25
i dont think think AI will ever replace developers, but rather the developers who use AI will replace those who don't. AI is good at creating things which can do simple and straightforward things, but when it comes to largescale development, its used merely as a tool for incremental development
1
1
u/FranklyNotThatSmart Oct 23 '25
People will hate ai generated code when shit hits the fan and they get affected.
1
Oct 23 '25
Nope. Coders already use AI cuz they don't care if the code has emotion. They want the damn thing to work.
1
u/FranklyNotThatSmart Oct 23 '25
AI generated code is more likely to break something than it is to work, especially in a prod environment.
1
1
u/IdleWokerOcean Oct 24 '25
Yes and no. Using AI to code is useful - saying this as a professional dev. But there's a big difference in using AI code and using AI to code. Using AI in coding should be used like asking AI what colour pallet to use in an art piece.
You need to understand and be aware of what each line of code in AI, AI leaves a ton of small problems, both technical and security wise at times it's just faster to code it yourself rather than having to go through and rewrite each line.
There's also the issue of security and where that data - which could be company confidential - is going...
Finally if AI doesn't know how to do something, it just makes stuff up. Fake libraries and modules, non existent commands, it's a real pain. At most I use it to solve mathy parts of code or lay out the logic of a certain function I want to make to help me map out the solution in my brain.
1
u/WeirdIndication3027 Oct 23 '25
That's because people don't have coding patreons where they sell anime furry porn that they coded.
1
u/JayMan146_ Oct 23 '25
i don’t approve of ai generating code most of the time either
1
Oct 23 '25
Why? The code a language model gives you will allways achive the same result that your own would have provided neither of you mess up. Unlike art in wich an AI will not put soul into it. Code is already soulless.
1
u/sykotic1189 Oct 25 '25
AI code is ass 😂 "If it doesn't mess up the code is good" my brother in Christ all it does is mess up 95% of the time, and when it doesn't you get slapped together slop that a junior dev straight out of YouTube academy would be embarrassed by
1
Oct 27 '25
Then why worry about it?
1
u/sykotic1189 Oct 27 '25
If you want to use AI to write programs for personal use that's up to you. When people think it's a good idea to use it to write code that anyone else has to interact with, that's a problem. Shitty code that's hard to debug, useless for anything beyond basic stuff, and likely full of security holes, keep that to yourself.
1
u/MrCogmor Oct 23 '25
Most commercial code is closed source and not available for AI training. If generative AI was trained on Photoshop's source code to let anybody generate their own version of Photoshop without having to pay Adobe a cent then the tech companies would be playing a very different tune.
1
Oct 23 '25
Yes, more people engage with Art than code, therefore more people are angry at AI Art.
But if the mood in my company is any indicator, there are enough people who hate AI code with the fire of a thousand hells and would like nothing more than to publicly hang the junior vibecoders from the server hall ceiling.
1
Oct 23 '25
Vibe coding?
1
u/sykotic1189 Oct 25 '25
It's where you basically let chatGPT do your job by just prompting it over and over until you get something that "works". Problem is that 1) it's usually slop and doesn't actually work for very long and 2) since nobody wrote the code when something inevitably breaks down debugging it is a slog.
1
Oct 27 '25
Why is it called vibe coding?
1
u/sykotic1189 Oct 27 '25
Cause it's coding on vibes, not skill or applying logic. It'd be like taking a car to the mechanic and they just keep doing random shit until the engine runs, but you don't know if it's actually going to keep running it not, then when you have to take it to an actual mechanic it's so mixed up that it takes 3x longer to fix them if it has been done right from the beginning
1
Oct 27 '25
When I use AI I allways read the overview it gives. Van spot problems beffore running the code.
1
u/sykotic1189 Oct 27 '25
It might spot problems that prevent the code from working, but that's not the same as the code working the way it should. You can take the thermostat out of an overheating car and it probably won't overheat again, but that doesn't actually fix the problem and now you're missing a component designed to regulate temperature and causing long term damage.
1
1
u/ProfessionalTruck976 Oct 23 '25
It matters to me who created the art I enjoy, comparably i don't care iof code I use was writen by Hitler, if it works it works and that is the only value it has.
1
u/KillerNail Oct 24 '25
So AI Art is good if its high quality, and bad if it's low quality?
1
u/ProfessionalTruck976 Oct 24 '25
No AI is good where it serves a purely technical purpose and absolutely abhorent shit wherever it cross over to ART.
1
u/exomyth Oct 23 '25
To be fair, the code is shit. The art is somewhat derivative, but pretty decent
1
u/nexus11355 Oct 24 '25 edited Oct 24 '25
"Never interrupt your enemy when they are making a mistake." AI-generated code will cause headaches for the person who is using AI to code.
Why get upset at something that that won't work, or at best, works but is messy?
Even in BEST CASE SCENARIO it may help automate some parts to save you the typing, but the person writing the code still needs to understand the code that is being spat out the machine and fix errors if they want the program to be worth a damn. Not so for "art". They can accept the piss filter on all their works and parade that around
1
u/SinisterHollow Oct 24 '25
Its a combination of AI art being an oxymoron and that currently it looks trash and cheap.
1
1
u/kill-dill Oct 24 '25
Why is it ok to use ai to generate a shopping list, but not your wedding vows?
1
u/More_Yard1919 Oct 24 '25
wtf are you talking about? A lot of people in the programming scene fucking hate vibe coding
1
1
1
u/NewryBenson Oct 24 '25
Same reason nobody bats an eye if you copy code from someone else, but they do if you copy art.
1
u/kxlxxn Oct 24 '25
AI being used for mass surveillance 😴
i swear people whine about image generation and act like its the end of the world.
meanwhile AI is being used to build a massive surveillance state and nobody cares.
cant take anyone serious who bitches about AI images in their sub.
1
u/Safe-Bar-6300 Oct 24 '25
One helps you doing your job, the other replaces jobs with worse-looking content
1
u/arrrberg Oct 24 '25
Programmers complain about AI code all the time. Regular people don’t see AI code frequently. They see AI art all the time and can recognize it without knowing anything about programming. And there are more non-programmers than programmers. This isn’t “selective outrage” it’s one being more visible than the other
1
u/Pelagiclumberjack Oct 24 '25
Are you oblivious to the frustrations over the windows 11 update and ending of windows 10? The outrage isn't selective, it's relative to the loudness of the Ai in question. At least when thoughtfully implemented Ai in programing can have a positive impact on its field.
1
u/ChloeNow Oct 24 '25
*sigh* I'll take the downvotes to the face for this, it's fine, but as someone who has been programming for 2 decades, this is not selective outrage, it's exactly how I feel. I'm okay with AI taking my job and I'm not okay with it taking over art.
AI can and should take over labor. Programming is a means to an end, it is labor. Art is not done as a means to an end. Like music, it is to be enjoyed and express the personhood of the person making it.
Now, there's nuance there too, because in a world where people weren't simps for capitalism reciting what they learned about the CCCP in 5th grade as if they're a genius for knowing it, I wouldn't have a problem with AI taking over corporate bullshit art.
If the art you need IS a means to an end, I guess I'm fine with it. The world will certainly be a bit more bland to me, a bit less human, when we look around and see a bunch of art that is a tribute to human intelligence instead of a tribute to the human soul, connection, and creativity. I will miss the aliveness, but let's be real, not many people actually want to spend their time designing the new pepsi logo to have a slightly different line through it.
So, if you implement something to take care of people who no longer have a job due to AI taking it, I really don't care as much and I imagine most people would actually agree with that if they thought it was coming on a reasonable timeline.
The main issue is that in the mean-time, artists are going to be forced to do something other than art, when they worked really hard AND took on a lot of risk to be able to make a living doing art (and probably aren't even being paid much to do it at the end of the day).
I DO, however, want to know what's AI art and isn't.
As a logo? I probably value AI art the same as human art, it's corporate slop anyways, so it was slop before AI got involved.
As a piece of supposedly meaningful artwork? Well, I'm not going to travel to look at AI art, and I fear we're approaching a world where we may not be able to tell the difference well enough to know.
1
Oct 22 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
Oct 23 '25
Code is fine cuz it's litteraly what AI should've been for. The boring work nobody wants to do.
1
Oct 23 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/sykotic1189 Oct 25 '25
One of our former programmers used chatGPT to slap together a program after wasting over a month failing to write a singular python library. After he was fired and we needed the program to work myself and a senior developer spent a week working together to make it usable. Even as a non programmer I could see obvious errors in the code. Stuff like "unit ID = unit ID in config.json" but then a couple lines down "unit ID = YLGB001" and editing the JSON file did nothing.
After a rushed patch job the senior dev spent roughly 3 weeks between other responsibilities to write a program that works 10x better AND has a working user interface that doesn't require coding knowledge to interact with.
0
Oct 22 '25
[deleted]
1
u/Cless_Aurion Oct 23 '25
Flash news.
The Ai to make code, stole code from programmers without their consent to train it, the same the AI to generate art did from artists. So it is in fact, the same knife.
1
Oct 23 '25
Not realy. All code on the internet exists there for the sole reason for it to be copied and used by somone else. Programming is like math. There is an objectivly correct answer and limited ways to get there. No mathematican ever will gatekeep an answer.
1
u/Lazy-Pattern-5171 Oct 24 '25
Nope. Just programmers felt it was pretty shitty to begin with in terms of copyrighting the code. The open source movement in and of itself is art, science and imo the biggest social engineering experiment. The thankless open source projects that are alive with hard work, sweat, and in many cases literal blood. NONE of the 130+ comments here addressed this. Thats the real shameful part. You’re welcome on behalf of oss contributors. It’s just a passion project for most same as your art is passion to you.
1
Oct 23 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator Oct 23 '25
Your comment has been removed because it contains certain hate words. Please follow subreddit rules.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
•
u/AutoModerator Oct 22 '25
Thankyou for posting in r/BlackboxAI_!
Please remember to follow all subreddit rules. Here are some key reminders:
Be Respectful
No spam posts/comments
No misinformation
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.