I've actually seen him and his friends deliver the JRR Tolkien quote "Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy what has been invented or made by the forces of good " in regards to the current Hollywood machine. Ironic.
@@sheevinopalpatino4782 Actually, you're correct. It's not a quote of Tolkien's. That being said, he and his friends have used this mis contributed quote, which seems to suggest that they believe the sentiment to be true; yet he ignores it when it's inconvenient to him.
This was the quote from Tolken, the speaker is talking about Orcs "The Shadow that bred them can only mock, it cannot make: not real things of its own. I don't think it gave life to the orcs, it only ruined them and twisted them"
Ya know at this rate, I'm thinking about making a parody of Shad's book and call it "The Conqueror Turns into a Naked Transgender Lesbian Cat Furry" or something just to piss him off
@@TheAshenTarnishedHunter Exactly, and it could be done in no time at all, prompt: rewrite shadow of the conqueror but make every character a furry. Oh and write it a bit better. Chat-GPT: Impossible not to.
I can't help but think so much of Shad's AI bullshit comes from a place of spite and jealousy towards his brother Jazza. He doesn't want to put in the work to develop his own art and doesn't enjoy drawing, which is absolutely fine - people should focus on what they enjoy - except Shad clearly DOES want to be a good artist, like his brother. So he decided to use AI to steal from other artists, and pretend that makes HIM a great artist. Now he's stuck defending this fantasy to protect his own ego, no matter how much harm it causes. It's pathetic.
Yeah, i think you are right, it seems he really dousent like his brother, and since the A.I think i cant stand him anymore... i really dont get it why he dousent see the problem first they go for the artists and then who comes next architects....? Who need a bloke who talks about sword when a ai will do it in the future.
This is my take as well, jazza is an accomplished artist as well as a very successful youtuber. Who has also managed to build quite the business around his success. Comparatively, Shad is (while, not negligible) comparatively only and ok youtuber..... and a self published author of dubious success and skill I'm willing to bet this weighs heavily on his older brother conscience
This argument is essentially luddite in nature. It doesn't matter how many people are "harmed". Lots of people were harmed by the industrial revolution, yet society goes on.
It most definitely comes from that. He’s an egomaniac, so if he’s not the center of drama it drives him crazy. Not only that though, it stems from his inherent laziness as well. He just wants recognition without any effort. The glory without the risk.
so, just started the video, and about the 3 minute mark, i think it warrants this quote from Terry Pratchett: There is a very interesting debate raging at the moment about the nature of sin, for example,” said Oats. “And what do they think? Against it, are they?” said Granny Weatherwax. “It’s not as simple as that. It’s not a black and white issue. There are so many shades of gray.” “Nope.” “Pardon?” “There’s no grays, only white that’s got grubby. I’m surprised you don’t know that. And sin, young man, is when you treat people as things. Including yourself. That’s what sin is. “It’s a lot more complicated than that . . .” “No. It ain’t. When people say things are a lot more complicated than that, they means they’re getting worried that they won’t like the truth. People as things, that’s where it starts.” “Oh, I’m sure there are worse crimes . . .” “But they starts with thinking about people as things . . . ” felt very appropiate
@@spookyfirst9514 its from Carpe Jugulum, according to the news article i took it from. I always make a mess of his books in my head, so i couldnt remember it for the life of me
Yep! He was a treasure. Also it definitly fits. Also the hogfather speech wher death says how irational imagination makes humans human. To why people need to believebelieve wild things,silly things, to practice be able to believe the things like compassion, love justice, fairness, and make them real.
As vile as he can be, I think his joy of poking artists in the eye has backfired to a point. At first the argument was spun that "you artists are only mad you're about to lose a job" and many bought into that. Thanks to loudmouth jerks like Shad the message that AI steals from artists is now more widely known. Normies don't worry themselves over copyright laws. Shad has made it easier to get that message to them, so they can decide for themselves. When explained properly most of the time people agree AI is stealing. Our own government (USA) has been open about wanting to protect artists rights when it comes to this issue.
That's very condescending for Shad to agree that artists opinions don't matter. Considering he tries to convince the art community that he's an "artist". He just rendered his entire creative view redundant by agreeing with Asmongold.
I agree with asmon as well. They took the clip out of context but Asmon whole view is that nothing will matter in the long run because consumers in general do not actually care. If the consumer and producer can get something cheaper, without paying an artiest, guess what capitalism is going to pick. So no, artist do not matter in the long run.
1:30:44 Shad: "I do not think a photographer is the same type of artist as a comic artist, someone who draws or a cartoonist or something like that. And I don't think they're the same type of artist as a painter, or a sculptor. I think these are different artistic mediums that have merit within their own sphere. And AI art there is more, there's AI art that has more artistic merit than others, depending on the artistry you apply to it." Pure sophistry. Without photographers, artists who draw, sculpt, paint, and cartoon, there would be nothing for an AI to use. Without that DATA SET, there IS NO AI ART. That is the truth he's desperate to avoid. This is not an argument he can win.
Literally nothing in his statement is wrong. All art isn't equal and it certainly doesn't take the same skill set to do all art. It doesn't matter if your art exists and AI uses it to extrapolate it's own thing. The world doesn't work on first discoveries. We have gained and lost tons of knowledge throughout history, that would be no different with art. I mean even without an artist there are still people able to explain something that they'd like to see made even if they can't express that into an artistic form. Thats how the machine learned generator does what it does. You say "I want this, this is what I want it to look like" and it goes "here you go". It's a useless pointless argument. A conductor doesn't play music, but they are capable of composing it and getting music out of others. We don't live in a world where these things don't exist so this idea it's supposed to be important because x wouldn't exist without y is just trying to add some inherent value to it without acknowledgement that it's not all the same.
They don't disagree with the first part about art having merits in different ways, they disagree with the premise that AI is art has its own merit. The lack of value with the AI art comes from the fact that no human is making a conscious artistic decisions about composition or anything. It's just a robot that chooses smears stuff together based on what the average of an image looks like. Real artists borrow and take inspiration but the machine doesn't have any intentionality about the inspiration, it just makes colors in the shape of patterns it sees with its samples. Sure, from the angle that we all make our own interpretations of what art is, nothing is inherently artful or artless. But I would argue that the process is so far removed from the intentionality that even the strangest pieces of art have. Photography is art because you need to get the perfect angle, perfect focus, and perfect time. Even grabbing some random rock off the ground and taking it to an art display could count as art in some weird meta way if you use it to make an interesting statement about the very act or art in general. But AI art doesn't involve a human in the creation process at all. But more importantly, I won't ever consider it an art just to spite AI art bros. Most don't give a shit about art. In fact, many are GLEEFUL that artists are going to be replaced by type-and-print slop. @@midnightfenrir
@@midnightfenrir You cannot call yourself an artist if you commission art from someone else and claim you've made it. A conductor at least can write music, a fundamental act of creation via human creativity.
1:16:50 I hate how he dismisses the jobs lost to AI as just, “oh no a furry artist loses his job, what are we going to do?” NO SHAD, there are real freaking designers, artists, marketers, and more that are being laid off by real companies because someone decided to use these AI tools in place of, not in addition to, real people. The argument isn’t only disingenuous, it’s downright insulting.
I always find it so ironically funny that he has like 7 different platforms that he begs for money on because if people didn't give him money then he would go broke and have to stop making RUclips videos and get a "real" job, but if OTHER people (artists) want to create content (art) then they can get fucked because he has "SICK ART SKILLZ" in the form of AI lmfao.
I fucking love that in the middle of all this shit going on pewdiepie learns how to draw within 100 days. I've heard asmon use the excuse that "not everyone has the time to learn how to draw." It's always pure laziness and unwillingness to learn. Nothing more, nothing less. ANYONE CAN BE AN ARTIST/WRITER.
Anyone can be an artist or writer; that doesn't mean they're automatically a good one, but it means they're trying, and thus automatically better than Artificial Intelligence.
1:10:53 You are correct, and the amusing part is that all these AI models are designed to emulate Silicon Valley politics (LLMs political orientation test). Shad, the self-proclaimed 'right-wing Christian,' doesn't seem to have an issue with this. What I find most amusing about Shad is that every picture he creates with AI image generators is objectively of poor quality. Shad lacks creative ability; as you mentioned in his book review, most of his ideas are simply repackaged pop culture concepts.
Stop acting like artists are this horribly oppressed class and they're being genocided or something because of AI art. That statement doesn't mean someone "has no moral compass", at all.
@@EntitySteelPokémon is a good game series, but they have done certain things not that great lately. But there are some marks of improvement tho. I hope they will improve, but need to wait an see.
I find it annoying when the AI defenders either dont know/ignore the difference between a program built from the ground up, like a digital brush, and AI programs that steal images. If a programmer/artist makes a curly hair digital brush and sell it, thats one thing. But a completely different thing when an AI program steals from hundreds/thousands of artists, to be a keystroke for "curly haired woman," generation.
@@EntitySteel there is a difference between inspiration and stealing. Example: You can be inspired to draw a cartoon duck because of Donald Duck or Daffy Duck. The new cartoon duck could be a different species, or a female or any number of differences. But if you traced the image, that's stealing.
@@AuroraPaintBrush4444 But AIs don't trace though... If I ask for a cartoon duck, it uses its knowledge of ducks and cartoons to make a unique image that is original.
@@ABUBBA22 A better example then. The AI programs steals hundreds or thousands of images it has no legal rights to, and throws it into a kitchen blender and it throws up a new born puppy's understanding of a picture collage. Like the Hollywood kidnapper's note, with cut outs from a magazine. But worse. Would you please read a dictionary, on the difference between inspiration and IP theft?
@@ABUBBA22 "I punch your face but not your balls, don't tell me I'm being cruel to you" Just like you can ask a picture of a duck, you can also ask something in the style of an artist by their name. Being on the internet doesn't mean everyone else has the right to claim it for themselves, there's a reason artists hate when their work gets reposted.
Ngl I'm kinda giddy at the thought of a big Hollywood studio grabbing a pirated copy of Shadow of the Conqueror Changing the script juuust enough that it's Legally Distinct TM And then filming a high budget adaptation without paying Shad a penny Oh and Daylen is gay in the film! Of course it won't happen, because nobody cares about his shitty book, but IMAGINE the meltdown...
Shad seems to continually conflate AI tools as being the same as Generative AI. Most AI tools are in no way created using copyrighted work. AI does not equal Generative.
Shad is amazing how how many independent communities he has managed to alienate. Personal take on Sellsword? - Shad cannot swordfight. It is VERY obvious to anyone who actually does. Shad is the one eyed king in the land of the blind as a LOT of people have never held a sword before. - Sellsword is completely correct in his argument that if you want to learn HEMA you need to watch videos from people who actually DO HEMA. - Sellsword maybe shouldn't have pointed out Shad directly in his first video. Sure Shad. Cannot. Swordfight, but it was a tiny bit mean to point directly at him in the first video. - Shad has 1.7m subs. He is, nominally, a very successful big channel. The correct response to being attacked from below is to either ignore, do a quick one and done politely disagreeing, or do a one and done pointing out how he and his 1.7m supporters are SOOOOOOOOO butt hurt. Either way his is the nominally successful channel. He should NOT be fueling a pissing contest. - Shad's big argument seemed to be that Sellsword was gatekeeping the 'Sword Community' and that was bad. One, there is in context no actual Sword Community online. There are some real communities for Pop Culture online and there are numerous creators who bounce and interact off each other. This is not a thing for online swords. Real world swords? Yes. HEMA is a very social hobby and - sorry Shad - you are not part of it because YOU went out of your way back in the day to openly belittle and mock HEMA because they made the sin of saying that LARP was not the same as studying and practicing HEMA. Shad doesn't swordfight. The people who do swordfight considering him a LOL Cow. THAT is the Sword Community. And the funny thing is Shad has managed to spread this... love over multiple unrelated communities. The cross over between Art and HEMA is minimal. The cross over between fantasy novels and HEMA is minimal. Yet Shad links them all together because Shad seems to insist that Shad Way is the Only Way and then plays victim when people push back at him. Also Shad cannot swordfight.
@@mudcrab3420 speaking of unconnected communities are you aware of Artists such as Centurii-Chan, F.S. or Mossa and others like them?. because whenever Shad post one of his OC that's what they remind me of, and FYI they're all Smut-Artists lol. I have no proof that he does or does not know one or more of those Artists but it shows, it really shows, He knows about Haruhi Suzumiya. Gatekeeping is what people like shad like to cry about because they want to belong so badly but something inside them can't help but ruin it for themselves and others.
@mudcrab3420 yes this is necroposting but, funny story, sellsword adts never mentioned any creators by name in his original video, shad decided on his own that the video was about him. It was an entirely self inflicted wound
Shad wants only to be acknowledged for being good at things without having to be good at things. Not just with art but also the recent meltdown he had over sellsword arts video. People realized shad has never done hema or any real sword fighting. He has refused to participate in hema stuff when invited but has made many videos talking about sword fighting and how much he knows about it. Shad is nothing more than a larper. He wants to be something respectable but he cant so he pretends and he wants everyone else to pretend that he can as well.
funny story how I started my journey. I started using AI generative "art" at the end of 2022, I thought it was fun and dandy BUT every single time I spent HOURS on end to even approach what I envisioned with my prompts, I didn't know how this "AI" worked back then, and learned about it when my frustration went overboard. I always told myself "I can't draw, especially when due to religious beliefs I got forced to change my dominant hand" or kept saying I'm too old to learn art at this age (around 30). But after a few months, mid january of last year I got very tired to see results that didn't match my vision, what I wanted, what kind of thing I wanted to represent. I had an idea in my mind, a very clear idea, and I got just a very scuffed approximation of it, and even then, it was clearly soulless to me. So I decided to actually start from scratch, made an instagram to record my progress, took art seriously and I'm still at it! I hate myself to not have come to this decision YEARS ago but honestly, It's the best thing I've ever did. The things I do are amateurish, pretty bad imho, but at least "I" decided where my brush stroke went, "I" decided to make that volume look that way, I made my mistake and are MINE. Something "AI" cannot do, actually learn, understand and "play" with what you learn to give life to something, even if something is technically bad, you can see the sweat, blood and soul, people put in their pieces. What AI do is just a bad collage of stolen art and call it the day, no different than a gacha game where you wish to get something good or decent without any actually say about the final result or anything creative also because, this isn't "ai", it's just an algorithm that barely put together a collage of several thousands stolen art to make something somewhat decent. It doesn't think, it doesn't feel, it's a bunch of "if-else" statements in the code
100% agree. I am a professional artists and also a tech enthusiast. I installed Stable Diffusion and tried it out for a few days. At first I was blown away how fast you could get a concept rendered in high quality. After an hour I came to the conclusion the generator works common mistakes of artists into the picture and it's impossible to make it create what you really want. Then I tried control net to try and create a good piece of art with it, in the end it took me longer than if I had just made it by hand and the result wasn't really what I wanted. I think if creative artists would try to create a piece of art with AI they would loose a lot of the fear they have, because it always tries to create lukewarm art, it's so underwhelming.
@@TK_zerrivet yes! Absolutely, if you have ANY creativity, you'll see "ai art" as another chat bot, fun at first but very disappointing beyond that. At best it would give you the push you needed to actually start drawing, like it did to me which is pretty ironic since it was created to replace artists haha
Good on you. Funny enough, you're not the only one who has decided to start drawing because of this, either. Even a lot of people who don't typically consider themselves skilled artists can see the difference between them. The image generator is just slapping random bits and pieces together from other people's work. It'll NEVER know what's in someone's head. People keep assuming that "in a few years it'll generate what you ask for perfectly." But how? If I say I want a "blue king", how is it going to know exactly what I'm thinking with that? It doesn't and never will. At least not in this form. Maybe someday they'll make something that actually reads your mind, but this stuff is remedial compared to that. So I hope more and more people see it for what it is and think, "You know what? I think I can do this myself."
" it's just an algorithm that barely put together a collage of several thousands stolen art" This isn't how AI works. It isn't "collaging" art. You were misled by a talking head somewhere.
@@SugarThyme "The image generator is just slapping random bits and pieces together from other people's work" Again, not how it works. Unless you think humans are also just slapping random bits and pieces together from other people's work.
I'm a translator, mostly novels and comic books, and I would never rely on AI to do my work for me. Chat GPT and other AI programs can make a rough translation, but the amount of nuances and details they miss is insane. They can't comprehend how idioms work in different languages.
He said, the datas are not kept. Then he sais, that if you requested a 1:1 copy of mona lisa, you will get a 1:1 copy of mona lisa. How then could the AI make a 1:1 copy, if the datas are not kept?
Is he correct that the average, normal person does not care about this? Yes. But that doesn’t mean they have his stance. They also don’t know the details of how it’s made and about the lawsuits and corruptions and attitudes that make up Midjourney and Stable diffusion. It isn’t necessary to convince the average person, anyway. It’s showing the judges proof that is important. Also. Him talking about a Gaussian blur in that context makes no sense, wtf is he even talking about? …. Pretty sure I’ve heard Shad and his friends say divorce should be illegal too, funny enough.
"(...) Because they're not artists at all. They are heartless, soulless, mindless automata going through the motions of artistry and technique, but with nothing behind their brush strokes." Dude tried to roast artists and managed to describe AI image generation instead. Wow.
i'm pretty sure HO was describing artists (he emphasized with "twitter artists") who draw in the same trendy ways without any of their own vision and creativity in their art. He sounds harsh, but I think there's some truth in his words.
As an aspiring write i gotta say i cant get enough of people like you dunking on ai bros. More importantly than all that tho, what game are you playin? It looks sweet
Can you imagine, an AI chatbot trained ONLY on Shadow of the Conqueror? You ask it what the weather will be like tomorrow and it threatens to explode your head while going on a self-pitying screed
It's incredibly disturbing how much joy he gets when he thinks about artists being dehumanized, used, and abused. The sheer glee in his voice and on his face is nauseating. 🤮
Well, Shad and HO both got a reaction out of a lot of people here. Made you all think, really. Certainly stirred an emotional reaction in you. And really, when Christians and Muslims complain about offensive art, is this not exactly the response artists retort with? Do we not tell them that art is SUPPOSED to make people uncomfortable? To stir an emotion? To make you think? To spark debate and reaction? Truly, Shad and HO are every bit the artist that any one of you are,. And let's be clear, this response is ultimately to KirkpattieCake's video, not any work of art. So the response is much more a work of art than any of their art in that regard.
@@MertowVA Talent. There should be talent in art. In that regard, HO is correct. Most artists, Kirk included, are inferior meat versions of AI artbots, meaning there is no soul behind their work, not that they are not human. This is a point Kirk missed in their rebuttal, either mistakenly because they're not intelligent enough to pick up on it, which quite honestly how could you not, or, and I would say more charitably, intentionally to play on emotional heartstrings.
Dr. Ian Malcolm : If I may... Um, I'll tell you the problem with the scientific power that you're using here, it didn't require any discipline to attain it. You read what others had done and you took the next step. You didn't earn the knowledge for yourselves, so you don't take any responsibility for it. You stood on the shoulders of geniuses to accomplish something as fast as you could, and before you even knew what you had, you patented it, and packaged it, and slapped it on a plastic lunchbox, and now [bangs on the table] Dr. Ian Malcolm : you're selling it, you wanna sell it. Well... John Hammond : I don't think you're giving us our due credit. Our scientists have done things which nobody's ever done before... Dr. Ian Malcolm : Yeah, yeah, but your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should. (Jurassic Park 1993)
@@EntitySteel how old are you, 9? Ask your mother and father what these quotes mean and how they relate to the subject. Or hush up, stop procrastinating, and go do your homework. Inserting your really lame eyeroll responses everywhere they don't belong seems to be a pattern of behavior for you, so I'm curious to know what you're neglecting in life just to waste your time doing this.
I think perhaps the most significant issue related to copyright in regard to AI image generators is not the output of the generators, but the fact that copyrighted works were used in the creation of the generators. A commercial (or intended to become so) product created by using copyrighted images. That doesn't get talked about enough. The AI apologists want to distract from that point by talking only about the outputs and how "transformative" they can be. Also, I know it has been said, but Shad either has no idea how copyright law actually works, or he is intentionally lying about it.
Can you expand upon this? I'm fairly sure it doesn't matter what commercial works you use to create something as long as the end product is sufficiently transformative in nature. Why would using copyrighted work in the development of the tool which has no copyrighted work in its end state matter?
@@EntitySteel Because using something the rights to which are owned by someone else, to create a product that would not function without that ingredient just seems wrong to me. I am not a lawyer, so go ask some of those about it, but I am pretty sure I am drawing a solid analogy here in comparison to using owned property without authorization to create a product. Contrary to what Shad says, just because something is “out there” does not mean one can legally use it in any way. Also, I’d argue that if (as shown in this video) such image generators can and will produce near exact copies of images they were trained on, it seems that they “de facto” do have those images in their databases, even if it’s not in the traditional way.
A response to the “There difference between the final product of human and ai art is so minuscule that for the common person they can’t tell the difference” I have this: If a person was hired by making a fake resume and memorizing the talking points of his position for an interview, does he deserve to keep his job over an actual qualified candidate?
45:34 I wonder if he'd be fine with AI taking his book, and his graphic novel comic, and someone else selling it as theirs? Because that could happen and he'd never know it until his sales evaporated. The results of the lawsuits aren't in, either. He may find himself eating a ton of crow in the near future.
I remember a shad video years ago. After he published his book or just before. He was crying about how making a novel was his dream. Like it was really important to him. Now he wants to have an AI write one for him, is just one of the most hypocritical things I ever heard. As an aspiring author myself, I find that insulting to the craft. Like even in a world where AI isn’t theft and is actually an original creation created by the AI it is insulting. Just want to have something else do all the work and profit from it. Shad’s favorite animal better be a leech or another parasite.
In his recent Madame Web vid he mentioned that 3d animation is easier than ai art... Tyranth disagreed with him and Shad jumped down his throat. You can tell Shad has never tried to learn 3d animation. That's a skill that took me years to learn. Btw I've been watching Jazza and Shad for around 10 years now. His AI hot takes are just too jarring... and he wonders why he is losing subs every month.
I can confirm that this idiot knows shit about 3D animation, it's a lot more difficult than imputing "Minecraft Steve's balls" on a glorified search bar.
@@dragondelsur5156Just 3D-modeling is difficult. Then add rigging and animation frames and it becomes even more difficult. Shitiversity has big habit of incorrect judgements of skill required. Learning to use nunchaku takes few hours. Learning to be artist takes a lifetime.
“Biased against Ai” is the most blatant “I think this computer is a human” statement in this entire video. I have not come so far to see robots become a part of identity politics, two of the things I hate the most. I will simply reply to that with “yes, I AM “robo/Ai phobic”, what of it?”
It drives me fucking nuts that no mtter what hes talking about hes talks like hes a 15 year old debatelord The literal language he uses bothers the fuck out of me
Shad is quite right wing from what I understand, and it's non-uncommon for people in those spaces to twist progressive language for less than ethical purposes.
I super appreciate that you analyzed what he says and provided context and background. The use of AI can be debated to all hell but spreading lies about it in its favor is a _choice_ , a political stance since if people believe what he says, it just helps big corp get the big corp money. I had subscribed to his channel for the historical accuracy... How he became a Podcast Dude™ Tech Bro™ who is now vehemently DENYING history - guess what, Shad, art history and the artists' position today and the very real political and legal discussion around this is HISTORY TOO - is absolutely beyond me. If what he says were true, I could just publish my Harry Potter fanfiction to be bought at bookstores and to earn money just for myself, and She who shall not be named could not sue me, but that's not true is it?? If what he says were true, every single piece of media that's out there could be copied without any repercussions, but that is quite literally not how the world works, and he MUST know that as a historian. He HAS TO know that. You have to cite what your quoting meticulously, you have to mark all your sources, you have to make sure they are peer reviewed, you cannot be a respected and relevant scientist / academic without actually adhering to, let's be real, a LOT of rules. And that's how he started out, didn't he? He used to call out media that did NOT adhere to the rules, that did not use relevant and accurate sources and was not historically correct or fair! So the fact that he's now spewing this nonsense is... actually so sad. He knows better, but for some reason he suddenly can't live without generating anime girls for himself? Off of other people's stolen art, that he somehow rationalizes in word-of-mouth fake news? How pathetic is that? It's utterly disgusting to me how he went from this mellow historian fellow to the angriest, most repressed little chap once he got the views and confidence. Really showed his teeth.
@@heybearnation You've just reinforced my assumption. You consider them real artists because they know how to do traditional art, rather than considering their ability to do digital art.
@@nightslasher9384 Nope, just like any contemporary artist you've ever seen would likely be unable to create their art to their current level without having been inspired by previous works of art.
7:02 Can't stop laughing at the Mr. Bean image. (Mr. Bean with a turkey over his head is one of my favorite comedy skits ever.) Thank you for a much needed laugh.
This video is incredibly based. Ignore the haters dog piling on you, they're entitled brats, soulless monsters, or simply mislead, but well-intended people. I don't know who you are but I'm so happy I clicked!
It would actually be kind of funny. A) take shadow of the conqueror. B) remix sentences and paragraphs. (Not individually remix words) C) publish it as conquer the shadowers
My wife is always baffled when i describe stuff from in my head. She is Aphantisic so literally doesn't see images in her head. She is a talented potter and painter but needs the image of what she is creating in front of her. Just an interesting condition realative to the 48.00 minute mark
1:04:14 I don't think Shad is one of the 'Haves' regarding AI. He's unaware (or doesn't care) that those entry level positions lead to mentor ships that increase experience and competency. He goes on and on about how awful media is, yet he pushes AI as some kind of beneficial tool. It's already having a huge impact on voice actor work in gaming and other venues. I've heard people crow over 'woke' voice actors losing their jobs, not understanding that it won't stop there. 1:09:19 Speaking as a disabled artist, I prefer old fashioned media like pen and ink, watercolor, and gouache. In college my drawing teacher brought in a woman born without arms who drew better than any of us with her feet. I've seen paraplegics who draw and paint using their mouths. AI Art isn't going to make any of us better artists. In point of fact it would be demeaning of the accomplishments made. (And Moonlight Sonata is one of my favorite classical pieces.)
@@samueltitone5683 I think you're right. Art contributes to quality of life for a lot of disabled artists (myself included). I don't know of anyone who'd give that up for a computer prompt. What would be the point?
"I've heard people crow over 'woke' voice actors losing their jobs, not understanding that it won't stop there. " Not really the argument being made. The point is that there was that Hollywood strike thing where one of the demands being put forward was protection from AI in their roles. This from many commentators was considered a valid point. Many of the other points were considered as LOL, but AI was a middle of the road topic. Then the strike ended and the unions bragged about how they had won and forced the mean studios to bend a knee. The actors had won. Go Actor's Union!!! Then a month or so later it gets revealed that the studio's had the right to use AI to recreate voices if they had already paid for the voice on a previous occasion (paraphrasing). So the crowing is not for the support of AI, but more for the artists who went on strike and then came out the other end agreeing to a worse contact. Is this crowing moral or ethical? Probably not, but this was the back story for at least SOME of the comments on this topic.
@@mudcrab3420 I was referring to the localizer voice actors who were dubbing for Japanese manga/anime. They were bragging on how they didn't translate the dialogue accurately in favor of their own preferences. The Japanese company fired them and replaced them with AI. The contract from the Union was a while back, the voice actor thing was the most recent mess. Sorry I wasn't more clear.
@@r.rodriguez4991 I don't think Jazza hates him. Hurt by him? Yes. Jazza is a true artist who's found his calling in educating others. He is kind, patient, and very creative. He loves encouraging others, and shares what he knows. I've enjoyed many of his programs, especially those where he draws characters based on the books they came from instead of movies. He does more than draw--he sculpts. He is everything Shad covets and will never be.
I cannot believe people are really out here advocating for dehumanizing art. We already have started to dehumanizing life with smart phones and how much technology/social media has been integrated into life. Art is something we desperately need to keep human, it's the only thing we've got at this point.
HarmfulOpinions is a good boi. Tim is definitely an acquired taste in terms of humor. Did you finish the entire video, or did that joke prompt you to turn it off? I believe he raised a valid point that a creative artist does not have much to fear from the current types of image generators. I think calling these datasets "stealing" when people are willingly signing away the rights to their intellectual property by using Google Drive due to laziness while not using Free and Open Source Software or privacy options is not a good perspective. The most compelling argument against AI image generators is presented in an interview with the master artist Craig Mullins titled "Craig Mullins Predicted the Future About AI Art". This reasoning aligns with the points raised by comic artist and animator Sven Stoffels in his video "WHAT IS ART!? | An OBJECTIVE definition | SHAD_AI response". PS absolutely not a fan of Shadiveristy.
I think it's ridiculous to call it stealing considering anything put out by an appropriately trained AI is absolutely transformative in nature, and doesn't even use the original art.
@@EntitySteel Should a theft occur, it would likely happen at the data-set level. What feasible outcomes could the anti-AI movement achieve? Realistically, they might advocate for more stringent laws and regulations, imposing substantial fines and even more draconian intellectual property laws. This would be advantageous for big tech companies as they could easily pay the insignificant fines, eliminating their competitors, undermining open-source projects, and solidifying a monopoly on AI. The primary impact of these measures would be felt by small ventures and individuals. More big tech dystopia.
@@EntitySteelFair Use "transformative" can only be brought into the discussion if the item in question doesn't directly compete with the origin, sharing the same market space, and AI art does *not* have that going for it, not even a little bit.
The thing about Adobe Firefly... at first i thought it was at least a good step, but then there was some concerning language in the Photoshop license agreement that sounded like (unless you specifically opted out), they could use anything you create with it in training their models. (Maybe only if uploaded to the Adobe cloud?)
Thankfully there are many alternatives. At this point I'm glad I picked up Krita. Great digital painting software and can do anything you need it to. Considering it's open source aswell I feel more assured that it won't go down the same route as adobe did..
26:21 Ignoring the bit about how Netflix hosting a movie does not mean I now own the movie, Shad might want to have a look at the term "Derivative Work" because he seems to think that altering a work you do not own grants you ownership to the edit.
I saw his AI video which had more comments criticizing AI and showing how it’s actually theft, but guess what he only liked the comment that agreed with his pov. Pathetic and this is the same guy who criticizes woke leftists for living in echo chambers.
I hate the “it’s a tool” argument and then they compare it to photoshop. I’m a photographer and I can’t just tell photoshop to do something. I have to know how to do it and make judgments on how the changes I make will improve the photo to a more pleasing effect. If I told a computer to do it and it spits out 100 options and I just pick the best one did I have any part of the creation of that edit?
It's funny how little people understand how AI art works and what kind of care has to go into it. Both beginners in the field and the people on the outside who've never seen it used at all and only know the final product, like you. I shouldn't have to tell you how much people bitched about how photoshop was going to "replace them" because it was going to give the less talented artists a free rise to the top because of all the tools it has (and continues to add, as photomanipulation gets braindead easy even for someone with no artistic talent whatsoever), and it did. The skill floor dropped out from under everyone and broadened the talent pool. Traditional artists still have their niche but nobody is asking for traditional artists in the industries that call for them. Now, hey, imagine an artist creates an image with an AI art and then reworks the image to be more like what they want. Is it a tool now? An artist used it in the same way they would use a powerful photoshop tool or filter. I don't think you get to make that call, though. If you don't want AI to beat you, step up your game, adapt to it, or just sit in the corner and watch the world pass you by.
You know it’s funny, another youtuber made a similar observation around one of his other videos about his sword stuff, when he was kind of using one of his other co-hosts or collaborators as a bit of a target dummy, or prop to "prove" his point, rather than respecting them as a sparing partner.
@@ProudPlatypus It annoys me how obviously irritated Shad gets any time Tyranth does better than him and Nate in any demonstration, to the point where he'll add ridiculous stipulations to whatever it is to try to make him fail. I hope he at least pays well, but somehow I doubt it.
AI art is just tech tracing. You can trace off five drawings, collage it, but it's still isn't inherently creative. The mix of things nay be viewed as a creative work. but the acknowledgement to the original creators needs to be addressed, monetarily and socially.
_"Check this out, I'm a musical prodigy!"_ Uhh... this is just a playlist of songs off the radio _"Yeah, but I had to tell it which ones to play! I challenge you to get the same results!"_
Shad was beaten by his brother at archery, his brother Jazza, is astronomically better than him at art. Shad is trying to do damage control, like no, no, no, SEE IM An Artist too. He spent the rest of the video trying to prove he was better than his brother at archery and failed, then tried to talk his way out, like yeah but I'm still better.
I've played around with an AI art generator, but I try to get it to replicate something that I've imagined in my mind rather than to copy an artist's style or work. AI art does what I want from it poorly. It seems much better suited for stealing from real artists.
That one guy's take on humanity is freaking wild. Great video, I like how you pull up articles and data about ai to prove what he says wrong. He doeant seem to use any datavto prove his point...
I'm a writer. I have been writing for 16-17 years, in hungarian. I never try draw because thats not my artistic field, I'm not good, and honestly I don't think I can spend enough time for that. And AI happend. And I'm so pissed, so angry, so so hateful of it, I bought a pencil, a notebook and started drawing. And I enjoying it! I have a very fancy colored pencil set, a better sketchbook, and I'm so proud of my badly amatour drawing! Because I did it! Okay, I use pinterest for reference and I copeing simple art, but still! I doing the drawing! And I'm so proud of myself, because I do something badly and joyfully. My art is still better art than AI """"""art"""""". And I actually considering spend more time with practicing, because turns out: I enjoying the process! So, AI art thief is inherently wrong and should burn in hell, not everything has lost. I started drawing, because of hate, but I do it now of joy and pride. And I'm so so bad, but thats the fun! Thats the lesson: you can make art. You don't need steal
Congratulations on picking up drawing and also finding something new to love! I also picked up drawing again in 2022, partially because a friend of my started drawing again and she inspired me and also because the genAI inspired me to actually learn how to draw so I could draw mine and other peoples characters. Some days are harder than others, but it has been so fun and I'm so glad you've found it so rewarding too! Good luck with your writing and with your visual arts going forward too!
i really wish folks would quit tying EVERY topic/issue to politics. My disapproval of generative AI has nothing to do with my views on foreign affairs, the defense budget, or any other ballot issue.
I just saw the Despicable Me 4 ad where they made fun people who make AI art and you know, Illumination may be owned by a big corporation, but at the end of the day it is nice to see a big animation studio like that take a stance against the use of AI generated work because mind you, this studio produced the 2nd highest grossing movie of 2023 and if they could do that while being against the use of AI art, that could influence other big studios to do the same.
@@dragondelsur5156 From what I hear they actually treat their artists and workers way better than other animation studios, so they might be making mid movies (TBH I kinda liked rise of gru and Migration) but at least they treat their artists right.
i dont get why people confused between skillset and individuallity. sure AI are making art i wont deny it but when it STEAL someone's identity is the problem. we need the law to reognise this generative AI is just a impersonating tool at the current stage.
The one thing I take issue with in this video is the idea that some people are inherently uncreative. I'm a musician, but for many, MANY years, I struggled with writing music that sounded interesting. I had to practice the art of being creative by writing snippets until I managed to get to the point where I could make what I wrote sound like what I had in my head. I'm still not sure if what I write is any good, but I finally managed to get "creative".
I have an in-law who doesn't understand why museums exist. When one of her relatives died, she couldn't understand why no one would let her throw away his paintings. (He was a very good landscape painter and portrait artist.) She's very up front in saying she has no creativity and zero interest in hearing about 'empty drivel.' In her mind, if you 'play with paper and paints' you're still a child. (No, we don't spend much time together.) It's very tough for any creative person to understand someone who has zero creativity.
@@spookyfirst9514 I think there are a lot of complexities of the mind that sometimes people don't even realize are a thing. For example, one person might think in images. If you say something to them, they picture it as an image in their head. Others won't picture any image. They comprehend what you said, but they're not picturing it at all. That's where I usually am (unless I actively attempt to picture something). And a lot of times people will go through life assuming everyone's thought process is like theirs. If they picture what they hear, then they think other people ALSO picture what they hear. And then they wonder why someone could listen to something awful and not get sickened by it. So I think it's hard to comprehend. Especially for people who are creative or are actively pursuing creative interests. (I think, like everything else, you can grow your creativity through effort.) But while I tend to want to believe everyone has some creativity, the realistic side of me thinks that isn't so. I think you're right. It's just so hard to comprehend when you are a creative person.
@@spookyfirst9514 I get what you're saying, but I still wonder if it's really a case of the "switch" in the brain being off, or if it's a combination between a lack of interest and lack of practise. My father, for example, has no real interest in art or music, he's never learned an instrument and I've never even seen him doodle, but he can think up the most out of the box solutions to repairing things that I'd never even think of. What I'm getting at is that creativity is pretty much what made humans the dominant species on the planet, so every human should have the capacity for it.
christ that opening... here i was gearing up to put 100 forma on the goddamn stug, thinking that would be torture. less than 5 minutes teaches me otherwise. jfc.
I love that you brought up how the machine is biased - it's controlled by someone, a corporation. and is limited by its own data (however vast it is; still limited). Even if you do what Shad does, and tweak stuff in PS before running it through the AI 10 times, the machine is still influencing your work, and it doesn't give a damn about your vision. Using AI is removing individualism from all the most expressive formats there are: writing, art, acting, music and even video. It's belitteling your own choices and opinions in favour of a corporation's algorithm.
I'll never forgive him for asking the question, "how much gold can an adventurer carry?" Then taking us through the scientific process without ever answering it.
Hey! I'm not sure why RUclips recommended this to me (not a writer and no idea who this Shad guy is) but I'm glad it did. I'm a professional software engineer, artist, and musician and a huge advocate for generative AI and I want to say you are, in my opinion, completely correct. Use of AI art in commercial products is completely immoral, and to claim it is somehow "yours" is theft. Full stop. It's like Google images, or pinterest. You type into a box and it spits images related to that out -- those images are great for reference and ideation but to claim that's yours is literally illegal. It's pretty clear to me that this guy has no interest in art or technology, just a troll trying to get rage clicks. Also in my opinion, real art is not gonna go anywhere. As these people stop being able to make money pissing people off these takes will stop showing up. If any artists are reading this and feeling bad, just know your work has value. Stay at it, the trolls will fade away in time.
I’m very much the same way. I like using AI tools in my process, but I in no way trick myself into believing that I own any of the things that I generate. I simply treat it like a Google search or other kinds of research and build on it from there. I might generate 100 images of something, then look at bits and pieces that I like from different things and go off and make something original from that but I’ll never take an AI generated image or text whole cloth and just slap it on something and say I created it, because I absolutely didn’t.
I used to like Shad. I love writing, and he had a few videos about writing I really liked. I was shocked seeing the person he truly is. I'm an artist/writer and I strongly disagree with AI generators. He's a writer? You'd think he'd be supporting artists.
There is no adapting to a machine that already does what an artist or creative person can do, but that machine does it instantaneously at 100percent. With the whole truckers being replaced by automated drivers and liberty minded folk being against that for the obvious harm it would cause to truckers around the world. It's weird, again, to see those same conservative people not railing on AI. And actually defending it.
I don’t believe in my own humanity but I know artists have something behind their eyes and I would die if it meant I could protect those sparks humans carry within them.automatons are the hunks of steel and electronic carrying silicon printed circuitry while human flesh and blood holds an experience that births that which I love and want to protect from the iron boots of the marching ai onslaught
We bullied the metaverse off of the Internet. We bullied NFTs off of the Internet. Crypto has been a joke for years. We need to rally together and use our bullying for good once again.
Metaverse was just BS marketing buzzwords for what already exists, NFTs were only ever used as a scam, Crypto has actually been useful. AI? Is also useful and has many, many applications that you're not going to do diddlysquat to stop with your twitter-tier outrage. This ship sailed long ago.
Harmful Opinions is God! You didn't understand his video at all. He's literally saying, that if you're claiming to be an artist, use your art like it's intended and make people FEEL things. People who can do this are actual artists, professionals, have nothing to worry about because AI will not be able to replace them. If you can't bring out people's emotions with art, you're not an artist, you simply like drawing. These people just fill up space with "art" which is no different from AI. TL;DR: GIT GUD
You're forgetting the most important part as to why AI is hated: It's not just people like her that will be replaced, it's EVERYBODY, including the people you say "have nothing to worry about".
AI is only hated by artist types with too much self importance. a real artist is no more threatened by AI than he is by the millions of other artists running around. These upsetti spagetti people are the ones who get upset over people copying their style.
@@EntitySteel Which is why they'll be replaced (unless this garbage is put massive blocks), because it's cheaper, it's faster, and companies can just pump out IP forever, the entertainment industry stops being where dreams come true to become where dreams die.
I disagree about some people not being artistic or unable to be a engineer. All of it is a skill. And while some people can't think outside of the box, you can train them to even if they did not originally. No one is born one or the other. A lot of the difficulty in learning these skills is that some people don't enjoy it and thus is harder to learn. But its all a perspective, there are plenty of people that hate one subject but have a change of heart later due to some specific event that gave them a new perspective. There is also a phenomenon where people gain appreciation for something by interacting with it more often due to a sense of familiarity.
You're incredible in the way you demonstrate logic and rationale to highlight and discuss a topic that's incredibly tough to talk about and simultaneously debunk and refute points made from Shadiversity and his flawed logic about a topic he's never had the authority to express an understanding of. Kudos to you Ian, You're an absolute champ 🏆
As much as I hate Disney deep down i do want them to find out that their art data is/ has been used in gen AI so that they can sue anyone and everyone who ever use them.
Wow, and they completed misrepresent people who want to learn to make their own clothes and farm their own food. In my limited experience, these people want to do these things as a safeguard should our society collapse. If our shipping routes fall apart for any reason, most of us are fucked. The people who won’t be are the ones who have learned to be self sufficient. And they will be capable of passing that knowledge on to other people.
I think they still are mostly proud of their own labours work and interest how to mostly i think. And selfgrown food, just is different. But its definitly good that ther are people that know how to do it and keep that alive. I just dont think that societial collapse is the first in mind there, and think its mosttly people interested, and wit hfood, well howmegrown food just good.
I can only ask of Asmongold or Shadiversity how they'd feel if they were the targets; what if tomorrow Twitch launched their own Generative AI, and it used all the past streams of Asmongold between his react content and his gaming streams, and we got AImongold, who is a relatively perfect replica of the man himself. Maybe Twitch and Amazon got a nice little hook in the terms of service that allows them to use his likeness. Would he be so apathetic towards the left of creative output? Because I'm not going to sell him short, he's managed creative enough endeavors to be a stand out personality who isn't involve in drama. Its easy for him to take the consumer mindset of 'I don't care as long as the product is good'. Asmon hasn't seen this from a personal level, and they don't see how the inability of AI to innovate, adapt, or imagine will lead to the slow decline in the products they receive. As for Shad, I don't know, ShadAIversity might write a better book, but I don't know if we need another one of those.
To be honest with you I think Asmon would be fine with it dude is too rich to care. Sgad though... The ego to far to great I sense copious levels of cope
What's wild to me is all I can think of in all of this AI generated stuff and the defense of it, is Dune, and the Butlerian Jihad to destroy thinking machines and humanity's dependence on them. Also, literally, as I typed this, you showed the new Dune film's images with the turkey heads. A sign! The spice (and vids like these in support of artists) must flow!
It's so funny how shad could have just stayed in his lane and avoided a shitload of drama and falling outs with other creators with his dumbass takes. All because he has a napoleon complex about his brother being the actual talented artist in the family.
Don’t know about that, since even before the knight watch thing took off and him supporting AI became a thing he already was losing favor within his own community. Mostly showing a lack of actual fighting/weapons knowledge. Look no further than his video where he suggests fixes for certain weapons.
@@dragondelsur5156 which funny enough only in his defense of the double sword only shows how much he doesn’t know about fighting. All of his defense for it is filled with whataboutisms and he doesn’t even attempt to spare with it.
Part of me thinks somebody should get an AI to make a bunch of Shad videos to prove a point. Guaranteed he'd be mad. But the rest just wants to delete the AIs.
![[AI Update] OpenAI Introduces SORA, AIBros Can't Think Without Help, but All Hope Isn't Lost](/img/1.gif)
I've actually seen him and his friends deliver the JRR Tolkien quote "Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy what has been invented or made by the forces of good " in regards to the current Hollywood machine. Ironic.
Vice robs us of our gifts
Which is NOT a Tolkien quote lmao
@@sheevinopalpatino4782 Actually, you're correct. It's not a quote of Tolkien's. That being said, he and his friends have used this mis contributed quote, which seems to suggest that they believe the sentiment to be true; yet he ignores it when it's inconvenient to him.
@@sheevinopalpatino4782But that's the vibe I'm getting from Silmarillion.
This was the quote from Tolken, the speaker is talking about Orcs
"The Shadow that bred them can only mock, it cannot make: not real things of its own. I don't think it gave life to the orcs, it only ruined them and twisted them"
Shad won't get it until someone steals his entire youtube catalog using ai images and voiceovers and tells him to cry about it.
You aren't owed your skillset being irreplaceable, sorry bud.
@@EntitySteelYou aren't owed anyone taking your comments seriously, sorry bud
Let’s teach him a lesson.
You're giving him too much credit, he probably wouldn't even learn then! He'd get his fanbase to defend him while he cries in the corner.
@@sunla Okay..?
Ya know at this rate, I'm thinking about making a parody of Shad's book and call it "The Conqueror Turns into a Naked Transgender Lesbian Cat Furry" or something just to piss him off
The conquerere becomes a catgirl and learns to cook :O
You write it with AI?
use AI to write it, then when he complains, tell him to cry about it.
@@TheAshenTarnishedHunter Exactly, and it could be done in no time at all, prompt: rewrite shadow of the conqueror but make every character a furry. Oh and write it a bit better. Chat-GPT: Impossible not to.
protected expression :) I'll help
I can't help but think so much of Shad's AI bullshit comes from a place of spite and jealousy towards his brother Jazza.
He doesn't want to put in the work to develop his own art and doesn't enjoy drawing, which is absolutely fine - people should focus on what they enjoy - except Shad clearly DOES want to be a good artist, like his brother.
So he decided to use AI to steal from other artists, and pretend that makes HIM a great artist. Now he's stuck defending this fantasy to protect his own ego, no matter how much harm it causes. It's pathetic.
Yeah, i think you are right, it seems he really dousent like his brother, and since the A.I think i cant stand him anymore... i really dont get it why he dousent see the problem first they go for the artists and then who comes next architects....? Who need a bloke who talks about sword when a ai will do it in the future.
This is my take as well, jazza is an accomplished artist as well as a very successful youtuber. Who has also managed to build quite the business around his success.
Comparatively, Shad is (while, not negligible) comparatively only and ok youtuber..... and a self published author of dubious success and skill
I'm willing to bet this weighs heavily on his older brother conscience
This argument is essentially luddite in nature. It doesn't matter how many people are "harmed". Lots of people were harmed by the industrial revolution, yet society goes on.
@@EntitySteel Is it a "luddite" argument to care about anyone that isn't yourself?
It most definitely comes from that. He’s an egomaniac, so if he’s not the center of drama it drives him crazy. Not only that though, it stems from his inherent laziness as well. He just wants recognition without any effort. The glory without the risk.
so, just started the video, and about the 3 minute mark, i think it warrants this quote from Terry Pratchett:
There is a very interesting debate raging at the moment about the nature of sin, for example,” said Oats. “And what do they think? Against it, are they?” said Granny Weatherwax.
“It’s not as simple as that. It’s not a black and white issue. There are so many shades of gray.”
“Nope.”
“Pardon?”
“There’s no grays, only white that’s got grubby. I’m surprised you don’t know that. And sin, young man, is when you treat people as things. Including yourself. That’s what sin is.
“It’s a lot more complicated than that . . .”
“No. It ain’t. When people say things are a lot more complicated than that, they means they’re getting worried that they won’t like the truth. People as things, that’s where it starts.”
“Oh, I’m sure there are worse crimes . . .”
“But they starts with thinking about people as things . . . ”
felt very appropiate
Love Granny Weatherwax. Which book is this from? I could use a good Pratchett read.
@@spookyfirst9514 its from Carpe Jugulum, according to the news article i took it from. I always make a mess of his books in my head, so i couldnt remember it for the life of me
@@sergiogimenez3923 Thank you!
As much as I am fascinated by AI, you're absolutely right.
Yep! He was a treasure. Also it definitly fits.
Also the hogfather speech wher death says how irational imagination makes humans human.
To why people need to believebelieve wild things,silly things, to practice be able to believe the things like compassion, love justice, fairness, and make them real.
As vile as he can be, I think his joy of poking artists in the eye has backfired to a point. At first the argument was spun that "you artists are only mad you're about to lose a job" and many bought into that. Thanks to loudmouth jerks like Shad the message that AI steals from artists is now more widely known. Normies don't worry themselves over copyright laws. Shad has made it easier to get that message to them, so they can decide for themselves. When explained properly most of the time people agree AI is stealing. Our own government (USA) has been open about wanting to protect artists rights when it comes to this issue.
@@solarydays I wonder how his wife feels having her head placed on 14yo girl bodies. I find it weird he uses that body type.
Good point. By him making a fool of himself and being so comedical and lolcow, he made it more obvious.
@@TheRQpaints I'll bet Vaush enjoys it.
It didn't backfire thou, why would you say that? thats cringe dude
@@PagmsSilver Because this shows the true nature of AI defenders, in between all their bullshit arguments, THIS is what they actually believe.
That's very condescending for Shad to agree that artists opinions don't matter. Considering he tries to convince the art community that he's an "artist". He just rendered his entire creative view redundant by agreeing with Asmongold.
I agree with asmon as well. They took the clip out of context but Asmon whole view is that nothing will matter in the long run because consumers in general do not actually care. If the consumer and producer can get something cheaper, without paying an artiest, guess what capitalism is going to pick.
So no, artist do not matter in the long run.
1:30:44
Shad: "I do not think a photographer is the same type of artist as a comic artist, someone who draws or a cartoonist or something like that. And I don't think they're
the same type of artist as a painter, or a sculptor. I think these are different artistic mediums that have merit within their own sphere. And AI art there is more, there's AI art
that has more artistic merit than others, depending on the artistry you apply to it."
Pure sophistry. Without photographers, artists who draw, sculpt, paint, and cartoon, there would be nothing for an AI to use. Without that DATA SET, there IS NO AI ART. That is the truth he's desperate to avoid. This is not an argument he can win.
It's like saying you're an artist because you're rich enough to commission art from somebody else lol
Literally nothing in his statement is wrong. All art isn't equal and it certainly doesn't take the same skill set to do all art. It doesn't matter if your art exists and AI uses it to extrapolate it's own thing.
The world doesn't work on first discoveries. We have gained and lost tons of knowledge throughout history, that would be no different with art.
I mean even without an artist there are still people able to explain something that they'd like to see made even if they can't express that into an artistic form.
Thats how the machine learned generator does what it does. You say "I want this, this is what I want it to look like" and it goes "here you go".
It's a useless pointless argument. A conductor doesn't play music, but they are capable of composing it and getting music out of others.
We don't live in a world where these things don't exist so this idea it's supposed to be important because x wouldn't exist without y is just trying to add some inherent value to it without acknowledgement that it's not all the same.
They don't disagree with the first part about art having merits in different ways, they disagree with the premise that AI is art has its own merit.
The lack of value with the AI art comes from the fact that no human is making a conscious artistic decisions about composition or anything.
It's just a robot that chooses smears stuff together based on what the average of an image looks like. Real artists borrow and take inspiration but the machine doesn't have any intentionality about the inspiration, it just makes colors in the shape of patterns it sees with its samples.
Sure, from the angle that we all make our own interpretations of what art is, nothing is inherently artful or artless. But I would argue that the process is so far removed from the intentionality that even the strangest pieces of art have.
Photography is art because you need to get the perfect angle, perfect focus, and perfect time. Even grabbing some random rock off the ground and taking it to an art display could count as art in some weird meta way if you use it to make an interesting statement about the very act or art in general. But AI art doesn't involve a human in the creation process at all.
But more importantly, I won't ever consider it an art just to spite AI art bros. Most don't give a shit about art. In fact, many are GLEEFUL that artists are going to be replaced by type-and-print slop.
@@midnightfenrir
90 percent of artists are the same. They're just as derivative
@@midnightfenrir You cannot call yourself an artist if you commission art from someone else and claim you've made it. A conductor at least can write music, a fundamental act of creation via human creativity.
1:16:50 I hate how he dismisses the jobs lost to AI as just, “oh no a furry artist loses his job, what are we going to do?” NO SHAD, there are real freaking designers, artists, marketers, and more that are being laid off by real companies because someone decided to use these AI tools in place of, not in addition to, real people. The argument isn’t only disingenuous, it’s downright insulting.
I always find it so ironically funny that he has like 7 different platforms that he begs for money on because if people didn't give him money then he would go broke and have to stop making RUclips videos and get a "real" job, but if OTHER people (artists) want to create content (art) then they can get fucked because he has "SICK ART SKILLZ" in the form of AI lmfao.
I fucking love that in the middle of all this shit going on pewdiepie learns how to draw within 100 days. I've heard asmon use the excuse that "not everyone has the time to learn how to draw." It's always pure laziness and unwillingness to learn. Nothing more, nothing less. ANYONE CAN BE AN ARTIST/WRITER.
Anyone can be an artist or writer; that doesn't mean they're automatically a good one, but it means they're trying, and thus automatically better than Artificial Intelligence.
Asmon "streaming is harder than working a 9-5" Gold?
1:10:53 You are correct, and the amusing part is that all these AI models are designed to emulate Silicon Valley politics (LLMs political orientation test). Shad, the self-proclaimed 'right-wing Christian,' doesn't seem to have an issue with this.
What I find most amusing about Shad is that every picture he creates with AI image generators is objectively of poor quality. Shad lacks creative ability; as you mentioned in his book review, most of his ideas are simply repackaged pop culture concepts.
EXACTLY. Hit the nail on the head
"As long as it's fun."
Oh... so he literally has no moral compass at all.
It would be fun if pineco would learn leech life in Pokémon Violet/Scarlet. At least koffing learns gunk shot now.
Stop acting like artists are this horribly oppressed class and they're being genocided or something because of AI art. That statement doesn't mean someone "has no moral compass", at all.
@@EntitySteel Woohoooo! You beat the shit outta that strawman! Good job!
@@EntitySteelPokémon is a good game series, but they have done certain things not that great lately. But there are some marks of improvement tho. I hope they will improve, but need to wait an see.
@@JoeSyxpack Strawman... like the one where someone is some evil dude with no moral compass because his opinions on art differ from yours?
I find it annoying when the AI defenders either dont know/ignore the difference between a program built from the ground up, like a digital brush, and AI programs that steal images.
If a programmer/artist makes a curly hair digital brush and sell it, thats one thing. But a completely different thing when an AI program steals from hundreds/thousands of artists, to be a keystroke for "curly haired woman," generation.
Human beings also steal art from others when they're influenced by other peoples' art. 🤷
@@EntitySteel there is a difference between inspiration and stealing.
Example:
You can be inspired to draw a cartoon duck because of Donald Duck or Daffy Duck. The new cartoon duck could be a different species, or a female or any number of differences. But if you traced the image, that's stealing.
@@AuroraPaintBrush4444 But AIs don't trace though... If I ask for a cartoon duck, it uses its knowledge of ducks and cartoons to make a unique image that is original.
@@ABUBBA22 A better example then. The AI programs steals hundreds or thousands of images it has no legal rights to, and throws it into a kitchen blender and it throws up a new born puppy's understanding of a picture collage. Like the Hollywood kidnapper's note, with cut outs from a magazine. But worse.
Would you please read a dictionary, on the difference between inspiration and IP theft?
@@ABUBBA22 "I punch your face but not your balls, don't tell me I'm being cruel to you"
Just like you can ask a picture of a duck, you can also ask something in the style of an artist by their name. Being on the internet doesn't mean everyone else has the right to claim it for themselves, there's a reason artists hate when their work gets reposted.
Ngl I'm kinda giddy at the thought of a big Hollywood studio grabbing a pirated copy of Shadow of the Conqueror
Changing the script juuust enough that it's Legally Distinct TM
And then filming a high budget adaptation without paying Shad a penny
Oh and Daylen is gay in the film!
Of course it won't happen, because nobody cares about his shitty book, but IMAGINE the meltdown...
Make it better and make his main character a black trans woman to really trigger Shad.
Rofl, nice pipedream you sad bitter f*ck.
You're sick in the head.
Is his writing even good enough for them to bother
Damn, can't wait for Shads two hour response to this.
Shad seems to continually conflate AI tools as being the same as Generative AI. Most AI tools are in no way created using copyrighted work. AI does not equal Generative.
"Most AI tools are in no way created using copyrighted work."
How do you know this?
@@solarydays Sorry, you're saying the AI just sort of magicks its way to its results from nothing? Or what?
@@EntitySteelAI is just Machine Learning. Your RUclips algorithm uses it without scraping and training it on your family photos, dude.
@@EntitySteel this guy is in every comment thread proving how dumb he is.
The drama between him and Sellsword makes this funnier, lol.
Shad is amazing how how many independent communities he has managed to alienate.
Personal take on Sellsword?
- Shad cannot swordfight. It is VERY obvious to anyone who actually does. Shad is the one eyed king in the land of the blind as a LOT of people have never held a sword before.
- Sellsword is completely correct in his argument that if you want to learn HEMA you need to watch videos from people who actually DO HEMA.
- Sellsword maybe shouldn't have pointed out Shad directly in his first video. Sure Shad. Cannot. Swordfight, but it was a tiny bit mean to point directly at him in the first video.
- Shad has 1.7m subs. He is, nominally, a very successful big channel. The correct response to being attacked from below is to either ignore, do a quick one and done politely disagreeing, or do a one and done pointing out how he and his 1.7m supporters are SOOOOOOOOO butt hurt. Either way his is the nominally successful channel. He should NOT be fueling a pissing contest.
- Shad's big argument seemed to be that Sellsword was gatekeeping the 'Sword Community' and that was bad. One, there is in context no actual Sword Community online. There are some real communities for Pop Culture online and there are numerous creators who bounce and interact off each other. This is not a thing for online swords. Real world swords? Yes. HEMA is a very social hobby and - sorry Shad - you are not part of it because YOU went out of your way back in the day to openly belittle and mock HEMA because they made the sin of saying that LARP was not the same as studying and practicing HEMA.
Shad doesn't swordfight. The people who do swordfight considering him a LOL Cow. THAT is the Sword Community.
And the funny thing is Shad has managed to spread this... love over multiple unrelated communities. The cross over between Art and HEMA is minimal. The cross over between fantasy novels and HEMA is minimal. Yet Shad links them all together because Shad seems to insist that Shad Way is the Only Way and then plays victim when people push back at him.
Also Shad cannot swordfight.
@@mudcrab3420 speaking of unconnected communities are you aware of Artists such as Centurii-Chan, F.S. or Mossa and others like them?.
because whenever Shad post one of his OC that's what they remind me of, and FYI they're all Smut-Artists lol.
I have no proof that he does or does not know one or more of those Artists but it shows, it really shows, He knows about Haruhi Suzumiya.
Gatekeeping is what people like shad like to cry about because they want to belong so badly but something inside them can't help but ruin it for themselves and others.
@@mudcrab3420 some gates need to be kept
@mudcrab3420 yes this is necroposting but, funny story, sellsword adts never mentioned any creators by name in his original video, shad decided on his own that the video was about him. It was an entirely self inflicted wound
Shad wants only to be acknowledged for being good at things without having to be good at things. Not just with art but also the recent meltdown he had over sellsword arts video. People realized shad has never done hema or any real sword fighting. He has refused to participate in hema stuff when invited but has made many videos talking about sword fighting and how much he knows about it. Shad is nothing more than a larper. He wants to be something respectable but he cant so he pretends and he wants everyone else to pretend that he can as well.
Generative AI art is the pinnacle of toothless pro-Capitalist nihilism.
Funny how a supposed religious traditionalist is simpis for soulless Ai materialism.
@@spacejunk2186 He's lazy.
funny story how I started my journey. I started using AI generative "art" at the end of 2022, I thought it was fun and dandy BUT every single time I spent HOURS on end to even approach what I envisioned with my prompts, I didn't know how this "AI" worked back then, and learned about it when my frustration went overboard. I always told myself "I can't draw, especially when due to religious beliefs I got forced to change my dominant hand" or kept saying I'm too old to learn art at this age (around 30). But after a few months, mid january of last year I got very tired to see results that didn't match my vision, what I wanted, what kind of thing I wanted to represent. I had an idea in my mind, a very clear idea, and I got just a very scuffed approximation of it, and even then, it was clearly soulless to me. So I decided to actually start from scratch, made an instagram to record my progress, took art seriously and I'm still at it! I hate myself to not have come to this decision YEARS ago but honestly, It's the best thing I've ever did. The things I do are amateurish, pretty bad imho, but at least "I" decided where my brush stroke went, "I" decided to make that volume look that way, I made my mistake and are MINE. Something "AI" cannot do, actually learn, understand and "play" with what you learn to give life to something, even if something is technically bad, you can see the sweat, blood and soul, people put in their pieces. What AI do is just a bad collage of stolen art and call it the day, no different than a gacha game where you wish to get something good or decent without any actually say about the final result or anything creative also because, this isn't "ai", it's just an algorithm that barely put together a collage of several thousands stolen art to make something somewhat decent. It doesn't think, it doesn't feel, it's a bunch of "if-else" statements in the code
100% agree. I am a professional artists and also a tech enthusiast. I installed Stable Diffusion and tried it out for a few days. At first I was blown away how fast you could get a concept rendered in high quality. After an hour I came to the conclusion the generator works common mistakes of artists into the picture and it's impossible to make it create what you really want. Then I tried control net to try and create a good piece of art with it, in the end it took me longer than if I had just made it by hand and the result wasn't really what I wanted. I think if creative artists would try to create a piece of art with AI they would loose a lot of the fear they have, because it always tries to create lukewarm art, it's so underwhelming.
@@TK_zerrivet yes! Absolutely, if you have ANY creativity, you'll see "ai art" as another chat bot, fun at first but very disappointing beyond that. At best it would give you the push you needed to actually start drawing, like it did to me which is pretty ironic since it was created to replace artists haha
Good on you.
Funny enough, you're not the only one who has decided to start drawing because of this, either. Even a lot of people who don't typically consider themselves skilled artists can see the difference between them.
The image generator is just slapping random bits and pieces together from other people's work. It'll NEVER know what's in someone's head. People keep assuming that "in a few years it'll generate what you ask for perfectly." But how? If I say I want a "blue king", how is it going to know exactly what I'm thinking with that? It doesn't and never will. At least not in this form. Maybe someday they'll make something that actually reads your mind, but this stuff is remedial compared to that.
So I hope more and more people see it for what it is and think, "You know what? I think I can do this myself."
" it's just an algorithm that barely put together a collage of several thousands stolen art"
This isn't how AI works. It isn't "collaging" art. You were misled by a talking head somewhere.
@@SugarThyme "The image generator is just slapping random bits and pieces together from other people's work"
Again, not how it works. Unless you think humans are also just slapping random bits and pieces together from other people's work.
I'm a translator, mostly novels and comic books, and I would never rely on AI to do my work for me. Chat GPT and other AI programs can make a rough translation, but the amount of nuances and details they miss is insane. They can't comprehend how idioms work in different languages.
He said, the datas are not kept.
Then he sais, that if you requested a 1:1 copy of mona lisa, you will get a 1:1 copy of mona lisa. How then could the AI make a 1:1 copy, if the datas are not kept?
Is he correct that the average, normal person does not care about this? Yes. But that doesn’t mean they have his stance. They also don’t know the details of how it’s made and about the lawsuits and corruptions and attitudes that make up Midjourney and Stable diffusion. It isn’t necessary to convince the average person, anyway. It’s showing the judges proof that is important.
Also. Him talking about a Gaussian blur in that context makes no sense, wtf is he even talking about?
…. Pretty sure I’ve heard Shad and his friends say divorce should be illegal too, funny enough.
westside taylor made multiple videos on this ai art and explained how he was wrong.
"(...) Because they're not artists at all. They are heartless, soulless, mindless automata going through the motions of artistry and technique, but with nothing behind their brush strokes."
Dude tried to roast artists and managed to describe AI image generation instead. Wow.
And honestly, AI is going to get even better.
i'm pretty sure HO was describing artists (he emphasized with "twitter artists") who draw in the same trendy ways without any of their own vision and creativity in their art. He sounds harsh, but I think there's some truth in his words.
@@Needler13 if you say so
As an aspiring write i gotta say i cant get enough of people like you dunking on ai bros. More importantly than all that tho, what game are you playin? It looks sweet
I wasn't actually playing a game. That was a capture from whatever Horrible Opinions was playing in his video "Twitter Artists."
Tiny Rogues
Can you imagine, an AI chatbot trained ONLY on Shadow of the Conqueror? You ask it what the weather will be like tomorrow and it threatens to explode your head while going on a self-pitying screed
I laughed so hard at your comment
4:43 Dude thinks he's an anime villain lol
It's incredibly disturbing how much joy he gets when he thinks about artists being dehumanized, used, and abused. The sheer glee in his voice and on his face is nauseating. 🤮
Ghoulish behavior
Well, Shad and HO both got a reaction out of a lot of people here. Made you all think, really. Certainly stirred an emotional reaction in you. And really, when Christians and Muslims complain about offensive art, is this not exactly the response artists retort with? Do we not tell them that art is SUPPOSED to make people uncomfortable? To stir an emotion? To make you think? To spark debate and reaction? Truly, Shad and HO are every bit the artist that any one of you are,. And let's be clear, this response is ultimately to KirkpattieCake's video, not any work of art. So the response is much more a work of art than any of their art in that regard.
@@kdolo1887 If you can't or don't want to delineate between the whats and whys of art, that's okay. Just don't be smug about it.
@@MertowVA Talent. There should be talent in art. In that regard, HO is correct. Most artists, Kirk included, are inferior meat versions of AI artbots, meaning there is no soul behind their work, not that they are not human. This is a point Kirk missed in their rebuttal, either mistakenly because they're not intelligent enough to pick up on it, which quite honestly how could you not, or, and I would say more charitably, intentionally to play on emotional heartstrings.
@@kdolo1887 "Inferior meat versions of AI artbots" and yet AI artbots are useless without them.
Dr. Ian Malcolm : If I may... Um, I'll tell you the problem with the scientific power that you're using here, it didn't require any discipline to attain it. You read what others had done and you took the next step. You didn't earn the knowledge for yourselves, so you don't take any responsibility for it. You stood on the shoulders of geniuses to accomplish something as fast as you could, and before you even knew what you had, you patented it, and packaged it, and slapped it on a plastic lunchbox, and now
[bangs on the table]
Dr. Ian Malcolm : you're selling it, you wanna sell it. Well...
John Hammond : I don't think you're giving us our due credit. Our scientists have done things which nobody's ever done before...
Dr. Ian Malcolm : Yeah, yeah, but your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should.
(Jurassic Park 1993)
Dr. Ian Malcolm: "God help us, we're in the hands of engineers." 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Well if the heckin hollywood movie said it, it must be true!
@@EntitySteel how old are you, 9? Ask your mother and father what these quotes mean and how they relate to the subject. Or hush up, stop procrastinating, and go do your homework. Inserting your really lame eyeroll responses everywhere they don't belong seems to be a pattern of behavior for you, so I'm curious to know what you're neglecting in life just to waste your time doing this.
@@sunla OMG the heckin movie quotes!
@@EntitySteel
"Metaphor!"--Drax the Destroyer, Gaurdians of the Galaxy
I think perhaps the most significant issue related to copyright in regard to AI image generators is not the output of the generators, but the fact that copyrighted works were used in the creation of the generators. A commercial (or intended to become so) product created by using copyrighted images. That doesn't get talked about enough. The AI apologists want to distract from that point by talking only about the outputs and how "transformative" they can be.
Also, I know it has been said, but Shad either has no idea how copyright law actually works, or he is intentionally lying about it.
it dosen't get talked about because just being commercial is irrelevent to fair use. there's more to it than that.
Can you expand upon this? I'm fairly sure it doesn't matter what commercial works you use to create something as long as the end product is sufficiently transformative in nature. Why would using copyrighted work in the development of the tool which has no copyrighted work in its end state matter?
@@EntitySteel Because using something the rights to which are owned by someone else, to create a product that would not function without that ingredient just seems wrong to me. I am not a lawyer, so go ask some of those about it, but I am pretty sure I am drawing a solid analogy here in comparison to using owned property without authorization to create a product. Contrary to what Shad says, just because something is “out there” does not mean one can legally use it in any way. Also, I’d argue that if (as shown in this video) such image generators can and will produce near exact copies of images they were trained on, it seems that they “de facto” do have those images in their databases, even if it’s not in the traditional way.
A response to the “There difference between the final product of human and ai art is so minuscule that for the common person they can’t tell the difference” I have this: If a person was hired by making a fake resume and memorizing the talking points of his position for an interview, does he deserve to keep his job over an actual qualified candidate?
45:34 I wonder if he'd be fine with AI taking his book, and his graphic novel comic, and someone else selling it as theirs? Because that could happen and he'd never know it until his sales evaporated. The results of the lawsuits aren't in, either. He may find himself eating a ton of crow in the near future.
that's not how it works. if you used an ai to recreate shads work it's no different from using a camera or photocopier.
Its funny. How large does the training set have to be for shad to think its is no longer copyright infringement?
I remember a shad video years ago. After he published his book or just before. He was crying about how making a novel was his dream. Like it was really important to him. Now he wants to have an AI write one for him, is just one of the most hypocritical things I ever heard.
As an aspiring author myself, I find that insulting to the craft. Like even in a world where AI isn’t theft and is actually an original creation created by the AI it is insulting. Just want to have something else do all the work and profit from it. Shad’s favorite animal better be a leech or another parasite.
In his recent Madame Web vid he mentioned that 3d animation is easier than ai art... Tyranth disagreed with him and Shad jumped down his throat. You can tell Shad has never tried to learn 3d animation. That's a skill that took me years to learn. Btw I've been watching Jazza and Shad for around 10 years now. His AI hot takes are just too jarring... and he wonders why he is losing subs every month.
I can confirm that this idiot knows shit about 3D animation, it's a lot more difficult than imputing "Minecraft Steve's balls" on a glorified search bar.
@@dragondelsur5156Just 3D-modeling is difficult. Then add rigging and animation frames and it becomes even more difficult.
Shitiversity has big habit of incorrect judgements of skill required. Learning to use nunchaku takes few hours. Learning to be artist takes a lifetime.
“Biased against Ai” is the most blatant “I think this computer is a human” statement in this entire video. I have not come so far to see robots become a part of identity politics, two of the things I hate the most. I will simply reply to that with “yes, I AM “robo/Ai phobic”, what of it?”
We don't take shit from a machine.
Exactly this. Every one talks about "training" AI. AI can not be trained, only programmed. It is not a living thing. AI is not human.
It drives me fucking nuts that no mtter what hes talking about hes talks like hes a 15 year old debatelord
The literal language he uses bothers the fuck out of me
Shad is quite right wing from what I understand, and it's non-uncommon for people in those spaces to twist progressive language for less than ethical purposes.
@@ProudPlatypus I am not against all right wingers or left wingers, I am against bad ideas. Like robots. Or intersectionality
I super appreciate that you analyzed what he says and provided context and background. The use of AI can be debated to all hell but spreading lies about it in its favor is a _choice_ , a political stance since if people believe what he says, it just helps big corp get the big corp money.
I had subscribed to his channel for the historical accuracy... How he became a Podcast Dude™ Tech Bro™ who is now vehemently DENYING history - guess what, Shad, art history and the artists' position today and the very real political and legal discussion around this is HISTORY TOO - is absolutely beyond me.
If what he says were true, I could just publish my Harry Potter fanfiction to be bought at bookstores and to earn money just for myself, and She who shall not be named could not sue me, but that's not true is it?? If what he says were true, every single piece of media that's out there could be copied without any repercussions, but that is quite literally not how the world works, and he MUST know that as a historian. He HAS TO know that. You have to cite what your quoting meticulously, you have to mark all your sources, you have to make sure they are peer reviewed, you cannot be a respected and relevant scientist / academic without actually adhering to, let's be real, a LOT of rules. And that's how he started out, didn't he? He used to call out media that did NOT adhere to the rules, that did not use relevant and accurate sources and was not historically correct or fair!
So the fact that he's now spewing this nonsense is... actually so sad. He knows better, but for some reason he suddenly can't live without generating anime girls for himself? Off of other people's stolen art, that he somehow rationalizes in word-of-mouth fake news? How pathetic is that?
It's utterly disgusting to me how he went from this mellow historian fellow to the angriest, most repressed little chap once he got the views and confidence. Really showed his teeth.
I'd like to see Shad create his "art" in the middle of a blackout
??? So your opinion is that digital artists aren't real artists either? 😂
@@EntitySteelmost digital artists I follow often post traditional art. 🤷♀️ So they actually know how to draw.
@@heybearnation You've just reinforced my assumption. You consider them real artists because they know how to do traditional art, rather than considering their ability to do digital art.
@@EntitySteelThey are, but would an ai prompter be able to prompt their stolen art without the internet?
@@nightslasher9384 Nope, just like any contemporary artist you've ever seen would likely be unable to create their art to their current level without having been inspired by previous works of art.
7:02 Can't stop laughing at the Mr. Bean image. (Mr. Bean with a turkey over his head is one of my favorite comedy skits ever.) Thank you for a much needed laugh.
This video is incredibly based. Ignore the haters dog piling on you, they're entitled brats, soulless monsters, or simply mislead, but well-intended people. I don't know who you are but I'm so happy I clicked!
It would actually be kind of funny.
A) take shadow of the conqueror.
B) remix sentences and paragraphs. (Not individually remix words)
C) publish it as conquer the shadowers
My wife is always baffled when i describe stuff from in my head. She is Aphantisic so literally doesn't see images in her head.
She is a talented potter and painter but needs the image of what she is creating in front of her. Just an interesting condition realative to the 48.00 minute mark
1:04:14 I don't think Shad is one of the 'Haves' regarding AI. He's unaware (or doesn't care) that those entry level positions lead to mentor ships that increase experience and competency. He goes on and on about how awful media is, yet he pushes AI as some kind of beneficial tool.
It's already having a huge impact on voice actor work in gaming and other venues. I've heard people crow over 'woke' voice actors losing their jobs, not understanding that it won't stop there.
1:09:19 Speaking as a disabled artist, I prefer old fashioned media like pen and ink, watercolor, and gouache. In college my drawing teacher brought in a woman born without arms who drew better than any of us with her feet. I've seen paraplegics who draw and paint using their mouths. AI Art isn't going to make any of us better artists. In point of fact it would be demeaning of the accomplishments made. (And Moonlight Sonata is one of my favorite classical pieces.)
Honestly, I don’t think these people care about disabled artists. They’re just a convenient shield to hide behind for sympathy points.
@@samueltitone5683 I think you're right. Art contributes to quality of life for a lot of disabled artists (myself included). I don't know of anyone who'd give that up for a computer prompt. What would be the point?
"I've heard people crow over 'woke' voice actors losing their jobs, not understanding that it won't stop there. "
Not really the argument being made.
The point is that there was that Hollywood strike thing where one of the demands being put forward was protection from AI in their roles. This from many commentators was considered a valid point. Many of the other points were considered as LOL, but AI was a middle of the road topic.
Then the strike ended and the unions bragged about how they had won and forced the mean studios to bend a knee. The actors had won. Go Actor's Union!!!
Then a month or so later it gets revealed that the studio's had the right to use AI to recreate voices if they had already paid for the voice on a previous occasion (paraphrasing).
So the crowing is not for the support of AI, but more for the artists who went on strike and then came out the other end agreeing to a worse contact.
Is this crowing moral or ethical? Probably not, but this was the back story for at least SOME of the comments on this topic.
@@mudcrab3420 I was referring to the localizer voice actors who were dubbing for Japanese manga/anime. They were bragging on how they didn't translate the dialogue accurately in favor of their own preferences. The Japanese company fired them and replaced them with AI.
The contract from the Union was a while back, the voice actor thing was the most recent mess. Sorry I wasn't more clear.
Harmful Opinions has made a Response. It's on his Channel if you'd like to watch it. He does explain his styling.
He's become such a vile person. I feel bad for his family.
@@justanidiotmk2749 Really?
@@justanidiotmk2749 I wouldn't say "prominent." His art is kind of meh honestly. But when did he say he hates his brother?
@@r.rodriguez4991 I don't think Jazza hates him. Hurt by him? Yes. Jazza is a true artist who's found his calling in educating others. He is kind, patient, and very creative. He loves encouraging others, and shares what he knows. I've enjoyed many of his programs, especially those where he draws characters based on the books they came from instead of movies. He does more than draw--he sculpts.
He is everything Shad covets and will never be.
@@justanidiotmk2749 I think he's rather disappointed that his brother is acting this way when he could be so much more.
Man you guys are fucking weird lmao. Why are you going after the dude's family just because he has an AI art take you don't like?
I cannot believe people are really out here advocating for dehumanizing art.
We already have started to dehumanizing life with smart phones and how much technology/social media has been integrated into life. Art is something we desperately need to keep human, it's the only thing we've got at this point.
HarmfulOpinions is a good boi. Tim is definitely an acquired taste in terms of humor. Did you finish the entire video, or did that joke prompt you to turn it off? I believe he raised a valid point that a creative artist does not have much to fear from the current types of image generators.
I think calling these datasets "stealing" when people are willingly signing away the rights to their intellectual property by using Google Drive due to laziness while not using Free and Open Source Software or privacy options is not a good perspective. The most compelling argument against AI image generators is presented in an interview with the master artist Craig Mullins titled "Craig Mullins Predicted the Future About AI Art". This reasoning aligns with the points raised by comic artist and animator Sven Stoffels in his video "WHAT IS ART!? | An OBJECTIVE definition | SHAD_AI response".
PS absolutely not a fan of Shadiveristy.
I think it's ridiculous to call it stealing considering anything put out by an appropriately trained AI is absolutely transformative in nature, and doesn't even use the original art.
@@EntitySteel Should a theft occur, it would likely happen at the data-set level. What feasible outcomes could the anti-AI movement achieve? Realistically, they might advocate for more stringent laws and regulations, imposing substantial fines and even more draconian intellectual property laws. This would be advantageous for big tech companies as they could easily pay the insignificant fines, eliminating their competitors, undermining open-source projects, and solidifying a monopoly on AI. The primary impact of these measures would be felt by small ventures and individuals. More big tech dystopia.
@@EntitySteelFair Use "transformative" can only be brought into the discussion if the item in question doesn't directly compete with the origin, sharing the same market space, and AI art does *not* have that going for it, not even a little bit.
How can one woman be so based?
The thing about Adobe Firefly... at first i thought it was at least a good step, but then there was some concerning language in the Photoshop license agreement that sounded like (unless you specifically opted out), they could use anything you create with it in training their models. (Maybe only if uploaded to the Adobe cloud?)
And not only that, but the people that willingly contributed to Firefly's database have no received any sort of payment in compensation.
Thankfully there are many alternatives. At this point I'm glad I picked up Krita. Great digital painting software and can do anything you need it to. Considering it's open source aswell I feel more assured that it won't go down the same route as adobe did..
26:21 Ignoring the bit about how Netflix hosting a movie does not mean I now own the movie, Shad might want to have a look at the term "Derivative Work" because he seems to think that altering a work you do not own grants you ownership to the edit.
SHAD IS 40?! When did people stop maturing?
Shad is a Disney villain with a origin story
What prompt does Shad feed the generative AI to cobble together a story?
I saw his AI video which had more comments criticizing AI and showing how it’s actually theft, but guess what he only liked the comment that agreed with his pov. Pathetic and this is the same guy who criticizes woke leftists for living in echo chambers.
Typically people who criticize an echo chamber. Also, we live in an echo chamber.
I hate the “it’s a tool” argument and then they compare it to photoshop. I’m a photographer and I can’t just tell photoshop to do something. I have to know how to do it and make judgments on how the changes I make will improve the photo to a more pleasing effect.
If I told a computer to do it and it spits out 100 options and I just pick the best one did I have any part of the creation of that edit?
It's funny how little people understand how AI art works and what kind of care has to go into it. Both beginners in the field and the people on the outside who've never seen it used at all and only know the final product, like you. I shouldn't have to tell you how much people bitched about how photoshop was going to "replace them" because it was going to give the less talented artists a free rise to the top because of all the tools it has (and continues to add, as photomanipulation gets braindead easy even for someone with no artistic talent whatsoever), and it did. The skill floor dropped out from under everyone and broadened the talent pool. Traditional artists still have their niche but nobody is asking for traditional artists in the industries that call for them.
Now, hey, imagine an artist creates an image with an AI art and then reworks the image to be more like what they want. Is it a tool now? An artist used it in the same way they would use a powerful photoshop tool or filter. I don't think you get to make that call, though. If you don't want AI to beat you, step up your game, adapt to it, or just sit in the corner and watch the world pass you by.
@@ViddyOJames it is still not a tool in that scenario
@@pulidoa1978 I don't think YOU get to make that distinction.
Chad's employee/cohost though... Poor guy. It's like he's in some kind of messed up abusive relationship.
You know it’s funny, another youtuber made a similar observation around one of his other videos about his sword stuff, when he was kind of using one of his other co-hosts or collaborators as a bit of a target dummy, or prop to "prove" his point, rather than respecting them as a sparing partner.
@@ProudPlatypus It annoys me how obviously irritated Shad gets any time Tyranth does better than him and Nate in any demonstration, to the point where he'll add ridiculous stipulations to whatever it is to try to make him fail.
I hope he at least pays well, but somehow I doubt it.
AI art is just tech tracing. You can trace off five drawings, collage it, but it's still isn't inherently creative. The mix of things nay be viewed as a creative work. but the acknowledgement to the original creators needs to be addressed, monetarily and socially.
My name was on that list and I NEVER gave permission to these losers to use my artwork to feed their own pitiful, talentless egos.
The final boss of this is that he isnt mad that ai uses stolen art, but he is more than happy to copyright his creation that the same AI spit out xD
_"Check this out, I'm a musical prodigy!"_
Uhh... this is just a playlist of songs off the radio
_"Yeah, but I had to tell it which ones to play! I challenge you to get the same results!"_
Shad was beaten by his brother at archery, his brother Jazza, is astronomically better than him at art. Shad is trying to do damage control, like no, no, no, SEE IM An Artist too. He spent the rest of the video trying to prove he was better than his brother at archery and failed, then tried to talk his way out, like yeah but I'm still better.
I mean Twitter has a lot of insane people that will get triggered by the stupidest shit. But sometimes a bad take is a bad take.
I've played around with an AI art generator, but I try to get it to replicate something that I've imagined in my mind rather than to copy an artist's style or work. AI art does what I want from it poorly. It seems much better suited for stealing from real artists.
Shad is such a weird guy
That one guy's take on humanity is freaking wild. Great video, I like how you pull up articles and data about ai to prove what he says wrong. He doeant seem to use any datavto prove his point...
I'm a writer. I have been writing for 16-17 years, in hungarian. I never try draw because thats not my artistic field, I'm not good, and honestly I don't think I can spend enough time for that.
And AI happend. And I'm so pissed, so angry, so so hateful of it, I bought a pencil, a notebook and started drawing. And I enjoying it! I have a very fancy colored pencil set, a better sketchbook, and I'm so proud of my badly amatour drawing! Because I did it! Okay, I use pinterest for reference and I copeing simple art, but still! I doing the drawing! And I'm so proud of myself, because I do something badly and joyfully. My art is still better art than AI """"""art"""""". And I actually considering spend more time with practicing, because turns out: I enjoying the process!
So, AI art thief is inherently wrong and should burn in hell, not everything has lost. I started drawing, because of hate, but I do it now of joy and pride. And I'm so so bad, but thats the fun! Thats the lesson: you can make art. You don't need steal
Congratulations on picking up drawing and also finding something new to love! I also picked up drawing again in 2022, partially because a friend of my started drawing again and she inspired me and also because the genAI inspired me to actually learn how to draw so I could draw mine and other peoples characters.
Some days are harder than others, but it has been so fun and I'm so glad you've found it so rewarding too! Good luck with your writing and with your visual arts going forward too!
i really wish folks would quit tying EVERY topic/issue to politics. My disapproval of generative AI has nothing to do with my views on foreign affairs, the defense budget, or any other ballot issue.
If only someone could write a YA novel about the horror of AI in the arts.
Very weird to keep hearing hedonist arguments from someone who's supposed to be religious.
Oh boy! Another Ian vs Shad video. It is a good Saturday.
I still can’t get over the fact that Jazza is his brother. Now I know where the jealousy comes from.
I just saw the Despicable Me 4 ad where they made fun people who make AI art and you know, Illumination may be owned by a big corporation, but at the end of the day it is nice to see a big animation studio like that take a stance against the use of AI generated work because mind you, this studio produced the 2nd highest grossing movie of 2023 and if they could do that while being against the use of AI art, that could influence other big studios to do the same.
How can Illumination be so based while producing the most average of average? Weird.
@@dragondelsur5156 From what I hear they actually treat their artists and workers way better than other animation studios, so they might be making mid movies (TBH I kinda liked rise of gru and Migration) but at least they treat their artists right.
i dont get why people confused between skillset and individuallity. sure AI are making art i wont deny it but when it STEAL someone's identity is the problem. we need the law to reognise this generative AI is just a impersonating tool at the current stage.
The one thing I take issue with in this video is the idea that some people are inherently uncreative.
I'm a musician, but for many, MANY years, I struggled with writing music that sounded interesting. I had to practice the art of being creative by writing snippets until I managed to get to the point where I could make what I wrote sound like what I had in my head. I'm still not sure if what I write is any good, but I finally managed to get "creative".
I have an in-law who doesn't understand why museums exist. When one of her relatives died, she couldn't understand why no one would let her throw away his paintings. (He was a very good landscape painter and portrait artist.) She's very up front in saying she has no creativity and zero interest in hearing about 'empty drivel.' In her mind, if you 'play with paper and paints' you're still a child. (No, we don't spend much time together.)
It's very tough for any creative person to understand someone who has zero creativity.
@@spookyfirst9514 I think there are a lot of complexities of the mind that sometimes people don't even realize are a thing.
For example, one person might think in images. If you say something to them, they picture it as an image in their head.
Others won't picture any image. They comprehend what you said, but they're not picturing it at all. That's where I usually am (unless I actively attempt to picture something).
And a lot of times people will go through life assuming everyone's thought process is like theirs. If they picture what they hear, then they think other people ALSO picture what they hear. And then they wonder why someone could listen to something awful and not get sickened by it.
So I think it's hard to comprehend. Especially for people who are creative or are actively pursuing creative interests. (I think, like everything else, you can grow your creativity through effort.) But while I tend to want to believe everyone has some creativity, the realistic side of me thinks that isn't so. I think you're right. It's just so hard to comprehend when you are a creative person.
@@spookyfirst9514 I get what you're saying, but I still wonder if it's really a case of the "switch" in the brain being off, or if it's a combination between a lack of interest and lack of practise.
My father, for example, has no real interest in art or music, he's never learned an instrument and I've never even seen him doodle, but he can think up the most out of the box solutions to repairing things that I'd never even think of.
What I'm getting at is that creativity is pretty much what made humans the dominant species on the planet, so every human should have the capacity for it.
@@simonlaurila2702 I agree. Problem solving in itself could be considered a kind of creativity. (Sorry it took so long to respond.)
christ that opening... here i was gearing up to put 100 forma on the goddamn stug, thinking that would be torture.
less than 5 minutes teaches me otherwise. jfc.
I love that you brought up how the machine is biased - it's controlled by someone, a corporation. and is limited by its own data (however vast it is; still limited). Even if you do what Shad does, and tweak stuff in PS before running it through the AI 10 times, the machine is still influencing your work, and it doesn't give a damn about your vision. Using AI is removing individualism from all the most expressive formats there are: writing, art, acting, music and even video. It's belitteling your own choices and opinions in favour of a corporation's algorithm.
breakdowns of dumbshad opinions is my new favorite genre of youtube videos. Itd be funny if his ai book is actually better then the one he wrote
Imagine this really happens... it would melt his mind. If it were a success but also just a proof that he couldn't do it without help from a machine.
Its wild to see Shad defend Asmondgold so fiercely when Shad's friend Mauler made a 6 hour livestream utterly destroying Asmondgold.
do you end friendships over petty disagreements?
Nathan always looks like this. I wonder if he's really desperate for the money or just has a fetish for pain
maybe its both?
I'll never forgive him for asking the question, "how much gold can an adventurer carry?" Then taking us through the scientific process without ever answering it.
Metaphors blow right past you, and you suppose to speak for the arts. Which you cannot comprehend. Sad. Harmful Opinions is god…
Hey! I'm not sure why RUclips recommended this to me (not a writer and no idea who this Shad guy is) but I'm glad it did. I'm a professional software engineer, artist, and musician and a huge advocate for generative AI and I want to say you are, in my opinion, completely correct. Use of AI art in commercial products is completely immoral, and to claim it is somehow "yours" is theft. Full stop. It's like Google images, or pinterest. You type into a box and it spits images related to that out -- those images are great for reference and ideation but to claim that's yours is literally illegal. It's pretty clear to me that this guy has no interest in art or technology, just a troll trying to get rage clicks.
Also in my opinion, real art is not gonna go anywhere. As these people stop being able to make money pissing people off these takes will stop showing up. If any artists are reading this and feeling bad, just know your work has value. Stay at it, the trolls will fade away in time.
I’m very much the same way. I like using AI tools in my process, but I in no way trick myself into believing that I own any of the things that I generate. I simply treat it like a Google search or other kinds of research and build on it from there. I might generate 100 images of something, then look at bits and pieces that I like from different things and go off and make something original from that but I’ll never take an AI generated image or text whole cloth and just slap it on something and say I created it, because I absolutely didn’t.
I used to like Shad. I love writing, and he had a few videos about writing I really liked. I was shocked seeing the person he truly is. I'm an artist/writer and I strongly disagree with AI generators. He's a writer? You'd think he'd be supporting artists.
Harmful opinions is too powerful for mortal minds to comprehend
There is no adapting to a machine that already does what an artist or creative person can do, but that machine does it instantaneously at 100percent. With the whole truckers being replaced by automated drivers and liberty minded folk being against that for the obvious harm it would cause to truckers around the world. It's weird, again, to see those same conservative people not railing on AI. And actually defending it.
The reason Shad is so into AI is because he's mediocre and too lazy to put in the effort to become genuinely good in what he's interested in.
I don’t believe in my own humanity but I know artists have something behind their eyes and I would die if it meant I could protect those sparks humans carry within them.automatons are the hunks of steel and electronic carrying silicon printed circuitry while human flesh and blood holds an experience that births that which I love and want to protect from the iron boots of the marching ai onslaught
We bullied the metaverse off of the Internet. We bullied NFTs off of the Internet. Crypto has been a joke for years. We need to rally together and use our bullying for good once again.
Metaverse was just BS marketing buzzwords for what already exists, NFTs were only ever used as a scam, Crypto has actually been useful.
AI? Is also useful and has many, many applications that you're not going to do diddlysquat to stop with your twitter-tier outrage. This ship sailed long ago.
@@gogetters6639 AI is for talentless noobs.
Harmful Opinions is God!
You didn't understand his video at all.
He's literally saying, that if you're claiming to be an artist, use your art like it's intended and make people FEEL things. People who can do this are actual artists, professionals, have nothing to worry about because AI will not be able to replace them.
If you can't bring out people's emotions with art, you're not an artist, you simply like drawing. These people just fill up space with "art" which is no different from AI.
TL;DR: GIT GUD
Harmful Opinion is the greatest artist.
You're forgetting the most important part as to why AI is hated: It's not just people like her that will be replaced, it's EVERYBODY, including the people you say "have nothing to worry about".
AI is only hated by artist types with too much self importance. a real artist is no more threatened by AI than he is by the millions of other artists running around.
These upsetti spagetti people are the ones who get upset over people copying their style.
@@dragondelsur5156 Nah, it really isn't. AI cannot currently convey a compelling message through its art. It can just produce consumer-focused slop.
@@EntitySteel Which is why they'll be replaced (unless this garbage is put massive blocks), because it's cheaper, it's faster, and companies can just pump out IP forever, the entertainment industry stops being where dreams come true to become where dreams die.
Got an ad for AI generator for this.
I disagree about some people not being artistic or unable to be a engineer. All of it is a skill. And while some people can't think outside of the box, you can train them to even if they did not originally. No one is born one or the other. A lot of the difficulty in learning these skills is that some people don't enjoy it and thus is harder to learn. But its all a perspective, there are plenty of people that hate one subject but have a change of heart later due to some specific event that gave them a new perspective. There is also a phenomenon where people gain appreciation for something by interacting with it more often due to a sense of familiarity.
He made this video because Efap didn’t invite him on for their coverage of it
Extremely funny if true
Imagine being too desperate for a podcast that’ll have anyone on.
Efap is just Mauler and Rags jerking each other off for 10 hours. Mauler went from constructive criticism to full moron like the fandom menace.
What is Elfap?
@@turkoositerapsidipodcast hosted by controversial (depending on who you ask) youtube reviewers Mauler and Rags.
Did they agree with his take?
Do Ai bros hear themselves when they speak?
You're incredible in the way you demonstrate logic and rationale to highlight and discuss a topic that's incredibly tough to talk about and simultaneously debunk and refute points made from Shadiversity and his flawed logic about a topic he's never had the authority to express an understanding of. Kudos to you Ian, You're an absolute champ 🏆
As much as I hate Disney deep down i do want them to find out that their art data is/ has been used in gen AI so that they can sue anyone and everyone who ever use them.
Wow, and they completed misrepresent people who want to learn to make their own clothes and farm their own food.
In my limited experience, these people want to do these things as a safeguard should our society collapse. If our shipping routes fall apart for any reason, most of us are fucked. The people who won’t be are the ones who have learned to be self sufficient. And they will be capable of passing that knowledge on to other people.
I think they still are mostly proud of their own labours work and interest how to mostly i think.
And selfgrown food, just is different.
But its definitly good that ther are people that know how to do it and keep that alive. I just dont think that societial collapse is the first in mind there, and think its mosttly people interested, and wit hfood, well howmegrown food just good.
I can only ask of Asmongold or Shadiversity how they'd feel if they were the targets; what if tomorrow Twitch launched their own Generative AI, and it used all the past streams of Asmongold between his react content and his gaming streams, and we got AImongold, who is a relatively perfect replica of the man himself. Maybe Twitch and Amazon got a nice little hook in the terms of service that allows them to use his likeness. Would he be so apathetic towards the left of creative output? Because I'm not going to sell him short, he's managed creative enough endeavors to be a stand out personality who isn't involve in drama. Its easy for him to take the consumer mindset of 'I don't care as long as the product is good'. Asmon hasn't seen this from a personal level, and they don't see how the inability of AI to innovate, adapt, or imagine will lead to the slow decline in the products they receive. As for Shad, I don't know, ShadAIversity might write a better book, but I don't know if we need another one of those.
To be honest with you I think Asmon would be fine with it dude is too rich to care. Sgad though... The ego to far to great I sense copious levels of cope
What's wild to me is all I can think of in all of this AI generated stuff and the defense of it, is Dune, and the Butlerian Jihad to destroy thinking machines and humanity's dependence on them. Also, literally, as I typed this, you showed the new Dune film's images with the turkey heads. A sign! The spice (and vids like these in support of artists) must flow!
It's so funny how shad could have just stayed in his lane and avoided a shitload of drama and falling outs with other creators with his dumbass takes. All because he has a napoleon complex about his brother being the actual talented artist in the family.
Don’t know about that, since even before the knight watch thing took off and him supporting AI became a thing he already was losing favor within his own community. Mostly showing a lack of actual fighting/weapons knowledge. Look no further than his video where he suggests fixes for certain weapons.
@@JohnWilliams-wl9px Or his recent temper tantrum against Sellsword Arts.
Well yeah but this AI stuff has pissed off a whole sphere beyond even that@@JohnWilliams-wl9px
@@dragondelsur5156 which funny enough only in his defense of the double sword only shows how much he doesn’t know about fighting. All of his defense for it is filled with whataboutisms and he doesn’t even attempt to spare with it.
Part of me thinks somebody should get an AI to make a bunch of Shad videos to prove a point. Guaranteed he'd be mad.
But the rest just wants to delete the AIs.
I doubt he would care, and I doubt the AI would actually understand the more niche bits of knowledge to be able to do it. 🤷
You changed my mind with that beautiful voice.
Not about the topic, but about life overall. Thank you. ❤