The leaks showing It's an art laundering machine and nothing more says it all. AI bros will clearly spend half hour excusing that It's legitimate theft. Worse. It's clearly for cheap, lazy, uninspired ppl and businesses and the ppl into it are unaware of don't care they are billionaire pawns while downloading billionaire AI spybots into their devices and buying AI spybot devices.
@@haleyspenceit would be trained off the data of city planners like yours...sooo..why would it be better? Lol. How would you know? What do you mean? What knowledge do you have of city planning that you think AI will do it better? Why haven't you done it and presented it? Lol. What has happened to your brain?
I've been to the never-finished nazi holiday resort on Rügen. The images Vaush showed doesn't even come close to conveying how dystopian that place is. It is simply enormous. It stretches on for literal miles. You can stand in front of it and see it vanish into the horizon on either side. Just block after block of dead, windowless concrete gravestones. Today the area is full of squatters and anarchist youth groups that try to use the space for something useful or at least decorate it a bit, but it's so huge, that their efforts just drown in the empty void.
I'd suggest Vaush start calling it AI Images, rather that this whole... "AI Art isn't Art yet I'm going to keep calling AI Art even through it's not Art" thing.
AI images is pretty general though (could refer to pictures meant to look like photographs as well). I think calling it pseudo-art would be funny but that'll never catch on
You realize.. In the 80s and 90s, most established artists refused to call any digitally created art, "art". Yet here we are today. History repeats. Same happened when photography was invented. They acted exactly as y'all are now, same logic and everything.
@@GrumpDog It's not remotely the same logic though. Digital art is different, but it's not so fundamentally different that it stops being art (all the basic principles of art still apply, it's only the medium that changed). AI art is fundamentally not art because it's not "creating" anything, it's just sticking together existing creations in a black box of algorithms and machine learning. It can't create anything new, and it's so fundamentally different from real art that if an AI were trained off of AI art, it would spit out garbage. Even the software engineers creating these algorithms know there's a difference and make sure not to feed bad data (I.E. AI art) to their machines. The only people who don't the difference are those who know nothing about tech or art.
Plato was surprisingly based on women for the time unlike Aristotle. Plato actually thought women should have equal access to politics and education. Aristotle was more fascist, he believed in all the same stuff about slavery and what not that plato did but also added sexism ontop of it.
@@zenbear9952Confucius was the “Top G” of his time, especially with that one quote about comparing the perceived value of 100 women to the supposed value of 1 t3$tic|3.
I legit feel bad for Wagner. I'm sure he had the regular amount of antisemitism of the average person on the continent at least, but god damn being tied to the nazis forever? That's rough...
They're talking about unemploying 20% of the population.... Like it's "nothing".... They don't realize, that's great depression numbers. Not to mention 20% directly unemployed. Then add the people who will no longer spend money in the economy, it will be like a house of CARDS, 30% unemployment minimum. So let's extrapolate. Now there are only 6 in 10 people with any money (and they'll likely be making LESS money due to depressed wages) what's their endgame? This isn't just a "cost saving" thing, it's the end of the economy and profits as we know it. They will "save money" just to NOT MAKE IT IN THE FIRST PLACE. end times.
Fascism isn't about alienation and isolation it's about the weldment of every individual will towards the goals of the state. Nazis would not like cars because cars give people freedom to go where they want when they want.
Clearly you know f all. Hitler in the real world loved cars and wanted Germans to all live in suburbs and whatnot. you can see in this video that the nazis mirrored modern car centric architecture and city planning.
How the hell did Vaush not know about the planned big building in Berlin?! Also, the jutting might be permissible if it calls back to the medieval practice of jettying.
It makes no sense to hate AI art if you really think it's terrible and doesn't approach real art in quality. If that is the case, there is nothing to worry about since human art is always going to be there by virtue of being the much superior product. People weren't angrily posting about AI art 3 years ago when it looked like weird slob that couldn't possibly be mistaken for human work. I think what it actually is is that artists become anxious and insecure seeing a computer spit out an image in seconds for free that to most people looks just as good as the stuff they need hours or days for. My real hot take is that most "artists" on the internet just know how to draw but don't actually have much artistic vision or talent behind it. AI shatters the belief that these people had that they have a special unique talent that couldn't be reproduced by a machine just looking at the thousands of other artists that are just like them.
That’s because artists aren’t afraid for the future of Art in itself. But that myriad of productions where talent is needed -but creativity frowned upon by executives- will be given to machines, effectively wiping out human creativity from 90% of our leisure industry, and barring the artists themselves of making a buck while working on their own, personal, long term project. Effectively killing loads, loads of art in the process.
@@julmyeBut that's a problem caused by the economic system. If a more capable technology was created in the future, we would have the same problem. The problem doesn't come from the tech itself. Instead of using AI art, and AI in general as an excuse of rethinking the economic system, we are attacking the technology.
@@julmye Unless you assume that the artists will all become homeless and destitude from this, I don't see how it follows that this means less art done by people in their free time. People don't have to be artists for a living to make art in their free time.
@@derpsternium8334 Yeah but thats a different argument than saying that AI sucks because its bad at making art. And being anti-AI because it replaces jobs is just being a Luddite imo. It sucks for those specific people that they have to find new jobs but every piece of technology that exists right now did that at some point.
Some members of family are definitely of the fascist bent. And even as a kid in the 90s, they were talking about how exciting it would be to replace artists and actors and useless people like that with AI and robots. It’s weird. Well jokes on them I’m a professional artist lol. Now they are extra weird because they love me and they love my art but also they hate me and my art 😅 it is funny to watch them try and mental gymnastic out of the dichotomy
22:04 Wouldn't that literally be a situation where saying the N word IS straight-up good? Like it sounds completely reasonable 😭 That didn't sound like an insult to 5-years-ago-Vaush, he just made a valid argument then said "Don't be like me, who used to make these arguments"
This explains a LOT. I used to talk to this guy online. We got along, until he started saying how much he loved A.I. art and how it was gonna be the future. It didn't make sense to me at the time, but then I found out he hang out with a lot of alt-right people online. I cut ties after that.
Generative AI helps me, because I use AI to improve my sentences for my personal projects. I also use AI to generate images because I can't draw for those projects. Sure I can pump money into hiring artists with a minimum wage budget and then have to cross my fingers that I'll get something that completely suits my tastes or I can use AI, but that's not feasable. Sure, AI steals from other artists just like (some) artists have stolen/taken inspiration from other artists without having paid a single dime for it. AI will soon allow people to singlehandedly create entire games and movies from their own homes. Yes, the first instinct would be massive layoffs in corporations just like during the industrial and technical revolution (when administration became easier thanks to computers), but another aspect is that so many people will generate their own games and movies that it will become an industry in itself. Producing games will become so cheap that we can expect more game studio's to pop up as the high costs of producing videogames is really what is preventing companies to produce the next GTA6 (setting a clear benchmark with GTA6 here). AI artists are now sharing their prompts for free while encouraging other AI artists to better themselves. And to tie it to crypto. You know how Bitcoin is decentralized and people have to vote on what should happen to the blockchain for any change to be implemented? I'm expecting that to be the future of politics. A decentralizede government could work. The future is digital. You can't stop the digital revolution just like you couldn't have stopped the industrial revolution. You can complain about it or you can go with the times so you won't be left behind. It would be morally better to go for the latter, because it benefits your audience more
Nah, you just proved everything vaush said, the future you envision is soulless. The difference between artists "stealing" ideas and AI stealing art, is that for artists it still requires skill, time and effort to do, that's a monetary investment in itself. A time investment, and they naturally always add a bit of themselves into the mix. That's how new ideas are formed. As for the consumers pig troph you've imagined where "everyone generates there own games" it's just not feasible, because without real artists to generate ACTUAL ideas for those systems to take, the Ai would cannibalise itself and start generating derivative slop over and over again, just as we've seen. So you'd kill off human craft and all we'd be left with is sub par AI drivel with no recourse to go back.The only thing you've convinced me of with your defense of Ai is you have no respect for the human act of creation, only a desire to consume its result. Ironic since you seemingly have no actual taste for it. You wanna write your essays faster? That's fine by me, but leave art to the artists unless you intend on picking up a pen.
@@BedOfNettles Nowhere did I say that AI completely removes human involvement. AI is only a time saving and cost reducing technology. I have even seen traditional artists use AI on their own art. People who want traditional art will always pay for it. There is no future in which artists will go without work, but there is a future in which AI artists have combined multiple artist's styles to create a new style that, in its turn, will inspire the next generation of traditional artists. Yes, all artists take inspiration from other artists quite similar to AI. As for its use in gaming and science, it has already contributed to new discoveries in various fields. Complaining about AI is like complaining about the Industrial revolution, automatization, digitalization, etc. It's just the next necessary step in our development.
lmao at vaush being cornered by chat and failing to defend himself at the end Though it's kinda sad, he's not seeing how irrational he's gotten about this one subject.
@@LimeyLassen I know, it's weird that they got a W like this. Or, more like, Vaush got so insane that when he bounced his thoughts of random chatters, he managed to lose, despite it not being a contest. When AI is involved, Vaush's IQ drops to that of libs of tiktok gal.
@@LimeyLassenThing is most of the time Vaush says this is when he phrases points poorly or even backpeddles idiotic takes and then gets angry when called out on shit points.
Have you seen the nazi cartoon propaganda where a disney-like bird is caged then escapes, fly a little, sees stuff and goes back to its cage because it was far more comfortable, happy, safer in the cage? Nazis want people to obey and not get out of the cage they build for them.
one thing that bothers me is that there's a lot of pro-AI people on tumblr who argue that it "enables everyone to partake in the creative process". it makes me wonder if people genuinely think having the slop machine present you and image and going "not that" until you have what you like is creative.
Except the problem with what you just stated is that your end point was about being creative. When being creative and producing art dont have to be inherently one in the same thing. What one views as derivative art vs non derivative art doesnt change the actuality of the end result falling into the classification of art.
It's about as creative as an alcoholic dripping buckets of paint on a canvas laid on the floor. You know back then supporters of Pollock said he was like a shaman because of the "drip style" similarity to sand art... kind of insulting when you really think about it.
Fascists being pro-AI? First to come to mind is Shadiversity, the medieval history youtuber and Mormon fascist. He called himself a "professional" artist despite his work looking like dollar-store 90's Rob Liefeld imitations; so of course he jumped right on the AI train and started saying that actual skill is overrated. The funny part is he obviously has an inferiority complex towards his liberal, art-youtuber brother, Jazza.(Yes, _that_ Jazza; having seen them both before finding out they were related, i was shocked)
Shad sucked up all the evil in their Mormon household like a sponge, leaving nothing for Jazza. So now we have one normal guy and one who has enough unhinged evil for two people.
Life is funny that way. Hitler himself had a nephew who fought in WW2… for the US. Now I’m not saying Shad is as bad as Hitler, of course not… I’m certain Hitler was far less annoying.
Kinda sucks that Shad turned out to be a horrible person. I rarely watched his stuff, so the impression I got was just a mega nerdy yet slightly informative kind of guy. I really hate that he just perpetuates the stereotype that people obsessed with Medieval Military tactics are all secretly N@zis
"what if we took brutalist architecture, removed everything that could potentially resemble human inhabitability and call it a day" - fascist architecture, probably
Me laughing while hearing all this knowing HITLER was himself a failed artist... This man does have a good point but damn does history have a sense of humor.
One thing i noticed about Nazi architecture half of the buildings are just a box with some boring concrete sticks that they feebly try to call columns. Forget austere its just boring boxes
@LimeyLassen basically its like saying "We totally aren't trying to be the romans see our columns aren't as decadent and flashy as the romans and see how boring our box buildings are we aren't degenerate artistic types"
Vaush not reviewing some of the paintings Hitler did himself in this clip, especially the architectural drawings, is a major missed opportunity IMO. Also, the ironic thing about Norman Rockwell is that, for all that tradcons like his aesthetic, his most powerful artwork for me is the one with an African-American schoolgirl (Ruby Bridges IIRC) walking with police officers alongside a wall with a racial slur scrawled on it. It goes against literally everything that American fascists stand for.
AI art is such a pain. I have a twitter account that I use to follow artists and comics, cat videos and hobby stuff. Everytime I see an artwork related to anime I check if the account that posted it has a blue checkmark. If they have - the chance of them using AI for their "artwork" is usually very high.
The “AI is just like any other piece of tech used as a tool” argument is so ass. When you use other pieces of technology as tools for creation, ultimately the CREATION ITSELF is still in the hands of human beings. AI art is, by definition, art created by a soulless and emotionless machine. In real art, even with the assistance of some creative tools, every aspect of the final creation itself is overseen and crafted by human beings with emotions and something to say. AI “art” is put together by 1s and 0s using an algorithm. An actual abomination.
oh noes...ai art can hlp ilustrate and make thigns you like with host of mistakes and problems whcih are bieng worked on.its in its infacny.what fucking abomination. host of "art" is done for money and in boredom tehnicall process/.and host of artistic edndavoures are shit. you are free to avoid all air art and products. i woudl like to watch movie made by ai with ideas and thermes by competent artists whcih woudl trump holywood and other shitty studios.same goes fro other artisditc endavbours.if ai can generate content i like to enjoy even better asd my itnerests are niche.
The dome itself it's almost a half sphere, very bad shape to transmit the weight vertically (La Sagrada Familia in Barcelona, extensively uses catenary arcs because that's the best shape for that job), the base of the dome would have been under constant tension sideways, which concrete is very bad at.
That’s not even the funny part. Which is that the dome would’ve been impractically huge it would’ve generated its own weather resulting in rain clouds pouring over the inhabitants.
11:03 They may have Hugo Boss uniforms, but I think it's worth pointing out the US had the A2 and G1 leather aviator jackets, and the B3 sheapskin jacket which are all still made today and the A2 and G1 have not only remained cool looking but also remained relevant drip almost 100 years later (see Indiana Jones for the A2 and Top Gun for the G1which may still be issued to Naval Aviators today). And as if that wasn't enough, during ww2 the US Army Air Corps began replacing the A2 with nylon aviator jackets which have their own history and impact in fashion (which I'm neither as knowledgeable about or interested in as the leather and sheepskin jackets)
The unornamented pillars are called Dorian columns, and they were the same style of columns used by the Spartans and their colonies. So that's another example of the Fascist obsession with Sparta.
You mean DORIC? And that's not exactly true, even Doric column style had them fluted, look it up. The order of columns that are very very similar to the nazi ones is called Tuscan.
I find that obsession kinda funny, but then again Sparta isn't the only bunch of losers they worship, but Sparta *is* overrated as fuck. They were, for most of their existence a second rate power in the region that really only survived due to it's absolutely insane obsession with enslaving people and chest thumping over how badass they supposedly were. There were plenty of people even back then who rightly thought they were full of shit. Even their military actions were often pretty much carried by people who technically weren't Spartan at all, but Perioikoi, free citizens for sure but not Spartan citizens specifically. The funny thing about Spartans too is that much like how fascists are constantly afraid, all that chest thumping really boiled down to their fear of the Helots, and what they might do if they rebelled. Students of US history might also find this fear of the enslaved to be a familiar subject.
@@HandleMyBallsRUclipsIt gets even better: The Spartans were so obsesed with war that they didn't have enough births to replenish their war casualties. As a result, the population of Spartan citizens eas decreasing. To counter this, they had to give spartan citizenship to perioikoi and helots all the time. Its like if hitler had to conscript jews to wermacht to cover the losses of WWII.
I have to admit I found it good when it was bad at it because me and my friends would just put funny prompts and watch it spit something incomprehensible out. But now that it can actually create something actually passable as "real" I don't like it anymore.
Well at this point, while AI technology may remain, many large generative AI companies are going to go bankrupt so you might not see as much AI in the coming years.
It's a shame Vaush hasn't played the new Wolfensteins. They really lean into clowning on the Nazis, showing that their hypercompetence was a myth and just a propagandistic fascade. It's also a shame that the screencap that chatter sent in didn't showcase how shitty Berlin looks in the game. His guess that it should have giant freeways is correct, there are huge highways going through it in game. The city just looks like giant blocks of sqare concrete decorated with Nazi flags split apart with long lines of asphalt. Same goes for Wolfenstein The New Colossus, that one's set in the US. Everywhere the Nazis conquer, they replace all of the region's food with sausages and sauerkraut, as if they cannot understand why anyone would like other foods.
I'm reminded of a story where the Schmazis set up two art museums. One for all the state-approved art about strength and aryan heritage -- which bombed horribly because it was boring and terrible. And one for all the "degenerate" art made by "evil subhumans," and it was constantly sold out because everyone loved it
The holiday camp had an interesting link with the VW beetle. Workers at the Volkswagen factory in Wolfsburg could earn credits that they could exchange for vacation time at the camp. They could also save up their credits and buy a beetle for themselves but it would have taken almost a decade to do so and no one ever did.
most ai art i see at this point are from basedtraddschziogroyp types generating either "triggered fat woke" or "da juice happy merchant" type slop and its funny because nothing reeks of degenerate lifeless marvel movie type modernity more than ai art
I usually agree with Vaush, but I think that this is a miss. Saying that the Nazis would like AI art is baseless speculation. They could just as easily hate it. The only reasoning he gives is a slurry of words like "soul, love, humanity" that they hate. And for some reason that means they like AI art. Don't get me wrong, i'm not a fan of AI art, but doing the whole "everything I dislike is literally hitler" on it is a bit extreme. I agree with him that the Nazis had no architectual sense.
Notice that Vaush is getting way more emotional when it comes to talking about AI, than even when he talks about Palestine or Ukraine. It is because he is scared of it. So when the topic switches to AI he is no longer rational, but emotional and that makes him come up with a lot of stupid arguments. The Nazi-AI link is just one of them, but trully the most irrational yet
I agree. Vaush has a history of holding these simplistic views on life, engaging in sophistry about "muh humanity", and poisoning the well. Anything he doesn't like is morally bad/evil and anything he does like is good. This is his stupid brain taking 2 unrelated things he doesn't like and making an assumption that these things love each other.
I've said it before, but people forget that art is an entire field of study and isn't just self expression. Even if algorithms like Stable Diffusion or Midjourney could be used at tools and weren't trying to replace artists outright, knowing how to use those tools doesn't inherently make you an artisan. Knowing how to use a program like Mathematica doesn’t make you a mathematician, so why should we consider most AI bros artists? Doubly so when, even before these algorithms existed, they actively looked down upon art as a field of study.
The day we start to consider the dude hitting 30+ seconds on a microwave to heat up frozen lasagna to be a chef Is the day we can consider AI bros to be artists
I quite like brutalist architecture, its not my favourite, but I like that it’s imposing and in a way mysterious for the lack of detail. That said, it only works for me when it stands out amongst other styles, if everything was brutalist, it would be depressing.
There's Blue from Overly Sarcastic Productions and they seem to like dome architecture over there... Along with a bunch of other architecture, like he recently did a video talking about some African architecture that iirc is made using clay or something like that and like to prevent it from collapsing the community will basically annually go and climb on these poles jutting out from the sides of the walls and then apply more of the material to the building to sorta fill in the cracks which is pretty neat... I know one dome he talked about was this one where basically every year on the anniversary of Rome the sunlight would shine through a hole at the top of the building and down onto the doorway where the emperor would walk through the doors and like... That is some VERY INTENSE architectural work to figure out just in terms of the mathematics involved, especially since having a dome is already pretty mathematically complicated since domes naturally wanna collapse inwards (and all the sides of the dome put equal pressure on each other to sorta hold each other up from doing so), but then also having an empty space at the top!? And then having the light shining through properly!? With Ancient Roman math/technological knowledge? It's just impressive... There's also Newgrange in Ireland which kinda has something similar for where during a solstice the light will shine through the doorway and light up the inner chamber of it which is pretty cool... I went to Newgrange personally and saw it kind of, it wasn't during the solstice, but they've set up a way to simulate what it looks like as the light moves through this really short/narrow hallway of sorts up into the chamber and that was pretty neat to see...
I think I can explain the oddity of futurism in its political applications. Obviously, Italian futurism was aligned with the fascists, and early Soviet futurism was aligned with the bolsheviks until Stalin. However, American futurism, in the form of the Up Against the Wall Motherfuckers, became a type of anarchism. Essentially, what I contend, is that futurism is an ideology oriented around oppose in the past, rather than a clear goal. Therefore, Italian Futurists could find the rejection of the past in the creation of a new national identity in the crucible of international war. Russian Futurists could find it in the destruction of the old social forms of the Russian Empire and the creation of a new proletarian culture. In the United States, tradition could be seen as a top down, one-way communication by the past, and therefore rejected by lateral organization, especially in the form of riots
I liked the AI arguments. It´s just NFT food. Make cheap infinite recource and make the money that other´s actually worked for. The base problem is the tool is build on theft and non-consensual use. And it´s use is 90% to replace/avoid paying people for the product you want.
The V in those words is from Latin because they didn't have a U at the time and it stuck around for a long time in more modern design as an "old-timey" style flair to spell something using just Roman letters, such as a courthouse for example might have a sign spelled Covrthovse. The reason the nazis like it is because...obviously they're fascist and they like their sanitized version of fascist Rome so naturally they ruin something potentially cool by obsessing over it.
I went to Munich with my highschool class, and it bothered me so much how the vast majority of the class was saying how cool the nazi buildings looked and how much they hated the modern art galleries...
Funfact: grecoRoman architecture uses curves and bent edges so that when you see it in person, everything looks straight *in perspective.* Fascists brook no such relativism... straight edges were straight, aesthetics be darned.
Ugh, "AI is just a tool" argument again. Sure, _when_ it's used as a tool to be utilized by humans. Like you can use AI to get better results with context-aware fill in photo editing, compare two documents more flexibly than a diff tool could, enhance text-to-speech by automatically adjusting tone and inflection, etc. You can even do some of those things offline and provide your own ethically sourced training data. But generative "AI" (not to be confused with the hypothetical AGI) objectively has no inner model or abstract thought. It's just pattern matching, so it's incapable of creativity and using it as a source of creativity reflects bad on you.
The ability to be utilized by humans for the tasks you described is what makes it a tool. Stating it has no true cognitive abilities doesn't take away that it is just a tool much like screwdriver cannot think either
I agree totally with your assessment of A. I. Art. One of the problems outside the usual I have with A. I. generative art is the lack of ability to hone its operational syntax to generate original creativity. It has limits and boundaries to its generation of new framing of known artifacts.
Not really a fundamental limitation. Thats just a matter of proper training. The reality is that all these AI art generators are done mostly by random techbros using research projects.
@@XMysticHerox yes agreed on the tech bro bit. But to get back to my point it is a limitation. If your language is insufficient to create a desired effect after a certain amount of training, it is by definition, a limitation. Especially considering the amount of GPU power used.
@@myhappyabby Language? This would be moreso a matter of the algorithm used but anyways. Modern generative AI is capable of "original creativity" just to a much less impressive degree than humans. In my opinion anyways. This discussion always comes down to what is considered original creation however. I will add that i think most people don't really understand that humans do not create out of nothing. Ultimately what we create is also combinations of and iterations on existing knowledge. Just at a very complex level which muddies things up. But most psychological models of mind agree that human thought is always input bound. We do not think spontanously either. And thats what it usually comes down to. People mystify the human mind because they do not understand it.
This really feels like a reach. Or at least, it's exclusively informed by blue checkmarks who engaging in the AI art discourse just to trigger twitter artists (who they presumably hold in contempt). Like really think about the points that Vaush is making: - AI-generated simply uses existing art to generate new art that might differ in content from the original art, but still use the same style of the pre-existing art - Fascists don't like art that pushes the boundaries of existing stylistic norms, because that is created by artists, who fascists think are degenerates - (somehow this means that liking generative AI makes you fascist then) - "I bet hitler would have loved generative AI" - "If you don't agree with me about AI, there's something wrong with you. An unwillingness to agree with me means that you lack empathy" - Generative AI is like crypto, because it's a technological innovation that is spread by annoying people who get excited by technological innovations - Defending generative AI as a neutral tool that can simply be used for good or bad isn't a good defense because everything is neutral until it's used by good or bad actors, that defense is good when it comes to guns though, for reasons - "People don't understand why AI is bad because they simply lack the ability to understand why AI is bad" I can absolutely get why people don't like AI generated art, I don't even like it myself. But when Vaush talks like this, it's very clear that his actual thought is "I DON"T LIKE AI ART", and the rest is just filling in arguments and making wild assumptions about why people like it, and talking about it in the way that he talks about actual fascists. It's like how fascists can point to anything they don't like and somehow bring it back to degenerate foreigners trying to destroy the west. The only thing resembling an actual point is the first two things at the beginning of the segment about how AI art can only imitate past art, and fascists are obsessed with the artistic styles of the past, but that isn't an argument. The reason why your average person would use AI art isn't because they have some spiritualized obsession with past art styles, with contempt for new art styles, it's because it's an easy way to create art that resembles art that they already like, which is pretty obviously a morally neutral thing to do. Does Vaush think that everytime someone intentionally creates art that is meant to resemble existing art, that it is somehow fascist?
Next, Vaush is going to say that not cooking for yourself is fascist because fascists believe that they are too good for manual labour, and the reason why people don't cook for themselves is because they hold home-cooks in contempt and want slaves to serve them (as opposed to an actually good analysis, which is that people are lazy and like to take the easy way to get something that resembles good food in favour of putting in the work to make actually good food)
Yeah, I get that people are scared of AI. Seeing what it's capable of us has put a ton of industries in fear of being replaced by generative AI. There's already AI accounts on youtube generating tons of content, and I'm sure Vaush is scared for his livelihood, so he reacts negatively out of fear, making every conceivable claim that AI is the devil, and is secretly conspiring with the nazis.
@@APaleDot Yeah. Controlnet alone blows that argument wide open. Even before that people were inpainting and using photoshop/gimp to alter images before, during, and after creation to their desire. Despite being the most common form of it, the "upper limits" of what AI art is capable of has evolved past "type some words and hope for the best". People can actually express themselves with AI now, and not just by hitting "generate" 1,000 times until you randomly get something you like.
@@isuckatusernames4297Not a huge fan of the hypocrisy argument but AI art is certainly avoidable. However if you are going to the point you call people who so much as use generative AI subhuman and Nazis it is at the very least a bad look to use it yourself.
@@isuckatusernames4297 If you consume AI stuff you a literally an evil space demon nazi. Consumes AI stuff. Says he is not an evil space demon Nazi. So what is it? Either way you need to decide. I'm happy with going the route that Vaush is an evil space demon Nazi, I don't really care either way.
I think that whilst a lot of people in chat are clearly just morons, part of why Vaush keeps getting into arguments with chat over this is that there's a miscommunication over whether we're talking about the specific technology of generative neural networks, or the phenomenon of unthinking machines being used to imitate human art and communication. These sound similar but are actually completely different. For instance I would have a problem with AI """"art"""" even if the specific technology used to create it were completely different. If someone somehow invented a steam powered contraption that does the same thing but without a single transistor or logic gate in sight the moral issues with its use would be the same. Likewise if someone takes the exact same lines of code used in chatgpt and uses it to make a tool that looks at MRI scans and determines if you have cancer more reliably than any human doctor in a fraction of the time then great, but what the fuck does that have to do with the AI art debate? I don't care that it's the same technology, I don't have a problem with the technology, I don't even know enough about how it works to have a problem with the technology. I have a problem with the phenomenon of things that don't have any conscious experience invading the world of human communication and crowding out all the real people with hollow imitations, all whilst also spreading misinformation and putting tones of people out of their jobs.
This is the case basically everytime Vaush gets angry and chat and does a ban rampage. He misccomunicated or just straight up nakes a garbage point. Then people call him out on it, he gets incredibly angry at them and then backpeddles. Well usually backpeddles. And yes generative AI has a lot of other purposes. Like generating patient records and scans for medical research.
I am honestly confused by your comment because the technology upon which generative AI is implemented is completely abstracted away from the actual computer bits. And I don’t think anyone was criticizing that it’s all running on digital electronics. When you say “if the specific technology used to create AI images were completely different” this makes me imagine you’d even be opposed to a prompt based AI image generator that did not require large volumes of training data from perhaps nonconsenting authors. Is that what you’re intending to say?
@@jarlsparkley Yeah pretty much. Whilst the art theft is a real issue and probably the best legal avenue to fight AI on, the main problem of AI art being a hollow meaningless imitation of real art is one that will remain as long as the thing creating the images isn't conscious. At the end of the day art in all forms is about human communication, remove the human and you remove all meaning.
@@pavonian7531 honestly, if you’ve never applied the concept of philosophical functionalism to address the question of whether or not some random example of arbitrary AI generated image should ever be considered art, then I think you are way out of your depth here and have not thought about this nearly enough. By the way, your misconceptions about the role of digital electronics in generative AI also itself illustrates a lack of consideration for the functionalist perspective.
@@jarlsparkley Ok, from what I can gather 'philosophical functionalism' is an up your own ass way of saying that it doesn't matter where the art comes from, if it makes you feel the same as human art then it's the same. To that I'd say imagine that you make a friend online, you talk to them every day and eventually come to value your friendship with them. Then you learn that the friend was actually just chatgpt the entire time, you were never talking to a real person. Would you be ok with that? Would you be fine as long as you never have to know that it wasn't a real person, or would you have an issue regardless? If your totally fine with that then that's fine (even if in Vaushes words it means you lack a soul), but I wouldn't be ok with it. I think there's a fundamental difference even if the AI is indistinguishable from a human and if that means I reject functionalism then so be it. As for the "misconceptions about the role of digital electronics in generative AI", what a vague fucking point to make. 'oh, I'm not actually going to point out anything you said that's wrong, just insinuate that you're mistaken in some unspecified way and that makes everything you said invalid'. My entire point is that the specifics of how the technology words are irrelevant, it could be a magic wand generating the images for all I care, as long as it's not a sentient magic wand my opposition to it would remain the same.
These people cannot look deeper into something than surface level, because then they'd have the mental capacity to know their way of thinking is fundamentally wrong.
Not related to this exact discussion but literally just minutes ago I was looking up Peter Elson's art on google to show a friend of mine after he asked me about my favourite artists, only to see that fully HALF of the results were images generated with midjourney. Just a few years ago when I actually found Elson this wasn't a thing, it's gotten so bad so quicky and holy fucking shit is it depressing. The sheer fucking horror of imagining a world where one day the google results will be so saturated with this garbage that you won't even be able to see the ORIGINAL artists work is what as an artist myself keeps me up at night. Thankfully I'm nowhere near famous enough for people to try to copy my style, but recent developements have been making me feel like I'll never be able to make a career out of this no matter how much skill and experience I've managed to attain through 20+ years of work. I'm actually considering a career in history instead, at least that hasn't been automated yet, and to be fair it's not a bad choice, but it's one I feel like I'm being forced to make and that sucks. Don't get me wrong, I do what I do because I love making art, and I won't stop until I am physically incapable of making art, but I had really hoped for a brighter future than this.
but domes and pillars look nice, dude. I'll enjoy the fuck out of a good dome and/or pillar, i don't care what you say. You seen the Jefferson Memorial? The fuckin Grand Central building? That shit is badass. Lemme get more of that in my life.
Vaush: "People are so defensive of ai art." Also Vaush: "Anyone who likes ai art is subhuman. Don't think I'm joking, I genuinely believe that." Also, also Vaush: "People are going to be naturally defensive when nazis don't treat them as people."
"...it would lead to more underground artis-" I dont want them underground "... the art galleries are still-" Who the hell cares about art galleries. You have no idea how refreshing was to hear both of those takes. and I AM an artist.
I really don't understand how people in this community can defend AI produced images so much. Like I don't agree with Vaush all the time but he is 100% on the money here, the pushback is so bizarre to me.
Someone said AI is just a tool and he did a whole rant about murderers, soullessness, and the over emphasis on cars in American society. Past that point image generation was no longer even being discussed.
@@rihaoliang3118 A nuclear warhead is also "just a tool", that doesn't mean anything. It's what people are incentivized to do with these tools under our current socioeconomic conditions and his rant about the results of the use of those "tools" is completely correct. This is basic sociological analysis, if you don't get this how are you on board with his analyses on other topics?
@@BLooDCoMPleX if you're going for an analogy comparing anything to nuclear weapons in terms of applications can only make your point weaker. Considering that nuclear bombs only have one function. Nuclear fission technology in general would be more applicable. That's one. Two, yes you're right in that his rant was correct if you hyper focus on image generation in its applications and literally ignore all other applications that are more common. Like let's take a step back and a deep breath. You talk about the societal use of a tool but do you even know what's going on in society. Like with your neighbor or coworkers for example. Do you think they're using AI to be self proclaimed artists or do you think it's more likely they'd ask about the weather or a cool place to travel to?
@iang3118 Literally 2 days ago I talked about this topic with a friend who is working as an interior designer and most of the conversation was about how angry she is that her boss is bringing this technology that he doesn't understand into the work environment, that the customers don't understand it, and that she and her colleagues can't get anything useful out of it but they're still forced to work with it because the corporate thinks that this new piece of shiny tech fad is going to change the world for the better. She is not even a leftist or even vaguely political, but she is aware that this tech is ruining her job even though it is not capable of replacing her. She now fears that in the coming months they can axe her or some of her colleagues off to cut costs since they think AI can do their job even though it can't. And when the corporate realizes that this AI fad can't actually replace people, will they hire those people back? No, of course not. They will simply lower the standards of their service for lower costs, since the push to normalize AI services is universal across the tech industry. This is a textbook example of how a race to the bottom works. It's not about people "becoming self proclaimed artists" (though some dipshits on twitter do think that's the case, that doesn't really matter), or some guy having fun with it to generate images of a vacation spot they want to visit, it's about a tech fad being hyped to replace parts of our technological infrastructure to potentially very destructive and long lasting consequences. This technology, in its current unregulated state, will make all our lives so much worse than it is right now.
the love fascists have for rockwell will always be ironic. he has made multiple pieces about respecting other cultures and races, he made a painting of ruby bridges being escorted to school as well. he loved portraying the regular american persons life and saw beauty in a lot of people.that the thing with fascists, they take away your work as an artist, reinterpret it and then use it against you. its inhuman. i dont trust anyone who uses AI shit.
The entire argument here seems to be "Nazis dislike new art movements", "AI is poor at coming up with new styles" (not even true exactly it's moreso poor at coming up with things that still appeal to humans) therefor thje Nazis would have liked it and anyone that likes generative AI must be a Nazi. Absurd. This AI arc is really becoming more and more ridiculous. I mean the entire argument falls apart when you consider that absolutely nothing about generative AI inherently makes art impossible. Let's not even talk about how art generation is just one application. But the only reason it replaces artists is capitalism. Literally nothing about the technology prevents anyone from creating art. It's not that a thing possibly being used in another way excuses the outcomes. It's moreso that the outcomes have a primary cause completely seperate to it. Which is capitalism exploiting anything that can even slightly automate things to remove jobs and of course offer no recourse to those that loose them. To me the question is whether or not without capitalism a single artist would be unable to make art due to genAI. The answer to that is no. What I find striking is how angry Vaush gets about this topic. The guy rarely ever gets angry. Seriously he is more outwardly angry about this shit than the invasion of Ukraine or literal genocide. Curious no? Feels to me Vaush only gets angry like this when he knows his position is weak and he lacks a proper reponses to points made in chat. As for the crypto/AI thing. Crypto is a scam born entirely from the techbro sphere. Whatever your opinion on it generative AI is primarily a research field that was then applied to make "art". It's also quite useful for numerous applications whatever your opinion on those applications. Nonsense comparison. I mean we are literally arguing pure vibes at that point. Talk about imitating fascists.
"Feels to me Vaush only gets angry like this when he knows his position is weak and he lacks a proper reponses to points made in chat." You hit the nail right on the head. Vaush is autistically against AI to the point of irrationality. Sure, he has some valid concerns of the tech, but he's been getting more and more unhinged about the topic. Remember in one of his anti-AI videos a few months ago were he said a global fascist takeover would be preferable to AI art becoming more common? Vaush is the kind of person that believes everything he doesn't like is objectively bad/evil but the things he does like are good. His favorite way of doing this is to engage in sophistry about "humanity" and "being human" which are totally subjective experiences. He will twist himself into pretzels to try to justify this every time. From videogames he doesn't like, to the concept of a watch to tell the time, they "make you less human" for enjoying them. If he doesn't like it, its bad and the people using it are evil and "destroying their humanity".
As an architecture student Neo-classical architecture gets shit talked a lot in my field so Vaush is kinda on the money here. Especially because of how badly the elements of Classical architecture got implemented for the new age (1800's)
People dont like nazis because of the racism and genocide, not because of architecture. You can still like neo-classical roman architecture and not be racist.
People may not like Nazis "because of the racism and genocide", but then if you ignore everything else fascism believes in, and refuse to understand the kind of mentality the average fascist has you'll just fail to recognize it until it's too late. Because, you know, usually when people want to do a genocide they don't start by saying "yup, we should totally genocide that population", that's like the last part
its also interesting how some of them like Goring, Boreman and a couple of others just stole all kinds of art, from sculptures to paintings to all sorts of things from all over europe and hoard it in their states, villas and other places, like they had trains full of stolen art, they have this strange relationship with Art, like a love-hate relationship or something like that
The idea that generative AI is just a neutral tool is dumb af. Its very creation requires stealing the creative works of actual artists. Contempt for art and the people who make it is a moral value that's baked into generative AI.
@@XMysticHerox Building an AI model to generate a thing requires you to have training data sets of examples of the thing you want it to generate. The ethics of how you source and give credit for this data matters. Furthermore, as a practical matter, why do you need an AI model for this at all? If you have anonymized patient records to train it on, why not just use that data directly?
@incooper5879So in reality you are talking not about generative AI you are talking about the very specific if widely known case of people using whatever images they find online for AI art generators. Even then I do think there is a legitimate debate to be had to which degree training on images constitutes theft assuming a sufficiently capable AI where generated images are never close to copies of originals (eg Nearest neighbor distance ratio close to 1). The obvious point would be that any human artist learns from the art they see over their lifetime and we of course do not consider that any sort of violation even when that artist creates something extremely similar. But I know it is probably not possible to have that debate here. As for why it is needed. Well anonymized patient records are never 100% anonymous. Especially when someone has access to multiple datsets containining records for the same patients. Modern GANs make that almost impossible if you use their generated data instead. Manually anonymizing is also more time consuming. The other advantage is to generate more data from less which is useful for machine learning.
When you understand that fascists are the lame cheating scrublords of the universe, their love of generative ai makes perfect sense. _edit: Nazi architecture looks like baby's first attempt at blender. They needed to jazz up those pillars with some normal mapping at least._
Why all the hate for people that like doing AI art? i know i'm not putting any artists out of work because i do it for fun. Also, Vaush is the last person that should be shaming people for the art they like
Seriously. Who knows.. I almost can't believe Vaush doesn't seem to realize AI's potential as an undeniable justification to end capitalism. Would've thought he'd be all over that.
![DDG & G Herbo - Nosey [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/I9Ra0Zc2NlQ/mqdefault.jpg)
What is your HOT TAKE about A.I. art?
I'd rather have an AI generated city planner than the one I got.
The leaks showing It's an art laundering machine and nothing more says it all. AI bros will clearly spend half hour excusing that It's legitimate theft. Worse. It's clearly for cheap, lazy, uninspired ppl and businesses and the ppl into it are unaware of don't care they are billionaire pawns while downloading billionaire AI spybots into their devices and buying AI spybot devices.
trash
it was better when the AI was bad at it
@@haleyspenceit would be trained off the data of city planners like yours...sooo..why would it be better? Lol. How would you know? What do you mean? What knowledge do you have of city planning that you think AI will do it better? Why haven't you done it and presented it? Lol. What has happened to your brain?
I've been to the never-finished nazi holiday resort on Rügen. The images Vaush showed doesn't even come close to conveying how dystopian that place is. It is simply enormous. It stretches on for literal miles. You can stand in front of it and see it vanish into the horizon on either side. Just block after block of dead, windowless concrete gravestones.
Today the area is full of squatters and anarchist youth groups that try to use the space for something useful or at least decorate it a bit, but it's so huge, that their efforts just drown in the empty void.
"Just block after block of dead, windowless concrete gravestones." is a raw fucking line
low-key looks like a soviet residential building. you can look up "residential building flute zelenograd" for example, over half a kilometer long
@@killermetalwolf2843the design itself is… photos of the buildings scream “it’s fuckin’ RAW!”
I'd suggest Vaush start calling it AI Images, rather that this whole... "AI Art isn't Art yet I'm going to keep calling AI Art even through it's not Art" thing.
I prefer "AI Garbage product"
AI images is pretty general though (could refer to pictures meant to look like photographs as well).
I think calling it pseudo-art would be funny but that'll never catch on
Should use the name Doctor Who used in the 70's when they predicted the concept. "Computer Pictures"
You realize.. In the 80s and 90s, most established artists refused to call any digitally created art, "art". Yet here we are today. History repeats. Same happened when photography was invented. They acted exactly as y'all are now, same logic and everything.
@@GrumpDog It's not remotely the same logic though. Digital art is different, but it's not so fundamentally different that it stops being art (all the basic principles of art still apply, it's only the medium that changed).
AI art is fundamentally not art because it's not "creating" anything, it's just sticking together existing creations in a black box of algorithms and machine learning. It can't create anything new, and it's so fundamentally different from real art that if an AI were trained off of AI art, it would spit out garbage. Even the software engineers creating these algorithms know there's a difference and make sure not to feed bad data (I.E. AI art) to their machines. The only people who don't the difference are those who know nothing about tech or art.
Adolf Dimadome, owner of the Berlin Dimadome!
Adolf Dimadome, owner of the Berlin Dimadome!?
@@pancakes8670That's right!
Dimadommen
Plato was really a hater of art. He was the original fascist, with his hate of things like democracy, egalitarism and disabled people.
To be fair, most ancient greeks hated disabiled people.
Platonism and Neo-Platonism are a curse the west has been saddled with.
Plato was surprisingly based on women for the time unlike Aristotle. Plato actually thought women should have equal access to politics and education. Aristotle was more fascist, he believed in all the same stuff about slavery and what not that plato did but also added sexism ontop of it.
@@zenbear9952Confucius was the “Top G” of his time, especially with that one quote about comparing the perceived value of 100 women to the supposed value of 1 t3$tic|3.
@@zenbear9952 Most of the Greek intelligentsia were like this about women. This includes the myth writers, especially Hesiod.
I legit feel bad for Wagner. I'm sure he had the regular amount of antisemitism of the average person on the continent at least, but god damn being tied to the nazis forever? That's rough...
Nietzsche be like: "First time?" (FUnny enough they used to be friends until they had a falling out)
Wagner was _extremely_ antisemitic even for his day.
Nietzche was rewritten by his Nazi sister.
Wagner did not have the "normal" amount of anti-Semitism. He was pretty anti-Semitic even by the standards of his wildly anti-Semitic era
I actually love some of his music
@@zenbear9952 Unlike many of his devotees, he was actually capable of producing art.
They're talking about unemploying 20% of the population.... Like it's "nothing".... They don't realize, that's great depression numbers. Not to mention 20% directly unemployed. Then add the people who will no longer spend money in the economy, it will be like a house of CARDS, 30% unemployment minimum.
So let's extrapolate. Now there are only 6 in 10 people with any money (and they'll likely be making LESS money due to depressed wages) what's their endgame?
This isn't just a "cost saving" thing, it's the end of the economy and profits as we know it.
They will "save money" just to NOT MAKE IT IN THE FIRST PLACE.
end times.
Fascism isn't about alienation and isolation it's about the weldment of every individual will towards the goals of the state. Nazis would not like cars because cars give people freedom to go where they want when they want.
Clearly you know f all. Hitler in the real world loved cars and wanted Germans to all live in suburbs and whatnot.
you can see in this video that the nazis mirrored modern car centric architecture and city planning.
Don't google "reichsautobahn" or "volkswagen".
How the hell did Vaush not know about the planned big building in Berlin?! Also, the jutting might be permissible if it calls back to the medieval practice of jettying.
Would the fascists actually care about that, though?
What is “the medieval practice of jutting”???? Lol
@@hughquigley5337 My mistake. I meant jettying.
Fascism is the opposite of demure
It makes no sense to hate AI art if you really think it's terrible and doesn't approach real art in quality. If that is the case, there is nothing to worry about since human art is always going to be there by virtue of being the much superior product. People weren't angrily posting about AI art 3 years ago when it looked like weird slob that couldn't possibly be mistaken for human work.
I think what it actually is is that artists become anxious and insecure seeing a computer spit out an image in seconds for free that to most people looks just as good as the stuff they need hours or days for. My real hot take is that most "artists" on the internet just know how to draw but don't actually have much artistic vision or talent behind it. AI shatters the belief that these people had that they have a special unique talent that couldn't be reproduced by a machine just looking at the thousands of other artists that are just like them.
That’s because artists aren’t afraid for the future of Art in itself. But that myriad of productions where talent is needed -but creativity frowned upon by executives- will be given to machines, effectively wiping out human creativity from 90% of our leisure industry, and barring the artists themselves of making a buck while working on their own, personal, long term project. Effectively killing loads, loads of art in the process.
@@julmyeBut that's a problem caused by the economic system. If a more capable technology was created in the future, we would have the same problem. The problem doesn't come from the tech itself. Instead of using AI art, and AI in general as an excuse of rethinking the economic system, we are attacking the technology.
@@julmye Unless you assume that the artists will all become homeless and destitude from this, I don't see how it follows that this means less art done by people in their free time. People don't have to be artists for a living to make art in their free time.
@@JohnDoe-jp4embut a lot of people who are artists for a living are perfectly justified in being fearful that Execs will replace them with AI?
@@derpsternium8334 Yeah but thats a different argument than saying that AI sucks because its bad at making art.
And being anti-AI because it replaces jobs is just being a Luddite imo. It sucks for those specific people that they have to find new jobs but every piece of technology that exists right now did that at some point.
Bro really found the secret link between nãz!s and fascism i cant☠️
Some members of family are definitely of the fascist bent. And even as a kid in the 90s, they were talking about how exciting it would be to replace artists and actors and useless people like that with AI and robots.
It’s weird. Well jokes on them I’m a professional artist lol. Now they are extra weird because they love me and they love my art but also they hate me and my art 😅 it is funny to watch them try and mental gymnastic out of the dichotomy
22:04 Wouldn't that literally be a situation where saying the N word IS straight-up good? Like it sounds completely reasonable 😭 That didn't sound like an insult to 5-years-ago-Vaush, he just made a valid argument then said "Don't be like me, who used to make these arguments"
This explains a LOT.
I used to talk to this guy online. We got along, until he started saying how much he loved A.I. art and how it was gonna be the future. It didn't make sense to me at the time, but then I found out he hang out with a lot of alt-right people online. I cut ties after that.
You didn't try to understand why he believed in that or have a conversation with him?
Generative AI helps me, because I use AI to improve my sentences for my personal projects. I also use AI to generate images because I can't draw for those projects. Sure I can pump money into hiring artists with a minimum wage budget and then have to cross my fingers that I'll get something that completely suits my tastes or I can use AI, but that's not feasable. Sure, AI steals from other artists just like (some) artists have stolen/taken inspiration from other artists without having paid a single dime for it. AI will soon allow people to singlehandedly create entire games and movies from their own homes. Yes, the first instinct would be massive layoffs in corporations just like during the industrial and technical revolution (when administration became easier thanks to computers), but another aspect is that so many people will generate their own games and movies that it will become an industry in itself. Producing games will become so cheap that we can expect more game studio's to pop up as the high costs of producing videogames is really what is preventing companies to produce the next GTA6 (setting a clear benchmark with GTA6 here). AI artists are now sharing their prompts for free while encouraging other AI artists to better themselves.
And to tie it to crypto. You know how Bitcoin is decentralized and people have to vote on what should happen to the blockchain for any change to be implemented? I'm expecting that to be the future of politics. A decentralizede government could work. The future is digital. You can't stop the digital revolution just like you couldn't have stopped the industrial revolution. You can complain about it or you can go with the times so you won't be left behind. It would be morally better to go for the latter, because it benefits your audience more
Lots of words for "I'm a parasite", did AI write this for you too?
@@AlexW1495 Good way of saying you're too unintelligent to engage with this discussion. You definitely wrote that yourself
Nah, you just proved everything vaush said, the future you envision is soulless. The difference between artists "stealing" ideas and AI stealing art, is that for artists it still requires skill, time and effort to do, that's a monetary investment in itself. A time investment, and they naturally always add a bit of themselves into the mix. That's how new ideas are formed. As for the consumers pig troph you've imagined where "everyone generates there own games" it's just not feasible, because without real artists to generate ACTUAL ideas for those systems to take, the Ai would cannibalise itself and start generating derivative slop over and over again, just as we've seen. So you'd kill off human craft and all we'd be left with is sub par AI drivel with no recourse to go back.The only thing you've convinced me of with your defense of Ai is you have no respect for the human act of creation, only a desire to consume its result. Ironic since you seemingly have no actual taste for it. You wanna write your essays faster? That's fine by me, but leave art to the artists unless you intend on picking up a pen.
@@BedOfNettles Nowhere did I say that AI completely removes human involvement. AI is only a time saving and cost reducing technology. I have even seen traditional artists use AI on their own art. People who want traditional art will always pay for it. There is no future in which artists will go without work, but there is a future in which AI artists have combined multiple artist's styles to create a new style that, in its turn, will inspire the next generation of traditional artists. Yes, all artists take inspiration from other artists quite similar to AI. As for its use in gaming and science, it has already contributed to new discoveries in various fields. Complaining about AI is like complaining about the Industrial revolution, automatization, digitalization, etc. It's just the next necessary step in our development.
lmao at vaush being cornered by chat and failing to defend himself at the end
Though it's kinda sad, he's not seeing how irrational he's gotten about this one subject.
You're the first person I've seen who thinks Vaush's stream chat is anything but illiterate. It's a running joke on this channel, among the fans.
@@LimeyLassen I know, it's weird that they got a W like this. Or, more like, Vaush got so insane that when he bounced his thoughts of random chatters, he managed to lose, despite it not being a contest.
When AI is involved, Vaush's IQ drops to that of libs of tiktok gal.
@@LimeyLassenThing is most of the time Vaush says this is when he phrases points poorly or even backpeddles idiotic takes and then gets angry when called out on shit points.
All of these buildings look like prisons.
Nazis subconsciously making echo chamers with their buildings will never not be funny to me
Prefect because it fit because they want to imprison people to be and act a certain way they dont anyone to be themselves
Have you seen the nazi cartoon propaganda where a disney-like bird is caged then escapes, fly a little, sees stuff and goes back to its cage because it was far more comfortable, happy, safer in the cage? Nazis want people to obey and not get out of the cage they build for them.
one thing that bothers me is that there's a lot of pro-AI people on tumblr who argue that it "enables everyone to partake in the creative process". it makes me wonder if people genuinely think having the slop machine present you and image and going "not that" until you have what you like is creative.
It's also weird to imply that art isn't already something everyone can participate in
They literally do lol. It’s so sad cause like…everyone CAN partake in the creative process. They just aren’t creative
Except the problem with what you just stated is that your end point was about being creative. When being creative and producing art dont have to be inherently one in the same thing. What one views as derivative art vs non derivative art doesnt change the actuality of the end result falling into the classification of art.
It's about as creative as an alcoholic dripping buckets of paint on a canvas laid on the floor. You know back then supporters of Pollock said he was like a shaman because of the "drip style" similarity to sand art... kind of insulting when you really think about it.
@@FortuitousOwlnot always, i see a lot of uses where people are just not good at drawing and would like to express their ideas quickly and visually
Fascists being pro-AI? First to come to mind is Shadiversity, the medieval history youtuber and Mormon fascist. He called himself a "professional" artist despite his work looking like dollar-store 90's Rob Liefeld imitations; so of course he jumped right on the AI train and started saying that actual skill is overrated.
The funny part is he obviously has an inferiority complex towards his liberal, art-youtuber brother, Jazza.(Yes, _that_ Jazza; having seen them both before finding out they were related, i was shocked)
Truly insane that Shad is Jazza's brother. I saw him try to defend himself live against his brother that he was an artist and Jazza looked so done.
Shad sucked up all the evil in their Mormon household like a sponge, leaving nothing for Jazza. So now we have one normal guy and one who has enough unhinged evil for two people.
Life is funny that way. Hitler himself had a nephew who fought in WW2… for the US.
Now I’m not saying Shad is as bad as Hitler, of course not… I’m certain Hitler was far less annoying.
Kinda sucks that Shad turned out to be a horrible person. I rarely watched his stuff, so the impression I got was just a mega nerdy yet slightly informative kind of guy. I really hate that he just perpetuates the stereotype that people obsessed with Medieval Military tactics are all secretly N@zis
I haven't followed the HEMA side of RUclips in years. What did Shad do or say that makes him a fascist?
Nazi architecture legit looks unfinished like they were going to put a bunch of nice stuff on the façade, but ran out of budget.
"what if we took brutalist architecture, removed everything that could potentially resemble human inhabitability and call it a day" - fascist architecture, probably
I think that’s what happened in real life 😅
Considering just how cartoonishly corrupt and inept they were, that's probably what happened.
@@MrGksarathy it's the natural result of rejecting meritocracy and embracing chicanery
They probably melted all that down for more shitty tanks that they dont have the fuel for and which break down every few kilometers.
Me laughing while hearing all this knowing HITLER was himself a failed artist... This man does have a good point but damn does history have a sense of humor.
Literally the most prominent example of a Fascist is also a failed artist. I don't think that's a coincidence lmao
The failed creative to right wing politics pipeline is real. Hitler, Ben Shapiro, Steven Crowder...
One thing i noticed about Nazi architecture half of the buildings are just a box with some boring concrete sticks that they feebly try to call columns. Forget austere its just boring boxes
It's like the "no homo" of architecture.
@LimeyLassen basically its like saying "We totally aren't trying to be the romans see our columns aren't as decadent and flashy as the romans and see how boring our box buildings are we aren't degenerate artistic types"
Vaush not reviewing some of the paintings Hitler did himself in this clip, especially the architectural drawings, is a major missed opportunity IMO.
Also, the ironic thing about Norman Rockwell is that, for all that tradcons like his aesthetic, his most powerful artwork for me is the one with an African-American schoolgirl (Ruby Bridges IIRC) walking with police officers alongside a wall with a racial slur scrawled on it. It goes against literally everything that American fascists stand for.
Thanks for sharing your perspective! Yeah that’s an iconic painting
He already talked about Hitlers paintings...
@@thefebo8987 Where?
Norman Rockwell would be sick knowing what his art is used for
@@BrandonPilcher Yeh he's talked about Hitler's art before and dogged it for its wonky perspective and stuff.
Behind the bastards podcast did a really great episode on AI that dives into this.
Yes. Actually genuinely deranged stuff. They’ve like “facts and logic (and capitalist ‘economics’)”-ed their way into capitalism as a religion
*looks at Shadiversity*
I was about to say!
AI art is such a pain. I have a twitter account that I use to follow artists and comics, cat videos and hobby stuff. Everytime I see an artwork related to anime I check if the account that posted it has a blue checkmark. If they have - the chance of them using AI for their "artwork" is usually very high.
The “AI is just like any other piece of tech used as a tool” argument is so ass. When you use other pieces of technology as tools for creation, ultimately the CREATION ITSELF is still in the hands of human beings. AI art is, by definition, art created by a soulless and emotionless machine. In real art, even with the assistance of some creative tools, every aspect of the final creation itself is overseen and crafted by human beings with emotions and something to say. AI “art” is put together by 1s and 0s using an algorithm. An actual abomination.
oh noes...ai art can hlp ilustrate and make thigns you like with host of mistakes and problems whcih are bieng worked on.its in its infacny.what fucking abomination.
host of "art" is done for money and in boredom tehnicall process/.and host of artistic edndavoures are shit.
you are free to avoid all air art and products.
i woudl like to watch movie made by ai with ideas and thermes by competent artists whcih woudl trump holywood and other shitty studios.same goes fro other artisditc endavbours.if ai can generate content i like to enjoy even better asd my itnerests are niche.
The Volkshall (Hitler dome) would have sunk under its own weight because the ground was too soft
The dome itself it's almost a half sphere, very bad shape to transmit the weight vertically (La Sagrada Familia in Barcelona, extensively uses catenary arcs because that's the best shape for that job), the base of the dome would have been under constant tension sideways, which concrete is very bad at.
This information brings me joy
That’s not even the funny part. Which is that the dome would’ve been impractically huge it would’ve generated its own weather resulting in rain clouds pouring over the inhabitants.
Hitler would have also blamed the jews for why it fell
@@zephyr8072That sounds cool though.
'come to the hitler dome, the only place where you will find clouds inside'
Shadiversity is seething rn
He's uh... an interesting fellow.
Is he ever not seething?
Man forget that guy.
What happened
@oandrade9807 He's an ai art bro
11:03 They may have Hugo Boss uniforms, but I think it's worth pointing out the US had the A2 and G1 leather aviator jackets, and the B3 sheapskin jacket which are all still made today and the A2 and G1 have not only remained cool looking but also remained relevant drip almost 100 years later (see Indiana Jones for the A2 and Top Gun for the G1which may still be issued to Naval Aviators today). And as if that wasn't enough, during ww2 the US Army Air Corps began replacing the A2 with nylon aviator jackets which have their own history and impact in fashion (which I'm neither as knowledgeable about or interested in as the leather and sheepskin jackets)
Nazi architecture looks like gmod maps lol
Gmod uses half life maps so the Combine are a good example of fascist archirecture
@@OccuredJakub12To be fair, the Combine are kinda Fascy themselves. They are built on a strict hierarchical structure determined by your species.
The unornamented pillars are called Dorian columns, and they were the same style of columns used by the Spartans and their colonies. So that's another example of the Fascist obsession with Sparta.
You mean DORIC? And that's not exactly true, even Doric column style had them fluted, look it up. The order of columns that are very very similar to the nazi ones is called Tuscan.
I find that obsession kinda funny, but then again Sparta isn't the only bunch of losers they worship, but Sparta *is* overrated as fuck. They were, for most of their existence a second rate power in the region that really only survived due to it's absolutely insane obsession with enslaving people and chest thumping over how badass they supposedly were. There were plenty of people even back then who rightly thought they were full of shit. Even their military actions were often pretty much carried by people who technically weren't Spartan at all, but Perioikoi, free citizens for sure but not Spartan citizens specifically. The funny thing about Spartans too is that much like how fascists are constantly afraid, all that chest thumping really boiled down to their fear of the Helots, and what they might do if they rebelled. Students of US history might also find this fear of the enslaved to be a familiar subject.
@@HandleMyBallsRUclipsIt gets even better:
The Spartans were so obsesed with war that they didn't have enough births to replenish their war casualties. As a result, the population of Spartan citizens eas decreasing. To counter this, they had to give spartan citizenship to perioikoi and helots all the time.
Its like if hitler had to conscript jews to wermacht to cover the losses of WWII.
@@HandleMyBallsRUclips Man it's really insane how totally possessed by ideology you people are.
I have to admit I found it good when it was bad at it because me and my friends would just put funny prompts and watch it spit something incomprehensible out.
But now that it can actually create something actually passable as "real" I don't like it anymore.
World is changing. There is no going back. You will hate a lot more about AI
I'm a software engineer. I understand ai and its implications.
And yeah, I probably will start to hate it@@vipcypr8368
Well at this point, while AI technology may remain, many large generative AI companies are going to go bankrupt so you might not see as much AI in the coming years.
It's a shame Vaush hasn't played the new Wolfensteins. They really lean into clowning on the Nazis, showing that their hypercompetence was a myth and just a propagandistic fascade.
It's also a shame that the screencap that chatter sent in didn't showcase how shitty Berlin looks in the game. His guess that it should have giant freeways is correct, there are huge highways going through it in game. The city just looks like giant blocks of sqare concrete decorated with Nazi flags split apart with long lines of asphalt.
Same goes for Wolfenstein The New Colossus, that one's set in the US. Everywhere the Nazis conquer, they replace all of the region's food with sausages and sauerkraut, as if they cannot understand why anyone would like other foods.
yup nazis werent competent just that their enemies were even less competent for at least firsty part of war.
6:08 It would probably be some Moscow/North Korean style paved area for maneuvers and parades of tanks and trucks with nuclear missiles.
I'm reminded of a story where the Schmazis set up two art museums. One for all the state-approved art about strength and aryan heritage -- which bombed horribly because it was boring and terrible. And one for all the "degenerate" art made by "evil subhumans," and it was constantly sold out because everyone loved it
Nazis loved adding superfluous, uninspired pillars to everything the same way AI loves to add extra fingers and ribs.
I wonder if the fascists would tolerate your ai generated goblin fantasy art?
The holiday camp had an interesting link with the VW beetle. Workers at the Volkswagen factory in Wolfsburg could earn credits that they could exchange for vacation time at the camp. They could also save up their credits and buy a beetle for themselves but it would have taken almost a decade to do so and no one ever did.
It's also worth mentioning that there's an ongoing debate whether the Beetle was entirely a VW design
Well they only had 12 years soo..of course noone did
Still faster than a Trabbi in real existing socialism.
@@phoenix5384 It is a design from Ferdinand Porsche who took influence from designs by Tatra and Zundapp.
@@matt_9112 I don't know why you're trying to do some sort of gotcha here.
All topics I’m interested in
most ai art i see at this point are from basedtraddschziogroyp types generating either "triggered fat woke" or "da juice happy merchant" type slop and its funny because nothing reeks of degenerate lifeless marvel movie type modernity more than ai art
Idk what vaush is on about with those buildings, they're great minecaft builds....
what do you mean that's pictures of real life!
I usually agree with Vaush, but I think that this is a miss. Saying that the Nazis would like AI art is baseless speculation. They could just as easily hate it. The only reasoning he gives is a slurry of words like "soul, love, humanity" that they hate. And for some reason that means they like AI art.
Don't get me wrong, i'm not a fan of AI art, but doing the whole "everything I dislike is literally hitler" on it is a bit extreme.
I agree with him that the Nazis had no architectual sense.
Notice that Vaush is getting way more emotional when it comes to talking about AI, than even when he talks about Palestine or Ukraine. It is because he is scared of it. So when the topic switches to AI he is no longer rational, but emotional and that makes him come up with a lot of stupid arguments. The Nazi-AI link is just one of them, but trully the most irrational yet
@@vipcypr8368 of course he is scared of it, its turning the internet into a garbage dump and soon real life as well.
It's a bit like declaring dead people trans. AI would propably be in conflict with the idea of the Übermensch.
@@emilwesterholm9097True. Saying it's literally hitler is just plain wrong though.
I agree. Vaush has a history of holding these simplistic views on life, engaging in sophistry about "muh humanity", and poisoning the well. Anything he doesn't like is morally bad/evil and anything he does like is good. This is his stupid brain taking 2 unrelated things he doesn't like and making an assumption that these things love each other.
I've said it before, but people forget that art is an entire field of study and isn't just self expression. Even if algorithms like Stable Diffusion or Midjourney could be used at tools and weren't trying to replace artists outright, knowing how to use those tools doesn't inherently make you an artisan. Knowing how to use a program like Mathematica doesn’t make you a mathematician, so why should we consider most AI bros artists? Doubly so when, even before these algorithms existed, they actively looked down upon art as a field of study.
The day we start to consider the dude hitting 30+ seconds on a microwave to heat up frozen lasagna to be a chef
Is the day we can consider AI bros to be artists
@@matheussanthiago9685excellent analogy!
Well, the average AI bro isn't. But some people actually do use it to create meaningful output.
Absolutely. However this is not Vaushs position. It is completely contrary to it in fact and he would probably ban you if you stated it in chat.
@@XMysticHerox What are you talking about?
I quite like brutalist architecture, its not my favourite, but I like that it’s imposing and in a way mysterious for the lack of detail. That said, it only works for me when it stands out amongst other styles, if everything was brutalist, it would be depressing.
Abandon skyscrapers.
Return to *D O M E*
(I'm trying to do a joke. I hate these people ngl)
But what if dome on skyscraper
@@dawildbear What if skyscraper on two dome? Titfuck: The building.
@@dawildbeardegeneracy.
Skyscraper on dome?
@@imperialwarhawk123abc5two domes, in between them an erect skyscraper.
There's Blue from Overly Sarcastic Productions and they seem to like dome architecture over there... Along with a bunch of other architecture, like he recently did a video talking about some African architecture that iirc is made using clay or something like that and like to prevent it from collapsing the community will basically annually go and climb on these poles jutting out from the sides of the walls and then apply more of the material to the building to sorta fill in the cracks which is pretty neat... I know one dome he talked about was this one where basically every year on the anniversary of Rome the sunlight would shine through a hole at the top of the building and down onto the doorway where the emperor would walk through the doors and like... That is some VERY INTENSE architectural work to figure out just in terms of the mathematics involved, especially since having a dome is already pretty mathematically complicated since domes naturally wanna collapse inwards (and all the sides of the dome put equal pressure on each other to sorta hold each other up from doing so), but then also having an empty space at the top!? And then having the light shining through properly!? With Ancient Roman math/technological knowledge? It's just impressive...
There's also Newgrange in Ireland which kinda has something similar for where during a solstice the light will shine through the doorway and light up the inner chamber of it which is pretty cool... I went to Newgrange personally and saw it kind of, it wasn't during the solstice, but they've set up a way to simulate what it looks like as the light moves through this really short/narrow hallway of sorts up into the chamber and that was pretty neat to see...
Another OSP enjoyer in the wild! XD
"BUt VaUsh, hItlEr WaS aN arTIsT 🤪"
How can you make a segment concerning Nazi architecture without mentioning Albrecht Speer.
There’s a link between nazis and fascism?
Sounds silly to me. And I say that as a fascist myself.
Its not even bad art there is simply no art.
I think I can explain the oddity of futurism in its political applications. Obviously, Italian futurism was aligned with the fascists, and early Soviet futurism was aligned with the bolsheviks until Stalin. However, American futurism, in the form of the Up Against the Wall Motherfuckers, became a type of anarchism. Essentially, what I contend, is that futurism is an ideology oriented around oppose in the past, rather than a clear goal. Therefore, Italian Futurists could find the rejection of the past in the creation of a new national identity in the crucible of international war. Russian Futurists could find it in the destruction of the old social forms of the Russian Empire and the creation of a new proletarian culture. In the United States, tradition could be seen as a top down, one-way communication by the past, and therefore rejected by lateral organization, especially in the form of riots
Hitler wouldn't need AI, that was what he got Albert Speer for.
I liked the AI arguments.
It´s just NFT food. Make cheap infinite recource and make the money that other´s actually worked for.
The base problem is the tool is build on theft and non-consensual use.
And it´s use is 90% to replace/avoid paying people for the product you want.
The V in those words is from Latin because they didn't have a U at the time and it stuck around for a long time in more modern design as an "old-timey" style flair to spell something using just Roman letters, such as a courthouse for example might have a sign spelled Covrthovse. The reason the nazis like it is because...obviously they're fascist and they like their sanitized version of fascist Rome so naturally they ruin something potentially cool by obsessing over it.
Oh WOW Fascists are all in on pro-AI “art” slop. Who would’ve guessed.
Petition to rebrand "AI Art" to "AI Slop"
Unironically one of the most important vaush videos
I went to Munich with my highschool class, and it bothered me so much how the vast majority of the class was saying how cool the nazi buildings looked and how much they hated the modern art galleries...
Wow, your classmates sound like they suck major bollocks
That is....actually disturbing.😳
This is actually pretty great! Normal people enjoying true quality!
AI that goes through data such as taxes and looking for cancer cells is good. Generative AI and AI making decisions is bad.
I love Brutalism. I’m surprised how many people hate it.😂 it’s spooky-builds. They’re the back rooms of architecture.
Based segment, love it
Didnt this guy get caught with multiple ai images
Yes
yeah, he was however, in his defense, he was horny when he downloaded those images.
Lol, AI art splits the political compass. It's not a left-right issue.
The dumb takes just keep rolling in.
Funfact: grecoRoman architecture uses curves and bent edges so that when you see it in person, everything looks straight *in perspective.* Fascists brook no such relativism... straight edges were straight, aesthetics be darned.
Ugh, "AI is just a tool" argument again. Sure, _when_ it's used as a tool to be utilized by humans. Like you can use AI to get better results with context-aware fill in photo editing, compare two documents more flexibly than a diff tool could, enhance text-to-speech by automatically adjusting tone and inflection, etc. You can even do some of those things offline and provide your own ethically sourced training data. But generative "AI" (not to be confused with the hypothetical AGI) objectively has no inner model or abstract thought. It's just pattern matching, so it's incapable of creativity and using it as a source of creativity reflects bad on you.
The ability to be utilized by humans for the tasks you described is what makes it a tool. Stating it has no true cognitive abilities doesn't take away that it is just a tool much like screwdriver cannot think either
6:54 well yeah, cuz the nazis didn't build it, it's literally just the Reichstag building, which was built during the empire
"This new type of art is degenerate and anyone who disagrees is subhuman garbage, also fascists like it"
ok buddy, Vowsh
I agree totally with your assessment of A. I. Art. One of the problems outside the usual I have with A. I. generative art is the lack of ability to hone its operational syntax to generate original creativity. It has limits and boundaries to its generation of new framing of known artifacts.
Not really a fundamental limitation. Thats just a matter of proper training. The reality is that all these AI art generators are done mostly by random techbros using research projects.
@@XMysticHerox yes agreed on the tech bro bit. But to get back to my point it is a limitation. If your language is insufficient to create a desired effect after a certain amount of training, it is by definition, a limitation. Especially considering the amount of GPU power used.
@@myhappyabby Language? This would be moreso a matter of the algorithm used but anyways.
Modern generative AI is capable of "original creativity" just to a much less impressive degree than humans. In my opinion anyways. This discussion always comes down to what is considered original creation however.
I will add that i think most people don't really understand that humans do not create out of nothing. Ultimately what we create is also combinations of and iterations on existing knowledge. Just at a very complex level which muddies things up. But most psychological models of mind agree that human thought is always input bound. We do not think spontanously either. And thats what it usually comes down to. People mystify the human mind because they do not understand it.
This really feels like a reach. Or at least, it's exclusively informed by blue checkmarks who engaging in the AI art discourse just to trigger twitter artists (who they presumably hold in contempt).
Like really think about the points that Vaush is making:
- AI-generated simply uses existing art to generate new art that might differ in content from the original art, but still use the same style of the pre-existing art
- Fascists don't like art that pushes the boundaries of existing stylistic norms, because that is created by artists, who fascists think are degenerates
- (somehow this means that liking generative AI makes you fascist then)
- "I bet hitler would have loved generative AI"
- "If you don't agree with me about AI, there's something wrong with you. An unwillingness to agree with me means that you lack empathy"
- Generative AI is like crypto, because it's a technological innovation that is spread by annoying people who get excited by technological innovations
- Defending generative AI as a neutral tool that can simply be used for good or bad isn't a good defense because everything is neutral until it's used by good or bad actors, that defense is good when it comes to guns though, for reasons
- "People don't understand why AI is bad because they simply lack the ability to understand why AI is bad"
I can absolutely get why people don't like AI generated art, I don't even like it myself. But when Vaush talks like this, it's very clear that his actual thought is "I DON"T LIKE AI ART", and the rest is just filling in arguments and making wild assumptions about why people like it, and talking about it in the way that he talks about actual fascists. It's like how fascists can point to anything they don't like and somehow bring it back to degenerate foreigners trying to destroy the west.
The only thing resembling an actual point is the first two things at the beginning of the segment about how AI art can only imitate past art, and fascists are obsessed with the artistic styles of the past, but that isn't an argument. The reason why your average person would use AI art isn't because they have some spiritualized obsession with past art styles, with contempt for new art styles, it's because it's an easy way to create art that resembles art that they already like, which is pretty obviously a morally neutral thing to do. Does Vaush think that everytime someone intentionally creates art that is meant to resemble existing art, that it is somehow fascist?
Next, Vaush is going to say that not cooking for yourself is fascist because fascists believe that they are too good for manual labour, and the reason why people don't cook for themselves is because they hold home-cooks in contempt and want slaves to serve them (as opposed to an actually good analysis, which is that people are lazy and like to take the easy way to get something that resembles good food in favour of putting in the work to make actually good food)
Generative AI isn't art. You can like to eat McDonald's, but that doesn't mean you like to cook because you like to eat McChicken sandwiches.
@@DeafDefiler
lol, you still think AI art just involves typing some words. You're about 3 years out-of-date buddy.
Yeah, I get that people are scared of AI. Seeing what it's capable of us has put a ton of industries in fear of being replaced by generative AI. There's already AI accounts on youtube generating tons of content, and I'm sure Vaush is scared for his livelihood, so he reacts negatively out of fear, making every conceivable claim that AI is the devil, and is secretly conspiring with the nazis.
@@APaleDot Yeah. Controlnet alone blows that argument wide open. Even before that people were inpainting and using photoshop/gimp to alter images before, during, and after creation to their desire. Despite being the most common form of it, the "upper limits" of what AI art is capable of has evolved past "type some words and hope for the best". People can actually express themselves with AI now, and not just by hitting "generate" 1,000 times until you randomly get something you like.
Yet another vaush rant on his worst topic. Every other topic is fire, this is the achilles heel.
Vaush you can’t really criticize ai art when it was in your spank bank
you critizise spciety yet you live in one ? how come ?
@@isuckatusernames4297Not a huge fan of the hypocrisy argument but AI art is certainly avoidable. However if you are going to the point you call people who so much as use generative AI subhuman and Nazis it is at the very least a bad look to use it yourself.
@@isuckatusernames4297 If you consume AI stuff you a literally an evil space demon nazi. Consumes AI stuff. Says he is not an evil space demon Nazi. So what is it? Either way you need to decide. I'm happy with going the route that Vaush is an evil space demon Nazi, I don't really care either way.
Why are you so full of hate? It oozes from every word you say. I feel sorry for you.
Brothers, take heed! The emperors holy light will never shine on the ai art blasphemers, long live the emperor on the golden throne!
AI is just repackaged propaganda. Art makes you think. Propaganda thinks for you.
You mean just people you don't like
What riveting critique
Fascists don't deserve to be liked so....
Its a valid critique
He says that word before biting atremie everytime
I think he is completely off base
I think that whilst a lot of people in chat are clearly just morons, part of why Vaush keeps getting into arguments with chat over this is that there's a miscommunication over whether we're talking about the specific technology of generative neural networks, or the phenomenon of unthinking machines being used to imitate human art and communication. These sound similar but are actually completely different.
For instance I would have a problem with AI """"art"""" even if the specific technology used to create it were completely different. If someone somehow invented a steam powered contraption that does the same thing but without a single transistor or logic gate in sight the moral issues with its use would be the same. Likewise if someone takes the exact same lines of code used in chatgpt and uses it to make a tool that looks at MRI scans and determines if you have cancer more reliably than any human doctor in a fraction of the time then great, but what the fuck does that have to do with the AI art debate?
I don't care that it's the same technology, I don't have a problem with the technology, I don't even know enough about how it works to have a problem with the technology. I have a problem with the phenomenon of things that don't have any conscious experience invading the world of human communication and crowding out all the real people with hollow imitations, all whilst also spreading misinformation and putting tones of people out of their jobs.
This is the case basically everytime Vaush gets angry and chat and does a ban rampage. He misccomunicated or just straight up nakes a garbage point. Then people call him out on it, he gets incredibly angry at them and then backpeddles. Well usually backpeddles.
And yes generative AI has a lot of other purposes. Like generating patient records and scans for medical research.
I am honestly confused by your comment because the technology upon which generative AI is implemented is completely abstracted away from the actual computer bits. And I don’t think anyone was criticizing that it’s all running on digital electronics.
When you say “if the specific technology used to create AI images were completely different” this makes me imagine you’d even be opposed to a prompt based AI image generator that did not require large volumes of training data from perhaps nonconsenting authors. Is that what you’re intending to say?
@@jarlsparkley Yeah pretty much. Whilst the art theft is a real issue and probably the best legal avenue to fight AI on, the main problem of AI art being a hollow meaningless imitation of real art is one that will remain as long as the thing creating the images isn't conscious. At the end of the day art in all forms is about human communication, remove the human and you remove all meaning.
@@pavonian7531 honestly, if you’ve never applied the concept of philosophical functionalism to address the question of whether or not some random example of arbitrary AI generated image should ever be considered art, then I think you are way out of your depth here and have not thought about this nearly enough. By the way, your misconceptions about the role of digital electronics in generative AI also itself illustrates a lack of consideration for the functionalist perspective.
@@jarlsparkley Ok, from what I can gather 'philosophical functionalism' is an up your own ass way of saying that it doesn't matter where the art comes from, if it makes you feel the same as human art then it's the same. To that I'd say imagine that you make a friend online, you talk to them every day and eventually come to value your friendship with them. Then you learn that the friend was actually just chatgpt the entire time, you were never talking to a real person. Would you be ok with that? Would you be fine as long as you never have to know that it wasn't a real person, or would you have an issue regardless? If your totally fine with that then that's fine (even if in Vaushes words it means you lack a soul), but I wouldn't be ok with it. I think there's a fundamental difference even if the AI is indistinguishable from a human and if that means I reject functionalism then so be it.
As for the "misconceptions about the role of digital electronics in generative AI", what a vague fucking point to make. 'oh, I'm not actually going to point out anything you said that's wrong, just insinuate that you're mistaken in some unspecified way and that makes everything you said invalid'. My entire point is that the specifics of how the technology words are irrelevant, it could be a magic wand generating the images for all I care, as long as it's not a sentient magic wand my opposition to it would remain the same.
These people cannot look deeper into something than surface level, because then they'd have the mental capacity to know their way of thinking is fundamentally wrong.
Not related to this exact discussion but literally just minutes ago I was looking up Peter Elson's art on google to show a friend of mine after he asked me about my favourite artists, only to see that fully HALF of the results were images generated with midjourney. Just a few years ago when I actually found Elson this wasn't a thing, it's gotten so bad so quicky and holy fucking shit is it depressing. The sheer fucking horror of imagining a world where one day the google results will be so saturated with this garbage that you won't even be able to see the ORIGINAL artists work is what as an artist myself keeps me up at night. Thankfully I'm nowhere near famous enough for people to try to copy my style, but recent developements have been making me feel like I'll never be able to make a career out of this no matter how much skill and experience I've managed to attain through 20+ years of work. I'm actually considering a career in history instead, at least that hasn't been automated yet, and to be fair it's not a bad choice, but it's one I feel like I'm being forced to make and that sucks. Don't get me wrong, I do what I do because I love making art, and I won't stop until I am physically incapable of making art, but I had really hoped for a brighter future than this.
Ive just jumped ship from digital art to cyber security, ngl I’m sick of being worried for my career
Jesus. Vaush really doesn't like AI art, we get it. But does everything he dislikes have to be Nazi?
Well his channel is a political channel, if you go to a right wing channel then everything wrong is THOSE GODDAMN LEFTISTS fault
Yup
but domes and pillars look nice, dude. I'll enjoy the fuck out of a good dome and/or pillar, i don't care what you say. You seen the Jefferson Memorial? The fuckin Grand Central building? That shit is badass. Lemme get more of that in my life.
Exactly this guy is acting extra
Vaush: "People are so defensive of ai art."
Also Vaush: "Anyone who likes ai art is subhuman. Don't think I'm joking, I genuinely believe that."
Also, also Vaush: "People are going to be naturally defensive when nazis don't treat them as people."
"Dehumanization is only ok if the right side does it"
"...it would lead to more underground artis-" I dont want them underground
"... the art galleries are still-" Who the hell cares about art galleries.
You have no idea how refreshing was to hear both of those takes. and I AM an artist.
Tech is my field. I love the AI. It increases my productivity an absolute ton.
Call me a nazi and ban me lol.
Vaush is 100% right about the water thing.
I really don't understand how people in this community can defend AI produced images so much. Like I don't agree with Vaush all the time but he is 100% on the money here, the pushback is so bizarre to me.
Someone said AI is just a tool and he did a whole rant about murderers, soullessness, and the over emphasis on cars in American society. Past that point image generation was no longer even being discussed.
@@rihaoliang3118 A nuclear warhead is also "just a tool", that doesn't mean anything. It's what people are incentivized to do with these tools under our current socioeconomic conditions and his rant about the results of the use of those "tools" is completely correct. This is basic sociological analysis, if you don't get this how are you on board with his analyses on other topics?
@@BLooDCoMPleX if you're going for an analogy comparing anything to nuclear weapons in terms of applications can only make your point weaker. Considering that nuclear bombs only have one function. Nuclear fission technology in general would be more applicable. That's one.
Two, yes you're right in that his rant was correct if you hyper focus on image generation in its applications and literally ignore all other applications that are more common.
Like let's take a step back and a deep breath. You talk about the societal use of a tool but do you even know what's going on in society. Like with your neighbor or coworkers for example. Do you think they're using AI to be self proclaimed artists or do you think it's more likely they'd ask about the weather or a cool place to travel to?
@iang3118 Literally 2 days ago I talked about this topic with a friend who is working as an interior designer and most of the conversation was about how angry she is that her boss is bringing this technology that he doesn't understand into the work environment, that the customers don't understand it, and that she and her colleagues can't get anything useful out of it but they're still forced to work with it because the corporate thinks that this new piece of shiny tech fad is going to change the world for the better. She is not even a leftist or even vaguely political, but she is aware that this tech is ruining her job even though it is not capable of replacing her. She now fears that in the coming months they can axe her or some of her colleagues off to cut costs since they think AI can do their job even though it can't.
And when the corporate realizes that this AI fad can't actually replace people, will they hire those people back? No, of course not. They will simply lower the standards of their service for lower costs, since the push to normalize AI services is universal across the tech industry. This is a textbook example of how a race to the bottom works.
It's not about people "becoming self proclaimed artists" (though some dipshits on twitter do think that's the case, that doesn't really matter), or some guy having fun with it to generate images of a vacation spot they want to visit, it's about a tech fad being hyped to replace parts of our technological infrastructure to potentially very destructive and long lasting consequences. This technology, in its current unregulated state, will make all our lives so much worse than it is right now.
@rihaoliang3118 it seems more likely that you're just incapable of following points that aren't directly spoonfed to you if I'm being honest
the love fascists have for rockwell will always be ironic. he has made multiple pieces about respecting other cultures and races, he made a painting of ruby bridges being escorted to school as well. he loved portraying the regular american persons life and saw beauty in a lot of people.that the thing with fascists, they take away your work as an artist, reinterpret it and then use it against you. its inhuman. i dont trust anyone who uses AI shit.
man this guy is just so intellectually and morally bankrupt
The projection is wild, anti-human.
The entire argument here seems to be "Nazis dislike new art movements", "AI is poor at coming up with new styles" (not even true exactly it's moreso poor at coming up with things that still appeal to humans) therefor thje Nazis would have liked it and anyone that likes generative AI must be a Nazi. Absurd. This AI arc is really becoming more and more ridiculous.
I mean the entire argument falls apart when you consider that absolutely nothing about generative AI inherently makes art impossible. Let's not even talk about how art generation is just one application. But the only reason it replaces artists is capitalism. Literally nothing about the technology prevents anyone from creating art. It's not that a thing possibly being used in another way excuses the outcomes. It's moreso that the outcomes have a primary cause completely seperate to it. Which is capitalism exploiting anything that can even slightly automate things to remove jobs and of course offer no recourse to those that loose them. To me the question is whether or not without capitalism a single artist would be unable to make art due to genAI. The answer to that is no.
What I find striking is how angry Vaush gets about this topic. The guy rarely ever gets angry. Seriously he is more outwardly angry about this shit than the invasion of Ukraine or literal genocide. Curious no? Feels to me Vaush only gets angry like this when he knows his position is weak and he lacks a proper reponses to points made in chat.
As for the crypto/AI thing. Crypto is a scam born entirely from the techbro sphere. Whatever your opinion on it generative AI is primarily a research field that was then applied to make "art". It's also quite useful for numerous applications whatever your opinion on those applications. Nonsense comparison. I mean we are literally arguing pure vibes at that point. Talk about imitating fascists.
"Feels to me Vaush only gets angry like this when he knows his position is weak and he lacks a proper reponses to points made in chat."
You hit the nail right on the head. Vaush is autistically against AI to the point of irrationality. Sure, he has some valid concerns of the tech, but he's been getting more and more unhinged about the topic. Remember in one of his anti-AI videos a few months ago were he said a global fascist takeover would be preferable to AI art becoming more common? Vaush is the kind of person that believes everything he doesn't like is objectively bad/evil but the things he does like are good. His favorite way of doing this is to engage in sophistry about "humanity" and "being human" which are totally subjective experiences. He will twist himself into pretzels to try to justify this every time. From videogames he doesn't like, to the concept of a watch to tell the time, they "make you less human" for enjoying them. If he doesn't like it, its bad and the people using it are evil and "destroying their humanity".
As an architecture student Neo-classical architecture gets shit talked a lot in my field so Vaush is kinda on the money here. Especially because of how badly the elements of Classical architecture got implemented for the new age (1800's)
Ai is fucking bad like if you want to ve creative then pick up a pencil and learn to draw its not that hard
photographers in shambles
It very much is.
Nobody is forcing you not to draw lol
@@APaleDotIronically photography had literally this exact same debate when it first came about.
@@XMysticHerox you are so dense if you think it's the exact same thing lmao
People dont like nazis because of the racism and genocide, not because of architecture. You can still like neo-classical roman architecture and not be racist.
People may not like Nazis "because of the racism and genocide", but then if you ignore everything else fascism believes in, and refuse to understand the kind of mentality the average fascist has you'll just fail to recognize it until it's too late. Because, you know, usually when people want to do a genocide they don't start by saying "yup, we should totally genocide that population", that's like the last part
jup roman architecture is based and Nazis are still evil lol
As a fascist myself I also hate AI generated art. Not all fascists support that nonsense.
I doubt you are one, but if so please elaborate why.
its also interesting how some of them like Goring, Boreman and a couple of others just stole all kinds of art, from sculptures to paintings to all sorts of things from all over europe and hoard it in their states, villas and other places, like they had trains full of stolen art, they have this strange relationship with Art, like a love-hate relationship or something like that
The idea that generative AI is just a neutral tool is dumb af. Its very creation requires stealing the creative works of actual artists. Contempt for art and the people who make it is a moral value that's baked into generative AI.
Me when generating patient records for a research project. Definitely stealing from those artists.
@@XMysticHerox Why are you being intentionally dense? I pretty clearly said the theft was baked into the creation of AI tools, not their use.
@@nebxan5879You said it is baked into generative AI. Also I am creating generative AI for this purpose in either case.
@@XMysticHerox Building an AI model to generate a thing requires you to have training data sets of examples of the thing you want it to generate. The ethics of how you source and give credit for this data matters.
Furthermore, as a practical matter, why do you need an AI model for this at all? If you have anonymized patient records to train it on, why not just use that data directly?
@incooper5879So in reality you are talking not about generative AI you are talking about the very specific if widely known case of people using whatever images they find online for AI art generators.
Even then I do think there is a legitimate debate to be had to which degree training on images constitutes theft assuming a sufficiently capable AI where generated images are never close to copies of originals (eg Nearest neighbor distance ratio close to 1). The obvious point would be that any human artist learns from the art they see over their lifetime and we of course do not consider that any sort of violation even when that artist creates something extremely similar. But I know it is probably not possible to have that debate here.
As for why it is needed. Well anonymized patient records are never 100% anonymous. Especially when someone has access to multiple datsets containining records for the same patients. Modern GANs make that almost impossible if you use their generated data instead. Manually anonymizing is also more time consuming.
The other advantage is to generate more data from less which is useful for machine learning.
When you understand that fascists are the lame cheating scrublords of the universe, their love of generative ai makes perfect sense.
_edit: Nazi architecture looks like baby's first attempt at blender. They needed to jazz up those pillars with some normal mapping at least._
Why all the hate for people that like doing AI art? i know i'm not putting any artists out of work because i do it for fun. Also, Vaush is the last person that should be shaming people for the art they like
Seriously. Who knows.. I almost can't believe Vaush doesn't seem to realize AI's potential as an undeniable justification to end capitalism. Would've thought he'd be all over that.
At least it wasn't made by a machine,
wait what?