first of all: this was a really really great watch. beautifully made! you pretty much encapsulated the same sentiment i have on this topic, hah! which was really awesome especially coming from another artist! also, really enjoyed the editing in this one! :0 as an artist whos mainly focused on the digital drawing/animation realms, the discussion of AI art has been kind of on the forefront in my space and i think if people hear "AI art" then that's kind of the first thing they think of. as much as AI art made me upset when it became "mainstream" i guess, i've really just accepted it. technology is only becoming more and more advanced and i hate to say that it's inevitable that tech/AI will overshadow actual people, it will! and i'm just gonna buckle in for the ride! i think we just need to learn how to adapt with it lol 14:33 abso-fuckin'-lutely man. the one thing AI can't do is communicate emotions or passion in whatever the fuck it produces. it really can't do anything without prior human creation! but i'm never gonna stop creating art, even if there'll be no "point" in it anymore, speaking career wise i guess. sure AI can be more convienient or cost effecient but like. that's just boring man. i hate to think people would much rather type up a prompt into AI and it produce something that doesn't even fit a specific vision they had or it's straight up not good than to consult an actual artist and create something with them that they can tweak and alter during the process and even just form a connection with them! but we can't win 'em all. you have a great way of articulating things, dylan! it's inspiring and makes me want to have more discussions o7 also Definitely start ending videos with "stay rad and stay real my gen z comrades"
thanks so much :) it is a difficult thing for artists who make a career off their work. on one hand, there goes your livelihood. on the other, there will always be an inherent 'human quality' to your work. i think there might be an AI 'rebellion'/human art renaissance, (if there isn't already atm) where people purposefully seek out human art in favour of 'AI' art. there's already the NoAI hastags and etc. out there, so for the moment there's still time.
Once again, I think u covered the topic well, coming from an artist I remember out raged artists being angry at AI and even things like Instagram reels for 5 second video clips and AI replacing there craft. I’m personally more on the pessimistic side when it comes to stuff (especially surround the AI field) ik that’s a stereotypical artist thing to say about AI, but it comes from a place of realism. Which I like the fact u presented both sides of the matter and ur conclusion was still that of an open mind. U brought up concerns that many artists have but don’t always express in a way where both sides are being seen, causing conflict amount artists and people who support more AI associated endeavours. I will say in places like the medical field and other areas AI has benefitted massively (as well as some negatives such as data breeches) towards those systems in many ways and will hopefully continue to do so, so I don’t think the AI space across the board is doom and gloom completely, but I’m rambling. And speaking on the artists perspective ones again I think u covered well and I appreciate that. Once again keep ur shit up and two things, loved the funny clip of u and ur friends with the AI anime filter AND the MGS2 reference at the end, idk who else noticed but I fucking loved that lol.
being into arts and tech is a weird thing-- they are constantly at odds with each other, so it's a weird feeling. with something like the medical field, it's driven less by imaginative creativity, but more so utility. they work perfectly (er, pretty well) together, AI and medicine. AI art doesn't really get that liberty. at least we get funny anime filters. thanks so much! -and thanks for enabling my ongoing MGS2 obsession-
"I don't know, and that bothers me." This was the most powerful statement for me. Yet we don't need answers today. We do need the questions always, like this video. What we CAN do isn't always what we SHOULD do, and in the moment, every moment, we need to be aware of the difference. Well done. Properly conceived, competently executed. Make more. Subscribed.
English is not my first language, and l have used chat GDP to help me remembering some advanced words by creating english stories many times. to be honest, it really saves much time for me ,more importantly, it is free😂But sometimes,l am afraid l will be another ai tomorrow😅 in conclusion, ai can assist me, not replace me ，more impossible offend me.all artists have rights to protect thier interests.😊
AI doesn't really allow for people to express their ideas. And people with strong ideas have discovered this. I've seen a few people who tried ai, thot it was cool at first but then... They stopped using ai and learned to draw, and for many their reason was AI couldn't express their ideas. And this is fundamentally the issue with ai, why it's not art, and why it should not be and never will be accepted. AI isn't expressing anyone's ideas. The entire point to art is to express ideas and experiences. Generative AI cannot do this, and it detracts from and devalues anything it touches. This isn't really comparable to the printing press. Even if u think the writing of the letters is an important part of writing, those letters for the printing press were made by someone, someone designed those letters for it. And the text itself - where the real purpose of writing comes through, was still entirely human made. AI is different, the outputs themselves are not human made except that they're some statistical amalgamation of billions of images that actually were human made. But this amalgamation by a machine completely devoid of human input is an insult to the real work and meaning that went into them. I think in the long run people will see it this way. Think about hand made mugs or clothes - people pay a premium for these. Or counterfeit jewelry, most can't tell the difference, but once they learn it's fake it loses all value to them. Things like clothes are a necessity, so we settle for factory made clothes. Art isn't tho, art is much like jewelry - we don't need it to survive. Most likely ai will be seen the same as counterfeit jewelry, many can't tell, but once they learn it's fake it will lose all value to them. And those using it in their "process" will be rightfully considered hacks.
"Digital dynamos and mean maestros" help?? "FOMO is a lifestyle" get me o u t of here 12:10 This got me thinking about the concept of gatekeeping!! I am sometimes reluctant to recommend a show to my friend in fears that they'll wildly misinterpret it or miss it's meaning. As artists, we see AI art as something that can be used to generate images and ideas in an instant: further cementing the idea in s o m e people's mine that human artists are "slow" or "overpriced". Thus overshadowing the painstaking effort every single artist or writer has had to put in to get to where they are. In a world that's becoming ever fast paced, I can definitelyyy see why this is a concern. Perhaps the people who use AI art (especially business people using it for marketing) will have their negative biases reinforced. Or perhaps, as with gatekeeping, maybe recommending that show you love WILL bring in the right people who will be able to fully appreciate it. Maybe AI will expand the boundaries of beautiful art, not choke it. The monkey pictures should probably be purged from the internet tho also, dudee your stuff is so epic! Your editing style is very entertaining and I love the varied clips!! I appreciate how you presented both sides to give us food for thought, and didn't come to this grand conclusion at the end :D I look forward to your future musings!
the whole gatekeeping thing is something i don't have an answer to, unfortunately. i think in corporate contexts, like ads and training resources and logos, there'll be more AI use than something like, an indie game. there's definitely people who will keep wanting it done 'the hard way.' thanks so much!
My personal stance on AI art is that as a tool, I am personally fine with the concept. But I am not ok with the current implementation that thrives off of billions of assets stolen and used to prop up these tools. Corridor Crew is currently the closest thing I've seen to a remotely ethical implementation of AI tools, Where they paid the artist that they used for the generation of the art style. However they didn't approach the topic of royalties and residuals from their work. And they as a company had to receive huge backlash just to pay the artists even the barest amounts. The problem isn't the tool. It is the way in which it is currently being used. You bring up the printing press, and yes, originally the printing press did create problems, alongside its' solutions. It took years to get a lot of these things fixed. If I write a book right now, no one is able to go and take pictures of all the pages and then try to sell it. You have to pay me for my work. Ai 'art' doesn't have those equivalent protections. And it desperately needs them. I'll continue making art until then. But I won't be sharing it with the wider populace. And the few pieces that I do share will be masked by techniques like Glaze specifically to make it far more difficult for these models to interpret. Because if someone wants to use my works, they should have to negotiate with me how they want to sell my work. There are a lot of positives to the technology. I see machine learning used for bots that detects nsfw talk and text, Apple is or has rolled out a feature that will mask nudes before you open them so dick pics aren't as much of a problem, there are ai bots that are being used low cost to dmca deepfake porn. I support people having powerful tools to create. I do not support theft. There is plenty of open source art that they can train these models with. They do not have to steal. And AI should not be the one writing the messages we share, just assisting us as a tool to write them. It isn't sentient, it is not creating art to communicate and express ideas, thoughts, feelings, identity, passions and more. It fill prompts because that is what it was written to do. AI Art isn't art by itself. It is only capable of art when used as a tool. I really do want to share what I make. I have animations that as is won't ever see the internet, I have series that I have in progress now that it's disheartening to know that I won't ever get to share. I want to express myself with the knowledge that my work will remain mine.
i really hope that protections do roll out in *some* way, because we can't guarantee that every AI entity does things the right way. being optimistic, i really want to believe things will be net better than worse. yes, like the printing press, the machine itself is not creating the art on a conceptual level. it is an interface between the human and the medium, like paint or pencil. AI is also an interface. you're right: AI isn't alive, it isn't capable of thinking for itself (afaik.) so as an interface, it requires a human. how long this will remain is what makes it different from the printer, brushes, etc.-- but that's for someone smarter than me to figure out.
@@dtwebpage If it comes down to it I honestly might move to countries with better protections against this stuff just so I can release my art. As for the other side. With actual, real AI. I'd be fine with them making art. Because with real AI, they would be alive. And they would have lived experiences, opinions and fundamentally they would have a self with which to express. But this 'AI' that is commonly gifted the buzz word isn't AI. It's a mix of machine learning and applied statistics. It fundamentally isn't AI, and it won't be until they change over to a completely new technology.
I'm a production welder. My work recently added 3 new robots that do the job of 6 human welders..... kinda. They don't do everything, but they do more than our older robots and make less mistakes. With these new robots several of the products can be welded entirely with a robot where on our older robots would require a human welder to complete. Don't hear any discussion about whether or not we should be allowing technology to replace human welders. No one talks about it because machines doing things more efficiently and taking over activities that humans had to do is kind of the point of machines and technology in general. For some reason many artists think art is special and should be shielded from this. I don't think so and I wouldn't put money on being able to stop it.
there is a chapter of a book about making games that said AI is a different creature than humans; AI doesn’t value aesthetic. in my education textbooks, they even argue for an adaptation of AI in schools rather than rejecting it wholly. this and your video have helped me calm down my radical anti-AI side. i guess we should move from asking “Do we get rid of AI or embrace it?” to “How do we appropriately use AI for betterment instead of detriment?”
i guess i should say i find the embracing of AI in teaching interesting because educators have to face the fact that AI is not going away, and we have to learn right along with our students how to navigate appropriate AI usage as they’ll encounter it in their careers. AI is cool to explore and engage with, but it’s also a danger to creativity when used irresponsibly. i’m sure i don’t need to go on the teacher plagiarism spiel. it’s bad blah blah blah
hello MX master 3 fellow user So for me personally I have kind of used AI as a TOOL, rather than a medium as such. for that type of usage i think it's okay and even to be encouraged. Why wouldn't we as artists want to use the most advanced and powerful tools we have available. using AI in my work has looked like putting some parameters (key, mode/scale, duration, time sig) into a tool and having it spit out a chord progression or randomised melody. I can then take that output and morph it accordingly into my own music. I use it as a starting point. I dont think i want to see AI "artists" getting signed to labels (think virtual pop stars, there's one in the news as the moment cant remember the name but it's just got signed to Warner) as I feel that takes the focus away from the individuals as a whole who are working hard to create good and personal music. Thats my thots. goodn ight
yeah, i feel like i should've emphasized its use as a tool. i think it can really work as a complement to someone's work to make amazing things. (keyword: complement) -the mx master is getting replaced with a trackpad for uhhhh reasons-
As an amateur "writer" i feel in a weird place with AI. Being honest, I began writing not because i love the craft and the effort, i write to create stories tailored exclusively to me. For that purpose, things like chatgpt and others are very useful and powerful tools. It can handle all the painful and boring parts of writing, and speed up dramatically my output. Of course, for the writer who loves the craft, all this is probably pure nonsense. And i don't get any money for my stories, so i don't have big stakes in this issue. So... It's complicated.
There isn't really a definitive answer for this, even legality. As hopeless as it currently is, the mobs from both sides (anti-AI vs. pro-AI) also trying to dig up their own grave. When someone said 'AI will never take away jobs' is also the same time they were really, really wrong. AI art is indeed a quickest and cheapest way to create art. How'd a company not find ways to exploit these and slap those into customer's faces? AI certainly did take away jobs, not super large size, of course. Some pro AIs said that AI also has 'creativity', which is at a same time more and more AI-generated works cannot be 'copyrighted' simply because none of 'entities' but human-being are able to claim copyright on works, simply because 'they are not human'. You can't claim things that 'seemed' to magically happen by itself, even if you tried to claim the effort you put into 'prompting' it out. But thing that we all agree is that, we create 'art' out of passion, a passion to communicate, to express ideas, moods, messages, and identity. AI has no business on these. They're just a tool to assist us (or big company), until sentient AI happens, the answer is very, very, _uncertain_ .
I dont like it. I've already witnessed a man on youtube saying that creating AI art "Opened His third eye", marketing it to other people as some sort of spiritual experience. And he was being serious! If that's not some Orwellian sci-fi mess idk what is. Like bro... you just typed words. The AI did all the work. I also don't like that these people now call themselves "Artists". They should use a different term and preserve our titles, at the very LEAST. On the rougher side of things, i saw a really popular youtube artist get backlash for people ripping/generating off his art style. And then when he spoke up about it, they decided to "punish" him by generating even more of his art and basically saying they can do what they want. But They said it in a way that's alot worse than how im describing it. If embracing AI is synonymous with accepting disrespect & having our spaces, titles, & intellectual property taken from us, Then it's just a flat out no. Being the "kind and accepting" one is what's gonna get our spaces trampled and our rights disreguarded, we need to secure clear boundaries and have our liberties protected before we simply "accept". It's already aggressively imposing on us and its just getting started.
first of all: this was a really really great watch. beautifully made! you pretty much encapsulated the same sentiment i have on this topic, hah! which was really awesome especially coming from another artist! also, really enjoyed the editing in this one! :0
as an artist whos mainly focused on the digital drawing/animation realms, the discussion of AI art has been kind of on the forefront in my space and i think if people hear "AI art" then that's kind of the first thing they think of. as much as AI art made me upset when it became "mainstream" i guess, i've really just accepted it. technology is only becoming more and more advanced and i hate to say that it's inevitable that tech/AI will overshadow actual people, it will! and i'm just gonna buckle in for the ride! i think we just need to learn how to adapt with it lol
14:33 abso-fuckin'-lutely man. the one thing AI can't do is communicate emotions or passion in whatever the fuck it produces. it really can't do anything without prior human creation! but i'm never gonna stop creating art, even if there'll be no "point" in it anymore, speaking career wise i guess. sure AI can be more convienient or cost effecient but like. that's just boring man. i hate to think people would much rather type up a prompt into AI and it produce something that doesn't even fit a specific vision they had or it's straight up not good than to consult an actual artist and create something with them that they can tweak and alter during the process and even just form a connection with them! but we can't win 'em all.
you have a great way of articulating things, dylan! it's inspiring and makes me want to have more discussions o7 also Definitely start ending videos with "stay rad and stay real my gen z comrades"
thanks so much :) it is a difficult thing for artists who make a career off their work. on one hand, there goes your livelihood. on the other, there will always be an inherent 'human quality' to your work. i think there might be an AI 'rebellion'/human art renaissance, (if there isn't already atm) where people purposefully seek out human art in favour of 'AI' art. there's already the NoAI hastags and etc. out there, so for the moment there's still time.
BRO you are crazy underrated. Dont quit on your potential here.
still working on good stuff! i just have less than zero time to work on it
Once again, I think u covered the topic well, coming from an artist I remember out raged artists being angry at AI and even things like Instagram reels for 5 second video clips and AI replacing there craft. I’m personally more on the pessimistic side when it comes to stuff (especially surround the AI field) ik that’s a stereotypical artist thing to say about AI, but it comes from a place of realism. Which I like the fact u presented both sides of the matter and ur conclusion was still that of an open mind. U brought up concerns that many artists have but don’t always express in a way where both sides are being seen, causing conflict amount artists and people who support more AI associated endeavours.
I will say in places like the medical field and other areas AI has benefitted massively (as well as some negatives such as data breeches) towards those systems in many ways and will hopefully continue to do so, so I don’t think the AI space across the board is doom and gloom completely, but I’m rambling. And speaking on the artists perspective ones again I think u covered well and I appreciate that.
Once again keep ur shit up and two things, loved the funny clip of u and ur friends with the AI anime filter AND the MGS2 reference at the end, idk who else noticed but I fucking loved that lol.
being into arts and tech is a weird thing-- they are constantly at odds with each other, so it's a weird feeling.
with something like the medical field, it's driven less by imaginative creativity, but more so utility. they work perfectly (er, pretty well) together, AI and medicine. AI art doesn't really get that liberty. at least we get funny anime filters.
thanks so much! -and thanks for enabling my ongoing MGS2 obsession-
"I don't know, and that bothers me." This was the most powerful statement for me. Yet we don't need answers today. We do need the questions always, like this video. What we CAN do isn't always what we SHOULD do, and in the moment, every moment, we need to be aware of the difference.
Well done. Properly conceived, competently executed. Make more. Subscribed.
English is not my first language, and l have used chat GDP to help me remembering some advanced words by creating english stories many times. to be honest, it really saves much time for me ,more importantly, it is free😂But sometimes,l am afraid l will be another ai tomorrow😅 in conclusion, ai can assist me, not replace me ，more impossible offend me.all artists have rights to protect thier interests.😊
AI doesn't really allow for people to express their ideas. And people with strong ideas have discovered this. I've seen a few people who tried ai, thot it was cool at first but then... They stopped using ai and learned to draw, and for many their reason was AI couldn't express their ideas.
And this is fundamentally the issue with ai, why it's not art, and why it should not be and never will be accepted. AI isn't expressing anyone's ideas. The entire point to art is to express ideas and experiences. Generative AI cannot do this, and it detracts from and devalues anything it touches.
This isn't really comparable to the printing press. Even if u think the writing of the letters is an important part of writing, those letters for the printing press were made by someone, someone designed those letters for it. And the text itself - where the real purpose of writing comes through, was still entirely human made.
AI is different, the outputs themselves are not human made except that they're some statistical amalgamation of billions of images that actually were human made. But this amalgamation by a machine completely devoid of human input is an insult to the real work and meaning that went into them.
I think in the long run people will see it this way. Think about hand made mugs or clothes - people pay a premium for these. Or counterfeit jewelry, most can't tell the difference, but once they learn it's fake it loses all value to them. Things like clothes are a necessity, so we settle for factory made clothes. Art isn't tho, art is much like jewelry - we don't need it to survive. Most likely ai will be seen the same as counterfeit jewelry, many can't tell, but once they learn it's fake it will lose all value to them. And those using it in their "process" will be rightfully considered hacks.
"Digital dynamos and mean maestros" help??
"FOMO is a lifestyle" get me o u t of here
12:10 This got me thinking about the concept of gatekeeping!! I am sometimes reluctant to recommend a show to my friend in fears that they'll wildly misinterpret it or miss it's meaning. As artists, we see AI art as something that can be used to generate images and ideas in an instant: further cementing the idea in s o m e people's mine that human artists are "slow" or "overpriced". Thus overshadowing the painstaking effort every single artist or writer has had to put in to get to where they are. In a world that's becoming ever fast paced, I can definitelyyy see why this is a concern. Perhaps the people who use AI art (especially business people using it for marketing) will have their negative biases reinforced. Or perhaps, as with gatekeeping, maybe recommending that show you love WILL bring in the right people who will be able to fully appreciate it. Maybe AI will expand the boundaries of beautiful art, not choke it.
The monkey pictures should probably be purged from the internet tho
also, dudee your stuff is so epic! Your editing style is very entertaining and I love the varied clips!! I appreciate how you presented both sides to give us food for thought, and didn't come to this grand conclusion at the end :D I look forward to your future musings!
the whole gatekeeping thing is something i don't have an answer to, unfortunately. i think in corporate contexts, like ads and training resources and logos, there'll be more AI use than something like, an indie game. there's definitely people who will keep wanting it done 'the hard way.'
thanks so much!
I like this video. It feels slightly unfortunate that there literally are only 2 more.
My personal stance on AI art is that as a tool, I am personally fine with the concept. But I am not ok with the current implementation that thrives off of billions of assets stolen and used to prop up these tools.
Corridor Crew is currently the closest thing I've seen to a remotely ethical implementation of AI tools, Where they paid the artist that they used for the generation of the art style. However they didn't approach the topic of royalties and residuals from their work. And they as a company had to receive huge backlash just to pay the artists even the barest amounts.
The problem isn't the tool. It is the way in which it is currently being used. You bring up the printing press, and yes, originally the printing press did create problems, alongside its' solutions. It took years to get a lot of these things fixed. If I write a book right now, no one is able to go and take pictures of all the pages and then try to sell it. You have to pay me for my work.
Ai 'art' doesn't have those equivalent protections. And it desperately needs them. I'll continue making art until then. But I won't be sharing it with the wider populace. And the few pieces that I do share will be masked by techniques like Glaze specifically to make it far more difficult for these models to interpret. Because if someone wants to use my works, they should have to negotiate with me how they want to sell my work.
There are a lot of positives to the technology. I see machine learning used for bots that detects nsfw talk and text, Apple is or has rolled out a feature that will mask nudes before you open them so dick pics aren't as much of a problem, there are ai bots that are being used low cost to dmca deepfake porn.
I support people having powerful tools to create. I do not support theft. There is plenty of open source art that they can train these models with. They do not have to steal.
And AI should not be the one writing the messages we share, just assisting us as a tool to write them. It isn't sentient, it is not creating art to communicate and express ideas, thoughts, feelings, identity, passions and more. It fill prompts because that is what it was written to do. AI Art isn't art by itself. It is only capable of art when used as a tool.
I really do want to share what I make. I have animations that as is won't ever see the internet, I have series that I have in progress now that it's disheartening to know that I won't ever get to share. I want to express myself with the knowledge that my work will remain mine.
i really hope that protections do roll out in *some* way, because we can't guarantee that every AI entity does things the right way. being optimistic, i really want to believe things will be net better than worse.
yes, like the printing press, the machine itself is not creating the art on a conceptual level. it is an interface between the human and the medium, like paint or pencil. AI is also an interface. you're right: AI isn't alive, it isn't capable of thinking for itself (afaik.) so as an interface, it requires a human. how long this will remain is what makes it different from the printer, brushes, etc.-- but that's for someone smarter than me to figure out.
@@dtwebpage If it comes down to it I honestly might move to countries with better protections against this stuff just so I can release my art.
As for the other side. With actual, real AI. I'd be fine with them making art. Because with real AI, they would be alive. And they would have lived experiences, opinions and fundamentally they would have a self with which to express.
But this 'AI' that is commonly gifted the buzz word isn't AI. It's a mix of machine learning and applied statistics. It fundamentally isn't AI, and it won't be until they change over to a completely new technology.
I'm a production welder. My work recently added 3 new robots that do the job of 6 human welders..... kinda. They don't do everything, but they do more than our older robots and make less mistakes. With these new robots several of the products can be welded entirely with a robot where on our older robots would require a human welder to complete. Don't hear any discussion about whether or not we should be allowing technology to replace human welders. No one talks about it because machines doing things more efficiently and taking over activities that humans had to do is kind of the point of machines and technology in general. For some reason many artists think art is special and should be shielded from this. I don't think so and I wouldn't put money on being able to stop it.
there is a chapter of a book about making games that said AI is a different creature than humans; AI doesn’t value aesthetic.
in my education textbooks, they even argue for an adaptation of AI in schools rather than rejecting it wholly.
this and your video have helped me calm down my radical anti-AI side. i guess we should move from asking “Do we get rid of AI or embrace it?” to “How do we appropriately use AI for betterment instead of detriment?”
i guess i should say i find the embracing of AI in teaching interesting because educators have to face the fact that AI is not going away, and we have to learn right along with our students how to navigate appropriate AI usage as they’ll encounter it in their careers.
AI is cool to explore and engage with, but it’s also a danger to creativity when used irresponsibly. i’m sure i don’t need to go on the teacher plagiarism spiel. it’s bad blah blah blah
What is certain is that you can't put the genie back into the bottle, and it will become more and more powerful as time goes on.
Great work
thank you!
hello MX master 3 fellow user
So for me personally I have kind of used AI as a TOOL, rather than a medium as such. for that type of usage i think it's okay and even to be encouraged. Why wouldn't we as artists want to use the most advanced and powerful tools we have available. using AI in my work has looked like putting some parameters (key, mode/scale, duration, time sig) into a tool and having it spit out a chord progression or randomised melody. I can then take that output and morph it accordingly into my own music. I use it as a starting point. I dont think i want to see AI "artists" getting signed to labels (think virtual pop stars, there's one in the news as the moment cant remember the name but it's just got signed to Warner) as I feel that takes the focus away from the individuals as a whole who are working hard to create good and personal music. Thats my thots. goodn ight
yeah, i feel like i should've emphasized its use as a tool. i think it can really work as a complement to someone's work to make amazing things. (keyword: complement)
-the mx master is getting replaced with a trackpad for uhhhh reasons-
I don’t think we should replace humanity with AI
As an amateur "writer" i feel in a weird place with AI. Being honest, I began writing not because i love the craft and the effort, i write to create stories tailored exclusively to me. For that purpose, things like chatgpt and others are very useful and powerful tools.
It can handle all the painful and boring parts of writing, and speed up dramatically my output.
Of course, for the writer who loves the craft, all this is probably pure nonsense. And i don't get any money for my stories, so i don't have big stakes in this issue.
So... It's complicated.
strange world.
There isn't really a definitive answer for this, even legality. As hopeless as it currently is, the mobs from both sides (anti-AI vs. pro-AI) also trying to dig up their own grave. When someone said 'AI will never take away jobs' is also the same time they were really, really wrong. AI art is indeed a quickest and cheapest way to create art. How'd a company not find ways to exploit these and slap those into customer's faces? AI certainly did take away jobs, not super large size, of course. Some pro AIs said that AI also has 'creativity', which is at a same time more and more AI-generated works cannot be 'copyrighted' simply because none of 'entities' but human-being are able to claim copyright on works, simply because 'they are not human'. You can't claim things that 'seemed' to magically happen by itself, even if you tried to claim the effort you put into 'prompting' it out.
But thing that we all agree is that, we create 'art' out of passion, a passion to communicate, to express ideas, moods, messages, and identity. AI has no business on these. They're just a tool to assist us (or big company), until sentient AI happens, the answer is very, very, _uncertain_ .
yup, it's a tool. its consequence is really yet to be seen-- this stuff is so new that this video will likely be out of date soon.
I dont like it. I've already witnessed a man on youtube saying that creating AI art "Opened His third eye", marketing it to other people as some sort of spiritual experience. And he was being serious! If that's not some Orwellian sci-fi mess idk what is. Like bro... you just typed words. The AI did all the work. I also don't like that these people now call themselves "Artists". They should use a different term and preserve our titles, at the very LEAST. On the rougher side of things, i saw a really popular youtube artist get backlash for people ripping/generating off his art style. And then when he spoke up about it, they decided to "punish" him by generating even more of his art and basically saying they can do what they want. But They said it in a way that's alot worse than how im describing it. If embracing AI is synonymous with accepting disrespect & having our spaces, titles, & intellectual property taken from us, Then it's just a flat out no. Being the "kind and accepting" one is what's gonna get our spaces trampled and our rights disreguarded, we need to secure clear boundaries and have our liberties protected before we simply "accept". It's already aggressively imposing on us and its just getting started.
fair enough. there's a lot of terrible things that are happening like art theft and demoralizing artists-- definitely still a bad thing.