I think you are absolutely spot on. I'd take this a step further, real human art (stuff with genuine inventiveness, soul and craftmanship) will have a massive resurgence as the real worthlessness of AI-generated instant art will become evident. Real art takes work and effort, and while AI can replicate a result, it can neither replicate the intention nor the process. To all artists and creatives out there, your greatest times lie ahead thanks to AI, but you will need to a. find your creative voice, b. refine it incessantly (get humanly awesome at it!), and c. find your audience and nurture your bond with it. Whatever you are creating, there is a crowd out there who loves what you do, and would never take an AI replica instead of the real thing: your art.
Sorry I missed this comment ! What you're expressing is exactly my feeling about AI art. Although it has bad aspects, my faith in humanity makes me think it'll actually result in more human creativity.
I'm applying some unique skills and interests to my art, and I thought "wait, this is so specific and not traditional in many ways that none AI will create something like this!" (it's more like a style based on decorative art)
Great vid. My first comment got deleted because I included links. I have to stop doing that. TL;DR Create with passion, be transparent, own your mistakes. Protect your art against exploitation with the tools and support available. Don´t give up. Don´t support greedy people making "The BEST A.I. Passive Income Side Hustle 2024" videos.
@@ArtPostAI I know about Glaze & Nightshade, and I think they are doing exactly what you described. It´s an uphill battle, but it´s something. There is EGAIR in the EU and the Concept Art Association for the US, which artists can support as well. The latter has a fundraising going on. You´d have the search for yourself, because links kill my posts :D
@@ArtPostAI test, if this comment stays up.trying for the third time. Edit: Ok, this seems to work now :) I heard about Glaze and Nightshade, which I believe do exactly what you described. An uphill battle, but it´s something. And there are also orgs like EGAIR, which artists can support.
@@ooraycreation That's really weird, there's nothing problematic with naming Glaze, Nightshade or EGAIR (I got to read your response in the notification x) ) Thanks so much for the info !
What is the song called you have playing at the end of the video? I've been trying to google the lyrics, but I can't find it. Also, great job on the video!
I define art as "the ability to illustrate thought" which is why machine 'art' fails. Not because it can't illustrate but because there's no intent behind its actions. The desire to "replace artists" can also be applied to any other job... workers & greedy CEOs alike. Everyone is equally replaceable. So let me present this ultimatum: if machines can do everything humans can, what exactly is the point of you? Let me paint a picture: Your job is done for you. The government runs itself. Machines build, design and maintain themselves without you. Your meals cooked for you. Cleaning done for you. Healthcare taken care of for you. Dating is no longer necessary. Making friends is no longer necessary. Entertainment is constantly generated so people don't need you to be happy and live fulfilled lives. Kids are raised for you... but as there are no jobs left they don't even need to be taught anything. The skill cap to be alive so low that humans devolve into inept blobs incapable of thought and basic motor control. Just pick up the damn pen!
Fascinating take. Pick up the damned pen ! I think maybe if we described the current world, of never having to farm for food, being able to potentially never go outside ever and still live to be 80 years old staring at these small, flat, shiny surfaces for 5 hours a day on average, our ancestors would have thought we'd have nothing left to do. Yet even with social media, we keep making friends outside. Even with farming, many people grow food in their backyards. Even though people stare at screens for 6 hours a day, they do marvelous things on these screens. We may be determined to not give up art, but we also have evidence that automatisation doesn't lead people to quit an activity. That's quite refreshing.
AI very clearly does not have an understanding of what it is "looking at" during the training process, or when interpreting text/image prompts. Look no further than its infamous inability to generate hands with the proper number of fingers. A child can do this, even if they can't render a hand any better than a stick figure, because a child understands what they are trying to make an image of. AI art really is just a complicated way of stealing lots of art and smearing it all together, its nothing fancy just a bunch of matrices relating words to pixels. Its very similar to the "what average nationality" looks like images where they take a hundred or so images of peoples faces and drop the opacity on all of them and let a single face be built up from the layering.
I don't think we can afford this belief as artists anymore. As an AI researcher I know it's actually pretty fancy what happens in these AI models. The matrix multiplication to make neural networks thing was figured out back in the 1960s/1970s. It took another 50 years to get to what we have now. Convolutions, attention mechanisms, complicated optimization procedures, are just a few of the innovations that were made in the meantime. Since they are trained without human interference, no one, not even AI researchers, knows what happens inside these models. We can take guesses ; for instance, the likelihood objective does mean that it produces images similar to the training images. But when it generates images, it is doing so purely from what it understands about the visual world. It doesn't take any images in when generating new ones. Just text. That's actually part of why it can't quite do hands properly (yet). The average of a thousand hands that all have five fingers is a hand with five fingers. But these models aren't just averaging. They're learning to produce things that the text model would identify as a hand. And when the text model isn't precise enough, a hand with 6 fingers is "good enough". I mean, I would also refer to a hand with 6 fingers as a "hand". So that's one flaw of these models. But as they get trained with longer text descriptions, these flaws are going to go away.
!!!LONG RAMBLING COMMENT WARNING!!! I think you hit the nail on the head when you talked about AI never innovating on its own. The way I understand it, in its current state least, is that it essentially takes an average of everything it has consumed and uses it to create the least offensive, most acceptable response possible. That's why so much of it looks so similar, because the AI is literally trained to stay on the dotted line. It makes me think of one of my favourite short stories, 'Walkdog' by Sofia Samatar. It moves me every time I read it, and conveys so much humanity in such an unconventional yet instantly intuitive way. It's so far from the normal way of composing a narrative that I'm sure it could never be replicated by AI; it pushes the conventions of narrative in a way that is so intimately understandable to a human being, but would be incomprehensible to a machine without another billion stories like it - which there are not, and never will be. I think that the most important thing to have in the face of AI is courage; courage to be human, to express yourself, to push the boundaries of normality in what you create. Empathy, too. I know the internet is the internet, but the amount of vitriol I see between artists is a bit depressing. If there was ever a time for solidarity, this is it. Empathy is the backbone of expression, and what is art if not expression? I also want to say, that from a business perspective, it is obviously very important to differentiate yourself from AI and/or find a way to circumvent its challenges in your career, but from a personal/artistic perspective the most important thing is create things that you are passionate about. Balancing the two is the difficult part. To succeed commercially we need to find joy in chaos. In any case, for those who work in a more 'conventional' artistic sphere, it is unfair that AI has stolen this 'space' from you, and it is a reality that corporations and many of the unwashed masses (haha) will not give your work the value it deserves. But even so, even if your work is similar to what AI might be able to produce, take heart in the fact that for you and for people who value art it is inherently superior by virtue of the fact that you created it. Also, to go on a slight tangent, for me, the most discouraging thing about AI images is not the AI itself, but what it has revealed about people's attitudes toward artists and art in general. People were so quick to jump on the 'artists are needed anymore, hooray' bandwagon it is frankly disturbing. The idea that you can have art without an artist, or even more laughable, that using AI makes you an artist is absolutely absurd to me. The reason art exists, its entire reason to be, is as a form of HUMAN expression. I think this attitude of 'art' as one-sided consumption poses the greatest existential threat to art that it has ever faced. It makes me wonder what would happen if artists ever did just stop making food for AI; would people eventually get tired of consuming the same mass produced 'illustrations' of pinterest girls or what have you, or would the visual medium simply stagnate forever?
Thank you so much for the super insightful comment. I agree with everything. Yes, it is disturbing how little empathy was shown towards artists, but it was to be expected. People stand up for their friends, but standing up for strangers in the name of a poorly-defined moral obligation is much less frequent. There is also resentment towards artists, because everyone wants to see themselves as an artist but most people have to shove down these desires. About passion, to me, if you're really passionate about your message and you create art that expresses your deepest feelings, but then no one reacts to it, that's super painful. I don't even show my finished pieces to any one, because I don't think I'm at the level where my message would go across. I know I'll get there though. There's no rush, I have a day job. To me, differentiating your art from AI is about more than business. Art is more than just expression, it is communication. Making art that looks like an AI made it, and thus getting lukewarm reactions, is like expressing yourself in a vacuum. Being the last person on earth. Also, I don't know where you got this info but you're absolutely spot on about the way AI works. It's not exactly an average, but it's kind of the same idea. It models the distribution of training images, and imitates it. This means that everything that is likely in the training data is likely to be generated by the AI, and vice-versa. My next video will be about this actually. How the bedrock foundation of current AI prevents any kind of creativity. And for the last point, I think we'd grow tired of stagnating entertainment, move away from visual art, cinema and music as a culture and replace it with something else. Then maybe cycle back to it every 30 years. either way thank you so much for the comment :)
Have you ever actually seen any of her works in person? Have you painted anything yourself? I’d be interested to see your ig or your website displaying your incredible works of art. I’d honestly be shocked if you ever even picked up a pencil in all your days of existence here. And if your name is Alejandro, you’d think you’d be more supportive of Frida considering she’s a fellow Hispanic. But I guess sexism is a pretty global leaning these days among men who don’t know who they are or who they want to be in this life these days. Sounds like you need a father figure if we want to get right down to it. But hey, that’s none of my business. Some life advice, Alejandro, next time you wanna say some dumb shit just don’t. Save us all the fucking trouble of knowing you exist. Fucking pathetic. And also, rewatch the damn video again. You might actually learn something.
![YoungBoy Never Broke Again - Sneaking [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1ILUps2zDFU/mqdefault.jpg)
I think you are absolutely spot on. I'd take this a step further, real human art (stuff with genuine inventiveness, soul and craftmanship) will have a massive resurgence as the real worthlessness of AI-generated instant art will become evident. Real art takes work and effort, and while AI can replicate a result, it can neither replicate the intention nor the process. To all artists and creatives out there, your greatest times lie ahead thanks to AI, but you will need to a. find your creative voice, b. refine it incessantly (get humanly awesome at it!), and c. find your audience and nurture your bond with it. Whatever you are creating, there is a crowd out there who loves what you do, and would never take an AI replica instead of the real thing: your art.
Sorry I missed this comment !
What you're expressing is exactly my feeling about AI art. Although it has bad aspects, my faith in humanity makes me think it'll actually result in more human creativity.
I'm applying some unique skills and interests to my art, and I thought "wait, this is so specific and not traditional in many ways that none AI will create something like this!" (it's more like a style based on decorative art)
That's the way to go ! What are these skills and interests if I may ask ?
Great videos man, subbed
Great vid. My first comment got deleted because I included links. I have to stop doing that. TL;DR Create with passion, be transparent, own your mistakes. Protect your art against exploitation with the tools and support available. Don´t give up. Don´t support greedy people making "The BEST A.I. Passive Income Side Hustle 2024" videos.
Great points.
About tools, I know about the glide-type tools that poison the training data
Do you know any other ones ?
@@ArtPostAI I know about Glaze & Nightshade, and I think they are doing exactly what you described. It´s an uphill battle, but it´s something. There is EGAIR in the EU and the Concept Art Association for the US, which artists can support as well. The latter has a fundraising going on. You´d have the search for yourself, because links kill my posts :D
@@ArtPostAI test, if this comment stays up.trying for the third time. Edit: Ok, this seems to work now :) I heard about Glaze and Nightshade, which I believe do exactly what you described. An uphill battle, but it´s something. And there are also orgs like EGAIR, which artists can support.
@@ArtPostAI I can´t leave a comment naming the tools, they disappear. But they do what you described.
@@ooraycreation That's really weird, there's nothing problematic with naming Glaze, Nightshade or EGAIR (I got to read your response in the notification x) )
Thanks so much for the info !
Thx
Damn man... Im tearing up. This video is beautifully done. Would you like to chat about art or do a collab?
Sure let's talk ! Here's my discord : artpostai
@@ArtPostAI Nice, Ive sent you a discord friend request today. Hope to talk soon.
What is the song called you have playing at the end of the video? I've been trying to google the lyrics, but I can't find it. Also, great job on the video!
It's AI-generated x)
Maybe I'll upload it to the channel, but I'm thinking I can just send it to you on discord if you want
@@ArtPostAI Nah, I'm good, thank you for the offer though.
Love your channel brother!
Appreciate it !!
I define art as "the ability to illustrate thought" which is why machine 'art' fails. Not because it can't illustrate but because there's no intent behind its actions. The desire to "replace artists" can also be applied to any other job... workers & greedy CEOs alike. Everyone is equally replaceable. So let me present this ultimatum: if machines can do everything humans can, what exactly is the point of you?
Let me paint a picture: Your job is done for you. The government runs itself. Machines build, design and maintain themselves without you. Your meals cooked for you. Cleaning done for you. Healthcare taken care of for you. Dating is no longer necessary. Making friends is no longer necessary. Entertainment is constantly generated so people don't need you to be happy and live fulfilled lives. Kids are raised for you... but as there are no jobs left they don't even need to be taught anything. The skill cap to be alive so low that humans devolve into inept blobs incapable of thought and basic motor control.
Just pick up the damn pen!
Fascinating take. Pick up the damned pen !
I think maybe if we described the current world, of never having to farm for food,
being able to potentially never go outside ever and still live to be 80 years old
staring at these small, flat, shiny surfaces for 5 hours a day on average,
our ancestors would have thought we'd have nothing left to do.
Yet even with social media, we keep making friends outside. Even with farming, many people grow food in their backyards. Even though people stare at screens for 6 hours a day, they do marvelous things on these screens.
We may be determined to not give up art, but we also have evidence that automatisation doesn't lead people to quit an activity.
That's quite refreshing.
AI very clearly does not have an understanding of what it is "looking at" during the training process, or when interpreting text/image prompts. Look no further than its infamous inability to generate hands with the proper number of fingers. A child can do this, even if they can't render a hand any better than a stick figure, because a child understands what they are trying to make an image of. AI art really is just a complicated way of stealing lots of art and smearing it all together, its nothing fancy just a bunch of matrices relating words to pixels. Its very similar to the "what average nationality" looks like images where they take a hundred or so images of peoples faces and drop the opacity on all of them and let a single face be built up from the layering.
I don't think we can afford this belief as artists anymore.
As an AI researcher I know it's actually pretty fancy what happens in these AI models.
The matrix multiplication to make neural networks thing was figured out back in the 1960s/1970s. It took another 50 years to get to what we have now. Convolutions, attention mechanisms, complicated optimization procedures, are just a few of the innovations that were made in the meantime.
Since they are trained without human interference, no one, not even AI researchers, knows what happens inside these models.
We can take guesses ; for instance, the likelihood objective does mean that it produces images similar to the training images.
But when it generates images, it is doing so purely from what it understands about the visual world. It doesn't take any images in when generating new ones. Just text.
That's actually part of why it can't quite do hands properly (yet).
The average of a thousand hands that all have five fingers is a hand with five fingers. But these models aren't just averaging. They're learning to produce things that the text model would identify as a hand.
And when the text model isn't precise enough, a hand with 6 fingers is "good enough".
I mean, I would also refer to a hand with 6 fingers as a "hand". So that's one flaw of these models. But as they get trained with longer text descriptions, these flaws are going to go away.
!!!LONG RAMBLING COMMENT WARNING!!!
I think you hit the nail on the head when you talked about AI never innovating on its own. The way I understand it, in its current state least, is that it essentially takes an average of everything it has consumed and uses it to create the least offensive, most acceptable response possible. That's why so much of it looks so similar, because the AI is literally trained to stay on the dotted line.
It makes me think of one of my favourite short stories, 'Walkdog' by Sofia Samatar. It moves me every time I read it, and conveys so much humanity in such an unconventional yet instantly intuitive way. It's so far from the normal way of composing a narrative that I'm sure it could never be replicated by AI; it pushes the conventions of narrative in a way that is so intimately understandable to a human being, but would be incomprehensible to a machine without another billion stories like it - which there are not, and never will be.
I think that the most important thing to have in the face of AI is courage; courage to be human, to express yourself, to push the boundaries of normality in what you create. Empathy, too. I know the internet is the internet, but the amount of vitriol I see between artists is a bit depressing. If there was ever a time for solidarity, this is it. Empathy is the backbone of expression, and what is art if not expression?
I also want to say, that from a business perspective, it is obviously very important to differentiate yourself from AI and/or find a way to circumvent its challenges in your career, but from a personal/artistic perspective the most important thing is create things that you are passionate about. Balancing the two is the difficult part. To succeed commercially we need to find joy in chaos. In any case, for those who work in a more 'conventional' artistic sphere, it is unfair that AI has stolen this 'space' from you, and it is a reality that corporations and many of the unwashed masses (haha) will not give your work the value it deserves. But even so, even if your work is similar to what AI might be able to produce, take heart in the fact that for you and for people who value art it is inherently superior by virtue of the fact that you created it.
Also, to go on a slight tangent, for me, the most discouraging thing about AI images is not the AI itself, but what it has revealed about people's attitudes toward artists and art in general. People were so quick to jump on the 'artists are needed anymore, hooray' bandwagon it is frankly disturbing. The idea that you can have art without an artist, or even more laughable, that using AI makes you an artist is absolutely absurd to me. The reason art exists, its entire reason to be, is as a form of HUMAN expression. I think this attitude of 'art' as one-sided consumption poses the greatest existential threat to art that it has ever faced.
It makes me wonder what would happen if artists ever did just stop making food for AI; would people eventually get tired of consuming the same mass produced 'illustrations' of pinterest girls or what have you, or would the visual medium simply stagnate forever?
Thank you so much for the super insightful comment.
I agree with everything. Yes, it is disturbing how little empathy was shown towards artists, but it was to be expected. People stand up for their friends, but standing up for strangers in the name of a poorly-defined moral obligation is much less frequent. There is also resentment towards artists, because everyone wants to see themselves as an artist but most people have to shove down these desires.
About passion, to me, if you're really passionate about your message and you create art that expresses your deepest feelings, but then no one reacts to it, that's super painful.
I don't even show my finished pieces to any one, because I don't think I'm at the level where my message would go across. I know I'll get there though. There's no rush, I have a day job.
To me, differentiating your art from AI is about more than business. Art is more than just expression, it is communication. Making art that looks like an AI made it, and thus getting lukewarm reactions, is like expressing yourself in a vacuum. Being the last person on earth.
Also, I don't know where you got this info but you're absolutely spot on about the way AI works. It's not exactly an average, but it's kind of the same idea. It models the distribution of training images, and imitates it. This means that everything that is likely in the training data is likely to be generated by the AI, and vice-versa.
My next video will be about this actually. How the bedrock foundation of current AI prevents any kind of creativity.
And for the last point, I think we'd grow tired of stagnating entertainment, move away from visual art, cinema and music as a culture and replace it with something else. Then maybe cycle back to it every 30 years.
either way thank you so much for the comment :)
0:33 Frida Kahlo was such a mediocre painter.
She didn't have the skills of Bougereau, but I like her work
It makes me feel things. It has a loud, clear and authentic message.
Have you ever actually seen any of her works in person? Have you painted anything yourself? I’d be interested to see your ig or your website displaying your incredible works of art. I’d honestly be shocked if you ever even picked up a pencil in all your days of existence here. And if your name is Alejandro, you’d think you’d be more supportive of Frida considering she’s a fellow Hispanic. But I guess sexism is a pretty global leaning these days among men who don’t know who they are or who they want to be in this life these days. Sounds like you need a father figure if we want to get right down to it. But hey, that’s none of my business.
Some life advice, Alejandro, next time you wanna say some dumb shit just don’t. Save us all the fucking trouble of knowing you exist. Fucking pathetic. And also, rewatch the damn video again. You might actually learn something.