Data poisoning: how artists are sabotaging AI to take revenge on image generators::As AI developers indiscriminately suck up online content to train their models, artists are seeking ways to fight back.

  • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    24
    ·
    11 months ago

    It has nothing to do with AI venture capitalists. Also not every profession is entitled to income, some are fine to remain as primarily hobbies.

    AI art is replacing corporate art which is not something we should be worried about. Less people working on that drivel is a net good for humanity. If can get billions of hours wasted on designing ads towards real meaningful contributions we should added billions extra hours to our actual productivity. That is good.

    • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      11 months ago

      The ratio of using AI to replace ad art:fraud/plagiarism has to be somewhere around 1:1000.

      “Actual productivity” is a nonsense term when it comes to art. Why is this less “meaningful” than this?

      Without checking the source, can you even tell which one is art for an ad and which isn’t?

      • lad@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        11 months ago

        I would assume the first to be an ad, because most of depicted people look happy

      • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        17
        ·
        11 months ago

        I’m not sure what’s your point here? Majority of art is drivel. Most art is produced for marketing. Literally. If that can be automated away what are we losing here? McDonald’s logos? Not everything needs to be a career.

          • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            11
            ·
            11 months ago

            Nah. In literally being proven right real time. You can set a reminder or something :)

            • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              11 months ago

              Not sure how you can be “right” to generally just shit on the concept of art and think it’s better replaced by ai.

              • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                10
                ·
                11 months ago

                Clearly you need to work on your reading comprehension my dude. Maybe use AI to help you out?

                • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Maybe AI can write your shitty dipshit responses for you so you can devote your free time to getting art class taken out of schools or something equally moronic?

                  • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    6
                    ·
                    11 months ago

                    Clearly all you can do is throw strawmans out when you finally clear up that your argument makes no reasonable sense.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      Also not every profession is entitled to income

      Yes it is. Otherwise it is not a profession. People go to school for years to become professional artists. They are absolutely entitled to income.

      But hey, you want your murals painted by robots and your wall art printed out, have fun. I’m not interested in your brave new world.

      • Kedly@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        The robots are far better at giving me what I want than humans ever were, so yeah, I I ironically am stoked for robot wall art and murals

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          11 months ago

          So you think you’re not entitled to income from your work? That doesn’t sound like something a professional would say. “I’m obsolete, don’t pay me.”

          • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            Nah I understand what’s going on. AI is not replacing real artists. It’s replacing sweatshops. And even when it will eventually replace most of art grunt work we’ll find something more interesting to do like curate the art, mix, match, add extra meta layers and so on.

            This closed mind protectionism is just silly. Not only it’s not sustainable because you will never win it’s also incredibly desperate. No real artist would cry and whine here when given this super power.

            Also pay is not everything in life. Maybe think about that for a second when you discuss art

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              11 months ago

              Pay is not everything in life, but it does buy things like paint and canvases.

              And I really have to question a self-proclaimed professional artist saying, again, that artists do not deserve to be paid for their work.

              • ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                11 months ago

                No, they don’t.

                Work has to have value.

                Some work - some art - has value. Some does not.

                Sometimes you spend money and buy lumber and build a chair and you can sell it because it is worth something to someone. Sometimes it’s shit and goes in the trash.

                Just because you made a chair doesn’t mean you get money.

                • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  This thread is incredibly disconnected to the point where it seems to be invaded by hobby artists that think too highly of themselves.

              • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                11 months ago

                “Deserve” - clearly you don’t understand the issue at hand if you’re using definitions like this. There’s no “deserve” in art.