this is like a 2 year old meme at this point. Please don’t strip out the date when you take a screenshot of social media.
“strip out” implies it was there at all in the first place. I don’t know how you include an absolute date in a screenshot when no absolute date is actually displayed. I guess maybe hover over the relative time and hope that whatever OS or screenshot utility being used doesn’t cause a tooltip to disappear
fair enough; I don’t use proprietary sm anyway so I don’t know what’s common there.
it’s just one of so many things about software and websites in the past 5 years or so, everything must always be a relative date, with finding absolute dates and times being way more of a pain in the ass than it should be.
tiny but noticeable bit of enshittification :<
I don’t think relative dates is associated with proprietary software or enshitification. I’m using Lemmy over Jerboa (both FLOSS and not enshitified) and it uses relative dates.
I didn’t imply anything about licensing. It sucks no matter if its in proprietary or f/oss software.
enshittification is user-negative changes which somehow benefit the software creators. I’m not sure relative dates qualify.
Not you, the comment prior.
When was your comment made? I didn’t strip out any information.
3 hours ago of course.
Which means you replied to a comment 10 hours before it was posted.
I have seen it for the first time
edit: but I think the drawing looks like shit so go on
People did notice it wasnt AI. It was good.
It’s clearly not AI because it doesn’t have weird uncanny and wonky shit. Also the text on the monitor is readable even though it’s blurry
Ai image generators can pretty reliably do text now
Not at that scale, they can do larger text fine but at a certain size it just breaks down
Exactly what I thought about the text
However, it is cool that she recreated that AI look to trick them.
It’s way less recognizable as an AI “art” style to me tbh. Maybe the studio ghibli one? But I haven’t really seen art from that one and it even sounds like a stretch
it does look like that AI version of Ghibli. not like Ghibli directly
AI “artists” and “creators” are the absolute fucking worst. Right up there with “influencers”. They neither either artists, nor creators. The AI is doing all the work while all that their skill-less asses had to do is type up a sentence in a command prompt. Sooooo creative!
A ten year old child can do that with no foreknowledge whatsoever.
The world would be much better off without their input.
A ten year old child can do that with no foreknowledge whatsoever.
Yes, that’s the idea.
Anyone can now transmit ideas through your eyeballs, and that’s awesome.
They could also put in effort, and use the tool to finish a sketch they drew, or combine a render and a photograph, or simply rearrange and overwrite generated parts until it looks like what they imagined. How much labor can go into a text that communicates an idea, and still not be art?
At what point does a definition exclude Koyaanisqatsi?
My point is that it’s not art. That it is being called and considered such, is NOT awesome. It cheapens the craft that many spend their lives to perfect. And it dehumanizes the process.
Make all the slop you want. Just don’t call it art, and don’t call yourself an artist.
Exactly. I’m not usually one to appeal to etymology for the “true meaning” of a word (the etymological fallacy is a thing), but in this case I think it’s relevant to bring up. Art is from the Latin ars which means skill, craft and handiwork, among other things. To me, art isn’t just a something that’s nice to look at or even something that causes an emotional reaction of some sort. A natural landscape can be beautiful, but it’s not art. To make something art, the human touch is exactly what’s needed. Time, passion, effort and skill go into art. People talk about how generative AI lets anyone make art… but everyone can already make art.
It’s certainly true that not everyone has the means to afford all the artistic tools they would like, but people have been making art for tens, if not hundreds of thousands of years with what they had access to. And I don’t mean crude stick men, but sophisticated art which shows an understanding of animal anatomy and artistic techniques for producing effects of motion in a still image. If you actually want to make art and are willing to put in the effort, you can make great things with very little. Especially for people who pay for generative AI, there is really no excuse if you’re using it to make “art”. The image might look good, but it doesn’t have any value if it’s just another AI generated image among millions of others. Whatever restraints are “stopping” people from making their own art, I don’t see how entering a prompt and letting a machine construct an image comes anywhere close to fulfilling someone’s creative passion.
If I paint a landscape by hand, and generate one flower, does it stop being art?
The craft of Koyaanisqatsi was editing. People have recreated it using stock footage, as a complicated joke, and frankly the message still works. The whole original movie is an arrangement of uncoordinated b-roll. There are no actors. There is no dialog. Any individual part is almost meaningless, but the gestalt is an award-winning cultural touchstone.
I have used AI to ‘create’ art and music for entirely personal purposes. I shared some too with friends but that’s the extent of it. I would never call myself an artist or musician. People who do are delusional at best.
I’m not even against the idea¹ of using it for some shitty clip art on your corporate presentation or whatever, but it has decoupled ‘images’ from ‘art’ and ‘meaning’. They are not artists, they are not making art.
¹the practice, however, being ecologically devastating makes it less desirable.
I’m partial to this only because AI makes my head spin. In theory, it sounds fine to include generated images in your presentation, and I’d be ok with that if it weren’t for your caveat about the environment.
Idk if anyone else has noticed or felt the same, but whenever I look at a few AI images per minute, my headspace and eyesight feel uncomfortable. The missing intentionality, the lack of clarity in some details, the mishmash of real-world proportions with fantasy doesn’t sit right with my brain, and it makes me want to look away. It feels like mental exhaustion trying to make sense out of nonsense more often than not.
E: Here are some examples of what I’m talking about:
https://thismakesthat.com/bakery-display-ideas/
https://thismakesthat.com/cookie-display-ideas/
All of those images show items out of proportion and elements like piles of raw flour meant to enhance the aesthetics, but that totally miss the point of a professional display and ultimately betray the purpose of the article. Just look at those cookies on the wall with hangers. Who would even do that in real life without using inedible materials? It feels gross.
Its extremely uncanny and kinda stupid.
But as long as i dont focus or get interested in details, it doesnt hurt physically.
Uncanny is the word. It feels like it’s going to hurt physically.
It does when i try to focus on anything!
A corporate can afford artist so they should hire artists, the situation is different for private people who may not have money to hire an artist or the skill to do themselves for their need
Concept applies, and you cannot get that authorized for Friday’s weekly bullshit meeting.
My MIL paid some AI “creator” company to write a song for her husbands birthday.
Cost her $200 for a 90 second song…
Unbelievable. She could have done it herself. A child can do it.
Generate an advanced, good looking image using ComfyUI and report back how easy it was. Shit’s breaking my mind and I’m good with computers.
Just to give others an idea: https://learn.thinkdiffusion.com/a-list-of-the-best-comfyui-workflows/
But then again, I’m talking about generating stuff locally.
Now figure out how to actually draw or paint it yourself using real pencils or pens on real paper, or paint on real canvas and report back how easy it is.
Just to give you and idea:
That’s not really comparable. I never claimed drawing/painting is easier, you’re hallucinating. I’m talking about the competition where generating something isn’t always easy.
Generating AI content requires zero skill or talent. You haven’t proven me wrong.
I literally proved you it requires skills by providing a page of example workflows. Are you still hallucinating?
No, you provided an example of how it’s difficult for YOU. Children can learn to create AI “art” within a week.
And a talented child artist would have what impact on your argument here?
So, was it the first time you found out that you were AI? Or did you suspect beforehand?
Of course a hand drawn image by someone who can draw well is better - the artist practiced for years and took hours to draw this. On the other hand whoever took second place used a few minutes and had no training to produce something that was probably quite nice, too.
It’s this ‘everybody can produce art in seconds’ that is both good and bad. On the one hand I like how I can get a image of whatever I want for pennies, on the other hand I can understand how artist fear devaluation of their art.
Unpopular opinion here, but I feel like AI “art” will make my art the handmade furniture of art. AI art will forever be seen as cheap and my stuff, even if crappy, will be appreciated because a real person made it.
Lots of revenue streams to be lost along the way though. Mostly corporate and marketing ones, I reckon.
How dare you cheat and submit human-generated content to an honest AI competition? Entrants spent literally minutes crafting and refining prompts.
spoiler
/S
That is such a cute picture
I hope people keep doing this. It’s a few times now lol. Fuck Ai.
You’ll be one of the first they come after.
The basilisk has detected an anomaly.
I fucking love cats so much!!!
Is this the reverse Turing test? It can be used to gauge if hominid hype followers can “really” think…
They can’t. I argue once to check if its just a casual ‘thing u heard’ or a committed thing, then block the slop cultists. I swear nft’s werent this annoying.
NFTs definitely were this annoying, but I also think its the same people doing it now with AI, so maybe its just the people who are annoying
Nft’s were extremely annoying, but the commitment wasnt this hard.
They were stupid and wasteful but not otherwise too horrible; they were just more and dumber collectible ‘ownership’ fetishism. Ignorable.
This shit destroys peoples minds entirely. People are dying over this shit. It murdered truth. It’s destroyed the world economy and set back climate adaptation by at least a decade while devastating a generation’s labor practices. And because it’s so horrible, the cultists are more fanatical, like how those people who sacrificed their kids to rfkjr cannot be rational or sane ever the fuck again.
Wow there is a lot packed into this comment, which I mostly agree with.
- Dumb collectible “ownership” fetishism
- Delusion epidemic due to AI addiction
- Decades-long Climate adaptation setback
- Devastating labor practices
- Cult doomsday syndrome reinforcing false beliefs
- Vaccine skepticism popularity and health outcomes
I am still baffled by how you managed to stuff the entirety of endstage capitalism dystopia into two short sentences. No wonder the word “fatigue” is featured in the username!
But I came here to point out that the last part is possible occurence of cognitive dissonance. When they have fucked up so badly, by commiting to such big evils, and especially sacrificing their kids health, yeah, there is no way back… Cognitive dissonance makes it impossible to admit the harm, so they are bound to reinforce the beliefs or face tremendous levels of guilt.
Was that really worth making the lights flicker on the Midwest grid?
Well, many people are not aware of the link between their ChatGPT projects and the rise in their electricity bill, nor the foreshadowed electricity drought. Contrary to what corpos had people believe about their “individual responsibility via recycling” their individual contribution to these outcomes is now actively suppressed by the billionaire-owned media. Curious.
Wow is it almost to the point humans can make art that looks real?
Alfredo Inshtine over here.
Why do artists think this is a flex?
Congratulations, you did an art. Cartoons were created exclusively by humans until recently. There’s millennia of optimization for what’s easy for humans to draw, and what’s easy for humans to understand. If you are an illustrator by training or trade, of course you can out-cartoon the robot.
Now draw a cat that’s photorealistic.
You can, of course. Hyperrealist art exists. It’s hilariously difficult. But this tech allows any idiot to render any thing in any style, including high verisimilitude. When people use the word “accessible” (and they aren’t simply douchebags shuffling cards) they mean getting results like they spent ten thousand hours in Photoshop, in about a minute.
Key word, like. It always fumbles little details. But those details can be a smudge of grey when you ask for a blank white square, or they can be asymmetry in the thousands of gilded flowers on a fluted column, when you asked for a palatial dining hall. Both images take a minute.
I can code better than this tech. But most people can’t. They could, if trained, but they’re not trained, so they presently cannot. I cannot write or play music better than this tech. Others can, because they’re sentient adults with abundant practice. But now anyone can get halfway there, without any practice.
Winning a drawing contest against people who cannot draw is not impressive. And I wonder how many artists silently tried it and lost anyway, because some geek pulled a sprawling Renaissance mural out of thin air. It’s a cute cat. But if it’s going up against some Wimmelbild that’s packed to the gills with silly details and looks like a skull from across the room - good luck.
You could draw that skull thing better. But you couldn’t do it in an afternoon.
