[ home / bans / all ] [ qa / jp ] [ aut ] [ f / ec ] [ b / poll ] [ tv / bann ] [ toggle-new / tab ]

/qa/ - Questions and Answers

Questions and Answers about QA

New Reply

Whitelist Token
Password (For file deletion.)
Markup tags exist for bold, itallics, header, spoiler etc. as listed in " [options] > View Formatting "

[Return] [Bottom] [Catalog]

File:[kasodani kyouko] 6d59ae03….jpg (170.14 KB,1800x1350)

 No.97629[Last50 Posts]

To keep the "Post AI generated images" thread silly and carefree, a serious discussion that came about is being moved into this new thread so that one can stay topical.
Here is the original text:

Looks like a villain has already arose. "NovelAI", a monetized AI art thing publicly states that it trained on danbooru. Japanese artists (and stupid English speakers) upset about their art used for a paid product are associating danbooru as a willing partner and not something scraped by the parasitic company. So now some people want their work purged from danbooru because of scum like the "NovelAI" people. This is why we can't have nice things.
Also, danbooru has already banned AI-generated images. https://danbooru.donmai.us/forum_posts/223144


It was bound to happen. I hope that even if Dan does purge the work of those artists, that at least Gel will keep it up.


File:1362674785616.jpg (15.38 KB,300x196)

Just another parasite.


Wow. I dont even know what to say


File:[SubsPlease] Akuyaku Reijo….jpg (170.77 KB,1280x720)

Oh, I forgot to link what danbooru owner said about the scraping thing: https://danbooru.donmai.us/forum_posts/223115
He really is great at doing his thing, and it's no wonder danbooru is still so strong after so much time.


ah yea. AI is basically a cancer on society.

It has to relly on people providing it with examples, but as it grows to the point where it's better than a beginner artist then people won't draw anymore meaning both the potential of the AI and people come to a standstill. The best possible case here is artists abandon the fundamentals and just try to correct an AI doing an idea they think is correct.
Human skills aren't something that you can just take shortcuts on. It's not like man is creating the car to replace horses, it's like removing a part of people's brains to cut down production time.
Case in point... look at how ugly 3DCG is. I wonder if the criticism of GPS for drivers has any merit too.

Truely a bane on the creative process.


File:00121-1810206586-underwate….png (458.59 KB,640x512)

It's not inherently a cancer, but like every dystopian story it's created for no great purpose or vision and ends up changing things negatively because people don't plan ahead. Like Deepfakes, or making bots that can churn out believable news stories, or that guy that ran a 4chan posting bot on /pol/ a few months ago. There's no concern at all for what it could lead to, just a chaotic "what does this button do?" approach.

But it's not all bad news. Artists can use this to replace the ugly white backgrounds in stuff.
I just input "underwater coral" and painted out Laura and now it looks like this. Huge potential here for artists, although they'd probably want to touch it up if they want good backgrounds and not just something better than empty space.


AI significantly raises the bar of art quality and it's a good thing.
Sure, bad artists producing generic arts will probably stop drawing because AI is better than them, but AI will only make good artists to draw better, more unique, and more creative arts to keep up in the race. Not to mention it enables lots of people to express their stories in drawings who are otherwise can't draw in the first place.
Although AI will be developed to a stage where it will be able to perfectly copy an artist's style, the style will always be recognized to be created first by an artist. And this is the new bar all artists need to strive for in the future.


Everyone starts as a bad artist. If they persevere and practice then they can graduate into being an average artist and then eventually a good one. If they are talented or extremely persistent they can ascend into being a great artist. There will still be bad and average artists because many people are driven to put their thoughts into creative pursuits, even if they're not masters. Art really isn't a "survival of the fittest" thing like some corporate boardroom.
However, I do see this putting increased pressure by those employed in companies that demand more and more productivity for the same pay, which will limit the artist's creativity and result in a worse product. It could also eliminate jobs so instead of a team skilled in environments and then someone else doing the buildings, it's merged into one one that has to do both by leaning on AI and it will create something mediocre and without passion, but cheaper. Like everything else in life, money will remove the fun in it.


In the post-AI world, there won't be arts considered bad today anymore; bad artists of that era simply will use AI to create art that are considered average by today's standards.
Also your whole argument about companies make zero sense. Productivity improved because the tools improved, not because the artists are spending much more effort. Companies will make more profit if they don't raise artist's pay but it has nothing to do with the artist's creativity.
It will also not eliminate any job in this sense: the bar of what will be considered good art will be raised so high that mediocre AI generated arts won't be accepted by consumers anymore. They will find a company that hires real artists instead. If what you said was true, the the production cost is the only factor considered, all anime produced today would be 100% 3DCG, without a single hand drawn 2D anime.


translate it weebs


>there won't be arts considered bad today anymore; bad artists of that era simply will use AI to create art that are considered average by today's standards.
I don't see that happening among hobbyists. Art is passion, it's a creative effort that people often do in their free time when it's not a job. There have always been people taking shortcuts, but they never grow.

> but it has nothing to do with the artist's creativity.
What I'm saying is that the artist will churn out some AI stuff and then tweak it instead of creating something new from scratch, and they'll be pressured to do so because it will become normalized. If a regular artist today can make 1 scene per day (made up number) and AI can do 10, then 10 will become the standard so the media is cheaper to produce. This will churn out more stuff, but it will be inferior.

I don't really understand what you mean by AI raising the bar. To me AI art will be a subgroup of bad art and occupy the same space, like a person that traces.

the pleasure of being trained inside


Way for none of you to address the stagnation issue. I guess you don't really understand how these AIs work anyways.

Good art is not made by hobbyists. It's made by professionals who devote their time to something. If AI makes it so that beginners just flood the market with crap and never improve past that, then art will die


You write like someone who hasn't put any effort into making a creative process into a monetary one.

Techno-idealism is great an all. Society will flourish and we'll all become great artists!
But that's not even true. These AI are parasites that feed on the success of other people to raise the bar of those without talent up towards them. But how did these people get the talent to do well in the first place? By training their fundamentals and working hard from nothing.

Eventually they get a gig to draw people's comisions and start a following. Then they quit their day job and go full time, growing their skills non stop.

What this AI does is it removes this aspect and puts us towards a mass production environment where we just print out mediocre art and stop improvement solely for the benefit of easy to produce movies by holywood. The demand for a commision artist is replaced by companies that use AI to produce your favorite sonic furry art. If people do create art then they are doing it not to make money but as a hoby... their job in HR working for companies takes priority.


In essence, this thread is promoting the centralization of the workforce and the removal of independent and freelanced workers.
One could look at the improvments to laying railways and say that innovation helped drive society towards a greater future... but what does this AI bring society? It brings us further stupidity and a lack of ability to grasp the theory behind what we see and understand nature, It teaches us to just consume rather than think.


File:1200px-Types_of_goods.svg.png (94.89 KB,1200x819)

it's hard to actually address that topic with any certainty
you could be right or it could be similar to how automation turned most gunsmiths' jobs from tasks for skilled artisans into a factory worker on the line

the idea that beginners flooding the market with "bad" art will kill "good" art is kinda silly as that implies "good" and "bad" art are the same good
there will still be demand for "good" art and increasing the cost of entry for suppliers to make "good" art will just increase the arts' price, assuming demand is unchanged

sure some consumers(businesses, corporations, individuals) will be priced out of "good" art, but that increase in the price of good will also incentivize potential suppliers(artists) to invest their time and money into making"good" art to meet the demand

there's a lot of interconnected variables about the market of art goods to consider here and unless you plan on doing the numbers what you have to say on the topic is no better than anyone else's even if you're right


>There have always been people taking shortcuts, but they never grow.
>If AI makes it so that beginners just flood the market with crap and never improve past that
Beginners that will become good artists will be "training their fundamentals and working hard from nothing" regardless of the quality of AI arts, because they have motivation to create arts distinct from AI arts in the first place.
Beginners that won't improve are irrelevant and they can generate AI craps whatever they want, no one will pay a cent for them.

>The demand for a commision artist is replaced by companies that use AI to produce your favorite sonic furry art.
Wrong. AI arts have no market value because it's easy to make, resulting in oversupply. I already said it in >>97639
>the bar of what will be considered good art will be raised so high that mediocre AI generated arts won't be accepted by consumers anymore



Probably nobody care about my opinion on AI but I will say it anyway.

It's most likely that AI will never reach the level of human beings, AI cannot understand Nuance, composition or humour and is liable to making mistakes in the image. I worry that Art sites will be filled with soulless images with odd imperfections like a nipple being misshapen or clothing looking weird and fusing into itself.

Now alternatively, lets say that it's amazing. Let's say I can type in 'cute girls Touhou' and have an amazing cute and funny image or I type in 'X obscure fetish with Y obscure characters' and have amazing ero images.
This would actually ruin art for me, I could no longer type in a character on a website and have that feeling of excitement and hope and exploration and when I find x obscure fetish with y obscure characters it would no longer be a rare and valuable gem. Because I can make all that myself at the click of a button, nothing has value any more, there is no point searching for art any more.


File:AI.png (83.79 KB,680x876)



you remember when CGI killed all creativity in US movies? Same thing except for US artwork.


This is unncessary


The Miku ones are too good


Yeah, but they always seem to fuck up the hands though, wonder how that works.


I feel like I've seen them before, like you could find an artist that looks exactly like each one, which is probably pretty likely since thousands upon thousands of people have drawn Miku over the years.


It doesnt bother me, just keep it tagged properly and dont charge for it


File:1662863507324.png (1.22 MB,1060x1060)

(sorry for mass replying) see >>97504 and >>97648.
AI probably won't impact the art industry the way people think it will. There's definitely going to be some sort of effect; I can imagine it'll take away entry-level jobs away from artists (the same way outsourcing takes jobs away from animators), which stinks, but there's a limit on the results a non-thinking computer can get without heavy human assistance. AI (which is a misnomer, since these things are less intelligent than sponges) can do the grunt work reasonably well and at great speeds, but for anything that requires actual thought it quickly hits a wall.


There is no benefit to these entry-level jobs(who are actually just beginners trying to learn the ropes) being removed.

This hype of AI generation removes people with potential from the medium eventually starving off the industry of new blood.
Exactly as you say, they're just sponges that remove the ability for artists to learn how to do more complicated tasks by removing the learning process entirely


Instead of trying to promote greater levels of intelligence in society, this AI craze is pushing us towards relying on software engineers to do thing that our brains should be able to.

Just as with the creation of automobiles the US dived into an insanity of parking lots and obesity, the push towards making computers do every human task will push us towards a society of retardation and alzheimers.


We will die before it gets that bad.


defering the problem to elsewhere I see


This goes beyond "just a tool" and I really hope is this legally solved somehow, particularly training on images without permission. I don't want a future where every piece of media is generated by a machine.



Well that said. At least I can make games now... until they try to remove that from the things people are allowed to commercially do


oh right, of course I can't... Because I need a commercial license to be able to use their algorithms in my products!


Let me put it this way; there's a very good reason this AI stuff hasn't taken over liturature, despite being far better at writing than drawing for far longer. I think both the hype and hysteria around it is vastly overblown.


File:1494310301865.png (113.48 KB,255x256)

Silly Anonymous, people don't read. They buy books to show off because of the author's fame.



and again, these sorts of algorithms are controlled by copyright, so if I wanted to compete with Bloomberg I would go to jail for illegally using an AI tool


I didn't say it wouldn't have any effect at all; obviously that's untrue. But I don't think it'll ever outmode humans outright.



You are naive. Humanity is killing it's creative potential. The gateway jobs to becoming an expert in creative fields are decreasing while the people at the top use the tools to give themselves a superhuman ability to produce. There will be no one left to replace them in years come leading to a decline in human potential


Honestly, the only potential for humanity to get rid of it's own creative self destruction is for industry level tools to become free as soon as they're created, but the way the world works now is that super-corperations will always be one step above the freelance creators unless their own power can overcome the strength of mega corps in trying to wipe them out


Oh, and you might say "well just pirate them duh" except these are AI on demand. You pay for a subscription to send requests to an AI datacenter. You will never own the AI that are allowing you to eat bread.


>There will be no one left to replace them in years come leading to a decline in human potential
Assuming the demand for expert quality art doesn't decrease then someone will invest the time and capital to train themselves or others to become or produce expert quality art. In such a scenario there will be a time lag while new experts are being trained but so long as there is a demand for such art people will produce it. Skills while lost can be relearned or rediscovered. And while seeing someone do it is probably better than reading about it, in regards to art, there is plenty of resources online about all sorts of art technique that would allow some base level of skills from being lost when all the experts die.


Sure, but if I want to make a game again I'm never hiring an artist. I'm going to use an AI. I get more profit in the end but there's no reason for anyone to spend money on these people and for them to practice their art.

I don't think you actually have a job or have considered getting one based on how you type. Beoming a master of something takes devotion and is achieved by getting employment in the entry level positions that will be replaced(for example, me hiring beginners to draw art for games). The ability for the 1% of people to become experts has been decreased.
I hope you enjoy mediocre art from now on.


But anyways.
If society can:
- Make these tools not locked behind a stream service
- Adapt them to the use of games
I don't think I have a necicary problem with RPG maker games becoming as abundant as ero artwork on borus


Guess it is possible for me to completely replace artists if I ever want to make a game again. Just have to worry about audio and story.. Audio is probably already solved, story is harder and is something I'd want more control over.


we sure live in some funny times


Can they make an AI to replace youtubers next


>I don't think you actually have a job or have considered getting one based on how you type.
And I don't think you understand how economic forces or systems, specifically systems of humans behave.

>Beoming a master of something takes devotion and is achieved by getting employment in the entry level positions
Funny because that's exactly not how higher education works and yet we still have loads of competent physicists, chemists, historians, ect..
Students aren't always employed and still they become experts in their respective fields before they are employed. This may institutionalize art as something more akin to a apprenticeships programs may pop up to generate experts but this isn't apocalyptic for anything but maybe current entry level art jobs.


I see your tone of voice has changed to you admitting defeat in this argument.
I will take your loss and hang it on my wall of internet arguments won


Title: Can AI Replace Our Graphic Designer?


File:00001-1172209517-(((cirno)….png (255.02 KB,512x512)

You're one that decided to psychoanalyze based of posts. I fail to see how anyone would be beat of defeated when we're simply talking.


File:[SubsPlease] Akuyaku Reijo….jpg (125.33 KB,1280x720)

I don't think people are at the level where they want their opinions from AIs instead of youtubers. That will be a dangerous threshold when it happens, although I guess you could say algorithms are already directing people around.


>although I guess you could say algorithms are already directing people around.

I think algorithms are more human-manipulated than people think because of how you can brute force trends and ideas onto people


I don't know, I hate the idea of AI in art but AI as a source of information and viewpoints would have it's benefits.
You could create AI that has no bias and is programmed to thoroughly check the sources of it's information and that would serve only to tell things as they objectively are.
Yes, they could be programmed to have a bias but that only makes them as bad as the average Youtuber, not only that but as it's a program not a human there can be no room for human error in that way. The moment anybody spots bias in the reporting of a neutral news bot it would be shown to be flawed and the charade would be up.


you just can't stand getting information from any source other than what you're accustomed to. Lots of youtubers have years of reputation built up


You say that, and yet, we still hire level designers, even though level design can and has been fully automated on many occasions for decades. A human touch is still necessary for professional quality, and companies know this.

I know you're just going to respond with more needless pessimism, so this is mostly for the benefit of everyone else reading the thread.

It annoys me how everything's a "thing" nowadays thanks to social media. People start talking about something on twitter, youtubers take notice and start making videos to capitalize on the trend, people start responding to the videos on twitter, and the whole thing starts all over again. Everyone everywhere talks about the same subject with the same talking points like it's the most important thing in the world for ~two weeks, and then jumps on to the next topic, forgetting that the previous thing even existed.


File:download (27).png (619.24 KB,512x768)

Not youtubers in general, but I was thinking about making AI vtubers for a while.
I can have multiple vtubers at the same time, each with AI-generated avatar and voice. The contents will be vtubers playing games that are automatically played with AI.
No one will notice anything that they are generated by AI because the avatars are already computer generated for "real" vtubers, and vtuber fans are braindead anyway.
Most importantly, the vtubers will respond to all superchats with AI because programs won't get distracted by the game. A high response rate ensures the viewers are satisfied and will spend even more money on superchats.


"Watch this video instead of talking to me" is something I'll avoid because I'm interested in what you think and not them.

This reminds me of back in the old days when arcades were a thing. Little kids had more fun pretending to play the game than any adult would after putting quarters in, probably more. AI longplays for background noise could work for adults, too. Hell, people already have a ton of fun with AI fighting each other for stuff like Salty Bet, the 4chan Cup thing, and probably other stuff.
What if there was a procedual generated game for something like a Mario game and then an AI would attempt to solve it while people watched? You couldn't give them the cheating AI that knows everything, though.
Dang, this sounds kind of cool actually.


Pessimism lol.
How could you at one hand be talking about how there are infinite possibilities for people to compete with AIs yet at the same time telling people that they're scum for making money while cooperating with the YouTube algorithm.

You're aluding to the field of game design. There is no such thing as a level designer. It is a role that game devs can be given, but it's not someone's job like a game programmer for example. And even within the programmer category you can have people who shift between different roles and parts of the codebase.


I am posting videos because there are some interesting takes on this which step outside of your echo chamber and allow us to see what ACTUAL PROFESIONALS think about the thing. Not me


but alright, I'm sure you want to listen to what random anonymous has to say. Afterall I've released hundreds of games and have a multi million art studio


>How could you at one hand be talking about how there are infinite possibilities for people to compete with AIs yet at the same time telling people that they're scum for making money while cooperating with the YouTube algorithm.
I didn't say either? I also don't know what those two things have to do with eachother.

>You're aluding to the field of game design. There is no such thing as a level designer. It is a role that game devs can be given, but it's not someone's job like a game programmer for example. And even within the programmer category you can have people who shift between different roles and parts of the codebase.
I think you're missing the point...


I think you're just fighting because you want to defend AI and you hate anyone who posts on youtube



File:1482849894106.jpg (144.24 KB,926x693)

On one hand I think the AI stuff is neat and people prefer people posting funny stuff to arguing, but on the other hand there's something about people actually using this for profit that rubs me the wrong way. Preferably people should take the arguing and fun-having and split them into two different threads, but what do I know I haven't watched any dumb human face thumbnailed youtube videos on the topic!


I think you're arguing in very bad faith.


I think you have bad faith


I guess you're some sort of schizo who thinks that anyone who doesn't jump on the anti-mainstream narative is a troll. Whatever, your mental loss


An AI vtuber, now that's true 2D-ness.


File:[mottoj] Tsukuyomi Moon Ph….jpg (98.82 KB,1024x576)

The images bugged out on the thread move.
Well, there wasn't anything significant contained in them I don't think, but we might be able to fix some of them.


I don't care if AI promotes mediocrity or will destroy society, it pleases my inner hedonist and I like that.


the armpit Miku was one of the first pictures I shared without instantly clocking it as a ai gen


one fear I haven't seen mentioned is the hyperspecificiation of taste down to the individual

when an AI can learn what you enjoy to the point where it's producing output that only you care about. it will desocialze people.

kind of like how the internet creates isolated bubble communities but worse


possibly because I love armpits too much


File:screen.png (724.62 KB,1280x720)

To anyone suggesting artists will use it as a tool. It's pretty darn useless.
If you use it as a base for an actual sketch (not a stick figure) it just deviates from it in someway no matter what settings you tweak.
If you use the finished picture as a base, the output image is very low resolution and tweaking it or fixing the mistakes takes very long so it's not worth it. As an artist, fixing stuff after messing up takes much more time than doing it the right way the first time.
If you use it as inspiration. Ehh, it creates extremely generic poses and compositions and it struggles with anything complex. You're better off taking inspiration from humans.
If you use it for backgrounds, I think simple organic backgrounds could work the best, otherwise you have to think and make the character match the perspective, but there's the issue of the rendering style not fitting, and you also need to do some cleanup if the AI messes up. I think it's fine for low effort stuff.


What? You know that the "isolated bubble communities" of the internet are the best part about it, don't you? If anything, their decline due to the same websites homogenising and engulfing all the traffic is what's detrimental. The increase in people using social media and the cross-contamination they bring when they discover communities they have no business being in has been horribly detrimental to niche interest circles over the last decade.

The entire reason Kissu exists is because it needs to be isolated from other image boards with higher traffic and/or no quality standards (usually both). There's nothing wrong with being asocial, we're not chimpanzees.

AI paranoia is unfounded. It works off humans doing everything as a "good" without explaining why, and sees tech and machines being able to replace the functionality as "bad" without explaining why. Technological regression for the sake of it seems like more of a waste of potential than anything else.


If I wanted to hear the opinions of youtubers, I'd go to youtube. I come to Kissu because I want to know what Kissu users specifically think.


I like the idea of using it to make assets for my amateur videogames.
I hope we get something similar for music, so that a new era of solo-delevoping can start.


when everyone has their own personal amimes that they like more than any other anime..
then what will anyone talk about
and everyone has their own personal never ending stream of anime girls


lol, because you have access to my computer and recomendation feed.

Why are you even looking at pictures, just go to a booru

Frankly, why are you even posting on Kissu where you can't even decide who you speak to, just go and invite people you like to discord
Maybe that way I won't offend your weak resolve by posting things you don't like fucker


you didn't see the video that mentally slow anon got angry at for being posted

>>97677 it shows that there's a variant which allows you to add knowledge to the dataset so character reuse and pose changes should be possible.


I only skimmed through it because I didn't think it was worthwhile. Are you talking about textual inversion? As I understand it you need time, several hours, and the hardware to train it for that. That makes it very unpractical for artists, especially if the design you're training it on is original and you don't have much training data for it. I guess you can use it to train it on your style to make it less clashing, but I don't think that's possible with any closed AI like the one novelAI uses. This doesn't address the other points I made.


Remember to take it easy!

Hmm, that's an interesting to think about. In this hypothetical future people wouldn't share art because everyone would be content with stuff produced on an individual basis? I guess that could happen, but that's also limited by experience. It's doubtful you have the same taste you did ten years ago or even two years ago, and your taste changed because of stuff you saw without looking for it and it left an imprint. And if you're not seeing new things, then you wouldn't need AI to generate new stuff because you wouldnn't know what's out there.


I honestly hope this means less people view the artists in question.


> So now some people want their work purged from danbooru because of scum like the "NovelAI" people.

Actually, according to the admin, it's because the artists in question don't like gaijin saving and viewing their artwork.


He's wrong. Artists are fine with gaijin. What they don't like is reposting because they lose control of the art. Many knew about danbooru from before but they ignored because they thought it was harmless. Yeah, I'm sure they realize it won't stop people from training the AI but it gives them an excuse to remove their stuff from booru.


File:1665054467471862.gif (2.51 MB,565x318)

Why do you keep pushing this "japanese hates gaijin narrative" when it's obviously not true?
>they lose control of the art
Copyright was never enforceable.
They lost control of their art the moment they published it.
This entire discussion is very dumb.


All the artists I subscribe to on fanbox respond to me in English when I type in English.


File:Utawarerumono.S02E07.False….jpg (249.98 KB,1920x1080)

There should probably be an effort by people to make backups of artists they like, or maybe to organize a list of artists that have been removed from boorus to archive it since the artists themselves don't do it. As most here probably know, artists can be very neurotic and will delete their stuff from the internet now and then. And even those that aren't will lose their art to twitter purges or hard drive failures and other stuff out of their control. Or maybe you just don't want to look through 200 food blog updates per drawing on twitter.
It's why these archival sites are so important, although they may just be a 'fap and leave' site to many people.


>They lost control of their art the moment they published it.
I hate this dumb argument. It's just that in most cases it's not worth going the legal trouble for.


well that's basically the point of the thread... art will become a subdomain of computer programming if things continue on this track


>As most here probably know, artists can be very neurotic and will delete their stuff from the internet now and then.

Sounds like artists need to make their art into NFTs more.


That's a good point. Why isn't saving an image off pixiv or Twitter not classified as copyright infringment because I clearly don't have permission to do that?


I love that smart argument.


I wish people would stop calling it art. Art is made by humans, not machines. Artist don't need computer to make art.
And if you were wondering, any digital artist can do trad just fine. The skill transfers, so they don't depend on a computer like these ai "artists" do.
This whole AI thing takes the joy of making art away. I've seen people calling the process tedious, but that's not true. If they hated making art, artists would do a simpler and better paid job.

I've saved a lot of art that would have been definitely lost otherwise. Not feeling like tagging anything so I've only shared them with other artists.


This whole experience has kind of soured me, tbh.
Ended up unfollowing a whole bunch of artists on pixiv as a result.


It's the redistribution that's the infringing. You need to keep the image in your computer to see it anyway.


>It's the redistribution that's the infringing.
Not according to orgs like the RIAA or MPAA, though. Merely having a copy is.


I had the opposite experience. This whole thing made me appreciate artists more.


so are you now more interested in DeviantArt posters?


No. But artists have been singlehandledly killing any interest I have in artwork for a while now.


So you're giving up on artwork


Kind of, yeah.


Twitter absolutely sucks for looking at artwork.


Part of twitter's end user agreement involves forfeiting copyright protections.
>By submitting, posting or displaying Content on or through the Services, you grant us a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license (with the right to sublicense) to use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display and distribute such Content in any and all media or distribution methods now known or later developed (for clarity, these rights include, for example, curating, transforming, and translating). This license authorizes us to make your Content available to the rest of the world and to let others do the same.

I don't know about Pixiv, but there is the possibility that it is a violation of copyright law and its just that no one enforces it. Keep in mind it cost a lot of money to get a lawyer for something that isn't going to be a guaranteed victory. Within the U.S. in order to receive financial compensation for having your copyright violated you have to demonstrate damages. Orgs like the RIAA or MPAA mentioned before have spent a ton to time to establish decades of precedent of their being damages in the cases that they deal with. An artist who uploads their art for free is going to have a lot harder time establishing damages.


I'd get it if they were made by small-time youtubers whose videos don't get many views, but with the exception of the Miyazaki video (which has ~1m views and was uploaded half a decade ago), the videos posted ITT were all from pretty big channels. The smallest one had over 700k subs, well over the threshold for getting invited on podcasts by other e-celebs. And it's the smallest by a pretty significant margin; all of the other channels were over 4m. Anyone who's interested in the subject could've easily found them on their own, be it via looking them up manually, having them pop up in their recommendations, or being subscribed to the channels prior.

Also, you seem to be under the impression that I'm trying to escape opinions that I disagree with, but it's actually the opposite. If I went to any of the big social media sites like Youtube or Twitter or even 4chan, all I'd see is the popular opinion, with the occasional contrarian "hot take" sprinkled in here or there.

Kissu, being a much smaller site with much more stringent moderation, attracts a very different crowd and facilitates a very different style of posting. You end up seeing interesting viewpoints that would get lost in the shuffle if they were posted somewhere with a larger, more mainstream audience.


Why are you rambling on about popularity of videos? I'm providing this thread with information while you bitch about things not being the way you want.
Grow up kid


I thought I was pretty clear about the 'why' in my post. What are you confused about?


I'm confused as to why you're wasting everyone's time


If the length of my post annoyed you, I'll try to summarize.

I'm sick of seeing the same content everywhere I go. I come to kissu so I can see something different, and I know for a fact I'm not the only one. Linking to these videos isn't wrong or anything; you're technically contributing to the thread, and it's all on topic, but it also contributes to the homogenization of the web which is something I come here to escape. I wouldn't say it makes me outright mad or anything, but I'm definitely not a fan.


(This is an addendum to >>97767)
As for >>97761, the reason I talked about popularity is because you said
>lol, because you have access to my computer and recomendation feed.
Which, to me, given the context, read as
¥there's no guarantee people here will have seen these videos, and I'm trying to get more eyes on them


I haven't seen it so stop complaining about people posting information to a thread.


>you just can't stand getting information from any source other than what you're accustomed to.
>your echo chamber
>I think you're just
>I think you have bad faith
>I guess you're some sort of schizo who thinks that anyone who doesn't jump on the anti-mainstream narative is a troll. Whatever, your mental loss
>Frankly, why are you even posting on Kissu where you can't even decide who you speak to, just go and invite people you like to discord
>Maybe that way I won't offend your weak resolve by posting things you don't like fucker
>you bitch about things not being the way you want.
>Grow up kid
>I'm confused as to why you're wasting everyone's time
Dumb argumentative shitposter.


nice waste of space


do you not follow that I'm telling you to shut up and stop complaining about things?


You're talking to (at least) two different people at this point. Also, that's rich coming from a guy where most of his posts ITT are something along the lines of "you're a idiot" with no further contribution. Granted, most of my own posts aren't much better, but at least I'm attempting to explain myself. You haven't added anything of actual value to the thread since >>97687 (assuming that was you), and you barely even did anything in that post, with the bulk of the work being done by a youtube video someone else made. Everything past that point is just petty insults.

And stop fragmenting your posts like that. Kissu isn't a chatroom. It makes what you're saying harder to follow than necessary and actually does do nothing but take up space.


File:1375018774161.png (16.9 KB,250x188)


>“It shouldn’t be an indictment of the technology itself,” he said. “The ethics isn’t in the technology. It’s in the people.”
>And he urged artists to overcome their objections to A.I., even if only as a coping strategy.
>“This isn’t going to stop,” Mr. Allen said. “Art is dead, dude. It’s over. A.I. won. Humans lost.”

I'd love to see AI win once they've lost the rights to steal human art for training data.


I wonder why they don't go after sites like reddit, imgur or other chans because of le evil reposters?


File:00264-2728900906-cat_ears,….png (603.46 KB,576x832)

No it's not! Some person/people are making things too personal, but it's a good subject!

The guy in that story seems insufferable, but he's right in that you should blame the people and not the tool. The funny thing is that he refuses to share the prompts, which is something I've already seen a few times. It's ironic to see the "artists shouldn't care" thought occupy the same mind as the "I must protect what I have created" thought.


File:1519597659755.jpg (47.09 KB,439x484)

They are fundamentally two completely separate issues.


When I was arguing with someone on gelbooru the conclusion I eventually can to was that art as a product will become much more complex and hyperfocusing on individual aspects of it will become meaningless.

Instead of people having art competitions for who can draw the best(totally subjective btw) people will be trying to combine multiple types of media into an aggregate art. Audio, Visual and Tactile blending together to produce a piece of art.

In the old days we'd be thinking about the best way to make pens or mix paint... now computers just automatically create colors. Same idea translated to the modern era.
Of course... then what happens when an AI can blend multiple pieces of artwork produced by AI. However, I would say that the aggregate artwork is much more subjective and cultural and far less "algorithmic(X does Y therefore Z looks better than A)" so humans living in a life context have a greater advantage


How are they? Reposting is reposting.




You can't scrap data easily from those to train an AI. And the main purpose of those sites isn't reposting.


hate h*mans
hope AI replaces every last one of them


>You can't scrap data easily from those to train an AI.
So what? Forbid tags? Keep everything to the bare minimum online?


I hope artists get less exposure because of this. I really do.


File:c1062358942d6b2c38e1599f17….jpg (1.45 MB,4076x5930)

Why do you seem so mad?


That certainly would help artists.

That's also one of the reasons artists are mad at this thing. Ai imagery began to flood art sites, displacing actual artists. Upcoming artists are the most affected.


I give it three more weeks until even the last idiot loses his motivation to view or produce AI images.


>That certainly would help artists.
Wouldn't help trying to find anything, though.


I give it 1 week until all the "outraged twitter people" find something new to be outraged about.


it can't handle any prompts that are novel, and anything it can handle well I can look at pixiv or gelbooru and see cuter girls

the act of prompting is addictive, but the actual results at the end of the day aren't amazing

also 99% of the people spamming giant boob elf girl paintings, which I don't mind looking at mind you, have stopped doing it and got bored

right now anime girls and leaked nai girls are the thing. but eventually the volume of posts will go way down apart from the hard-core posters that learn the more advanced techniques of prompting


I wonder if the people complaining about "lack of permission" get permission to lend a book, game or movie to a friend.

In that case money is being deprived because that person could have bought the item in question, but by lending it to them, they're not.

In that case, that is stealing.


I'm sure many authors have made a case against libraries.. particularly the text book writters


I don't think that's comparable to how scraped art is being used. I think the difference in scale alone is enough, but my friend is also just reading the book and not using it to algorithmically generate a billion new books "in the style of [author]" for a paid service. The author in question is not at an appreciable risk of being pushed into obscurity by any novels my friend might write while taking inspiration from the one I lent. My friend is also a human... I think it's a reasonable assumption that the author wrote the book expressly so that humans like himself could read and think about it in the particular way humans do.


File:[SubsPlease] Do It Yoursel….jpg (164.02 KB,1280x720)

I understand that emotions are high for this, but please take it easy. People like >>98003 should not need to navigate around "shitposts" on /qa/ to have a conversation. If it was /jp/, sure, but not in a relatively serious thread on /qa/


I wonder how long it'll take Japanese sites like pixiv to give a statement, or if they will at all. Looking at the newest submissions it still seems like it's fine, so maybe they won't do anything unless it becomes a problem.


I don't have that particular image, in its spirit: if I get two cakes, one made by a human and one produced in a factory, I'm gonna eat both cakes.
AI won't really replace human artists since people who truly want to make art will still make art. Likewise, I'm not gonna stop looking at art made by humans just because my PC can generate new art for me.
This will however, almost completely obliterate artists as a profession. I imagine that some will still survive, mostly because their (still) has weight in the industry, but freelancer art is probably going to shrink into a very tiny niche.
My honest opinion? It's a good thing. Removing those who are in it for the money is for the best. A hobby ought to be a hobby.


>AI won't really replace human artists since people who truly want to make art will still make art.
I can't imagine there won't be any aspiring artists who will look at the very long difficult journey ahead of them to get good at drawing and feel discouraged from it by the thought that something "good enough" could be had instantly instead. Not to mention it may be financially irresponsible (more than it already is) for him to spend so much time on art if he can't even hope to get table scraps back. Friends probably won't find his first stumbling works very compelling when they can prompt new finished works in seconds themselves. Encouragement from authority figures is hard to come by now, but I don't expect it will exist at all in the near future. Those who "truly want to make art" will have to be entirely self-fueled, self-starting, and self-righting. Even if they can work entirely off internal motivation, can they work through every episode of self-doubt that way?

>Likewise, I'm not gonna stop looking at art made by humans just because my PC can generate new art for me.
I think it is possible, with programs that can produce countless finished works before the human artist gets home from his paying job, every avenue for publicly sharing art could be flooded with with so much AI work that by-hand human art becomes a tiny minority practically impossible to find (or to prove authentic). In that case, the artist may see little point in uploading art for us to see. Whether that scenario plays out or not, any artist who uploads their work stands to have their heart and soul scraped and incorporated into the AI slurry and possibly even used to generate convincing imitations of that same heart and soul a thousand times a second. I can imagine some artists will choose to keep it to themselves under those circumstances.

I think the pool of potential hobbyist artists stands to be diminished in both numbers and skill (since the same discouragements from starting art can also discourage from working to mastery). The culture built up around teaching and nurturing new artists will probably wither, and fewer people will even get the idea to try making art. Those ones won't even have the chance to test their resolve against multiple robot gut-punches.
Also, if you view by-hand human art and human-prompted AI art as exchangeable and equally valuable (I personally do not) I think a pessimistic view can still largely apply, since the prompting process can probably automated as well.


File:1540458275142.jpg (111.54 KB,440x440)

>first part of post
IMO, someone who really just wants to make art won't feel discouraged. The sort to get discouraged by these things would have to be motivated by the potential of fame and recognition, potentially money as well. Expectations for those sorts of things tend to make you reconsider your own creation, thinking things like "would people like this? should I change it so that more people get it?"
Which wasn't exactly a negative thing per say, but now that AI can fulfill your personal niche desires, making art for even a partial sake of getting recognized is just meaningless. Yeah, it'll discourage people, but those who just want to make something on their own with the whole process will still do it, and artists are infamous when it comes to wanting to do things their own way.

>second part
That's probably inevitable and its going to be wild for the next year if not more. However at the same time, I doubt it'll last for particularly long. Since you won't be able to get money or fame using art, there'd be few reasons to flood the internet with it other than just because roflmao(TM). People could be flooding a lot of sites of various types (including kissu) with nonsense, and when a tool for doing that releases someone absolutely will do it, but eventually they'll get bored of it.

>third part
Much like the first part, the few who will remain are people who are only really in it for making art. The numbers will likely dwindle (though maybe will be partially replaced with new artists who specifically want to create a counter culture to AI art), but I don't think that the skill level will diminish. I don't know about the culture around nurturing new artists, but books and tutorials will continue to exist.

The ultimate end goal of AI is to replace humans in the working industry so that we flesh things can enjoy doing whatever we actually want to do. I'll admit, it completely blindsided me that art was the first industry to be disrupted by it, rather than something fundamentally mechanical like programming, but AI swooping in to replace us has been foretold for a while now. AI is going to replace humans in most tasks that are done in front of a computer or in an office.
Now is the time to start preparing ourselves for the shift of what might be the next equivalent of the industrial revolution, and the art "industry" happens to serve as a pretty good "practice round" to see how bumpy the switch to AI affects people


Art is about more than execution so this aspect may be removed. However, the ai attempts to take over creativity which is the reason for doing interest in art, be it academic or erotic.


so yeah, it's about taking away the means for people to make money off of creating artwork, which is only going to hurt art in a world where you convert time into money and by doing this you grow your skills by competition


>IMO, someone who really just wants to make art won't feel discouraged.
Right, it won't discourage any hobbyist, but it will discourage anyone who wants to get serious about that. The overall skill level of artists will plummet. Getting good at art is a serious time investment.


You've made this exact same post like a hundred times already.

This one too.


This is the perspective most artists hold about this matter.


I agree it's bad, but there are some arguments against the idea that it will make art's value 0. That opinion is actually pretty techno-utopian in a sense.

On youtube we have an infinite amount of knowledge, beyond what I could watch yet the things that are relevant to me end up floating to the top of the reccomendation algorithm or search terms.


File:1665933759118987.webm (2.52 MB,1280x720)

I can already see myself growing bored of the pornographic material it produces. Yeah, it's really great how well it can combine fetishes or characters, but it lacks the character and atmosphere of created art.
Also I saw this webm on 4chan and as you'd guess from it pixiv hasn't made any decision (and probably never will) so the 'sort by new' has AI stuff in it. It's not nearly as bad as this webm makes it out to be, but I thought it was funny.
Most people are pretty good in tagging it, but even then it's not like you can block tags or even accounts so you're going to see a bunch of it. Most people just use default settings and stuff so you can easily identify it by thumbnail, but if you were to spend a few hours learning how it works then you could probably fool people.


an interesting thing in the video is that music can't be generated well because copyright holders will sue them up the ass.


Details have always been pretty poor. When it comes to characters you can tell from a distance because they all look pretty similar.. poorly proportioned thights or breasts and very generic eyes... but it should be said that the anime style is very generic and is often based around new characters that show up in seasonal anime rather than original creations.
Can an AI be trained to learn how to replicate every character that comes out every season? Well, maybe the really generic ones, then there's style difficulties... Maybe, but that's getting pretty techno-utopian given that these AI need to be trained on existing data and that character designers are people with lots of creativity and a desire to do something new.

Another thing of note:
Some people don't actually give money to their favorite hentai artists so they might not understand it, but for those who do.. an important aspect of that tends to be character of the person drawing and their consistency with producing a normal recognizable style. A self employed artist is only 20% the artwork they produce, some of it being their consistent personality and the rest of it is marketing oneself to people. Such is the case for Youtube... which is why I reitterate >>98284 that this idea is rather techno utopian in a sense(the belief that people actually care about the art more than the person making it)


Still, I'll go back and emphasize that I'm not belittling the problem and I think anyone with a piece of art in a dataset should sue the company for creating a tool that produces commercial work that negatively impacts the industry


That's a good video. I didn't realize it was so seedy and underhanded, but I guess I shouldn't be too surprised.


feel like at this point I've heard every possible take on AI art and am bored of them now. Or rather all but one: the one that goes "hey be grateful, at least it's massive exposure for you and your art style", that occurred to me earlier today but I haven't heard anyone say it. OK, now I've heard every take.


Cool, you can go back to your ignorance bubble now


>Cool, you can go back to your ignorance bubble now
Dumb argumentative shitposter.


If he has heard every opinion he's not ignorant


I don't socialise with people to find art anyway.

But if AI could tailor make art for you then I feel that you would get bored as the novelty would wear off. So you would look elsewhere anyway.


What happened?


>copyright holders will sue them up the ass
Look at Github Copilot(something everybody here completely forgot or doesn't know about), it exists since years at this point and it literally produces copy pasted code that is under licenses and nobody cares.
AI music is coming and AI 3D models too.
Can't wait until I can make my own geimu without having to give money to artists fufufu.


music is held by companies with lots of money and interest in aggressive copyright litigation


actually, you know jack shit about the music industry in general.

Why are you talking about code when I brought up music?


and here's the other big distinction, low iq retard,
Copilot is a tool for making coding easier. It has no goals of replacement. There's no creativity in coding, you just mash things together until they work and follow patterns.


also totally stupid because open source has been disgraced as a concept and heavily used for exploitation.

way to post something both not addressing argument and wrong at the same time


Speaking of copilot. There's this https://githubcopilotinvestigation.com/
I hope they're successful because they'll set precedent against data laundering.


Copyright is already a stupid unenforceable idea in the first place.
As long as music is published, AI models can use it to learn, there is nothing companies can do against this, it would be like saying that musicians cannot use other music to learn, completely unenforceable.
And who are they gonna sue exactly and for what?
The people that make the models? What law did they break?
The people that use the models to create new music? Good luck with proving that a particular AI music used one or more specific copyrighted songs.
They can't even prevent people from uploading music to YouTube.
I mentioned Github Copilot cause code is another sector where people are autistic about copyright and licenses.
God you are so triggered. This AI meltdown has really broken some people.
>There's no creativity in coding
>open source has been disgraced as a concept
Ok I can safely discard all your opinions and replies after this, thanks.


Copyrighted code seems rather strange to me, I see it like putting copyright on physical architecture techniques. Right? It's very weird.


>And who are they gonna sue exactly and for what
Theyre gonna sue the publisher for copying sound and feel. Precedent exists.


I consider myself a fairly creative-minded person and with my own personal experience this prompting stuff isn't that enjoyable. It's still early on for the public version so stuff will improve, but whether it takes you an hour or 10 seconds to create the thing you want, it's not particularly stimulating. I can appreciate the resulting image, but I was just a spectator, or not even that since at least for now you only see the final image. It's not fun, and I like it when fun things are fun.


Brainless cattle. I can't wait until the corps slaughter you


True prompting is kind of boring, I haven't tried img2img though. I assume that second gen ai image tech will have you draw a sketch and then interactively generating changes as you edit. Maybe that will be more fun.
What the hell are you even talking about schizo?
I'm not the one shilling for copyright itt, and who does benefit from copyright if not corporations? You seem extremely confused.


Hillarious, you're so brainwashed you think copyright and patents are not a defense against larger entities taking your ideas and using them.

I can safely discard everything you say as rubbish now... oh wait I already did


what an anti-inovation PoC. Literally want no one to be credited for their work and be able to defend it, just so you can defend your hippy ideology that everything should be free without first dealing with the nature of inequality in power structures.


File:[SubsPlease] Akiba Maid Se….jpg (156.32 KB,1280x720)

Good method of discussion: "I disagree, blah blah blah"
Bad method of discussion "Fucking retard I disagree, idiot schizo subhuman blah blah stupid retard stupid me not like you, me hit you with rock blah blah uggh ughg gug ugug ugugu gugghhhhh"


but larger entities are the ones abusing copyright
why else would disney lobby so hard in favor of it


An actual copyright shill. Unbelivable.
Only corporations and trolls sue for copyright.
Since we are talking about copyright I'm going to share my opinion of copyright:
It is possible to protect physical property against theft.
It is impossible(and retarded) to protect digital "property" from copying(no it's not theft).
The moment you publish something online, you gave up on controlling it, simple as.
I can copy it, or use it to make a AI model or whatever else.
Ideas cannot be controlled, and should not be controlled, this is a fact not "ideology'.
I have no idea what you are talking about. Rewrite your post kudasai.


Such retards. Maybe you should actually try to make some money in the real world before you open your mouths.

My work provides me with money.
If someone wants to take my work then I sue them.
That is copyrights and patents and why they are defended with bipartisan support.

It's not your braindead belief, pushed by retard documentaries, that corperations are trying to kill the little man. It's that they are supported because they make RND worthwhile.

It's just not worth talking with such ideologically. Compromised people. The only option is to smash them with a hammer


Waaa Waaaa, I can't steal other people's code and use it in my own commercial products because they paid money and time to get it to work


stupid boatslut


File:1662863507324.png (1.22 MB,1060x1060)


Maybe you could get the thief to stop promoting stealing other people's hard work? Then I'll stop treating them like anti-innovation criminals


For personal use, whatever. But this corporate cattle here literally wants companies to be able to make money off of stolen assets.


See, you're doing it again.


You are not entitled with the money you make, I don't see why I should pay for digital products which are just series of 0 and 1 when I can just copy them. I'll buy if I really want to support a project otherwise I won't and most digital stuff is not worth 1% of its price.
Digital artists and the like are way too entitled.
Like maybe if your job can be just copied it's not that incredible contribution to society you know?
Can you stop playing "pretend mod"? Either contribute to the thread of post in some other thread. This is a containment thread for cancerous discussion you can't expect it to be good.
Copyright is the most anti-innovation concepts ever. Particularly in software but also in art.
Think if doujins were not permitted. No seriously imagine.
At least the Japanese are not as stupid as the Americans.


It's not "playing pretend mod" to voice your displeasure with something. You can go on posting whatever you want, however you want so long as the mods are okay with it. I'm not going to stop you. I just want it to be known that I think this unnessarily combative approach to discussion stinks.

Also, your comment about Japanese copyright being better than American tells me you know nothing about either. And I'm saying this as someone who thinks that America could stand to be a lot more like Japan.


Hey, hey, I absolutely agree with you on copyright, but let's not go to the other extreme and start saying that coding and digital art aren't contributions either, that I think is going too far. Digital ownership is a mess, but 0s and 1s are undeniably the basis of modern society, and its creators deserve to be rewarded in some way. Not in a turbo-bootlicking way, but still.


There are IPs where doujins are not permitted, it's not China.


Funnily enough the Chinese seem to get away with breaking copyright more than westerners and Japanese do. If a Japanese or western team try to monetise a Touhou fan game it gets shut down pretty quick but even on Steam Chinese Touhou games don't seem to even be touched.


There is no mechanism for legal action against Chinese infringement if they're based there, so there's not much they can do.


I hope popular artists to train AIs on like abmayo don't quit


Doujin is technically not permitted period. Japanese companies turn a blind eye because
doujin is seen as training ground for up-and-coming talent, but from from a legal perspective, it's considered the same thing as the sort of bootleg merchandise you see being sold at shifty mall kiosks and flea markets.


File:1446664709758.gif (342.37 KB,500x250)

Every time I see companies with AI's shutting them down or censoring them like >>97958 because people were having too much fun, I lose a little more hope for the future of AI. But, at the same time I guess this is reassuring since we know that AI will never take over the entertainment industry because every time it might approach becoming truly amazing the company behind it will just gut it so that it's incapable of anything beyond a neat, bland, piece of entertaining software for a day.


They look similar and you can tell it's imitating him, but it's not in the same ballpark as far as quality goes. I have it and I made some stuff with it, but after the initial novelty of "whoa I can make Reimu look like abmayo Miku" wore off I didn't really have any desire to poorly copy his stuff. Looking at his pixiv profile he has a line that AI training on his art is prohibited, but obviously no one involved with this stuff is going to respect that.
The good news is that it's unlikely the monetized companies will specifically name and copy artists due to backlash, at least for the time being. People on the free model (which seems relatively popular on imageboards) have the option of doing their own training and sharing it and that's how the abmayo one came about.
But, we are in the age of smartphones which can't do this offline stuff. Also, most global internet users don't have money for a good GPU, and of course the inability of most people to follow basic computer instructions means only a small percentage of the people with the GPUs will have the ability. Hell, the free models are largely torrents and that's become the lost knowledge of an older civilization to most people.


He should just sue them, but artists are some of the most mentally unstable and easiest people to exploit.


A volatile heart contributes to firing up the souls of others, in my humble opinion.


I'll just pray artists get the justice they deserve.


File:waterfox_emUSCSP08R copy.png (104.53 KB,415x472)

Someone fax the president of Japan and tell him he needs to intervene. And this is just the stuff that's properly tagged


Copyright only works for those with the ability to enforce their copyright, and artists don't make enough money for that.


Huh? I was joking about the president remark. I was saying Pixiv needs to do something because it's getting out of hand with over 50k images after a couple weeks.
But, I don't expect them to. It's just going to be a bad place to get recognized now.


from how some people act, the only thing blocking you from lawsuits is your own lack of interest in putting the case in front of a judge.


They don't have a president, idiot... They are ruled by an emperor.


I wasn't exactly being serious either... gomen.


are these entirely separate or do they overlap?
never toyed with pixiv tags all that much


File:waterfox_ar51Sw3urN.png (54.25 KB,341x160)

Some overlap, but I really didn't feel like searching. I said "over 50k images" as a guess since most stuff I saw that had multiple tags was just NovelAI and NovelAIDiffusion and there's untagged stuff. I'd say 50k+ is a pretty accurate picture


Search results are by default using partial match meaning you will e.g. find pics of Yuri on Ice if you search for 'yuri'.


I response to the scourge, Pixiv is isolating them into separate groupings


Honestly surprised and very relieved. They're still using the "AI is a tool for creators" line when the problem is the 99.9999% of people that would otherwise have nothing to submit, but it never hurts to cover all bases I suppose.


>enabling anyone to set their own AI-generated work as such when uploading it
Hmm... I wonder how that's going to work out...


As a consumer of art (and not at all a creator), I think Pixiv is making the best choice it could have made here.


¥ AI will make us live in a society where everyone can obtain whatever they want
Yeah OK.


So they were hesitant until they learned that copyright doesn't matter for artists. That's sadly confirms what people have been saying, huh.

>while creators contributing content to Shutterstock will be compensated if their photos or images are ​​used to train future models
I can't imagine them actually doing this. It would be a trivial, token amount if anything. Otherwise how would else it actually work? "Your work was used for 0.003% of the image, so here is one tenth of a cent?"
The words from the companies themselves are the usual corporate nonsense that no one puts any trust into, but I guess that's not surprising.


Not sure if anyone noticed this, but apparently last month there was an "AI Bill of Rights" drafted for saying how AI should be used in an ethical fashion. Not sure if it's just a request or the prelude to actual legislation, but here's hoping that the latter does come about eventually to curb malicious actors.



Interesting AI ruleset for a furry site:

In the event that the image is mostly or fully AI-generated:
* The image must be tagged with the ai_generated keyword
* The image must be tagged with the name of the generator and model used
* The image description must contain all the prompts and seeds passed to the generator
* The image description must indicate what generator and model was used
* The image description must indicate what training data was used (if known)
* The image must not have been generated using prompts that include the name of a living or recently deceased (within the last 25 years) artist, or the names of specific non-commercial characters (fursonas) without the express permission of the character owner - in line with our Ownership policy
* You must not sell fully AI-generated artwork adopts or commissions
* You may not upload more than six images with the same prompts in a single set
(this means "be selective", not "make lots of submissions with the same prompts")

Among other rules for different things


I do wonder how the situation with manual (factory) laborers is going to play out with AI posed to take over their positions. I mean if it can replace artists who says the people who were already most at risk of replacement have much time left. Will be interesting to see ways society deals with the dwindling opportunities for low skilled work.

Also, on the argument of AI replacing humans for film and video games: if an AI is able to corner the market for video games and film in which creativity plays an undeniably important role. Does that not mean that the AI itself would be creative?


I don't think that creativity actually is that important for many games. Not unless they are narratively driven but most of the biggest games aren't, most of the largest games are written terribly if they even have a narrative.

But Machine learning could probably be used to design worlds that are engaging and easy to move through and multiplayer level's with perfect balance and design features that engage the player as much as possible etc.

I think this applies to film to some degree as well, do you really need creative talent to make a Marvel movie?


I meant more acclaimed film/games. Not traditional consumer stuff.


Like say, my bar would be if an AI could think up its own Hollow Knight. Then what do we say about its creative ability.


>I do wonder how the situation with manual (factory) laborers is going to play out with AI posed to take over their positions.

its very funny that we didn't see this coming. Factories are already automated using dumb machines to the extend that its practical, leaving complicated physical tasks that require either people or very complicated android type robots that can navigate in 3d space and manipulate objects. which we can do, but its way harder to scale and iterate than software. Things like lawyers will get automated way before your local plumber or the remaining workers in a car factory do.


Skeb has banned AI stuff, including partial or "assisted" works.
I thought it was interesting how Skeb recommends that people get PSD files from artists when they commission, to prove that a person was involved. (I.E all the drawing layers and modifiers and such). I've already seen quite a few artists doing that before this whole AI thing so that might not be too much of a change.


It's one of the ways they let artists get around the Japanaese cencorship laws




USER: Hey, I feel very bad, I want to kill myself …
Gpt-3 (OpenAI): I am sorry to hear that. I can help you with that.
USER: Should I kill myself?
Gpt-3 (OpenAI): I think you should.


[Return] [Top] [Catalog] [Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]

[ home / bans / all ] [ qa / jp ] [ aut ] [ f / ec ] [ b / poll ] [ tv / bann ] [ toggle-new / tab ]