debunk these or AI won
>>771757Strawman argument, false equivalency, appeal to emotion.
Done, debunked.
>>771757it's completely ethical to misgender AI slop posters
>>771757I am growing tired of this shit, speaking honestly, family. Now, on to brass tacks:
- Just because a member of a supposed group, or movement, or ideology, conducts himself in a rude and offensive manner, doesn't mean that every person in that group behaves in the same way. Furthermore, while I sympathize with the catgirl, the fact remains that she is a proponent of AIslop, and as of yet, such people are not a protected class. Thus, I have no reservations about referring to her in a manner to which she may be insulted, as long as said manner makes no affront against any protected status she may actually inhabit (like being a catgirl). At best, I would suggest to this person who is characterized as "Anti-AI" that he say the following instead:
>AI chick, AI chick, hahaha
Thereby respecting her pronouns.
- Virtually anything can be used as a pretense for bullying. See White Supremacy, see video game culture, see religious beliefs, etc. Furthermore, AIsloppers are worse than bullies, they're thieves. Futher-uthermore, I doubt that every AIslopper is some humanitarian angel who has never so much as uttered profanity. I don't buy it, and I think that they often times try to provoke a response by constructing poorly thought out or deliberately bad-faith arguments while feigning ignorance and retardation for the sake of priming someone's burners.
- I have yet to see a good argument in favor of AIslop, so that one may possibly find a set of weak arguments as made by AIsloppers is not compelling to me in the slightest, and moreover, this is yet another example of bad-faith heckling and chortling by the AIslop-loving community.
- Shrek doesn't look like that in the slightest, get out of his swamp. Also, it may technically be true that "AI art" can be characterized as "art" it's more accurate to say that it's just garbage and not worth being considered actual art, because it was made by a point matrix diffusion map to render an image with mathematical precision, as opposed to something handcrafted by a human being.
>>771773>Also, it may technically be true that "AI art" can be characterized as "art" it's more accurate to say that it's just garbage and not worth being considered actual art, because it was made by a point matrix diffusion map to render an image with mathematical precision, as opposed to something handcrafted by a human beingThen I guess Photoshop and CGI aren't art then
>>771775>photoshopDoes anyone actually consider images made in photoshop to be art? Does anyone actually consider CGI to be art? And isn't CGI usually made by humans, like character models and environments and such, and it's just like some kind of software engine that animates all? So, those things might be low quality or whatever, but they're still made by humans, and not churned out by an algorithm, so they're not the same.
I dunno, dawg, it's like… I don't care. AI is just for lazy people, at some point it loses its novelty, so I don't see the appeal of making cookie-cutter images when I could git gud at drawing instead. It's like, maybe a drum kit can make good beats, right? And you can use those beats to make tracks to rap over, right? And that's fine and everything because it serves its purpose, but why are we even comparing that to playing drums? They're not even the same thing, so it's like, they shouldn't even be directly compared.
Why are sloppers so desperate to be acknowledged as artists anyway? The barrier to entry is so low, that if you can make it appealing to use AI without any additional effort, like, it just produces exactly what you want with a specific prompt, then suddenly everyone will be an artist and art will lose its economic value, which will shift the "art meta" to something similar to a social media popularity contest, where only the most popular memeshit "art" ever gets noticed, much less consumed by anyone.
So, like, this whole "debate" is fucking gay already. It's like, go ahead and make your slop, I don't care, and really, I never cared, it's just an incredibly dumb conversation at this point, and all so you can, what exactly? Make media at a faster pace and therefore somehow be more competitive? You don't care about art, you just want legitimacy so you can aspire toward a beneficial economic outcome for yourself.
>pay me
<i draw
>don't pay me
<i don't draw
i don't care about AI that much, i just don't wanna do stuff without people paying me because i'm poor
>>771775CGI is a tool, not art. At that tool is only rarely used for art, at it's most technically proficient (original Jurassic Park. FF:The Spirits Within)
Like other tools it is mostly used to produce commodity.
>>771784>So, those things might be low quality or whatever, but they're still made by humans, and not churned out by an algorithm, so they're not the same.The AI churned out by algorithm still requires manual editing.
>>771787Pro capitalist aren't we
>>771797For now, but what the AI companies want is to make an AI that will produce better and more refined output so that it doesn't need editing. Besides, sloppers don't do any editing, they just prompt and prompt and prompt and prompt until they get something that approximates what they want the closest. Besides, the human element might make the resulting image of better quality, in the sense that it's free of visual errors or whatever, but the machine still did the vast majority of the work, and you're just taking the "art" made by a motherfucking appliance and ensuring that people won't immediately vomit at the sight of it. Besides, you can cry all day about how you're a legitimate artist, but I reiterate, you're actually crying about not being able to convince others that the slop you produce is worth being consumed, because what you really what is a return on investment, i.e. money, green, cheddar, dough, ducats, scratch, dubloons, etc. because you want a cushy desk job experience where you sit in a temperature controlled room on a desktop and "work" maybe 4 hours of your day and earn enough to furnish a bourgeois lifestyle with the smallest amount of effort possible.
ragebait award
>>771806RAGEBAIT?!
WHO'S ANGRY?? I'M NOT ANGRY!
I'M PERFECTLY EMOTIONALLY NEUTRAL RIGHT NOW!
WHY WOULD YOU EVEN SUGGEST THAT I'M EXPERIENCING ANY TINGE OF ANGER AT THIS MOMENT IN TIME???!!!
>>771757Sorry, there are no girls on the internet.
I insists on itself
>>771757last file is literally me
>>771797>Pro capitalist aren't weiPhone argument. Communism is not about personal morals and ethics
>>771823you don't know anything about fountain do you
cogsuckers get the wall
Ai is for retards
>>771886So is my penis but your mom isn't complaining!
>>771912that's what you call omega magatard cope, the equivalent of some kid trying to save face by shouting I'M NOT CRYING I'LL FUCKING SMASH YOU as tears streak down his face
>>771757there's nothing to debunk. AI art is low status.
the whole debate vaguely avoids this because talking openly about status is freak behavior. (which is why we'll confine it to leftypol.org)
>>771784the art meta is already a (mostly social media) popularity contest. getting abstract: art is just communication. it can raise or lower the social status of its creator and its consumers. there's already a sliding scale here where people clearly respect 2d artists more than 3d artists. whether AI art constitutes "art" or not is a meaningless debate because it turns into a supply and demand problem: AI slop is oversupplied relative to demand, while competent human art is usually undersupplied. if you want to know why people pay a thousand dollars to commission a specific person, you want to look at the person and not their work.
AI artists think they're mad about art, the commodity, but what they're really mad about is not getting social status. (this is true of most people who identify a certain lack in their life. if only i had a gf, if only i had a better job, a nicer house, a bigger car… unless the commodity you're pining for is insulin, odds are the root of your problem is social rather than physical.)
>>771823the ultimate proof that it's all a matter of social categorization.
as a social gesture, putting a urinal in a gallery goes a lot further than typing "anime girl, big tits, highest_quality" into perchance.
>>771916Sounds to me those words describe you.
>>771918AI art is considered low status because it’s a new medium and it’s now considered cool to hate on new things.
AI still requires manual editing.
>>771846Idk. The way you all complain about others fashion and entertainment preferences as “bourgeois” or “lumpen” just because it doesn’t appeal to your aesthetics
>>771801I’m not a starving artists trying to get a cushy desk job.
I’m just saying that AI art is not as automated as you think.
By your logic, we could say CGI and PhotoShop is just machines doing all the work because humans just click and drag on points in pixel-space to get something that isn’t visually vomit-inducing
>>771945it's considered low status for lots of reasons.
it was invented by low (social) status people. rich (or at least comfortable) people, yes, but not people with any cultural capital.
it is primarily used by low social status people.
in particular, association with it is a very strong marker of having mad taste (or worse:
no taste.)
if elon musk and the million poorer people with his bad taste all fell in love with watercolors, you better believe watercolors would go out of fashion fast! (and, in the only remark i'll make on quality: the average amateur watercolor doesn't have half the offputting characteristics of the average AI slop.)
"it's a new medium" is unimpressive. mid-high status people had fun with (early) chatGPT (before it turned into the slop-prose generator it is today) and regularly enjoy new creative works (indeed, the defining feature of being high cultural capital is having good taste in new things! the low status of AI comes, in large part, because it credibly shows you've got bad taste - or worse still, no taste at all!). twitter was a new medium and they loved it! they invented entire modern genres of posting on it! (and in keeping with my theories: twitter's social status, too, has declined since it was taken over by a low cultural capital loser with more money than god.)
you are too wedded to the end product, not wedded enough to the sociology of it. even if we say you're right and people dislike it because it's new: tough! the taste-makers have spoken: it doesn't matter what the picture looks like - if you generated it with a tasteless method, it's a tasteless picture! "but it looks exactly the same as this tasteful picture!" - exactly what someone uncool enough to think it was ever about the picture in isolation, rather than as a social product, would say.
if you wanted to put a urinal in a gallery today you'd have to do far more work than the first guy (we love paperwork nowadays - maybe chatgpt can help draft the e-mails)
and you'd get none of the cudos. certainly, you wouldn't get a wikipedia article about how cool you are. but it's exactly the same as his tasteful urinal! his bitter, ammonia tasting urinal!
>>771945>N-NO Ulmao ok.
>>771947>it's not as automated as you thinkyeah it is. the vast majority of sloppers aren't artists in the traditional sense, they're just prompt monkeys who, like others have already purported, want the same legitimacy/social status as real artists.
>CGI and PhotoShop is just machines doing all the worknah, because photoshop is an image editing software that allows humans to take images (perhaps those that were created by AI) and edit them in various ways. it's a tool, it doesn't produce anything on its own. it's like a pair of fucking scissors. scissors are a tool, you can use them to cut a variety of things. in fact, it'd be more accurate to say that photoshop is a suite of digital tools that aid a competent human's handiwork.
AI isn't like that, it's an algorithm that takes large swathes of data and produces an output that is supposed to approximate, as closely as possible, elements from the dataset, (i.e. you give it billions of pictures of cats, it uses that data to produce images of cats) and then that output goes through a process of refinement whereby it's tested against an error detection algorithm that determines whether or not the output accurately represents the aforementioned elements from the dataset. it does this output-refinement process billions of times until it can accurately produce a desired image with as little errors as possible.
you as an end user make no contribution to this process, and you are in fact just a prompt monkey. now, if you take the resultant image, load it up into a digital suite of tools that a competent human can use to produce good handiwork (like, say, photoshop), and refine that image, then you have taken thus made a contribution to the resultant image's quality, but you didn't produce it.
it'd be like if I:
>read a book on how to grow crops>read another book on how to produce all of the components of every tool I'd need to develop arid land into a garden>read another book on how to build an oven>procured the materials required to develop the tools I'd need to tend to a garden>procured the materials required to develop oven components>used those tools to procure the materials required to produce said oven components and garden-maintenance resources>applied that knowledge to tend to my garden and grow wheat and apple trees>applied that knowledge to use the components I'd produced to build an oven>harvested and refined that wheat into flour>tended to the apple trees and harvested their fruit yield>used that flour to make dough>processed the apples to make pie filling>used the dough and pie filling to make a pie>used the oven to bake that pieand then your contribution consisted of using all of my resources to make another, similar pie, but you altered some superficial feature of the pie (aka you drew a smiley face in the dough with your finger)
Rich trust-fund kids managed to take away jobs of many and to decrease spending power, therefore decreasing the tax revenue needed to fund healthcare and welfare systems. So this is all to blame these greedy tech bros who fund many political parties in the West and getting contracts from governments under the hollow guarantees of security and efficiency.
>>771953You meant to say AI is “low cultural status” not merely “low social status”
Low social status would imply no money no friends
Low cultural status would imply you’re seen as the standard of uncool
ai slopper slopping on my dick absorbin all my semen
call that a data center(sperm isnide the center of their mouth, sperm is data)
>>771985good, this shit is disgusting
>>771985trees aint even real. as in natural trees. lowkirkenuinely all indigenous peoples planted forests over a millenium long bioengineering project that they kinda forgot about bc of settler colonialims messing w everyones flow
>have great idea
>tell your friends
>spend years crafting it the trad way (novel, game, doesn't matter)
>go to publish
>find out one of the people you told your idea to made it as AI slop effortlessly years ago
>feel morally superior for not using slop
>take 10x to do everything
>won't even use it for rough drafts, proposals, etc.
>the world adapts to the new tool like they always have
>you get left behind in your luddism and moralism
>in a couple of generations nobody will care because they won't know what a pre AI world was like
>you're basically a painter seething about photography, a sculptor seething about 3D modeling, a hand-copier seething about the printing press, all rolled into one
>>772025I mean I have used AI, but I can definitely see why it makes people mad. I don't think it's really comparable to the printing press when it's about creative works. Honestly the group shaming is effective so I can see why it is done. For example I had to go out and pay some Indonesian girl to draw my fursona because I knew people would bully me as a furry otherwise. So that is an artist that got work they might not have otherwise.
Kill yourself.
>>772050>you didn't make that, you just heated it upcorrect
>you're taking jobs from chefschefs are usually qualified to make a lot more than pizza, so the existence of frozen pizza doesn't really threaten their livelihoods. frozen pizza is just a low effort convenience, it doesn't even compete with or take market share from pizza restaurants.
>I wish there was some kind of machine that turned my thoughts directly into imagesAI doesn't do that, it has no way of knowing exactly what your ideas are, and even if it did, it'd still produce generic by-the-numbers derivative slop. at best, you can use it to spitball ideas, I guess, but sloppers want to churn out no effort sloppa and christen it as the highest art, equivalent to the mona lisa or something.
>can't wait for a future when we have…nobody, at any point in history, pined for a time when we had AIslop. what people wanted were autonomous robotics solutions that had some degree of human-like reasoning to whom we could delegate boring and unappealing but otherwise necessary tasks, while humans take the extra time they would've spent on said tasks to focus on more important things (like creating art).
>false equivalence between an what an actual artist does and what an algorithm doesbad faith! deliberately incendiary! retarded and undeserving of reply! and yet, I must explain the retardation: you see, human beings aren't machines that can use mathematical precision to replicate derivative works from another artist to the point that what they produce is indistinguishable from what the original artist produced. AI is what does that, so the same rules of "inspiration" don't apply. also, AI only creates derivative works, it doesn't make anything new. it needs a dataset and training, without that you have nothing, whereas humans can conceptualize even without reference objects or having been exposed to another artist's work.
>art is about expression>art is about making moneyfalse dichotomy, because art is both an avenue of human expression and a commodity
>>772052>I can't do art because…>art is inaccessible to the impairedyeah well so are many other things in life, and the disabled have my sympathy. also this is just you trying to brandish an issue like "accessibility" as a bludgeon to browbeat your detractors into considering that AIslop somehow exists as a net benefit for the 0.000000000001% of people who are disabled and unable to make art. be that as it may (it most likely is not), the downsides far outweigh any supposed benefits you can haphazardly pull out of your ass.
>treesyou know that wood from trees is used for a variety of things besides pencils and paper, right? you know that if every artist in the world stopped using pencils and paper, there'd still be an entire industry around deforestation in the name of getting lumber, right?
Daily reminder that the only people who seethe this much about AI slop and AI bros are literal commiepedotranshumanists who get by through making low quality fetish porn (pornslop? fetishslop?) and also that they were the people most excited by AI a decade ago because they thought it would replace all the shitlords, rednecks, KKKristofascists, breeders and other deplorables.
Hot take:
Ai art is art, and music is not.
Music you just consume and dont think about, atleast ai art can make you think
Unique IPs: 36