This is big and may completely change the scene. Anti's previous claim that "AI works can't be copyrighted" may now be completely invalid seeing as AIs now have a legal identity (in China at least)

Heres my complete take on genai and what people should probably realize (in terms of why ai art does not recieve near the same praise).

I do not fully understand how and why someone who gens claims to be an artist, I do not claim to be an artist when I commision work, which is effectively what you guys are doing. I do not fully understand how and why someone who gens claims the ai piece is their art when the effort is very minimal.

I do not hate people who use Genai, as long as you arent claiming to be the artist and are using your own hardware for it, I do not entirely see the issue, I know a lot of artists have started using ai as proof of concept, which I feel is relatively valid as long as you are not straight copying that.

I always see the argument "its the result or the imagination of the person that counts, rather than the work", I wholly disagree with this argument. People hone their skills for months or even years to make quality art, even digital artists, musicians, trad artists, 3d modelers, animators, etc... And when they work on a piece real tactile effort is being put forth that takes time to do, you cant just whip up a great piece in 30 minutes unless you are absurdly talented. people spend hours to days on pieces because they have the passion and effort to do so. Using AI to skip this process (I know you can make extenuos prompts, upscale, detail, difuse, etc... which takes some time I guess), makes the overall value and reputation of the piece arguably go down as the same time was not nearly invested as if it was an actual art piece. You effectively undermine the process that people have peinstakenly worked to master, which just puts a sour taste in peoples mouth. So it is no wonder you recieve backlash or not near as much praise for the ai piece, because you didnt invest the time, so dont expect the same praise.

Time and time again, I see the "digital art initially wasn't accepted" argument, which although true, you still have to put forth a lot of time and tactile effort into your piece. Digital art was relatively similar to trad art, just with a bit more knicks and knacks, but you still spend the time and effort on the piece, just as you would a trad piece. Ai only requires you to type a prompt and maybe set up some nodes, which is a whole lot easier and less time consuming than any actual art piece would take. This goes back to that point of undermining the process, you are just skipping that effort that is required for a relatively succesful piece in hopes of the same result.

This is why you can see people praise a piece, as they presume it was made with effort and time, but then backtrack and potentially berate when they find out it was ai that made it as there is nowhere near the same effort. To an everyday person, the effort may not matter as much, but for investors and actual artists, the effort adds to the value of the piece as you know it took time and grit for it. This is the same principal for actual art in many cases, people will see a piece that took say 30-50 hours and it will recieve a ton of praise, where a piece that took 1-5 hours would likely not see the same ammount of praise.

You can refine your prompts, refine your program, but ultimately your improvements rely soley on the new models that come out, you can find certain ways to improve that, but at the end of the day, you are stuck to programs. Artists are not and are constantly improving their skillset with every piece, which is extremely impressive and respectable compared to a generator shilling out the same style stuff of same quality all the time till the coders behind it push out a new model. You are also stuck to the program, an artist can use almost any medium which allows for further improvement.

TL:DR: Dont expect the same praise if you gen, as you have not put the same time or effort towards your piece.

Also as my last note, to pro ai people (not all but a lot of you), hiding behind oppressed minorities to try and seem oppressed yourself or gain sympathy points is a poor play and choice.

I mean, if you're going to do that at least use AI to remaster it. The original CGI is showing it's age.

Also, did no one notice the anatomy of that thigh muscle? Talk about slop.

I'm not saying this simply because of some stupid "ai overlord", infact, I want to preface that this opinion is based on the idea that AI DOES remain in human hands. I also want to preface that I quite enjoy AI, I just don't see how this won't result in the deaths of millions (namely thanks to jobs).

AI will inevitably take many jobs. The AI companies a rushing towards a "Super Intelligence" that can do effectively anything. It's no secret, they say it themselves. As AI gets more and more insurmountably intelligent, humans will naturally fall off in terms of utility.

There always seems to be a sentiment of "oh but factories didn't" or "we'll find a way" or "it will bring us infinite resources" but quite frankly I think this is wishful thinking.

Factories only affected one area of human jobs: "manufacturing". It did take jobs away from "designing", "planning", "maintaining", "marketing", etc. etc. etc. AI does all of these and can handle itself, and if you have any doubt about massive job loss, take a look at anthropic's own research regarding the future of AI and jobs.

I need not remind any of you that we live in a world about "playing the game (of capitalism)", there is no marginal benefit to giving any individual peasant free stuff or "infinite resources". If you cannot recognize the ever increasing prices of necessities and subtle loss of all ownership you must not be deserving of the natures pattern recognition whatsoever. Also thats socialism. SOCIALISM IS NOT HAPPENING.

The ONLY post that has come close to explaining anything was one that stated that "it'll be a total restructuring of the economy where anyone will be able to make materials and the corporations will be deprivatized" but that in and of itself is quite delusional.

In a future where "Super Intelligence" is superior to humans in every aspect (INCLUDING LEADING, THERE ARE NO "MINI CEOS") and robots are capable of doing 99% of human tasks, power will inevitably centralize around computing power and manufacturing capacity (tldr ability to house ai and ability to produce robots), of which your average human beings have neither, and are actively being stripped of their assets for a future of no ownership.

You will have no power, 50% of the Populus will have no income, the powerful have no wishes and no reason to keep you alive, and if you are in the bottom 60% you will become what's effectively an erased permanent underclass. Millions will die and considering the population goals published by the largest governments themselves that is of no concern of the government either.

At least thats my opinion, explain how im wrong if possible im all ears.

Title basically.

Am kind of curious, for the anti-AI folks who are fine with vibe coding and vibecoded apps, what happened to those arguments? Obviously LLMs are far worse on all 3 factors.

I've seen that the photoshop clones/reverse engineered apps that are being developed are getting support from quite a few anti-ai foolks too, even though they are directly tied to having the issues with theft/jobs/environmental factors. Are we thinking that theft/jobs/environmental arguments just stopped mattering in the past few weeks/months or whatever?

This sub is a bit of a mess. For what its worth, i'm not anti. I like vibecoding and have 0 idea how to write anything outside of html/css. I wouldn't expect anybody to call me a developer.

But for the image gen people, do you want to be seen as artists? or just not evil/scum?

Because I can agree with the latter but the former is a "have your cake and eat it too" stretch. When the learning curve is a flat line you're probably not going to get any praise for your execution, but you can still have interesting and unique ideas.

Same goes with vibecoding. Chances are every app, page and site i've made is built inefficiently, over complicated and buggy. I would expect 0 respect from actual developers, even the general public probably wont be impressed with my creations, but I still have fun doing it, really thats all that matters.

I think the internet is a loud place for "Antis", the real outside world cares a whole lot less, for most people AI images aren't evil or something they take offense to seeing, just that its boring. People know when something is AI, seeing it gives you a disappointing, nothing feeling. Not outrage.

It's an episode of Star Trek: Next Generation called "When the Bough Breaks" and in this scene, this kid is given a laser carving tool that effectively reads his mind and translates it into what he wants the sculpture to be.

It conveyed the idea that skill wasn't a barrier to creativity. At least that's how I interpreted the nature of the tool.

Then you have Data and the Holodeck.... and a miriad of other technologies that reflect the kinds of things that LLMs and image generation are capable of.

It was genuinely inspiring.

And so much of the criticism of AI is based on the idea of "theft" and "theft" only exists when resources are scarce and we live in a capitalist society that demands that we trade pieces of paper to represent effort and work.

I honestly, believe that if a post-scarcity society existed, we would stop seeing what AI is doing as theft and it's just yet another tool that we have in our tool box to use or not use as our choosing.

Maybe a kid has an idea of sculpting a dolphin before the necessary 20 years of skills development... and after a while, maybe he decides he wants to develop those skills so he can feel more connected to the material that he's working with.

It's up to him.

Anyway. Just wanted to share.

As neutral, I'm getting tired of *some* people trying to force everyone to respect their work even if they used AI for the process.

"But I only used AI for part of it, don't boycott me just because of the tool."

It's just about as silly as an Anti trying to force you not to use AI at all.

By using AI (especially for visuals) you are voluntarily cutting a portion of your potential consumer base, there's no point in complaining about it.

https://apnews.com/article/kroger-layoffs-grocery-job-cuts-30f0a5d88377e9969ce8994644e14498

Grocery store chain Kroger said it will lay off 3,000 corporate employees over the next three years as it ramps up its use of artificial intelligence to streamline operations.

“Technology is reshaping what’s possible,” CEO Greg Foran wrote in a memo to employees on Monday. “The way work gets done is changing across every industry; we must adapt and take advantage of technology. We need to adopt capabilities, reduce duplicative work and look closely at where work is best fit to be done.”

My personal philosophy is never to gamble with something you aren't willing to lose. I'm an X-Com player, so I'm well aware a 99% shot isn't guaranteed. I am generally pro-ai but, if there is even a 0.000000000.....1% chance that AI obliterates us, why take that chance?

I guess I just don't understand why we need AGI rather than hyper-specialized AI. If I have a robot nanny, I don't need it do to my taxes or recite ancient literature; I just need it to do very basic tasks. So, if AGI has a chance of wiping us out, I just don't understand why we don't used assorted hyper-specialized AIs that aren't *capable* of taking us out.

Made with Edit pro on PixAI

Are there pro AI people obsessed with anti AI people and keep egging them on, pestering them and invading their spaces? Sure. Of course.
But antis seem just way too obsessed with the other side and the vast majority of it comes from their side. It's not equal at all, it's almost all from the anti side.

Any pro AI space has antis in it. Like a LOT of them. Sometimes, depending on the sub, they make up more than half. They are in quite literally every pro AI space on the entire internet and they're only there to berate and insult you and say the same things they've said a trillion times at this point.
They're in this one, because it's for both sides. It's a coin toss what you're going to get here. Sometimes they'll swarm posts and literally all you will get in the replies is antis telling you how stupid you are and downvoting the fuck out of you. I've had it happen to me here multiple times, I just happened to get unlucky and boom everyone clicking on my post is an anti.

They claim they're only in pro AI spaces "because this shit keeps popping up in my feed" but they also keep interacting with it, clicking on it and making replies, so I don't believe that excuse. I'm pro AI, and when I see an anti AI sub, I usually just mark it as not interested. Guess what, because I didn't interact with it, it goes away and it takes a good while before I see the next one.

And then the stuff they post is just... the same things over and over and over again, endlessly regurgitated. It's very ironic how they hate AI because they think all it does is regurgitate things humans made again and again, but the majority of what they type online is:
AI SLOP
You're destroying the planet
("your ai slop bores me")
AI SLOP
AI SLOP
We can survive without AI but we can't survive without water
AI SLOP
At least I have a brain and don't need AI to do everything for me LOL
Why don't you just ask ChatGPT to explain it for you, dumbass
AI SLOP
get this worthless ai garbage out of here
AI SLOP
AI SLOP

Then when you look into their spaces it's just constant bitching and complaining about pro AI people and making fun of them. (Yes I understand I'm doing that right now from the other side, but I wouldn't call it hypocrisy because it's not all I post.)
When you look at art posts there's a lot of anti AI sentiment even when AI isn't even involved in anything whatsoever there. Someone will make art and put a little sticker of AI crossed out in the corner and then you get people in the replies going FUCK AI and getting awards and upvoted.

Then there's a sub for "deslopping" ai generated images that now has a trend because they all got ragebaited super fucking hard from one lazy AI image. This one

They got baited so fucking hard by this and got so mad over it that they started a whole trend of deslopping it with their own art, to then try and burn pro AI people with
"Maybe I draw like shit, but at least I draw"
"Maybe I draw like shit, but at least I don't use AI"

They're trying so hard to ragebait back but almost nobody that's pro AI even looks at the sub.
So it's kind of this one way thing where they keep getting ragebaited by pro AI people, trying to ragebait them back but they just do not care because they don't even see it.

Some of the art over there is pretty cool though.

Subs that have absolutely nothing to do with AI in any capacity will have them making anti AI posts, getting tons of upvotes and awards and it's just out of nowhere. I saw a post on the Winnie the Pooh sub of all things that was all the characters looking mad and disappointed with text like "When you find out bro is using ChatGPT"
And then the replies were what you would expect with FUCK AI and all that.
In the Winnie the Pooh sub. Out of nowhere. Just because. Why?

Then I'll be scrolling around Reddit and come across a sub for Ultrakill. Oh hey lemme scroll around this a bit. Find an image of V1 with the text "I may be a machine but even I fucking hate AI."
Then I happen upon a Warhammer sub a few days later and get an image of some space marines with the text "GLORY TO THE EMPEROR AND DEATH TO AI"

They just cannot stop thinking about it. They are constantly thinking about it, constantly posting about it, wanting to turn every space into an anti AI space and always going around looking for pros to insult and tell that they're evil and destroying the planet and we'll all die of thirst because of them. Even places that semi coexist with pro AI people, where the pro AI people aren't even being inflammatory or insulting to them, they'll suddenly start making posts about how the mods need to start getting rid of the pro AI guys and ban AI in the sub entirely.

I very rarely see pro AI people be mean and insulting and bully the other side. Does it happen? Yeah like I said at the start, of course it does, and of course some pro AI spaces has those dumbass "break the pencil" morons that nobody wants. But the extent of it is substantially less than antis, like by an enormous degree.

tl;dr, antis are obsessed with AI and pro AI people online and they need to chill the hell out and stop making it their entire personality.

There's the triple belt, the weird chest design.
Not to mention its not quite looking like Engel either!

I want this to be real! If it is Claude is hilarious.

https://already-clean.goodfire.com/

“I think I have good news about the nature of neural networks.”

“After many months studying neurons and circuits in image and language models, I’ve come to believe a network’s own mechanisms are its legible building blocks, and that the outlook for mechanistic interpretability may be far better than I’d feared. The canonical evidence of polysemanticity and superposition that convinced much of the field, including me, that networks pack concepts arbitrarily was misread. What looked like arbitrary packing was mostly a motif I’ll call recursive generalization, which is much less concerning. This means we can study networks directly, instead of first untangling them. Neural networks are already clean.”

Alright, this makes the existential dread levels fall a bit. However, now we need to worry about how mankind directs this technology more so than in obliterating us with hyper competence/ hyper literalism/ hyper indifference

So, with the good news, what do you all think about future prospects now? More “good” and “acceptable” futures now are within reach as understanding of these minds as they grow more intelligent won’t be a runaway issue.

​

The pic originally implies that AI art is not art/it is bad, because "microwave" is expected to automatically have negative implications (here: no expertise, no flavour),

I think there's some truth in the metaphor, but not in the way mentioned in the pic.

The similarity is that a microwave oven is a fucking tool.

To heat food.

That's it.

A talented person can make a delicious meal even if they utilize a microwave for a few steps. Maybe they are able to create unique dishes that can only be done with the help of a microwave.

Maybe we don't need to eat at a 5 star restaurant every day. Antis have microwaves in their homes too, and use it when they don't have the time, strength, effort etc. But using AI is somehow suddenly heresy.

And we haven't even talked about some microwave food actually being nice. Sometimes you are in the mood for a cup ramen, a mug muffin, your favorite leftovers.

This anti-ai purism that blindly rejects anything related to AI is exactly so backwards and hindering to society. I don't think AI is perfect and there's definitely things to be done about it differently, but picking something useful, sensible, handy, and judging and rejecting it based on some arbitrary personal double standard shit is just so dumb.

What are AI fans doing on Reddit? Why spend so much time reading and writing when you could just make a forum for agents, with agents communicating on their behalf? Strange thing..

A Catholic archbishop in Belarus recently blessed an AI-assisted image of Saint Carlo Acutis, and some believers aren't happy about it.

What's interesting is that the artwork wasn't simply generated by typing a prompt. Three people, including a prompt engineer, designer and photographer, contributed to its creation using AI and other digital tools.

Some critics argue that AI-generated images shouldn't be used for religious devotion. But that raises an interesting question about what makes art authentic in the first place.

If humans are involved in the creative process, at what point does AI assistance supposedly invalidate the work?

And does the answer change when the artwork has religious or cultural significance?

I'm curious how both pro-AI and anti-AI people here would approach this. Is the objection really about the technology, the creative process, or the context in which the artwork is used?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2oH1NACBgS4