- Thread starter HotVenusStudios
- Start date
I am not going to get into the murky legality of using AI for art. I am simply going to point out that while the poster was sick of AI, you apparently missed the point that he was able to easily detect it as such because you missed the swollen hand and other typical AI artefacts that mark it as digital manipulation. No artist in their reight mind would allow an imperfection in their artwork to leave the studio. But here we are.If you dont like it, ignore it or report it, stop whining
I marked it as AI and i think partially AI is also a piece of Art
And if you go back and see the likes, emotes and reponses to my posts I am not the only one
True, he isn't. He's just piggybacking his work off of the stolen artwork of others.
I know we are coming close to the point where there will be enough lawsuits against AI that it will eventually result in a fairly enormous class action lawsuit - one that makes the cigarette lawsuits look liek small claims court. I think that after discovery is made to identify the specific artists whose work was used to train the AI, there will probably be a blanket rollout of payment for them up to that point. After that point, artists will hae to register to receive weekly/monthly payments [aka royalties] for any subsequent usage of their art, since it cannot be unlearned. Some artists will like the steady income, and others will take steps to prevent any future art from being used to train AI.
I think that the fallout from this is that AI artists will have to pay to develop art, but will no longer have the stigma of being considered thieves - which is exactly what it is currently.
I get it; not all people are artistically gifted. AI is a way for them to express themselves - and that is what Art is - self-expression. It's just that, right now, all AI artists have to go through the wringer for their art, and shut up about it.
Well, maybe not; Van Gogh gave an ear and most of his sanity for his art. Dickenson, Baldwin, and Michelangelo gave up having anything approaching a satisfying personal life. For AI artists, this is your cross to bear. Shut up and take it.
That subject of AI is sickening when we think about it.
Though I'm not here to rant about it, we just have to live with it unless you have the means to fight it.
And you can't fight it because Govs and Corps are encouraging it behind.
But personal opinion, we shouldn't call people "AI artist" unless the guy adds something artistic to it.
Otherwise it's not an artist.
Back in the times of famous old artists you mentioned there was also that same clash problem between artists who see art as a "form of expression" or a "therapy" and just throw paint randomly and sell it, and artists who really put their heart into it and passion to create something memorable. The problem is that the clubs of collectors favored the shitty pieces over the ones that really had value. And some artists didn't like it because it's not fair.
But at the end it's the market that votes, if the people consume shit, Corps will feed them shit. and that's why today everything decreases in quality because people don't want to use their minds, they just want to swallow any piece of poop that is shoved down their throat.
and so the AI is one of them.
My final verdict on this, people want to use AI fine, since the Govs and Corps are promoting it, then so be it but they shouldn't make money out of it. Because it kills actual jobs. But this last thing is not considered either by the last two + the public.
To each their turn. today Art, tomorrow a normal job won't be allowed to an average human.
where is the content cucks?
the fucker who complained about my 3D work before maybe can do some?
comon loser show me some
the fucker who complained about my 3D work before maybe can do some?
comon loser show me some