And others…
nah.
Go on, take your little robot pictures and fuck off
Ah yes, is that person in the room with us now?
Let’s just say, we had a thread where some people upvoted anti AI sentiments, and recently upvoted AI art in another thread.
I haven’t changed my opinion on my nuanced approach to GAN. But OP and I do feel an apology would be welcomed at the very least.
Let’s just say, I don’t know what you’re saying.
Not a problem. Not many folks are aware voting is public.
OP & I are just more self-conscious when we use public networks. Have a happy Cop30!
Ah so what you’re saying is you’re obsessed with this, possibly to an unhealthy extent, and you stalk people. Got it.
Why would I obsess over hypocrisy?
Isn’t normal people live hypocritical lives?I don’t know why you would obsess over this, you’ll have to figure that out for yourself, sorry.
I am not?🤷♀️
Still don’t know what point you’re trying to get across. Do you feel morally righteous by pointing out that people hold opinions that are not 100% reflected in their actions? Do you get a mega boner by pointing out that people are not infallible and are human, and that it is human to err?
You bring nothing of value to this conversation.
Is this about yourself?
Lumidaub asked a question, and I answered. Nothing more to this.
You didn’t answer their question at all.
The “anti-ai” threadiverse users are still using the threadiverse to upvote ai content.
Unless you’re not aware of the idiom.
The hell is wrong with people. It can’t even be art by the very definition of art. It’s literally just lifeless pixel mush done by nobody, showing nothing, meaning nothing.
I’d like to agree, but:
around works utilizing creative or imaginative talents
[…]
generally through an expression of emotional power, conceptual ideas, technical proficiency, or beauty.
[…]
There is no generally agreed definition of what constitutes art, and its interpretation has varied greatly throughout history and across cultures.
There is creativity needed to come up with a general idea of what you want to generate. Imagining prompts and workflows is more of a technical requirement than a “creativity” one, but this is part of the definition above. Programming e.g. needs creativity as well, in the form of abstracting real world objects and their behaviour in a formal language.
Would a caveman consider an oilpainting not to be art just because the tools have changed over time?That being said, generative AI is illegitimately built on top of the output of all humanity. This and the sheer amount of low effort slop out there is probably why people refuse to acknowledge it as “Art”. But there has been art which constitutes a high level of craftsmanship one the one side, and so to speak sloppy art before this as well.
It also needs insufferable amounts of energy and most of the infrastructure is in the hands of ~5 big corporations. This may change when the bubble pops and inference hardware gets available comprehensively.
We opened Pandoras box, there is no way back.
We opened Pandoras box, there is no way back.
Sooner or later people would have opened this Pandora’s box anyway, since they have been trying to do this for a long time, since the 80s, if not earlier.
60s*
Which is why I find some folks in the Lisp community incredibly hypocritical.
Yes, lately I’m becoming more and more disillusioned in people.
The thing is, most people don’t care who did it, as long as it looks beautiful and perfect.
People care about content and satisfying their needs; they don’t care about other people.
