I think it’s important to remember that any grotesque thing AI makes us is still drawing exclusively from human made examples. There’s no aspect of what AI image generators generate that isn’t derived from humans.
No, but taking most of the collected creative works humanity has ever digitized and distributed electronically and literally making an engine to compile it and puke out ai generated derivative human works on demand certainly is.
Trying to commoditize and mass produce the intrinsically elusive spark of human creativity is the height of vanity, and the often horrific results of it aren’t at all surprising.
Yeah, because a guy eating pizza at the beach would be the pinnacle of human creativity otherwise.
Humans are mostly not creative, they copy and adapt what they’ve already seen. Don’t jerk yourself too hard, otherwise you’ll create Pollock paintings from chaffing.
These guys will jerk off to their moral superiority on this subject for years to come, it’s best to just ignore it and move along and do whatever the hell you feel like with the technology that’s available to you if it makes you happy and doesn’t hurt anyone (inb4 IT’S LITERALLY KILLING ARTISTS IN THE STREETS!)
Shall we at least admit that it’s ability to make utilitarian images for use by people making creative commons content like Indy games, YouTube videos, instruction courses, online education tools and similar which we all benefit from is a great thing and worth celebrating.
I think it’s important to remember that any grotesque thing AI makes us is still drawing exclusively from human made examples. There’s no aspect of what AI image generators generate that isn’t derived from humans.
These images are monuments to humanity’s vanity.
Calm down.
Is every painting, drawing, story, etc. ever created by anyone ‘a monument to humanity’s vanity’?
No, but taking most of the collected creative works humanity has ever digitized and distributed electronically and literally making an engine to compile it and puke out ai generated derivative human works on demand certainly is.
Trying to commoditize and mass produce the intrinsically elusive spark of human creativity is the height of vanity, and the often horrific results of it aren’t at all surprising.
Yeah, because a guy eating pizza at the beach would be the pinnacle of human creativity otherwise.
Humans are mostly not creative, they copy and adapt what they’ve already seen. Don’t jerk yourself too hard, otherwise you’ll create Pollock paintings from chaffing.
These guys will jerk off to their moral superiority on this subject for years to come, it’s best to just ignore it and move along and do whatever the hell you feel like with the technology that’s available to you if it makes you happy and doesn’t hurt anyone (inb4 IT’S LITERALLY KILLING ARTISTS IN THE STREETS!)
Shall we at least admit that it’s ability to make utilitarian images for use by people making creative commons content like Indy games, YouTube videos, instruction courses, online education tools and similar which we all benefit from is a great thing and worth celebrating.
I disagree.
Using tools such as Stable Diffusion is like asking a malicious compliante genie a wish.
You have to account for all the “bad” things and use negative prompts for the things that you don’t want, eg: “ulgy, deformed, extra limbs”
The aberrations don’t really need to come from the training data itself, but are produced when content is generated with it.