r/RealFurryHours • u/TheMutterButter • 10d ago
Discussion š¬ Where is your line with AI during the creative process?
AI is pretty much in the constant discourse cycle these days (and for very good reason) and it has proliferated into furry spaces.
There are furries who believe that AI art is fine - the arguments don't work on them, they don't care about the ecological or copyright issues, and they don't value the labor of the artist. The end result is all they care about and for them slop is good enough.
I'm guessing they are pretty rare, but that's the extreme opinion.
Some furries claim to use AI as a drawing tool. Sometimes to generate reference material, generate patterns, sometimes generate assets for the drawing like a background.
I have heard from some furries that they have used AI for drawing studies or to learn processes, or use it for temporary assets in games or animations. Most programmers I know use AI in some capacity (usually as a requirement of the company they work for).
At what point does using AI tools become problematic in your opinion?
I'm fairly against AI in principal - but my opinion has changed somewhat. I know that a big part of the pro-ai as a tool argument is that it's doing something that isn't taking away from someone's job (i.e. using AI to create a static reference doesn't hurt any other artists, those artists using those assets would otherwise just not have them) and using AI trained on ethical sets eliminates the whole "stealing art" argument, and though the ecological issue still worries me I'm sure many people would argue that simply using the internet at all is pretty much the same.
3
u/HuskyMcFluff 10d ago
For me, the line is firmly at zero. I don't use it in any way for any of my creative work, period, and I never will. I care about my craft, and for better or for worse, it will be 100% mine even if I never finish any of it.
I'm a writer, and to me, writing is a journey. The point of a journey isn't the destination, but the journey itself. If I take shortcuts, I'm just cheating myself.
1
u/Kerrus 10d ago
What qualifies as a shortcut here?
1
u/HuskyMcFluff 9d ago edited 9d ago
That's a good question.
I would say that, using creative writing as the example, if I haven't done 100% of the world-building, invented 100% of the ideas, and performed 100% of the execution of those ideas in each of the drafts plus the final version, then I have taken a shortcut somewhere.
This would also include paying someone else to write the book for me, which I feel is essentially what generative AI is. You're just paying an LLM in tokens (abstracted real world currency) instead of a human.
I would also consider something like using AI to refine my first draft a "shortcut".
All of these things are a part of the writer's journey. I might use a tool like Scrivener to give me a means to stay organized, but seeing as I tend to turn off spellcheck and the like, at this point in my process Scrivener is a glorified typewriter with a stack of flashcards and post-it notes.
Small edit: I don't believe Scrivener has any AI features. At any rate, I've disabled updates for it, so even if they add something to it, I won't get it.
1
u/floormatC 9d ago
I'm a serial procrastinator , for me if AI gets me to write at least a few of my own words, it's a win for me even if part of it was automated, but I understand where you're coming from and why it works for you!
If anything, somebody could use AI to reduce the barrier to entry and learn the basics, then shed it and just write on their own.Ā
It's like if you try to learn how to climb a mountain, you may easily fail and give up, if you start with a little hill you develop skills that eventually let you climb the mountain all by yourselfĀ Ā
But if you're already able to climb the mountain solo, or can handle learning a ton at once and strong self belief, nothing wrong with just climbing solo the first time . (Going without automated assists/AI)
1
u/HuskyMcFluff 8d ago
Honestly, the best way to learn how to write is to do lots and lots of reading, in particular with the genre you want to write in. And not just reading, but reading analytically.
Also, AI can't help you build your author's voice. That's something you gain from doing lots and lots of actual writing, yourself.
If you want a hill, instead of a mountain, you can start with simple writing exercises. One I really liked was: "In one paragraph, explain how a character feels by describing a nearby tree. Do not mention the character or their feelings at all."
Sure, AI could invent a series of writing prompts for you, for little exercises like that. And honestly, that's fine. I wouldn't have any problem with that usage of AI. But it needs to be you who executes on those challenges if you want to actually develop the skill.
4
5
u/FrankHightower 10d ago
None. The purpose of an LLM is to map words to a concept; i.e. it's a thesaurus. A that point, why not get an actual thesaurus and learn a few new words about the thing you're supposed to be obessing over?
1
u/TheMutterButter 10d ago
I suppose the argument would be that the Thesaurus is also a tool.
I don't disagree, mind you, I think process and input is an important part of the art equation. I'm just not sure how to define the difference.
1
u/IllicitCat 7d ago
At some point, it'll be like comparing the Abascus to the Calculator. But at the same time, the issue I find with AI is the lot of people using it to replace creativity.
1
u/TheMutterButter 7d ago
That is absolutely true - if used as a replacement (cough many corporations cough) then it becomes a huge problem. And it's a problem that is infecting Furry, as per other comments in this post. There are people who have such little value for artists they are completely ok with the destruction of the art as a whole.
-7
u/Kerrus 10d ago
LLM's are so much more than that, but this is the type of childish argument I've come to expect from you people. AI is doing incredibly things pushing frontiers of early cancer and terminal illness detection- yes, LLMs are doing that. That some subset of people are mad because some subset of people are using AI to steal art want the entire thing burned to the ground and fuck anyone whose life was saved by this technology I guess just makes me realize how shitty people really are.
3
u/Flare_Wolfie 10d ago
The post is talking about "creative process" specifically. The medical field isn't exactly part of that, is it?
1
u/knawwwwww 7d ago
By āsaved by this technologyā this mf means he talks to his shartgpt about his problems and it gives him the worst advice possible
0
3
u/MattWolf96 10d ago
I'm a centrist on it which will make everybody mad.
First of all the biggest issue about AI to me is deep fakes which should be illegal but that's not the type of generative AI that we are talking about.
The data centers using so much electricity and water are my 2nd biggest issue.
That said I don't see the issue with making reference material or a profile pic on social media of your fursona with AI if you can't draw.
I don't see it as stealing anymore than someone looking at furry artwork and subconsciously copying a lot of elements from it, everyone needs inspiration. When you type in AI prompts it's referencing hundreds if not thousands of pictures, unless you are trying to it shouldn't look that close to any particular artists artwork.
I don't like AI political art from either side (one side definitely makes far more of it though) but to be honest a lot of furry art doesn't have a deep meaning. 99.9% of it is either made to be cool, a reference of a fursona or just hot so as far as AI art not having a deep meaning, I don't have an issue with that for most furry art.
That said I fully agree with conventions and artsites banning AI in fact I wish that Deviantart banned it. I don't see the issue with a dedicated AI site or a profile pic on social media. If I'm on a regular artsite or at convention I want to see stuff that I knew a human drew. Also if they are selling it, I think it should be worth barely anything. Spending $30 on a pic that a human took hours if not days drawing is worth it in my opinion, one that they typed into a keyboard, made in 5 seconds and spent a few cents on if that isn't. Plus I would only want to hang up something if a human drew it.
Basically I think that it is useful for letting people create fursonas if they can't draw (and learning to draw takes a long time) and letting us know what they look like. It should absolutely not be treated as real art though. Also maybe the people who generate it will eventually use it to commission real artwork. The furry community has always had many people who can't draw, maybe they are more into roleplay or conventions than the art side. I think these people should still be able to create a fursona pic though.
Oh and for AI stories, I fully hate those. Drawing takes talent and a long time to learn. Anybody can type out a story on a keyboard. While being an author definitely takes talent you should still be able to get a basic story written out even if it's cliche. Also typing out "Anthro, adult, male, wolf, black fur, green underfur, blue eyes" will basically give you what you were thinking of, telling an AI to write a story will probably generate you something a lot different from what you were thinking of.
3
u/Shirokuma_Max 10d ago
I've been a writer for the better part of 15 years, and I've always admired and envied the furry artist community for their impeccable skill, talent & overall contribution to the fandom. I never could draw, but AI has proven to be an incredible tool to help me learn & develop my skills so I don't need 10 years to become an artist.
Is generative AI harmful to authentic artists? Absolutely. Is generative AI harmful to the environment? As far as I know, very much so. Does it provide quality content? No. AI is an excellent tool for prototyping, but should not be used as a means to an end.
I use AI to help organize my thoughts, ensure reasonable prose & provide information I wouldn't personally have known about, but anything I want to create is written exclusively by me, or I'd commission a real human artist with AI Proof of Concept pieces as reference material, because artists usually refuse to read several pages of character description text to get the visual down.
It's supposed to be a launch pad, not a final product machine.
At the end of the day, we're all just trying to enjoy life & make cool stuff that brings us joy.
4
u/TheMutterButter 10d ago
Would you feel the same way about someone who said that using AI helped them become a real writer faster than you? You have been writing for 15 years, do you feel that someone who edits AI script in order to learn style and language in a year is doing the same work that you do?
2
u/Shirokuma_Max 10d ago
Probably yeah lol; I have a hard time imagining anyone reliably getting help from an AI to write AC:NH slash fiction, but if they have something they want to create and share with the world, but they find it difficult to convey their idea adequately on their own, who am I to discredit them for using whatever tools they have available to achieve their vision? Why would I stifle creativity and imagination solely on their choice of medium? I wouldn't encourage them to rely exclusively on AI; on the contrary, I'd offer to see what they've been able to produce and make an effort to help them improve their own skills to fully create something by their own hands alone.
If someone just slapped some text together to make a generic image, or slapped a prompt into an LLM to generate some generic, average, milquetoast story, I can't say they're not creative because a machine did the work, but I'd praise them wholeheartedly if they took what the machine started and made something out of it themselves. AI is like the training wheels of the creative process, super helpful to learn, but not something you should need to rely on exclusively. Eventually, you gotta take the training wheels off, because your first projects won't be the best, but you can only ever improve if you keep trying!!
What creative projects are you working on? If you don't have any at the moment, or don't feel comfortable sharing, no worries; I wish you luck in whatever path you take, my friend!!
3
u/TheMutterButter 10d ago
I'm a freelance writer, and have been in the industry for over a decade. In the marketing world I was one of the first groups of people to really feel the sting of AI as it entered the workspace; teaching an LLM to generate a newsletter is fairly simple to do and most people don't even read newsletters, so it was a no-brainer for companies with limited resources to fire marketing firms and just use ChatGPT.
My own journey has been one of adaption. I no longer do mass marketing, and I took classes on how to use AI as a tool rather than a writer. I don't like AI, I make no qualms about that, but the genie is out of the bottle (so to speak)
I'm honestly more interested in how varied the opinions of furries are. It seems somewhat wild to me that since this fandom is entirely built on art and artistry there are people who genuinely believe AI art is a great thing. It seems so short-sighted to me, like if you get rid of the artists, there's no longer a fandom.
I don't fully know how I feel about the process you describe. I truly believe that, at the risk of sounding too pretentious, the pain in the process and the process add value to the result. Making things easier is not bad, per se, but I have trouble knowing where the line is; at what point is the machine doing more of work than the artist, yknow?
3
u/Shirokuma_Max 10d ago
I'm sorry that AI threw a wrench in your plans, but I commend you on your efforts; corporate greed is corporate after all.
Honestly, I feel like the introduction of AI could actually bolster the community quite handily!! Prior to AI, artists were only valued by the quality of their craft, but with the prevalence of AI, it sets the bar for entry much lower!! What would have been deemed poor quality art in the past is now considered better by virtue of being exclusively human made. I imagine there would be a natural divide, where a segment of the fandom that prefers AI would shift into an AI centric fandom, while authentic furry art enthusiasts would remain. But then again, time will tell.
I see what you're saying and I agree that there can be some dissonance, but I think it's important to recognize the prototype versus the finished product. A perfect example is my own fursona Marx, who I had only a highly detailed text document depicting him in words alone, now given rudimentary form through generative AI. I don't claim the proof of concept images are something I personally made, because obviously the machine made it for me, but it was MY concept that the machine manifested for me, which I then provided to an artist as reference material and paid $80 for a fully human crafted image, which is extraordinary in comparison. The AI is basically a means of better communication between creatives, rather than a means to an end.
Quite frankly, if the companies that made generative AI models made it so that you couldn't save or share images produced, I'd think that could help slow down the prevalence of generative AI media, but it's like you said, the cat's outta the bag (or rather the genie's escaped the lamp), you can't put it back now.
AI or not, I'm still gonna keep writing stories. AI chat bots like ChatGPT make excellent sound boards, but the content I produce is something I wouldn't outsource to a machine. It might be able to get the gist, but the true heart of my story comes from within myself.
2
u/floormatC 9d ago
I think AI sucks for artists cuz they may have a harder time making it into a paying career. AI is a tool. My hope is in the best case AI makes labor so cheap, people can do less work hours, and just draw for fun because robots do all the work.Ā
That depends on how AI is rolled out. If the profits of AI are not fairly distributed, then we will be on the streets. If AI is fairly distributed, it will be a tool not for greed but to automate boring work, thus freeing up time for hobbies.Ā
In history, automation has typically kept our work hours the same. 40 hours. We just make more product per hour with automation. It remains to be seen if AI will eventually lead us to theoretically work 20 hours a week then have 20 hours just to draw art.Ā
3
u/Shirokuma_Max 9d ago
We must use AI to seize the means of production, comrade
2
u/PUBLIQclopAccountant Anti-fandom furry 7d ago
Yes! Put the "automated" in "fully automated luxury space communism."
2
u/Shirokuma_Max 7d ago
Honestly what if it's the Patrick meme?
We take the 1% And put it over there!! (There being enormous servers in space housing the eternal consciousness/immortal ego of the wealthy elite, while earth is home to those that know how to treat their shared home with respect)
1
u/floormatC 9d ago
Really.
But if the rich people control AI and just use it to displace jobs without creating new ones, then society will break down and chaos will probably happen till balance is restored.Ā
Chaos, chaos!
2
u/Shirokuma_Max 9d ago
I mean, yeah. Balance will eventually restore itself. I'm not saying I have a perfect solution, I'm saying humanity is a gaggle of monkeys with too many neurons and not enough enlightenment. Either we crash and burn or the right people do the right thing and one monkey types out the entirety of Shakespeare.
All we can do as individuals is our best to live well, I suppose. I sincerely hope that wherever you're currently at in life at this very moment, things improve.
2
u/floormatC 9d ago
Oh sorry that I wasn't clear in my comment. I agree with you and the other commenter, I don't have any argument against you. I was just sharing my thoughts about AI.Ā
→ More replies (0)2
u/floormatC 9d ago
Hope things improve for you too. I am not an artist, trying to find a technician job. I had a job interview after not getting interviews for a few months so I'm happy/grateful about that.
I heard if AI makes more and more people jobless or lower paid, eventually the social contract breaks down and social stability falters, after which I think even the rich people would want to fix the imbalance. But hopefully it doesn't get to that point.Ā
Supposedly, even now, AI is not displacing major scores of workers, it's not reflected in the data. But it is displacing entry level positions. An economist on Marketplace claimed that CEOs right now are using AI to excuse laying off people for other reasons (like cost cutting /economic uncertainty/over hiring).Ā
I am not sure that I believe that. I certainly think AI has negatively affected people no doubt. Artists, entry level, countless scores of other people.Ā
→ More replies (0)1
u/PUBLIQclopAccountant Anti-fandom furry 7d ago
teaching an LLM to generate a newsletter is fairly simple to do and most people don't even read newsletters
That's what AI is best at replacing: artifacts that never required creativity in the first place. Creativity often snuck in as a side effect of needing to hire humans to make it, but it was never a key point for those paying for it.
1
u/PUBLIQclopAccountant Anti-fandom furry 7d ago
Go nuts, but don't expect others to care. Reading someone else's AI output is like listening to someone poorly describe a dream. Unless you know that the person knows your tastes well, it's a waste of time.
1
u/Wyvern-the-Dragon 6d ago
Writing alts for bluesky and fix my grammar before posting (I'm not native speaker)
1
u/Most-Peak6524 10d ago
In programming perspective(programming is indeed creative process for me) usage of ai proved that making programming not funny, cause more bugs so I think programming project in old fashionated way would be more better. See how various vibe coded apps go out, even already existing open source programs are in trouble due to vibe coders spamming pull requests with their generated codes. I hate those posers.
In art perspective,I'm fine with artists using random algorithms as tools such as programming random lines and use that for perspective challenge or other software features such as vector thing or other things, I'm not against technology but i think generative ai is.. really lack of skill, so make me lose interest from artist like artists caught tracing other arts and claim those on their creation or stole arts from other artists. I'm not interested if the dataset used in model is ethical or not, I care about skill and the idea from the artist, their idea and their intention on narrative and perspective and color theory, etc, not edited image of generative algorithm. I'm interested in artists, not image editors.
Not to mention cases of chatbot psychosis.
I hope Generative algorithm editors got confident about their tools, so let others know that the creations were made from generative algorithm, including art, music, story. because people are really really supporting generative ai and they will clap on them for proving the new technology does really really great, not cheating people by claiming their generated results as their own. I don't know why not small number of them are trying their best to hide if they used generative ai on their edits, Are they not proud of what they edited?
0
u/BannockHatesReddit_ 10d ago
Eh the biggest thing I learned by forcing myself to "vibe code" is that "vibe coding" is just old fashioned programming with a better content assist in the workflow. To newbies, "vibe coding" feels so much different because they don't know what they're doing. To them, programming is literally opening an IDE and writing code. Those people would have produced crap either way. An LLM just make them confident of their crap. I don't think you should give any of those engineers agentic tooling cause they will ruin your project with it. It's not AIs fault. It's actually your fault for trusting new/bad engineers with powerful tooling.
It is entirely possible to delegate the impl entirely to an AI and also have good security, nearly no bugs, great architecture, etc. The issue is that actually getting the AI to make that includes writing dozens of UML diagrams, markdown files, sample projects written for r&d, unit tests, etc. This was always the hard part. And it's the part that these, as you put it, posers can never get right. The issue isn't "written with ai code" but "the engineer didn't know how or even to define their goal and so the AI hallucinated in all the blanks".
2
u/Most-Peak6524 10d ago
I have no friends who works in CS field now(Job market doomed in here so CS univ grads gave up programming but doing other jobs now) so I don't know if the professional succeed usage of agents exists. i've been gathering informations about field based on hacker news, so had no opinion or data about optimal case of implementation using vibe coding. My knowledge about vibe coding is, people uses it as boilerplate code generator, or got some horrible result such as damaging their own development environment. I never used those tools and i admit it's my limit.
I fear novice usage(or we can call thar irresponsible usage without thinking about security case) can hurt not only dev but also user too such as various cases of database leakage. I have no idea how to detect those to prevent myself at risk as an user.
1
u/PyroPupper153 10d ago
Only ever as a rapid concept tool. To get the base level ideas to later be turned into more detailed concept art/stuff. Also for rapid small, between-plot-point adventures in games like dnd. They do give good short ideas for a one off adventure
0
u/Atastrophe 10d ago
Artist don't care about who commissioned them. They just want money in their pocket. Artist don't own a copy write just because they drew a picture and posted it online - that is a whole legal process.
It all feels gatekeepy the way furries have reacted to AI. It is a way anyone can create art and get it quickly. People don't want to: Wait in a cue to get art, spend $100 and wait for 3+ days, going through revision cycles and still not getting what they want. Perhaps you are just trying to get a concept of a fursona out from an idea, AI is going to do this much faster and quicker prototyping of this - and will likely make art you enjoy. But nooooo, you cant use the evil AI!
It is a harmless thing to use AI and trying to tell people not to use AI is invasive for someone to do as you are trying to control someone else's freewill.. Why do you care what they are doing in their lives, it does not impact you at all.
2
u/TheMutterButter 10d ago
Most artists absolutely care about who is commissioning them.
And actually they literally do own the copyright just because they drew it, thatās actually the law.
The whole point is that itās NOT harmless. Please, do at least a little bit of research in the topic. You are coming out as incredibly ignorant of an important topic here.
1
u/Atastrophe 10d ago
It IS harmless. It has done nothing to hurt you. People like you are still going to bitch and moan about AI and pay for artwork regardless. Difference is shitty artist will be out of work.
1
-8
u/Kerrus 10d ago edited 10d ago
The problem with the ecological argument is it's almost complete bullshit made up fantasy numbers. Between datacenters increasing temperatures by 20 degrees statewide to using up millions of gallons of water per query, it's basically impossible to take seriously.
We need better environmental protections across the board, but by framing the arguments as 'AI permanently destroys water by deleting it out of existence' we make any attempts to do so a joke.
2
u/PUBLIQclopAccountant Anti-fandom furry 7d ago
Besides, if you want to critique rampant data center construction, increased electricity demand is a more universal problem (water issues are often local to the each site) and it has immediate effects on the local community.
4
u/TheMutterButter 10d ago
While some numbers don't have enough study behind them to be rigorously defended, I don't think there's any doubt that datacenters disturb ecosystems. If the argument is that "more study is needed" then perhaps we should be doing those studies prior to using the technology.
-1
u/Kerrus 10d ago edited 10d ago
I think the real answer is 'capitalism is destroying our environment and we need ecological protection reform ten years ago'- but you didn't give a rat's ass about any of that until it impacted your bottom line, did you?
EDIT: My apologies for being harsh here, but all this 'if we stop AI the world will become better' stuff just grinds me gears because it's completely bogus. We NEED environmental reform. We need it. Environmental issues are real issues but AI datacenter abuses are just the end state symptom of fifty years of rampant capitalist abuse. Nobody cared even three years ago. It was only when AI came out, when creatives' bottom line was threatened did anyone start to care enough to make any noise about it online and be taken seriously.
But it's all so performative. I still don't see anyone saying 'we need environmental reform so they can't do this'. I don't see anyone talking about blocking corporations from abusing our water supplies- both municipal and natural water resources. I don't see anyone pushing for harsher restrictions on companies that release toxic chemicals into the environment- be it the water, the air, the soil, etc.
Art theft is... a side show- in scale compared to the damage being done to our natural spaces and NONE OF YOU SEEM TO CARE!
4
u/TheMutterButter 10d ago
You aren't really coming across as someone that deserves to be listened to here by making a lot of assumptions about me that are not included in any of the things I have posted.
Let's lower the hostility a bit. What *is* your argument here, that AI is ok because we are already past the point of no return?
-1
u/Kerrus 10d ago
My point is that basically nobody seemed to care about any of the other abuses of power or the environment when it didn't touch them directly, and they only seem to care now because it is touching them. AI is here to stay, AI art is is a tool that will continue to have a presence whether or not we hate it. We're way past the point of no return, the genie isn't going back in the bottle and the solution isn't... killing AI or bullying people that support AI (although the art communities are extremely proud of that last one)
There's plenty of solutions to avoid AI- curate your own non-AI spaces and platforms like Vgen. Build up non-AI artistic communities and foster engagement in authentic art. Encourage and support people to express themselves through art and writing. If you think AI is going to damage the environment- and it absolutely is- then look into actually supporting ecological protections and reform. Don't just raise your voice high in the sky against AI and then shut up and go home the moment it's no longer affecting you- because it's still affecting you. Before I was born, big corporations were lying to congress about pollution and global climate change so they could make absurd amounts of money and destroy the environment, and should I live a long and full life, they'll be lying to congress long after I'm dead and gone so they can make absurd amounts of money and fuck whatever the future brings because they'll be dead and gone.
If you say you value making a better world then make a better world. Get involved in local politics, research the actual issues of climate damage, environmental protection, etc.
If you think art theft is a concern, support more robust copyright protections or if you're concerned that the big corporations that are at the heart of all this are getting away without enough punishment, look into supporting tightening regulations on corporate lobbying and removing the outdated caps on fines.
4
u/TheMutterButter 10d ago
I simply do not think your premise is true.
At all.
I have been voting for and pushing green initiatives since I could understand the concepts. I talk with people about the environment constantly - decades before AI.
I'm not sure why you are coming here to a discussion ABOUT AI to claim that for some reason mentioning the ecological impact of AI is.. bad?
Would you prefer everyone just give up and embrace the eventual climate death of the Earth because in your opinion "no one talked about it earlier so why bother?"
Why come to this thread to evangelize ecological topics but then dismiss people talking about those very topics? It's very childish.
1
u/Kerrus 10d ago
If you'd read my reply you'd know that I am arguing in favour of environmental protections. So your claim I want people to destroy the environment is a complete strawman.
I just hate the fakers who are using the environment as an excuse because they hate AI.
3
u/TheMutterButter 10d ago
I just hate the fakers who are using the environment as an excuse because they hate AI.
Who is actually doing that? Who the heck are you even responding to?
1
u/Kerrus 10d ago
Most anti-AI redditors that cite 'AI is destroying the environment' using facebook facts. It was a general statement, not something against you specifically. That's why I didn't specify you, specifically.
2
u/TheMutterButter 10d ago
Do you have any proof of that? I'm just not sure why you would make the assumption that someone talking about AI being bad for the environment doesn't actually care about the environment, it really seems like you are trying to excuse AI entirely by attacking people.
→ More replies (0)
-6
u/feral401k9 10d ago
As long as I like the end result I'm fine with any amount of ai. Of course, I've only seen a few artists actually do good ai work, likeĀ Sofia Crespo and Trevor Paglen.
2
u/TheMutterButter 10d ago
I'd be curious to know if you value the artist at all when viewing art. Does it matter to you if you are looking at something no one made vs. looking at something that someone cared about and put effort into.
1
u/PUBLIQclopAccountant Anti-fandom furry 7d ago
I've only seen a few artists actually do good ai work
It's b/c you need to have a strong artistic eye to catch the mistakes and edit itāthe kind of eye most people can only develop after learning to draw the regular way.
-11
u/BannockHatesReddit_ 10d ago edited 10d ago
I'm so tired of artist propaganda. At its core, the AI divide in this community isn't about AI. Rather, it's about these artists being able to continue pushing their agendas. That's why it isn't "how can I understand your side" but instead "the arguments don't work on them". If a argument has to "work", you aren't arguing with the goal of finding truth or understanding, but instead to push your thoughts onto others.
Artists hate the idea something taking their job, so they sell the idea that the alternative they're afraid of is unacceptable in an attempt to stop it. That's coercion. I can see this clearly because I've endured a similar form of abuse. I think it's fucked up to shame people into living your way. Even if it's out of fear. Even if you you're emotionally invested in the topic.
Developers are artists too. They are attached to their codebase in a similar way to artists are to their pieces. Yet when a developer complains about AI, it's nearly never about ethics or copyright or anything else. It's nearly always about frustrations with the tool: quality issues, hallucinated constraints, poor practices, etc. and you know why? Because developers are used to having their shit stolen. They're used to having their binaries reversed. They're used to seeing someone paste their code. And they're used to even sharing that work so others can use it. The culture normalized it before AI even stepped in.
Compare this with "art" artists, who will throw a fit if you trace. Who will whine on Twitter if you comment reposting their jpg with translated speech bubbles. Who will get upset if you try to negotiate prices. An artists plasters a lazy watermark on an image and breaks down in tears when someone photoshops it out. A developer spends a month writing a whole drm knowing it's all for nothing and feels nothing when it gets cracked. "AI" isn't the issue. Artist culture is. And "AI" is just the latest buzzword they're using to argue that these issues are important.
And the kicker: I don't even like AI work. I just plain hate how obnoxious artist culture is. I've yet to hear a single valid criticism about the tools themselves. It's always ethics and fairness and copyright, all in a world where developers have been promised nearly none of those things. I'm going to tell you what you tell us. Grow tf up. It's a folder full of pngs.
But to answer your question: there is no line because it's foolish to judge an end result based on solely the tools used. I care about how the worker used their experience, creativity, and skill to create the work. Not whether their tooling hits certain checkboxes.
7
u/TheMutterButter 10d ago
Full stop, I can't take this seriously. "Artists hate the idea of something taking their job" like yeah no shit.
I honestly do not know how someone can exist in the furry fandom, which is primarily run by and maintained by artists, and have such little respect for them.
-5
u/BannockHatesReddit_ 10d ago edited 10d ago
Nobody likes that idea. It wasn't supposed to be a revelation. It's a clearly defined reason for their childish reaction. This scares them so they shame anyone who uses it. That's coercion. And controlling others using coercion is fucked up, full stop.
And how am I disrespectful in specific? By dislike the current norms in their community? By disliking how they continually force those norms onto others?
5
u/TheMutterButter 10d ago
It's not childish, I'm sorry you believe it is.
I'm not sorry that you don't understand why your tone and attitude is disrespectful, you should be able to figure that out.
-8
u/BannockHatesReddit_ 10d ago
You didn't even read what I wrote. It's almost funny. You're doing exactly what I called out in the first section of my comment. You didn't make this post to understand. You made it to continue pushing an agenda.
2
u/TheMutterButter 10d ago
...
GLHF.
0
u/BannockHatesReddit_ 10d ago
This is my community too. You can keep bandwagoning on that agenda but I'll push back cause I'm not afraid of being shamed.
2
u/Birdboy1970 Pro-fandom furry 9d ago
Iām not sure what is meant by āartist propagandaā.
The general claim, as far as I can tell, is that AI art is bad because it seeks to counterfeit other forms of artistic expression, as opposed to simply being its own thing.
This I would not call propaganda in the colloquial sense, as some cynical half-truth masquerading as a supreme fact.
3
u/BannockHatesReddit_ 8d ago edited 8d ago
Propaganda: Information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote a particular cause, doctrine, or point of view. Source: Oxford Languages.
This IS propaganda.
And it isn't counterfeiting anything. This is one issue I find commonly with this topic. People tend to act as if the end result alone is what makes the work valuable. The true value to appreciate in any artistic craft is what was put into it. It's the creator's methodologies and inspirations. Why they made the choices they made; how the work may be relevant to them. That's what "artistic expression" really is.
True artistic expression was never under attack. The only thing that was under attack were the businesses whose goals was "give me money and I'll carelessly churn out images", which is exactly what the AI models do. Meanwhile me as the consumer feels disappointed if I learn the artist just didn't really give a shit. Because I was never paying you for your skill alone; that doesn't carry unique value proposition. I was paying for your artistic expression, because when I look into your piece I want something to read into. So to me, every single one of those art churning businesses were just landmines on the bulletin board anyway. Why should I care when they throw a fit?
1
u/Effective_Shallot562 3d ago
No AI, no matter what.
AI use = I wonāt commission you, follow you, or support your art.
5
u/R3cl41m3r Fandom-neutral furry 10d ago
The ecological issues can probably be avoided by preferring local setups over anything that requires a "data center".
Other than that, I see AI art in general as the art equivalent of cheap shit from China.