I just want to make funny Pictures.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    318 hours ago

    Because then artists aren’t getting paid but you’re still using their art. The AI isn’t making art for you just because you typed a prompt in. It got everything it needs to do that from artists.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      217 hours ago

      So it’s more of an ethical “someone somewhere is probably being plagiarized and that’s bad” thing and not really a business or pragmatic decision. I guess I can get that but can’t see many people following through with that.

      Some people got mad at a podcast I follow because they use AI generated episode covers. Which is funny because they absolutely wouldn’t be paying an artist for that work, it’d just be the same cover, so not like they switched from paying someone to not paying them.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        1
        edit-2
        9 hours ago

        The issue is similar to using other people’s data for profit. It’s easy to not feel that’s the case because “it’s the AI that does that, not me.”

        There’s a lot of concerns around it. Mine is that we have longer periods of style with minimal variety because of artist stagnation due to lack of financial backing. Though, this is for all gen AI as it depends on humans for progression, else it stagnates. People are already getting AI art fatigue because it feels like that old 2005–2015 Adobe Illustrato vector art everyone was doing, because it is. It was an incredibly popular and overused style back then, so itt’ brimming with it in comparison to other art styles it got from the internet. It already looks dated, but acceptable because it’s familiar to most. It depends on more artists progressing our art to be able to do the same. But it won’t do that as fast if art culture is slowed due to lack of support.