• bridgeenjoyer@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Really sucks this ruined everything. I have no motivation for art or music because anything made in this era is suspect now and no one has any integrity. Why even release music when people probably won’t even listen to something that new. Should have stopped in 2012 boys.

    • racemaniac@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      20 minutes ago

      Honest question, but is your only goal for for example music to put it online? I play music, an obvious goal of it is to play it for other people, and what does AI matter? They see me play the instrument and that’s the problem solved.

    • GalacticGrapefruit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 minutes ago

      Artist here. I don’t draw because I’m good at it. Or because other people are better at it than me.

      I do it because I like it. A lot.

      It makes me happy to be able to take something from my own brain and make it real enough that others can see it. I don’t want to make a career out of it or anything. But being able to draw things for my friends for Christmas or birthdays is something that makes them happy. Drawing my own assets for games I’m programming, or sketching dumb stickers for friend group in-jokes on Discord is satisfying.

      Please keep drawing. Please keep making music. You don’t have to make anybody happy other than yourself. It’s as normal an expression of humanity as dancing or singing.

  • Seth Taylor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Literal fucking nightmare

    Makes me want to never release anything ever again

    (I’m not on Meta. I mean anywhere)

    • MinnesotaGoddam@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      16 minutes ago

      i’m not sure what art you do specifically, but release it out of spite. directly to people who can appreciate it. please.

      skip the internet.

      i would love to see/hear it

    • GalacticGrapefruit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 minutes ago

      Please keep making things. Art for art’s sake is a noble calling. Posting it is just icing on the cake, it’s the act of creation and the feeling you get from it that really matters. So don’t stop doing it.

  • internetisnotthesame@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Wait until for them to close your account with the pretext of “your account has violated our community guidelines”, no legal justification whatsoever if some people decide to spam that report button lol stop using these bullshit platforms that see you as nothing but a number. Hell, you might be earning your life through Instagram or YouTube, and all it takes for them to delete your years of content is pressing one button.

  • pulsewidth@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    202
    ·
    11 hours ago

    I bet this is because LLMs stole her art for training, so now that the LLM users have pumped out thousands of slop-art aping hers down to the colour palate and brushstrokes, her originals also get identified as also AI.

    • PostaL@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      27 minutes ago

      If that’s the case, everything on Instagram, heck, the internet, would be labeled as AI …

    • Ex Nummis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      69
      ·
      10 hours ago

      This is exactly it. Also the reason that inputting an excerpt of a classical text (cfr. Dracula, Frankenstein, …) returns “likely AI” results - it’s literally what it was trained on.

    • HappyFrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 hours ago

      While I don’t think you’re entirely wrong, I feel like this sentiment will lead people to believing AI content checkers more. The content checkers are wrong even for newer stuff. I always default to believing something is human made because I never want to accuse a real artist for using AI.

      • OrteilGenou@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        6 hours ago

        I don’t follow, if content checkers are wrong for not being able to tell original art from AI slop because they have been trained on datasets that include the original art, why wouldn’t they also be wrong for the same reason on newer art? They would still likely absorb that newer art into their datasets.

        Okay after writing it out I get what you mean, but I am thinking that the turnaround time of absorbing new art, using it to produce AI slop requests a few dozen/hundred/million times, and then calling the original works AI because the AI sloptificator can no longer tell the difference will be a constant, unless there is some way to track OC across multiple AI agents in the panslopticon.

        • HappyFrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          6 hours ago

          AI content checkers will always be wrong. They’ll always sometimes flag non-AI images as AI and AI images as human made some percentage of the time. I don’t want artists to have to prove that their art is real, I want them to be able to make and share the content they want.

          • OrteilGenou@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 hour ago

            I agree, I am not sure how they can do this… Maybe release original art work with some kind of 2FA QR code to verify authenticity to the original author? That probably wouldn’t work but you get my drift.

    • ඞmir@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      56
      ·
      8 hours ago

      LLMs don’t steal art for training, image generation models are fed datasets by humans, which are then invoked by LLMs when prompted

        • ඞmir@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          20
          ·
          5 hours ago

          No, words have meanings, I hate AI as much as the average lemming but “LLMs stole art” is just a horrible way to describe what actually happened. It makes it sound like LLMs are going rogue and collecting art themselves. Humans decided to train an image generation model specifically on art like the one in the OP, and just glued an LLM on top of the final model. LLMs are not the ones that do this. I wasn’t even trying to defend anything or anyone here, but I guess this place is too toxic to even use correct phrasing.

          • MinnesotaGoddam@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            12 minutes ago

            “LLMs stole art” is shorthand for “the people who made the LLMs stole the art and put it into their datasets to generate shitty images”. we don’t want to type that every time.

          • Doom@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            14 minutes ago

            I fully agree with you that humans are the culprit here. And you’re right, words do have meaning. So I’m going to point out you took an active action “stealing” to the passive voices “fed” and “invoked” and “trained.” Yet you never said humans “stole.” Because they did. They are thieves who are stealing and profiting on other people’s intellectual property. Even if other commenters can’t name why they are upset, that’s why. It’s the same thing that pisses people when news articles do the same thing depending on which groups they are talking about. Without meaning to your language soften when you talked about the human actions for the exact same acts. It’s a bias. One I’m sure you’re not aware you’re doing. I’ve honestly noticed a lot of people doing it. We all need to work on recognizing when we are unnecessarily softening our language for any group in power. We need to call them out for the thieving shitheads that they are with bold language. “Billionaires are stealing art.” Because they fucking are.

          • TrickDacy@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            3 hours ago

            I guess this place is too toxic to even use correct phrasing.

            I feel you on a daily basis here, however I do think you could consider what the tone of your first response was like. There are a lot of AI supporters out there and I genuinely think you sounded like one there.

            • ඞmir@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              3 hours ago

              Yeah I considered editing it after the first response but had better things to. Karma doesn’t exist on Lemmy anyways.

          • Jtotheb@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            16
            ·
            5 hours ago

            But you could have said something along the lines of “LLM companies steal data, don’t accidentally give credence to the marketing idea that these things are sentient”

            • Test_Tickles@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              3 hours ago

              The irony of him complaining about inaccuracy and lack of clarity in someones post, but being so inaccurate and unclear with his complaint is just… amazing.

  • smiletolerantly@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    9 hours ago

    I had never heard of the artist before, and if you haven’t either, I cannot recommend giving her website a visit enough.

    Insanely talented and really unique style.

  • Ech@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    78
    ·
    11 hours ago

    The back edge of generated content that I don’t see a lot of discussion about is mislabeling real content, accidentally or not. It’s gonna have a monumental affect on how we consume media, even for those that want to avoid it.

    • f314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      44
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Yep, this is the most important threat of Gen AI in my opinion. The erosion of trust, and the following devaluation of truth, is already hurting society so much. And it will only get worse.

      Remember, it’s not just «did someone actually paint this?». It is also «did this actually happen?» and «did they actually say that?».

      • bridgeenjoyer@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        4 hours ago

        10000%. Its really ruined everything. So many people like myself are just sticking to media made before 2018 ish. I follow very few artists today that I know are fully legit, but have zero trust for the majority.

        Thats OK. I was listening to 60s music in the 90s so I was always an old fart.

      • LycanGalen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        27
        ·
        8 hours ago

        A promotional image I created for a local queer rally was deemed “AI” by the community (the image was actually the result of me sacrificing 8 hours of sleep.) The vitriol I was hit with, including one of my fellow committee members passive aggressively implying I was lying about it not being AI, was enough to make me no longer want to volunteer my time or skills for my own community.

        Which is really fucking shitty. The increased lateral attacks happening because of Gen-AI pitting us against one another benefits those fucks at the top, and they didn’t even have to work for it.

        • internetisnotthesame@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          4 hours ago

          +1. I was releasing free fucking music for indie devs who didn’t have budget or limited budget for this kinda stuff, some mf on reddit who was selling his music saw this, contacted admins to claim it was made via AI, then they took the post down without doing any investigation or even contacting me. Labeled as made with AI. I’ve worked in the industry for over 10 years, there’s literally 0 reason for me to use AI to make music lol From that point onward I just pulled out all of my free libraries from public, if it’s that easy to mislabel somebody’s hard work, and only give the download codes for free for people who did contact me personally and that I was sure they were actually building something.

          • internetisnotthesame@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            4 hours ago

            Then they’ll claim that video of you doing the work is also generated via AI. There’s no way of convincing your regular joe once they made their mind up.

            • lawks@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 hours ago

              Though people will claim that, creating very long, consistent, and physically-accurate videos is beyond the capability or budget constraints of publicly available models, for now.

              • internetisnotthesame@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 hours ago

                I see your point and would like to add, the issue is, some people are like bricks. Like, you could get a more logical reaction(!) from a brick than these people. You could literally paint something in front of them, and they’d still claim it’s not your own work. Like, there’s no way of proving your innocence/righteousness, no matter what evidence you put in front of them. I can not wrap my head how we can communicate with these people.

    • inlandempire@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      53
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Even caught myself mislabelling real art a few times, ai has destroyed our trust in genuine human stuff

    • Fawkes@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Then maybe stop treating it like a purity signal wielded like a weapon, and judge content based on its actual quality?

      I know it’s a radical idea. But artists can use AI and also be fully emotionally invested in the process. Other artists can choose to use no AI at all. And some can even make interesting pieces that would be literally impossible without it.

      Aim your ire at corruption and greed. Not the concept itself.

      • jve@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 hours ago

        some can even make interesting pieces that would be *literally* impossible without it.

        Got a “for instance”?

        • Fawkes@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          https://m.youtube.com/@ChloeVSHistory

          First one that comes to mind, but I’m sure there are more.

          Could this be made without AI? Yes, of course it could. But it would require a HUGE budget, and an entire studio dedicated to it.

          Is the creator hiding the fact it was AI gen? No, of course not. Would I prefer it be created with studio quality and real actors with real props? Absolutely I would. But absent that, this is still a really cool project.

          • jve@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            3 hours ago

            Could this be made without AI? Yes, of course it could. But it would require a HUGE budget, and an entire studio dedicated to it.

            Got it. So not literally impossible.

            • Fawkes@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              32 minutes ago

              So is the argument that restricting people’s creativity to only be expressed if you have the finances to do so, a good thing?

              Because it is indeed literally impossible for the average person to create this without that technology.

    • ParadoxSeahorse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      There are interesting signing processes in software being done for photography in camera to help combat this, ironically some utilise machine learning as part of the process. I wonder if something similar could be done for digital art

    • ladybugs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Lots of “AI detector” tools for both images and text are AI, yes. People using them don’t realize the irony because everyone wants so badly to believe there’s a way to stop all the AI fakers.

      edit: please, someone come up with an actually reliable way to detect AI art, something that’s not based on probabilities that will be skewed by real artists having their art used to train AI

        • Axolotl@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 hours ago

          Text is trickier but for now the major signs are

          • corporate speech
          • “it’s not X — it’s Y”
          • em dashes used in the wrong place

          There are others but i can think only of those rn

    • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      47
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 hours ago

      This doesn’t work for artists who need to make a living. The art-buying audience is not on the platforms you are talking about.

      • bort@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        artists can make a living from insta? (please assume I am very out-of-the-loop in regards to instagram and modern art stuff)

        • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 minutes ago

          It’s not that the money comes directly through Instagram, it’s that the artist grows their audience through Instagram. The benefit is the size of the potential audience pool.

          A lot of time has to be spent marketing yourself, unfortunately. To find people who are willing to pay you for your art, you have to be present, you have to be visible. You could be the most talented artist in the world, but if nobody sees your work it won’t matter, you’ll die in obscurity, penniless.

          • bort@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 hour ago

            like artist post cool stuff on insta and put a link to their etsy in their profile?

            I seriously cant image the average insta doomscroller to stay long enough on a thing to notice that. I cant image there is enough money their to make it worth the effort, for the artist

      • Turret3857@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Instagram also needs to “make a living”. They do that by making your life as an artist harder. You have to make a choice between using software that respects you and having a smaller following, or using a platform that, in every way that you can imagine, is abusing you.

            • Lumidaub@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              12
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              9 hours ago

              “You chose one of two possible bullshit options, now stop complaining that the result is bullshit.”

            • CerebralHawks@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              7 hours ago

              Then they gotta, as the saying goes, lay in the bed they made, except they’re (helping) making it for others, too.

              They want the benefit of the privacy-respecting network, they want the exposure of the artist-hostile network, but they don’t want to contribute to bringing their audience to the privacy-respecting network. That choice is 100% on them, then.

              • waterwasamistake@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                3 hours ago

                I think we should put the blame where it belongs. Insta and all other plattforms have massive amounts of power and reach. They make more money from their users than the other way around. Its also not just artists livlyhoods on the line. With that level of power we need to inforce respinsibillity as well.

                Your plan does simply not work. Just like you are not comsuming solely ethical products so does everyone else. “personal responsibility” IS what these companies want you to believe the solution is when we KNOW it is not.

                There will not be enough people leaving to make a difference IF enough people would leave to theoretically make a differnce than the new place gets either sold to the bigger company OR sued OR banned since they are basically our politicians bosses. You can’t fight these things with “personal choices”

                We should always stand with the people with us in the mud and demand responsibillity from those who have actual power. Just assume that everybidy in your class is doing their best and will probably be more deserving of your support. They want you to blame the creators don’t help them.

              • TrickDacy@lemmy.worldM
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                6 hours ago

                Yeah artists don’t have it hard enough already, let’s victim blame them for trying to use tools that used to be less hostile.

    • Gullible@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      12 hours ago

      They’d probably be distinctly socially liberal and full of Linux nerds. But who would want that?

  • Saapas@piefed.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    10 hours ago

    It’s the same issue with people, there’s a shitload of vibe based accusations of AI over stuff people have actually made, written, whatever. Some AI stuff has that certain look and sometimes writes a certain way, but that’s stuff that people do, that’s why AI does it too. It’s just ending up mimicking people.

    Don’t personally like that certain style, whether it was made by a human or not tbh.