digitalnuisance @ digitalnuisance @lemm.ee Posts 0Comments 16Joined 3 wk. ago
Or maybe perhaps people on social media don't have a goddam idea what they're talking about? That is, you know, also a possibility...
Suck my dick from the back. There, happy?
I don't care; they can downvote away. People on social media are stupid, which is demonstrated by the fact that if you read the rest of my replies, you'd see that I agree with Miyazaki, but also that everyone is interpreting what he was saying incorrectly by ignoring half of what he said, which is ACTUALLY disrespectful to the man. The important context in what he said was that an AI would not be able to replicate the expression of pain his friend felt via animation like a human who understands pain and emotions could, and THAT is why he found it offensive to life. There is a giant difference between that and using AI in your workflow to improve your efficiency so that you can focus more on the important creative bits, which is what Miyazaki was clearly referring to as being what he cared about.
So yeah, dumbasses online not being able to read context or critically think from their social media complaint armchairs don't have any sway on my opinion when I have a decade of real-world experience being an artist for a living on them.
no u
super funny that everyone calling me a bot weirdly said the exact same kinds of things because they thought I was "self-censoring". Who's the bot here?
Dude, did you even read the article I linked? You train your AI models on databases of your OWN ART. That's literally the only way it works properly. Otherwise it would just be a mishmash of different styles that don't fit whatever it is you're trying to do.
Even the point you're trying to make doesn't make sense, and it's being addressed in the exact same article:
"Smith agrees with all artists who don’t want their work to be used for training different AI tools. At the same time, he thinks that we should be prepared that lawyers will argue that the process of AI training is similar to how real artists learn from other people’s work."
He then compared the AI to the bombs activated by Ozymandias at the end of Watchmen. This has already happened, and artists now should realize how to deal with the outcome.
of a tool it can be in ideation and pre-production, as well as inspiration and other things. It also already has your data. Moving your images to another site isn’t going to stop the scrape. Nothing will until laws are passed and enforced. ArtStation knows this.
— Ryan James Smith (@OverdrawXYZ) December 18, 2022
That’s why Smith thinks that artists should learn how to use AI as soon as possible. “It is a tool just like anything else, and when time = money, knowing how to effectively use powerful tools will make you a showstopper in this industry,” he noted. “And having the added bonus of being able to actually art direct these things will make you more powerful, not obsolete.”
All art is derivative. Pandora's box is open. Either learn to leverage it in creative ways or get left behind. That's the unfortunate reality.
My dude has no idea how gamedev works at the AAA level. It's not that simple, smartass. You can be fully staffed, with outsourcers and even have contract workers and still have to crunch; there are a limited number of people who know how to build certain proprietary systems on this earth, and having limits on your budget and having to pivot major parts of your game late in development are both extremely common things. This is why custom efficiency tools are made in the first place, to make highly competent people with rare skill sets and with limited time more efficient. The solution isn't "hurr durr just throw more people and money at the problem". Having a larger number of developers without the proper skillsets (because those are the only other people on the job market you can feasibly hire to staff up) can actually make a project take MORE time, not less, believe it or not. This is why coder interview processes have, like, 4 or 5 phases at some companies. You're handing somebody the keys to the kingdom (for a fairly large paycheck, no less) and they might accidentally burn down the castle with you in it if they're not the right fit for whatever it is you're working on.
So yeah, AI art is not all bad. Please sit down.
Gonna guess you don't make art for a living.
Please do a little bit of reading before you go saying stupid things.
He hated people taking humanity out of art, which is what is actually disrespectful here. AI being used as an efficiency tool to remove the more tedious, time-consuming and less creativity-intensive aspects of making art is not the same thing as letting AI write/animate an entire movie for you, which I do agree is an affront to the concept of human art.
Idk, why did your dad yell "gawk gawk gawk" last night when he was gargling my balls?
I understand what you're saying, that the job market is a lot of luck and can be unfair. But it does sound like they need to keep trying. Every determined, talented person I've seen enter my industry (gamedev, an industry at the bleeding edge of ai art as a technology) has done so after hundreds of rejected applications and eventually broken in. Is it fair? Not at all. Will you eventually have your value recognized if you keep at it long enough and keep honing your craft? Absolutely. The difficult part lies in not burning out and quitting during the agonizingly grueling process of breaking in, which I can sympathize with, as I've gone through it myself. I have seen many people end up down that route, but the thing everybody on that route shared was that they didn't care enough about doing art to just keep on trying despite whatever circumstances they had thrown at them, which is just an unfortunate reality. And yes, for what it's worth, AI is absolutely making that process more frustrating.
His reply doesn't disagree with anything I said. Using AI to enhance your creativity and do work more efficiently is not the same as letting the AI do the actually creative/artistic bits for you, which seems to be the thing he's upset at in that clip.
Looks like I made somebody upset for sharing the opinion I was calling out.
"Aw man, some person used an AI filter to quickly make a cute picture of themselves as a couple! Guess they should ride the sewer slide. Anybody who uses any AI whatsoever should krill themselves, otherwise there will be exactly zero human beings that still prefer art made with human hands, expertise and creativity!" ~ Dipshits all over social media
FFS, they're not taking your job, they used an AI on their own photo to do a cute thing that they're not going to sell. If you're a good artist, you WILL find work. I make art for a living myself (and am paid quite well for it), and on occasion I use AI tools to make my workflow more efficient while still doing most of the difficult bits (such as, idk, CREATIVITY) myself. This all-or-nothing approach the internet has to AI in art is unbelievably annoying and pretentious, and reeks of that classic armchair critic stench. God, people sure do like to post extremely dumb shit to make themselves feel better, even up to and including stuff that essentially amounts to saying "kys" in response to someone using a glorified Snapchat filter.
Good. Let the stupids hit the darwinian great filter of "figure out how to make an account with more than 2 brain cells" and never make it here. Will hopefully mitigate yet another eternal September.
The devil came to JOHNNY, not the other way around. The moral of the story is not that it is possible to beat the devil out of ego or for glory, but that even the devil could not defeat a man completely dedicated to his pure, uncorrupted love for a craft. It's not a story about Johnny's hubris winning out, it's a story about the respect one should have for genuine passion when it is lovingly applied to creativity. It is a story about the indomitable human spirit.
But okay, America bad or whatever, sure.
silent hill protagonist