Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

billytiger t1_izah0is wrote

Reply to comment by Alexandertheape in What do you think of all the recent very vocal detractors of AI generated art? by razorbeamz

That’s absolutely untrue. They are angry about corporations stealing their artistic innovation and using it for profit and without credit. They trained for years to develop style, they made it their livelihoods. UBI isn’t the issue. They should be getting royalties. The computers didn’t generate these ideas.

8

LevelWriting t1_izawxhg wrote

by that logic most artists need to give royalties to other artists they copied to learn from. no artists is created in a vacuum. its pure fear and money, end of. if you create art and love it, and people love your art too, why would you care so much what a robot does? I love to draw and couldnt care less about ai art, no matter how good it gets. I also see people saying this is a tool and have to say it is not. A tool is what you use to help you, this pretty much replaces the doing entirely. an artist doesnt create just for the final result, its also about the process. I love to see my progress over time, what Im capable of. I'll always follow and appreciate art from my favorite artists but I also think its so silly how some of them are waging this war against ai.

8

billytiger t1_izdb16b wrote

A.i. isn’t creating or inventing a style, it’s mimicking a style that was R&D’d by an artist. That cost time and money and should be compensated.

3

CannaCrunch t1_izdebr7 wrote

When A.I. combines styles in ways that haven't been done before I'd say it is creating a new style.

0

Agreeable_Bid7037 t1_izdkyub wrote

artists should use the A.I. to make their art better instead of complaining. Whether they complain or not people will still use A.I.

0

LevelWriting t1_izf15no wrote

I can understand when it specifically mimics an artist exactly but when they use a ton of different sources, it's no different than what an artist does.

0