this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2024
1313 points (95.8% liked)
Science Memes
10348 readers
2011 users here now
Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!
A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.
Rules
- Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
- Keep it rooted (on topic).
- No spam.
- Infographics welcome, get schooled.
Research Committee
Other Mander Communities
Science and Research
Biology and Life Sciences
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- !reptiles and [email protected]
Physical Sciences
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
Humanities and Social Sciences
Practical and Applied Sciences
- !exercise-and [email protected]
- [email protected]
- !self [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
Memes
Miscellaneous
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Artist incomes are threatened by the rise of Generative models. Especially mediocre artists who Stable Diffusion have already surpassed.
Technology changes the world and obsoletes some professions. It has been like this for ever. Artists are not any different.
genuinely curious what you mean by 'mediocre artists' and the idea that Stable Diffusion has 'surpassed' them
do you have any examples? or is this just a vibes thing?
take a look at civitai: https://civitai.com/images
there are some amazing gems there.
that doesn't answer my question though - what are you defining as a mediocre artist? or is anything that doesn't fit the 'hyper realistic AI' look count as mediocre?
there are lots of graphics designers making content for various advertisements, promotions, digitial animation, effects and the like. these are the first people to be replaced. that is what I mean.
again, its just very clear you have no clue what graphic design involves, let alone anything else to do with the creative process
art really is just 'pretty picture' innit
why would someone pay for a graphics designer when Stable Diffusion can do the same?
How do you plan to tell stable diffusion things like "make the star a bit bigger" or "move the words slightly further to the left"? Have you ever actually used a graphic designer? You don't just ask them to make you a logo and they're done, there's a lot of back and forth between artist and client to reach the final product.
You can do these with ControlNet.
No you can't.
Creating an AI UX Researcher who finds pain points based on 18 finger models
How will AI take over creative professions when it can't even perform rote professions? AI chatbots keep going rogue and lying to customers about company policies (and even the actual law), image generators can't get enough of illegal and violent imagery, facial recognition AI's keep identifying black people as all looking the same - in art the value of a peice is constrained by the meaning it has to people, so why do you think that LLMs and all the other predictive generators we laughably call intelligent will be able to create meaningful peices by putting together the most likely set of pixels?
they are improving vey fast.
I didn't ask when, I asked how. How is a prediction engine, that is something that guesses a likely output based on past information, going to display creativity?
The results speak for themselves. There is amazing AI generated content out there.
I don't fucking care if it's on the moon, answer my question: by what mechanism will a machine learning model exhibit creativity? Like you understand my question, right - you know how "AI" works?
You can't convince people that something does not exist, if they can see it with their own eyes.
So you don't know how AI works? And can I remind you that you literally haven't offered a single image as evidence, just vaguely told people to go look at websites? Even if you weren't avoiding my question, you do understand that you have to show specific examples to back your claims up?
I don't understand your problem. There are mountains of images and videos in many online communities. CivitAI is probabl the biggest. There are even several ones in lemmy. Take your pick.
All those mountains of images and you can't even link a single one and explain what about it shows creativity.
Anyway, you can't be so stupid as to not know what my problem is, I've spelt it out specifically in every single comment: My problem is that you won't give an answer to my question (as a reminder, that question is "how will an AI show creativity?"). Use your words to provide an explanation, backed up with specific linked images to demonstrate it. Stop saying "uhhh i saw it on ebaumsworld" when you're asked for an actual explanation articulated through language.
you're just obsessed. AI works, creates lovely images, and nothing you say can change the facts of the world.
join us in the stable diffusion communities if you want to learn more: [email protected] [email protected]
And still you avoid the question, because you have no idea about art or machine learning. You just think the patterns are pretty.
which is good enough
Don't you have a baby mobile to be gurgling at?
"Of course I know how AI works. I type 'Big titty tradwife submissive elf who looks like she loves me' into the the magic prompt box and then it gives me my BEAUTIFUL image"
even mediocre artists actually create art, which is something stable diffusion can't do and will never be able to do. You completely misunderstand what art is and its purpose. It's not just a nice looking picture or a meandering story. You understand art as a technical profession creating a product to sell, which is why you equate AI slop with art. Your earlier comment making a distinction between artists and "ordinary people" is completely wrong. The distinction between someone who's an artist and otherwise isn't technical proficiency or ability to make a picture. It's a deeper skill than that, the ability to be creative, to have perspective. It's an ability to communicate. AI can't communicate because it doesn't have a perspective, since it doesn't actually know anything.
yet AI produces beautiful images.
This is not any different from the invention of paint or coloured glass improving quality of art.
yeah that's not the point of art nor what it is. What art looks like isn't connected to the quality of it. Go get some perspective by engaging with artists sometime. I'm out. You're not a serious person. See ya.
people want quality. why would anyone pay for low quality art?
The measure of art is not the sale you absolute dingus. What a sad, soulless prespective
this is what it always comes down to
they don't respect artists, they don't respect artistic labour but they so desperately need and want the fruits of said labour and so the only option left is to cheat and lie
hell, it's evident in the last sentence of their reply - that they see 'Artist' as a profession that is getting 'Obsoleted', as if the only reason art exists in the first place is because we as a society have been too archaic, and we would jump at the chance to drop the creative process in a heartbeat
complete and total alienation from creativity as a human experience
it's so bleak and I can't sympathize with their perspective at all. It's like the most they get out of art is to see a picture or a movie and say it looks cool. Purely superficial. They don't like art, they like decoration. They don't actually care about seeing a representation of another perspective. They don't care about themes, symbols, or what an artist is trying to communicate, nor do they even want to know.
its very evident from their other replies that their metric for 'good' art is 'is it beautiful?' and their definition of 'beauty', in turn, is simply 'does looking at this release dopamine or not'
deeply unserious person