The problem with AI-generated art | Steven Zapata | TEDxBerkeley
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 11 ต.ค. 2023
- Steven Zapata tackles the rise of AI-generated art and the consequences and questions this technology poses for artists and broader society. Steven Zapata has alway had a great love for drawing. From a young age, his avid sketching was fueled by a voracious appetite for video games, horror movies, science fiction novels, and pulpy paranormal reporting. A native New Yorker, his frequent visits to the Metropolitan Museum of Art inspired him to strive for the fluency and freedom of the old masters in his own imaginative work.
Shortly after high school, he moved to Los Angeles to attend Art Center College of Design and went on to work in video games, film, theme parks, and advertising. He continued his work in entertainment after moving back to New York and began teaching art, both independently and at Art Center. After a decade in commercial art, he began to reorient his focus towards online education and nurturing the love of drawing in all those attracted to it. In 2019, he began a TH-cam channel where he shares video essays about the mental challenges that accompany an art practice, and where he tries to guide viewers towards the truly strange and spiritual aspects of drawing. In 2022 he published a video, “The End of Art: An Argument Against Image AIs” where he expressed his concerns about the training practices of text-to-image models. This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at www.ted.com/tedx
![[Live สด] การออกรางวัลสลากกินแบ่งรัฐบาล งวดวันที่ 2 พฤษภาคม 2567](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/GO21E3C-kXE/mqdefault.jpg)
Many thanks to UC Berkeley for putting on this great TED event and for inviting me. A lot has happened since I gave this talk, and the situation remains urgent. Speak up, please write and call your representatives, and keep drawing and being creative.
Bless you, beautiful boy
Thank you Steven and keep drawing everyone.
thanks Steven
Wow just Wow.
Thank you Steven, for being such a powerful voice for us human creators on this topic.
Emmm, I never knew you did this Ted talk?!?! I was watching a few of your videos and this popped up? Well sir, colour me speechless! (and well done, I'm feeling very proud right now thanks to you)
When the first complaints about AI art and copyright infringments started people were quick to judge that the art was uploaded onto the internet out of the artists free will, and that how it is used by AI would be equivalent of someone maybe copying it and altering on photoshop. What the screenwriters and actors strike shown us is that even though there was no laws that would work retroactivelly no one would expect this AIs to feed of all information ever uploaded, we have to protect the interest of the artists because one day all jobs will be able to be done by computers.
"one day"..? This day is here lol
I say let it happen. They're much better at being efficient than we are.
Didn’t expect to see Steven on TedxTalks, but it’s great! As artists we should bring our point of view to non-artists and those who don’t know the main danger of AI.
Great talk Steven! I can hear this forever
STEVEN?!?! i wasn't expecting to be jump scared by my favorite poet that just so happens to be an artist by opening the recent tedx posts
Wait a minute, I thought he was a professional dancer?
So much insight in such a short time! He articulated so many of my thoughts and frustrations. This might be one of the most important TED talks ever given. I had to take notes and quotes:
"We need to figure out exactly who the future is for. I think it's for people, not for machines."
"We need to acknowledge that we have power. These systems would not exist without out data and our content. And if the people making these things don't want the valuable data that they use to train their products to up and vanish, they're going to have to help keep the markets healthy. So resist, speak up. Tell these companies and lawmakers and the websites that you use that you want your data and your content protected."
"This is an opportunity for artists, creatives, people of all sorts to come together and defend each other. We have never had such a desperate need for collective action. The very heart of creation could be on the line. And if we really want the future to be aligned for our benefit, we need to remember why we got into art in the first place: because we get an experiential joy from doing it, from making it. Is that something that we are really ready to give up to machines today? I'm not."
AI should be useful to us, without being invasive. Consent. We would have to unplug completely to rid ourselves of the infringement.
I appreciated this talk, and it is a serious matter evolving in the areas of creativity. Photographers are losing their images through the cyber realm, and AI is a typical element designed to superimpose itself upon the naive and empathetic. I just pray we all wake up, be watchful, and value one another's work with the utmost respect. Thank you and keep up the process you're undertaking.
One thing to remember, the people on the side of AI art/ AI will replace artists genuinely hope they are wrong because it’s definitely not to their benefit if they’re right.
Oh you have no idea how blind some (smart) people are about all of this. They are completely tunnel visioned on the idea that AI will create a utopia where everyone will be happy (a vague, undefined idea) and they see no detail or nuance at all. I have a tech bro friend like that, and you can see a lot of them on youtube.
Creativity is in most of our thinking, if we outsource it, then it is not just art that is at stake. Our labor force has grown more non-physical the farther we move from the Industrial Revolution, and we became dependent on it. This is definitely the erosion of the middle class, and perhaps the collapse of the global economy.
@@BinaryDood
Yes, but this works to our benefit as it will result in a shift toward libertarian socialism. Then we'll actually have a middle class and the top 10% won't own 92% of the market.
I got so excited thinking there was a new steven zapata talk before realising it was the old one, but maybe it was time for a rewatch anyway 💜
A historic speech, without a doubt.
You know, I'm all for transformative fanworks, fanfic, fanart, and TBH I don't see anything immoral with piracy, either. But not for a second do I think it's appropriate to claim any of that as my "original work" or try to make money off of it.
There's enough public domain and creative commons art out there that these corporations could've build their generative AI around them and come out with good results. The reason they didn't was because it was cheaper to scrape the web and not worry about the consequences.
I've already seen people assuming something was AI when it wasn't, due to this plague of midjourney horrors (and the rest!). It's a horrible situation. I think more frightening than what is hapepning to us artists, is it being used for military reasons and of course political misinformation with ai video as well as pictures. Scary times indeed.
The thing is that there a lot of people in the World who say that it's perfectly fine to let AI feeding them with any type of content (Art, Music, Games whatever). The reason is that they are quite undemanding. They do not have taste in anything.
❤ Thanks for doing your part to bring awareness .
Thank you for rising this question on a wider public on a Ted.
This problem shouldn't be silenced.
Very vibrant and inspiring talk Steven, and I hope that a lot of people will hear this true talk to start to help us to change things!
Thankyou❤ ❤❤fellow artists ❤
Great talk Steven! We should hold them accountable for exploiting everyones data!
Youre on Ted! ❤ Theres still an authenticity in real expressive art though...
While art isn’t my main career since i just do drawing and sell my arts online, but pretty scary how it’s gonna affect job markets
Now AI, then AGI, then probably Bio AI then boooofff. Then....Nothing to talk about:) Anyways, what we are living today is just because of our curiosity for perfection while being a part of a nature where imperfection is a key spec to keep the harmony alive. Imperfection is the reflection of human artist and I admire it. Imperfection is a natural must that opens a gate to sincerity.
man u got my heart❤
I am only a hobbyist artist and even my work was used to train AI. That hit me right in the guts. When you think that some unknown hobbyist isn't even save from AI, how bad must it be for those who made it a career. My heart bleeds for everyone. I have been sharing my views on AI on all the platforms and shared many videos and I will share this one too. I have FB friends who have flooded my feed with AI images to no end, fairy cats, Halloween cats, Xmas cats. I love cats but heck it really annoyed me because I recognised some of the styles. I have followed great artists on FB enjoying their work who have now stopped sharing their art to safeguard it. What is the point of art if we can't share it anymore? AI not only stolen art it made it impossible for artists to share their future work. We need an ethical solution asap.
This was great to watch, im a big fan of your YT channel and youre an excellent speaker
Thank youuuuuu Bro. Well done 🤝 You can count on with me. We'll fight.
bravo Steven!
Scroll down at your own risk, you'll find too much negativity it's better if you go and do your studies
Brilliant talk.
Grate TEDx. I hope someday we win agenst AI.
I just don't see how you can stop this. Firstly the law is actually not really in favor at least. And all it takes one country to allow it and its all going there. Plus i think its going to be super easy to obfuscate the origins. I think its game over for making a living via digital art at least the way it has been practiced to date.
Something I think we're going to start seeing a lot more is the likes of the "great firewall" but like outside china. There are already sites I cannot access as someone in the UK because they do not confirm to EU cookie regulation or data protection. Facebook has removed features from messenger in the past for this reason. The internet already has a few dams in place that were not there 15 years ago. The UK government already makes ISPs block certain sites that have high court injunctions against them (sites of the 123movies variety.)
This would be the perfect excuse for these governments to do more of this. 'oh, we're protecting our artists livelihoods: you cannot access these tools and if your business is found to be using them it's a hefty regulatory fine.'
The false assumption you make is that governments are not able to block what you see. They already do.
@@VicvicW That's a good point I did not think of at all. I could 💯 see that.
Just because it is hard to figure something out doesn't mean we should wave our hands in the air and just accept it as it is. This is what we humans do. New technology appears? We addapt. We make new laws. We learn as society. And eventually we will find a "middle ground" of sorts. Happend to a lot of technologys. From cars to nuclear physics.
Why should machine learning be any different? Not to mention that you do not have to get ALL nations on bord but the important ones, like in Europe, the US and China. By the way, China is actually very keen about regulating Ai created content because if any nation is fearfull on "loosing" their newly forming middle class to automatition? It's China.
We will see regulations one way or another. What ever if will be a "good" one? I don't know.
@@VicvicWIt’s so easy to bypass though with basic IT literacy.
@@AymanAntri7 yeah but the vast majority of people are IT illiterate.
THIS:
""If we allow the appropriation of everybody's creative work for the benefit of technology that is just going to turn around and compete directly against them in their very markets, we are going to do untold damage to the vigour and energy that people have for their work."
I wish that everyone would watch this, I wish it had a billion views. This is such an urgent and important issue, not to mention how scary the implications of AI are for our future, as humanity.
awesome video!
Plagiarism and greed is an old world problem--not just something that sprung to life in the age of AI.
Major publishing houses of London have fried and eaten the small fish writers of the Third Workd for dinner, while handing their novels to the bigwig writers of their literary stable to copy and "revise" (in landscapes featuring bigger and more profitable demographics.)
We need better copyright laws overall. Ironically, AI already knows who stole whose novel. But they won't use it to machine-train and catch the big criminals because plagiarism is far too profitable.
Everytime a new tool is created in the society we need to figure out how to use it in a ethical way. Well IA isn't even created in a Ethical way, but now the genie is out of the bottle and we MUST demand laws to unsure the ethical USE of this product! Also an ethical way to maintain it, cause I am sure they will need to update the datas bases. Now that we know what they are up to we need to be against this improper use of our data! ( I am talking photos, text, voice, videos, intelectual property in general... Not "just" art)
i never subscribes tedx but after this video, i done it!
i agree with him .
Just Beautiful!
his art great!
Do Ai bros fail to realize what happens when people stop creating art to feed the data sets? No innovation, no further creativity, it will reach a peak and then die off because it is only as good as the data it is trained upon.
Very very very very nice 👍🏻 ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤😊😊
The only good Ted Talk 😊
Steven is such a grown up.
❤❤ Science fiction is science predicted. ❤❤. Remember Lieutenant Data playing music on Star Trek?
The question of the decade will be: "Do we get on or under trains?"
I usually watch videos of art being copied by other people. I had a book being stolen by someone that I wrote. I don't know who is making money of it. They can't change the name of the book, or the file name, because I am the author. This is my only comfort about that. There will be those matters that you won't be able to repair. At least your name is on them.
The thing is your name is on them. An artist’s name isn’t. No one will ever know or see the name of the artist who created that “data”
Is it true that Standford University and students have open sourced a robot, -- " Mobile Aloha" -- that can be built for less than $32k which can -- LEARN -- to:
Cook,
Clean,
Ride an elevator,
Wash and put away dishes,
Get a towel, lift up a filled long stem glass to clean under it.
Imagine home care assistants that would help families with care giving?
Can I give this more than one like please?
Commenting for the alghorithem.
Plagiarism is an old problem, though. I shared my novel with a major publishing house in London and next thing I knew the editor-in-chief had passed it to the best literary names in her literary stable. Her bigwig writer with a giant demographics attached went on to win big accolades and very nice royalties. Third World writer=0, London publisher=9. Greed and anhillation of the small fish by the big sharks is an olde worlde problem, not a new thing by any means. We need to have better copyright laws and respect for creators, not just for marketable "content."
Yes its a problem
Therefore these systems are also a problem
I'm sorry this happened to you. I hope you sue and win
It is an issue. But that is where copyright laws and other protections - hopefully - come in to place. And as bad as it can be, for the most part, it's a known problem. What is happening now though with machine learning is unprecedented. The "plagiarism" so to speak is happening on a whole new level.
Think about it this way. Imagine the publisher not only gave your hard earned work to someone else so they can claim it as theirs but they actually trained a model on it so it could throw out books written in your style in minutes. And once that model is released to the internet you can't get it back. Not really.
This is what happend to Sam Yang pretty much. Once he started to speak out against it people started "competitions" on who could train the best Sam Yang model to create artwork in his style.
Plagiarism in the past was bad. Like really bad. But it never removed your ability to produce work. You could still continue to do things in your style. But now? We're looking at a future where people could even take that from you in a heart beat. It's like going from dynamite to a nuclear bomb.
Just collect a lot of proves before trying to publish a book.
"All rights to this work are reserved and protected by copyright law. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the copyright holder" this is not permitted" right? is what all the books say (and this applies to all type of art, am I wrong?).
The artificial intelligences are being trained and must necessarily reproduce the protected content (in one way (form) or another) to be trained. That's illegal!!! Ai companies (including Sam Altman), are stealers and not ethical companies! Can we all artists of the world join in a group to share thoughts and motivations against Ai, and also to earn funds (as a group / as a collective funding) to take legal actions against Ai companies?, I want to join...
Note: Yes, I know there is fair use, but fair use can not go against artists earnings like Ai companies are doing, they are taking all possible earnings from artists (creating a massive quantity of competitors by stealing the work of same author / artist), which means with your own work, they leave you without earnings and work.
I'm really upset, and want to join the battle against these stealers (Ai companies)...
Note: So. Ai lawyers are using the excuse that they are not using the original art work but a compressed form or a transformed form right, but anyway, the privacy notice says "No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in ANY FORM", I understan ANY as ANY (including what Ai is doing in the process of training), so, for me, this is completely illegal. Am I wrong?
As an engineer and writer, I want to know info of groups or collective fundings to take lagal actions against Ai companies to protect rights of all artists of the world so I can join... Thanks
"Ai itself (and Ai companies) with all stolen content from artists are ALL (HIGH VALUE), Ai itself (and Ai companies) without all stolen content from artists are NOTHING (NO VALUE)!"
Give generative Ai all of the music prior to the XX century as input and it would never create jazz
I wish I had done something else. It was already almost impossible to make a living. Then this.
That day can’t come soon enough. Are we seriously complaining about machines doing our work for us? It’s a dream come true. A nation with total efficiency and a booming GDP. A human population enjoying a national dividend and all the free time they need to pursue their interests and spend time with their family. People have gone insane. We should all be popping the best champagne and celebrating the rise of AI and our freedom from labor and drudgery. Even zapata, like what? He wants to spend the rest of his life chasing contracts and being a task monkey illustrating other people’s ideas? Does he lack the imagination to look a step froward and realize he’s now free to paint or draw whatever his heart desires? People are so small minded.
Regardless of the law...Art is something unique to only thinking humans. It's personal expression. Music, paint, sculpture. A building. Art. No computer can think. No computer can be organicly creative. The end. No argument. Artificial definition speaks for itself. Not real 😂😂😂😂😂😂
They've found through testing the latest AI models are more creative than the average human. Just saw an article about it.
they used the exact same argument against digital and 3d when it came out
@@MsReclusivityIt's just marketing. If they are so creative why can't they cure cancer or allergies?! Somehow these AIs that were supposed to save us have done nothing to help and only hurt people.
@@Sageoftheforest7 As someone who's been working with AI to create short stories I disagree. It's helped me a ton especially with brain storming for my book. Been writing a chapter a week since November of last year and I don't have many people in my life that will endlessly listen to me talk about Sci-fi so I talk with ChatGPT and it helps me do much especially with quantum technology.
@@MsReclusivity Under what measurement? Human art is communication about human experience. What experiences are AI communicating with their art?
The brainstorming is useful, but no different than any other brainstorming technique (prompt books? random images? google before it was bad? etc). Your short stories come from your own experiences and what you want to communicate.
I wholeheartedly feel that AI use in art should be banned forever! 😒
Why just art?
@@thepilot7612 Because art is a pure expression of the soul.
Actually I think they rushed with the use of AI. However, if in time AI will learn to replicate or even surpass us in exact sciences, in art it will never have a real place for the reason already mentioned.
All the misery of the world comes from the creative people, the fears, the emotions. Because these entities can't create anything on their own and can't think for themselves, but everything has been used against us for hundreds of years today with AI or has always happened that way. Good talk but unfortunately we can't do anything about it.
Awareness is the first step! I belive where there's a will, there's a way.
Law suits, Court hearings and spreading awareness have all been happening to get to the bottom of this AI infringement. Saying we can't do anything is what the AI companies want from us. We have power, we just have to use it.
@@sterlingbirks9101 I use it, but that doesn't make it any less creepy
We can delete the dataset and ban companies from spying
Boom problem solved
I don't know. Why don't we hear the same uproar from the music industry? Why don't we have the exact same models there, where EVERY soundtrack, song, melody was scraped from the net to train a model that could create all music you want with any voice and any text?
Apparantly ... it is possible to have it different.
who is they?
I will stop posting art. I’ll do it for me I guess, here I go restaurants.
There's no stopping progress, AI will continue. However, I do agree that plagiarism is unacceptable and unfair. The solution is to have AI pay royalties to the source material creators every time it generates an image. This would work similar to how stock art relies on small royalties to the creator. This copyright/royalty system needs to be implemented as part of the algorithm. Conversely, artists should have the right to request their work to be excluded from being sampled.
However, a small royalty per generated image could mean an even bigger income for artists than directly selling their work.
Progress for who?
@@davielias4404 Progress for everyone. Historically, technology advances to the benefit of some and detriment of others. The luddites were negatively affected by the industrial revolution, it put them out of work, but it made production of textiles faster and cheaper for everyone else. Today, digital artists are in the same boat.
Why don't all people from the world steal the source code of these Ai companies (and create same service Ai by training Ais with the soruce code they stole), (so these Ai companies lose all earning and jobs)? (These Ai companies would be very upset). Wouldn't they be?, but wouldn't be this fair because what they are doing to all artists of the world? Oh maybe we can not do that, we can not steal the source code from these Ai companies and maybe nobody can, and maybe it's because they don't monetize directly from the source code but by software services they sell right? (not like all artists who monetize directly from the art), and maybe also because these Ai companies and people are "so intelligent" that they protected the source code of their Ai in advance, so nobody can steal it. So, they are very intelligent to steal and also very intelligent for not to be stolen.
Maybe this is the reason why they are the richest people in the world?
you have students?
This reminded me of South Park's 'they took our jobs' episode
They're not taking our jobs, but surely they're taking advantage on our work.
I would love to debate this small thinker
Why are you calling him a small thinker?
I'm not 100% agreement with his takes but I still find his arguments quite rationale.
What are your views?
Well so much for the Getty lawsuit, because they use AI art now as well lol.
We need global universal basic income. I bet artists would mind less if their lifelyhood wasn't depending on it.
This is the real answer.
no, we would still mind it very much. We don't do art for money. We do it out of love for the craft. If we follow your logic, a world with universal basic income would mean people can steal from eachother and somehow we're gonna be okay with that cause we get money without working??
Most artists wouldnt be happy having their life purpose slurped up by vile tech companies even with free money. If making art was about greed they would have done something financially easier.
No, we artists would still mind. Because it's not just about income. See what happend to Sam Yang. The models make it possible to impersonate him. Art is not only a profession. It is also a way of expression. It is a part of peoples idenity. Some are great chess players. Some are great athletes. And some are great artists. Take that away from someone ... and you can brake them.
UBI is slavery with a different name.
How long did it take humans to domestic dogs, a deca-millennia? Cats are a work-in-progress. When you flip an AI off+on and it reboots gushing about a Near Death Experience, then I’ll give Turing the nod. AI savants are just starting and assuming we can know what it, and we, will become is a long way off.
First comment 😊
Why?
@@SkywalkerPaul because of you
@@user-xn1pc4qv9z ✌️😀
Very motivational love it pls pin meeeeeeeeeee ❤❤❤❤❤
Could you be more self-centered?
This is a man who would have a very difficult time discussing art history. He is very worried about the least interesting thing in art history.
Commenting to consider coming back to this comment some day.
You don't need to be a muslim to stand up for PALESTINE You just need to be HUMAN🇯🇴
Wrong Ted talk mate.
Era's come and go
We just have to adapt and move on
Great way to sweep any argument under the rug without actually addressing it
"defeatism" at it´s finest
huge cope lmao
Wow, lets fit art into your little box. MOST art is BAD. Most art for profit is even worse....it always has been that way . AI is a medium ripe for disruption. You haven't the brain-width to see that. Your analysis is simplistic and pedestrian . Unfortunately your view is omnipresent. These ideas need to be explored in greater depth. I invite it.
Artistic style is not copyrightable by law. Duh.
Why do these artists lament, whine, pout and complain about safeguarding their art? From whom did they acquire, imitate, or borrow their brilliant creative concepts while honing their craft? Creativity thrives through iteration. I can't think of any artist who birthed something entirely original...not even the esteemed old masters. - Adapt, Evolve or Go Extinct!
The amount of fearmongering in this video is off the charts. It is very obvious that this man has no grasp of IP or Copyright law in the US, which already has addressed rights holding by non-human entities. Additionally his underlying stance essentially amounts to the same as "What of the candlestick makers?" when the lightbulb was invented. AI usage in art and other domains is inevitable and quite frankly is more likely to democratize the Art sphere rather then doom it. The ones that are early adopters and learn to use it, augmenting it with their own artistic skills will be the ones reaping the coming age of AI art generation.
Nobody is stopping anybody learning to make art. Art is already fully democratised. That’s not what this is.
If you start drawing for 30 minutes a day, and keep that up every single day, at the end of 2 or 3 years you will be really good at drawing. At the end of 5 or 6 years you will be amazing at drawing. This is true for everybody, not a select gifted few. AI lets you use the work of others to skip that.
How does that boot taste?
I think your example lacks any actual grounding in reality. First and foremost, individuals are not mere blank slates with the same lower or upper boundaries regarding skills. If you labor under that delusion, i am sorry for you but it simply isn't true.
That said, I call this democratizing due to AI being a powerful tool previously unavailable to the general public whom prior to its invention were relegated to seeking out a specialist class (artists) to try and get a desired product (sometimes successfully, sometimes not) or taking the endeavor into their own hands and typically producing sub-par or middling result.
As to AI "using the work of others", it does in a broad sense, albeit AI machine learning identifies underlying patterns and overall styles present within and across multiple works. These parts are not copyrightable due to being in it of themselves ideas, concepts, systems, or methods of doing something. Further, even if this wasn't the case, "using the work of others" is a weak counter, given that every single artist that ever learned from/took in other artistic works could be said to do the same thing.
Again, this mans arguments are once again, a person being upset that revolutionary technology has upended a field and attempting to scare people away from it using Neo-Luddite talking points in a vain attempt to not have to adapt. @@Kaitain
Was that toward myself or Kaitain? If it was toward me, I wouldn't know, but you are free to taste mine.@@IdiotinGlans
@@darklelouchg8505 I will decline, I don't bootlick for corpo or their shills.
The technologies change, but luddits mentality never do 🤦🏼♀️. So I really don't understand why some people always want to complain instead of embracing the technology and think how it can help them make their life better. I'm the digital artist, photobank contributor and graphic designer myself so I know very well how these things can easily take your job, your clients and your profits away. And it keeps happening to me for more years than this presenter's entire career. Yet, I'm very happy with all those AI tools and use them successfully in my daily work routine.
Technology progress rate is really high, soon enough it will not need a prompter anymore. If a tool now does all of your job, can you still consider it as a tool? Unless we live in some sort of a socialistic/communist regime (which makes regulations mandatory), only then we can tell that this technology can benefit us, but we live in a capitalist world, where greed rules.
But hey, i do think that you made a good job of adapting to current situation, but it does change, really quickly, not anyone can adapt that fast.
You say yourself that it's taking away your profits and yet somehow you're... happy with that?
Why do you assume technological progress is good? Maybe you should pay more attention to reality.
@@Folbak I've never said that exactly these AI technologies took my profits away, but other did. Like automatization and templatization of everything that was custom made by me before. So this time I was super quick offering AI generated solutions that saved me tons of resources while not damaging profits. And that's why I'm happy.
@@bookworm8815 the problem is that this isn't just a case of a new, weird tool that scares people because they don't know how to use it though. It's pretty clear that the end goal is complete substitution of artists for ai art. There is no reliable business model here if you're an artist, when a client that previously had to talk to you and describe what they wanted and then wait for it to be done can now instead just type a prompt, wait a couple of minutes at best and have a finished product, for less than an artist could ever realistically charge if not for free. There is no adapting to this, either giving up on the field entirely or pushing back.
I could never take this AI art outcry seriously.
Its always pros acting like everyone else should learn or create exactly how they did. "I grew up loving the process" blah blah and? No one decides how you "art" other than you. If someone wants to prompt naruto in walmart then who cares? If they copy your artstation dime a dozen style, so?
Make art for yourself. This has never been more important. People will come to you for what you make personally if they want.
If you're doing it for clout and a sense of superiority cause you studied 10 years but now every teen can prompt your style in a second, then you're in the wrong field. If you want to feel validated for something you did become a doctor, you wont be validated but atleast your skill wont be replicated anytime soon AND you'll be useful to society.
Every pro has a chinese workshop ripping their work, tracing it, duplicating it, and selling it plastered on a pillow.
AI changes nothing. It simply let people with no skill generate something that required skill. Simply, that.
Imagine spending years honing your work only to have that work be fed into an algorithm without your consent and then being sold to people. The issue is that AI companies PROFIT from scraping so you can make cheap convincing ripoffs of others work and those people don't get any form of compensation, or say in whether that happens. You also act like art theft merchandise isn't a problem for artists, which it 100% is. Just because you can rip off someone work doesn't mean that you should. If you want to create art, do it without stealing the years of hard work of humble artists. AI will change everything if we don't regulate and update our laws to account for it. In china there have already been games that used AI for some of its art, putting the very people who made that possible OUT of one more job. Artists aren't rich and if companies start using AI for their games all it means is one more artist out of a job, probably an artist who's work has been used in the creation of the very AI that took their job, surely you understand how unfair that is, this kind of thing is what IP law is supposed to protect us from. artists probably worked on your favourite movies/games and made them that much better with their vision and time and now you're here posting a comment about how you don't care if their work is stolen and that they should've studied in a different field. Please reflect on why you stand with AI companies and not the people being exploited by them for their profit.
@@sterlingbirks9101 Imagine using paragraphs am I right?
@@Cerbskiespeople imagine while reading novels and stories right? Maybe that's the thing people who lack imagination give up on natural creativity and make art using ai, ai is like using steroids. Some like it but in long run it destroys you, making art isn't just about having a result the process challenges your thinking, your reasoning, your awareness, your sense of knowing just like solving maths questions. But sadly we're living in the age where people are getting devoured by reels which is making their attention span shorter than animals and enjoying artwork made by ai, supporting them because they're just too lazy to make something that looks appealing. It's fine if you can't draw like a pro but atleast try to make something for your happiness using your own consciousness, it's upto you brother. I don't hate ai, it's not even alive, infact I don't hate anyone, I am just really against how our artwork is getting ripped off and people are making millions out of it and we the people who worked out asses off gets nothing.
tell me, how old are you?
@@time9967 Stop focusing on all the negatives and balance it with the positives. AI is just a tool. Making art is up to the individual, you dont decide on how others create brother.
Amateurs and Pros use AI to fix up a small piece of artwork, gain a better idea, heal-brush out something with another something, inspiration, learning, improvement.
Saves time on looking for just a perfect image. Perfect for photobashing. Perfect for iteration. Prompt something instead of having to redraw it.
We've already had photoshop and chinese sweat shops stealing and profiting off of professional work. This changes nothing.
However If you just focus on the negative aspects cause a tweet told you so, then ofcourse it will be all doom and gloom. Its about balance.
Ai generated imagery isn't the same as human-expression art
There, I saved you 17 minutes
All my videos are made with the help of AI, and they are works of art.
That's OK, but in order for you to make art a lot of art was stolen, with attribution or compensation. I think there is a place for these tools but there has to be a way to get the artists who's work helped create the tools a fair cut or have their works removed from the training sets. And before you say that's impossible to remove it. It's not it just means that they need to start over again.
@@spacedracespacedrace5524 It's just like if I paint a picture and I use another artist' painting as reference. It all has to do with intention.
And it's not copyright protected, so I can claim your work and you can't do anything to stop me.
@@trippyvortex except you don't even know which artists you're using as reference. It's also not the same at all. AI art just isn't impressive, and not because the art itself isn't good, but because there's no work to it. There's no struggle behind it. And when the difference between AI generated and human made art can't be told is when all works of art are forever devalued. But who cares, right?
Who would care to watch your videos, if you don't even care to put an effort into making them?..
Blockchain solves this problem. Trying to illegalize this is never gonna work. There is no way to stop technological progression. Find a solution to the problem, instead.
What AI generative models do is enable those that are creative (i.e. have the idea) but lack the skill to translate that into an image. This argument is basically "my skill is no longer as useful in the world". I wonder if he would have made the same argument about the monks who no longer were the only people to produce books... alas, we should oppose the painting press. Or the Calculator working at NASA who is replaced by a computer...
The best reply so far
Era's come and go
My grandfather still saves textbooks like gold, not understanding that I can get most of my textbooks with my phone ( that's if I ever need a textbook)
Never a bad idea to have hard copies of important works, particularly given economic/global instabilties. That said, having digital copies is also good to have as well, for ease of use. @@onyekanwokike4589
That's a false equivalency. Good writing still required skill, even if everyone had access to it. You also assume effort has nothing to do with how impressive a piece of art is. Go look at the Sistine Chapel (preferably in person) and tell me you would have been equally impressed with it if it didn't take YEARS to complete. But then again, the easier the better. Let's just witlessly march towards a future where even physically moving is a preposterous idea.
Ideas have a way of working way better in our minds. When the time comes to put them out there, in the phisical world, you have all sort of "translation" problems. You understand the composition is wrong, the light doesn't make sense, the angle you wanted to paint it in is all wrong.
A painter refines the idea in the process. It is intrinsecally a very phisical act, through which everything is improved. It's the same as having great ideas while you're walking or taking a shower, instead of just sitting there.
When you draw, the hand has accumulated a lot of automatic gestures and at the same time it's trying to learn and to put down an idea. That put you in a flow-like meditative state that is the space in which you truly are creative.
Thinking you can get there clicking a mouse is like thinking you can kick a penalty like Cristiano Ronaldo just because you're watching him on TV.
Eh, the people who think like this don't really understand how art works once you get to high levels of skill. I have no doubt that an AI could create something "like" 1984 or "like" 2001: A Space Odyssey or "like" Lord of the Rings. Is an AI going to be able to communicate the ideas and experiences those authors had in a meaningful way? Or is it just going to copy the same ideas of the past, without infusing any new experiences or anything prescient from current events?
I sincerely doubt that current-gen or even next-gen AI models are going to be able to craft a work with the same cultural impact of the above works beyond "ooo, look what the shiny AI did!" Current and next gen AI do not have anything meaningful to communicate about authoritarianism, technology, or war. You're not going to have AI developing new genres of art like minimalism, art deco, or post-modernism.
The best you're going to get is a pulp novel and art ripping off others' styles. The surface of what it makes is new, but the flesh underneath the work is all the same.
I listened to this while making AI art on Dall E 3
Amazing! You did something completely useless that any person can do without any trouble, completely vapid, and inane, but I’m glad you’re able to take joy in doing something so mediocre, not everyone is so boring.
you didn't 'make' the art, you typed in some words and some images spilled out to you. It's like buying from a vending machine. I'm sorry but you didn't 'make' the chips that spilled out from that vending machine.
“Making” art
Ohhh such hard work typing a few words. How honourable 😂
You didn’t make it. Dall E 3 did. The process and skill makes one an artist. You’re still a consumer.
AI art is the future of art.
Nothing is new. Your style is not new. To create art is to borrow. Don’t tell me you don’t look at reference images when you create art. AI art is also very useful to people who have ideas but not the skills or talent to make their ideas come to life. And it’s not as simple as asking chatGPT to write a prompt and boom you get the perfect image. Mostly you don’t even get what you want on the first generation. He’s oversimplifying A LOT and doing a bit of fear mongering. Greg Rukowski is also now more famous because of this… so 🤷♂️ Take what he says with a grain of salt.
Exactly
greg rukowski actively denounces AI as it has stolen many of his clients and ruined his name by people using AI to pass off as him and sell to people, as well as just flooding the market with lookalikes which brings his market value down. You ruin good, transformative art because you actively punish good artists for making good art. If you aren’t good enough you get no clients, if you’re too good AI starts using your name and your value drops because the market is flooded with lookalikes. Most of the time I don’t look at reference images when I create art, they usually bore me, though they do make my work better. AI also isn’t a person, don’t humanize it and use the arguments that it does art like a human, it’s a chance algorithm that tries guessing what you want based on percentages, we use references nothing alike and to make such an argument shows a lack of knowledge. This is a huge company stealing images off the internet to make a buck. Also, democratization of art has already happened with the dawn of the internet, if you search up any problem you have with drawing you will find a video. We have already democratized every skill to the people, what you want is ease, not freedom of use. Writing, math, art, sculpting, crocheting, chess. Every single skill has been democratized. In fact art has probably been more democratized than most.
Just be honest, people are lazy and don’t want to put the work in. Art isn’t that hard. Put in a week of doing 2 hours a day and you’ll be drawing better than 60% of the population.
I’d recommend watching a video called The AI revolution is rotten to the core. It’s very informative. I hope you have a good day!
(P.S- this video also definitely wasn’t very good, the one on his channel was much better though still pretty fearmongery)
I have to disagree. There are many artists who've pushed their style far enough the edges of what we know to be considered unique. The foundation of any beginner artist will always be the same, but what they do with that foundation as they master their craft has infinite potential. There is constantly "new" in the realm of art. You either don't see it or you're choosing to ignore it.
And if someone has creative ideas, they should just learn the craft. If they can't be bothered to pour the sweat and tears to make their creative vision real, they are not worthy of it anyway. You can't just use such an immense shortcut and expect to make great art, or to express yourself, that's not how it works.
AI isn't make art more accessible, it just creates the illusion of being an artist.
Luddism. Anger about the inevitable advancement of technology for the good of all humankind simply because the process -- the changing of markets, supply and demand, etc. -- is messy, disruptive, and creates uncertainty. Yet you could see this coming for decades -- not exactly how it would play out, but futurists have been talking about the advent of artificial intelligence and the emergence of a "global brain" via the internet since at least the nineties, and in more general terms since well before that. He's afraid of the what's going to happen to human imagination and creativity. That all depends on us. Each of us. All of us. I try to listen to him, and to Karla Ortiz, but their naivete and Luddism just upsets me.
This is the beginning of a new era of visual communication. This is the democratization of creativity. This is the freeing of the human mind. Yeah, it's financially uncomfortable for visual artists in the short-term. But the future benefits are more than worth such temporary disruption. Further, trained visual artists are probably in a better position to leverage the power of these new technologies than almost anyone. They simply need to let go of the past, and to embrace the possibilities of today and tomorrow. In the decades to come, through the use of new tools and understandings, human visual creativity will flourish like never before.
As for the training of generative AI models by means of allowing them to see art that is freely available for all to see on the internet? That's fair use, by any definition. It's fundamentally no different from one of the ways in which human artists learn their craft.
The luddites were left to die. Their revolution was inevitable, they didnt magically jump 20 years into the future to benefit from the tech's positive outcomes. This will happen again as the middleclass will fall, on a near global level.
And that’s the problem you don’t see. It’s not gonna get better, this technology has no benefits for the common good, it only benefits the giant corporations, that is all. Middle class will disappear since it is extremely easy to replace thanks to AI, and they will keep a few smart people because why would they bother keeping the average person when they have no use? Seriously, how can you be so optimistic when all stakes are against the normal people. And who is to say this time is not gonna be disruptive instead of elevating humanity?
“Democratisation of creativity” 😂
Listen to yourself. In a democracy your voice matters, in the over-saturation of AI generated images your story or whatever you’re trying to convey will matter even less so. Get a grip.
@@soysource3218, it's not about how much your voice matters. It's about *having* a voice. Lower the barriers to entry and you give more people a voice. You empower more people to play the game of content creation. That's the democratization of creativity. I have a grip or grasp of this concept. Reject Luddism, let the new tools be developed, and let artists and creators use them. Let everyone use them and we'll see who the real artists are. It's going to be a lot of the same people as before, and quite possibly many new people.
@@Darhan62 If you want a world where artists share their art for you to use, then you should share your profits with them. Oh wait, that's exactly how the world works right now.
It's the same as protect horse riding because of cars
People are not horses. Horses were left to die. Art is not to bring you from point A to point B, that is the wrong mentality. Everyone is AI's line of sight, not just artists. Cars were a terrible invention longterm for the world and society and the individual