I can’t imagine a worse group of people to try and market AI tools to than artists.
I mean AI tools have been around for a while, like the magic lasso. But I feel like generative AI almost always gets shoved into things without a thought on how it will be used.
If AI wasn’t shitty and if it didn’t train of stolen work, would it still be as hated? I think it has potential as a tool to elevate the works of talented individuals.
I think there’s merit to old fashioned creations, but I’m not going to discredit a work for using a spell checker or an digital spray brush. The truth is that tools are shortcuts for bringing thoughts or ideas into reality.
I think we have a lot of bad faith arguments on this front. Let’s compare to the conservative. I remember a clip where conservatives were presented with an image of a fetus. When asked if it was living human being, the responded yes absolutely, only to be told it was a pig fetus or some other animal. You also see it with transvestigations. There is an irrational kneejerk response to something they don’t like. For the anti-ai people, you get a similar response about how AI looks bad.
The reason I have a problem with judging AI for looking like shit is that it won’t always be like that. We need to focus on the fact that even if it did look good, it’s work stolen from others, replacing them, and not compensating them. I’m afraid that some of the users may have responded poorly, and that there might have been more here to discuss before caving to mass internet rage.