In a post-scarcity solarpunk future, I could imagine some reasonable uses, but that’s not the world we’re living in yet.

AI art has already poisoned the creative environment. I commissioned an artist for my latest solarpunk novel, and they used AI without telling me. I had to scrap that illustration. Then the next person I tried to hire claimed they could do the work without AI but in fact they could not.

All that is to say, fuck generative AI and fuck capitalism!

  • @AIhasUse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    1111 months ago

    It also makes a way for the poor to be able to afford to get art to make comics and other things when they otherwise would have been unable to hire artists. Generative ai also allows poor people to write code they couldn’t before because they couldn’t afford the help. It also gives poor people the ability to brainstorm new ideas when they can’t afford a team of consultants.

    It helps the poor, just like search engines and the internet. There were people back in those days scared of change as well. Gen ai is a huge equalizer or wealth and power. The vast majority of people using Gen Ai are using it for things that they never would have considered being able to hire someone to do anyway.

    • ASeriesOfPoorChoices
      link
      fedilink
      1611 months ago

      shh. if you can’t afford to pay people, then you should just die. /s

      you’re quite right, and it’s a shame that generative AI art is treated like a gun and not a hammer. Both can be used to kill someone. (it’s not a great analogy, but hopefully people see my point about it generative AI being more than a weapon to kill artists)

    • Veraxus
      link
      fedilink
      511 months ago

      This is why I focus on distribution rather than training. If you commercialize a model trained on things you don’t own/license, and it generates anything remotely infringing, you should be fully on the hook for every single incident.

      But if a model is trained and distributed freely as FOSS, then it’s up to anyone running it to ensure the output is not infringing. This protects fair use while also ensuring that big companies tread more carefully when redistributing models that can violate fair use by competing with those whose work was trained on without permission and are subsequently being emulated without permission.

      • JackGreenEarth
        link
        fedilink
        English
        511 months ago

        Who do you care so much about protecting the failed and unethical law of copyright? Are you going to tell me you don’t pirate media too?

        • Veraxus
          link
          fedilink
          111 months ago

          Why do you care so much about defending unimaginably wealthy corporations stealing the labor of regular people?

          See, now we have both misrepresented each others comments.

    • @jaybone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      311 months ago

      And it helps the poor perform heart surgery because they couldn’t afford medical school. And it helps the poor build space craft because they couldn’t afford engineering degrees.

      There’s a reason some of these things are done by experienced professionals not some AI kludge. If you really want to fix the problem, allow the poor access to education so they can become professionals in these areas if they so wish. The answer isn’t some AI telling them to put glue on their pizza.

      • @___@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        511 months ago

        I need a cover for my novel. Hold on real quick while I get this 4 year degree and spend $80k to send an fu to the AI overlords and design it myself.

        After that I’ll throw my shovels away and use spoons instead.

        • @Incblob@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          811 months ago

          Or you could pay someone… There’s a bunch of starting artists who work for cheap. There, saved you $79.5k Sadly your novel won’t sell because it’s been buried by an avalanche of ai generated books. (amazon recently limited the number of books you can self publish to only five per day… Your argument works both ways, why should I study and practice for years to learn to write my own novel (or pay you) when Ai can just generate it for me?

          • @___@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            011 months ago

            I recently commissioned a logo because AI is terrible at it. Once that becomes good enough, I don’t see myself paying another $100 when I can generate it for nearly free. I had submissions for the logo that were clearly AI generated. It’s the same problem with search, you won’t know what’s human unless you dig. It harms artists, but technology improvement always leaves a trail of industries obsoleted. The technology is here, it makes some work more efficient. If you cripple it now to save jobs, you’ll limit the investment and any future gains due to fear of repeat. I think the key is to look at it as a tool, not a replacement. It can certainly help you flush out your ideas and write a better book.

            • @Incblob@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              511 months ago

              Gains for who? If Ai does all the art and books and all the artists are broke, the only ones left are the corporations making money, and the ones selling AI/hardware. The rest are left with generic art, and ironically, innovation in art will stall because Ai cannot innovate.

              And it’s not being used as a tool, you yourself said that you’ll use it instead of paying an artist. As I said, there’s already a ton of Ai books being churned out, flooding the market. Are you fine with yourself being replaced by Ai because it’s cheaper?

              • @___@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                -211 months ago

                I think at the point AI can “replace” artists, the individual becomes the artist. A much less exclusionary field if you don’t have the drawing ability. It becomes just another advanced paint brush.

                The true creatives will still find a way to stick out. The definition of “art” will change.

    • queermunist she/her
      link
      fedilink
      111 months ago

      There’s another way for the poor to acquire art for their own comics. Can you guess what it is?

      • @atrielienz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        311 months ago

        Barter. Between artists. That kind of collaboration happens all the time and people are deliberately ignoring it so they can justify AI LLM’s.

      • @AIhasUse@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        011 months ago

        Yeah, I can guess that you think that everyone who wants to make comics should either have to draw it themself or hire someone to draw it. Just like how you probably would have thought that anyone who wants a shirt should weave it themself or hire a hand weaver.

        People will always create new and better machines to automate away what they don’t want to do. Similarly, there will always be people who are upset about this. It’s an age-old story. You can accept the times or try to prevent an avalanche with your body, but that snow doesn’t care at all about your favorite little patch of land. It’s doing its thing regardless.

        • queermunist she/her
          link
          fedilink
          011 months ago

          Environmentally speaking, people should probably learn to sew and not be overly reliant on unsustainable mechanisation.

          • @AIhasUse@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            211 months ago

            Yeah, and they should probably not use cars, or plastics, or make spaceships, or airplanes, or smart phones, or beanie babies. They shouldn’t farm or hunt more than they need. They shouldn’t make medicines either. They should do none of these things if preserving the environment is the number one concern. The issue is that there are billions of years of evolution driving us to explore and conquer, to learn and manipulate our surroundings, to do anything we can to stay alive and keep our lived ones alive. That couple billion years absolutely annihilates any vague notion of preserving the environment. I’m not saying it’s a better idea, just that people are restless by design us all curling up into little balls and having minimal impact on the environment simply isn’t going to happen unless something massively limits us.

            • queermunist she/her
              link
              fedilink
              -2
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              If only there was some kind of compromise between “drawing comics and sewing clothes” and “burn down the entire amazon rainforest to generate apes”

    • @Mango@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      -111 months ago

      Don’t call it gen AI when you mean generative. It also implies artificial general intelligence which we do not have.