this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2023
1343 points (99.9% liked)
196
17966 readers
138 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
Other rules
Behavior rules:
- No bigotry (transphobia, racism, etc…)
- No genocide denial
- No support for authoritarian behaviour (incl. Tankies)
- No namecalling
- Accounts from lemmygrad.ml, threads.net, or hexbear.net are held to higher standards
- Other things seen as cleary bad
Posting rules:
- No AI generated content (DALL-E etc…)
- No advertisements
- No gore / violence
- Mutual aid posts are not allowed
NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.
Other 196's:
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
Even if text to image generators are able to improve to be better than human artists, people won't stop making art just because a computer can do it faster.
But they will stop hiring artists, and that's more to the point of what they were saying. We're already seeing some jobs being replaced with algorithms (mostly stuff like shitty click bait journalism, but still), and art has long been considered a skill not worth paying for. In centuries past, art used to be something only the rich could afford. Now, people get upset if artists charge $60 for a commission.
The algorithms won't need to produce work better than we can, or even equal. It just needs to make stuff that seems value appropriate. People have already made algorithms to imitate certain popular artists' styles, and they've seen a hit to their income as a result. Why get a commission done from one of them when you can go online and get 50 for free that are kinda close, and then just pick the one you like.
People have been getting automated out of their jobs for well over a century. Technology shouldn't stop advancing; everyone should be compensated for the human labor saved through the use of automation.
I don't disagree, but there are 2 issues when you're talking about AI generated art:
People aren't usually compensated for the labor saved in a meaningful, direct way. The people who did those jobs are often left to learn new skills to find jobs in other sectors with no safety nets.
With art, you're talking about automating away human creativity rather than labor.
AI has the potential to be a great tool for artists to help improve their workflow with stuff like iterating variations of design concepts and the like. But that's not how companies will use it (and already are). It's being used to avoid having to pay artists and writers entirely.
In an ideal world, these tools would prove to be a boon for just about everybody. Unfortunately, we don't live in an ideal world and have to worry about how these tools can be abused to destroy people's ability to afford to live. This doesn't mean that we put the genie back in the bottle and stop forward progress, but we do need to make sure we protect people from the downsides as much as we can.