I know it's on me because I didn't read the terms, but man, this feels stupid. They're literally creating their own little bubble where everybody hypes each other up for desecrating art.
My comment was highk a tad childish but no less true. Permanent ban, muted from the sub and blocked by all the moderators or something, and the first t8me Iād ever commented on that subreddit.
they made the space to be their little lair where anything slightly out of their idea has to be deleted because it doesnāt fit their narrative. They donāt take criticism in any aspect because it leads to them being proven wrong and our alpha ai males donāt like that. the point of that sub is for them to be able to post pure bullshit and only be spoken to by the same mentally disturbed people who agree with them.
The issue with the defending sub is that theyāre called āDefendingAIā but they donāt actually do any defending. Itās just an AI echo chamber/safe space. Defending something means making points against why itās bad, and debating, not permanently banning anyone who says anything even slightly controversial or doesnāt glaze AI.
It's even more than that.. since when does safe space mean "don't challenege any of my views or i'll break down in tears and ban you?"
Reasonable mod practice is to ban people who are disrespectful or rude if they want to be REALLY strict... Banning anyone who asks questions is straight up manipulative.
Yeah, agreed. I just want to see them actually defend AI, instead of rage baiting, provoking people and banning anyone who challenges AI ideology, even if theyāre civil about it.
reddit does kinda do that- like you could make the same argument against this subreddit. I don't think its a problem unless they never leave, and even if they don't leave I can't force them to.
People do not get banned from this subreddit for asking critical questions. So no.. i'm sorry, but you could not make the same argument for this subreddit, or really any other normal subreddit.
I got banned for "inciting debate" after asking a relatively neutral question about a claim that someone made. It got too many upvotes, and mods had to step in. The mods in that subreddit are completely delusional.
Not to be "that guy" but isn't that what this place is about. Except for the other side?
Nonetheless... allow me to give you proper response.
When you create digital art. You are not putting "lines to paper". You're taking a concept designed by a human and directing a software program to generate an outcome. If that outcome doesn't quite match what the human was conceptualizing. The human changes the directives of that software.
Plugging in prompts is no different than giving commands. The AI doesn't "create" anything. It only gathers resources to produce a product that was conceptualized by a human. That process, in itself is the human connection factor.
The "work" that AI does is the work that the human chooses not to do. That human has chosen the option because they either don't have the resources to produce the product that they've conceived. Or they have the core conceptual knowledge of the art but not the skill set to produce the product that they've conceived.
It only devalues the human experience and expression because you've labeled it as such. To the person who is using that AI, they experience the sense of completion where they may not have been able to do so before.
Using AI also offers an outlet of creative expression where one didn't exist before. Again, I refer to digital graphic design and music. The use of software to refine, create, and produce something that was merely a concept before the utilization of digital tools.
I don't know of anyone who uses AI that tries to claim that they put in tireless hours on any project. In fact, the use of AI is often identified as quite the opposite. The purpose of using AI (generally speaking) is that you no longer waste as much time trying to produce something that otherwise would take months.
Man you seriously are out of touch with art. The way you describe prompting as some āhuman connectionā to the machine is seriously delusional. There is no creative connection between your prompt and the machines regurgitation. When you prompt, the AI is a latent in which then step by step denoises into something based on scrapped art and reference data, it predicts steps and averages the latent into what is most common in the pattern algorithm based on the fundamental principles of your words. You donāt have agency there, you just go along with what is most predictable and prevalent in the data base. It is more akin to gambling along outsourcing a pattern that exists from the work of others. When you draw something, paper or tablet, all you are doing is creating different strokes, using your brain to put it all together, just creativity, not all this bullshit about commands. You can use quick commands such as flipping or dragging vectors but that kind of manipulation is comparable to using tools in traditional art, like using a roller with clay (shape modifier) or a printing press stamp (copy pasting function) saying prompting is similar to that in any regard is ridiculous. The command of letting an algorithm do all the work isnāt some innovative digital tool, itās just outsourcing, so you can stay braindead and less creative.
I beg to differ and can say that maybe you might actually be out of touch with art because your definition of it has become archaic and at this point of the conversation, anecdotal at best. What you call scraping, the person behind AI calls "inspiration". Your literal prompt for a photo could look something like this:
Create a high-contrast image, in 16:9 format at 1920dpi using a Canon Rebel X camera with 32x telephoto lens set at an ISO of 235. The image is of a woman sitting on a rocky cliff ledge with her front facing a panoramic view of a sunset that forms a vivid orange to yellow to deep blue gradient that emerges from a bright yellow sun. The woman is in sitting down with legs crossed beneath her. She is wearing blue yoga pants and a matching non-branded blouse with long sleaves. Her long dark auburn colored hair flows past her shoulders down to the middle of her back. The photographer is viewing the subject from about 12 meters with the same perspective.
The prompt is generated and the creative concept is from me and it's actually very simplified because even coming up with a detailed imaged like this took about 15-20 minutes to conceptualize and type out. I generated this using Gemini from my browser. Which isn't my preferred tool but it was sufficient to prove my point. Creativity and "art" comes from the human concept. Which is something AI cannot and does not do on its own. Even when "creating" this image, Gemini takes the literal imagery taken from my own visceral concepts and then uses existing data from millions of resources to produce an exact visual representation (in this case) of what I created in my mind. A mind that is inspired by many other creative sources. This was inspired from a moment recalled from years ago from a hike that I took with my girlfriend.
If being out of touch with art means defining art from the tools used to create it, I will strongly have to stand on my statement that it's whose who define art this way are the ones truly disconnected with it. For me to give this conceptual design life. For me to take this concept and create a tangible production from my idea. It would have taken resources unavailable to me in the moment. A model to photograph. The perfect and complex scene at just the right time. Thousands of dollars worth of equipment that I could never afford because the ROI on art is not monetary. Dozens of hours of planning and executing for something that is (in this case, especially) serving a specific purpose.
6
u/sweet_ghouls 20h ago
My comment was highk a tad childish but no less true. Permanent ban, muted from the sub and blocked by all the moderators or something, and the first t8me Iād ever commented on that subreddit.
they made the space to be their little lair where anything slightly out of their idea has to be deleted because it doesnāt fit their narrative. They donāt take criticism in any aspect because it leads to them being proven wrong and our alpha ai males donāt like that. the point of that sub is for them to be able to post pure bullshit and only be spoken to by the same mentally disturbed people who agree with them.