The whole "anti-AI" outrage is exactly what it looks like: performative nonsense. It's a brand-new faux crusade liberal circles cooked up to rile up the base, cosplay concern for the "working man," and score moral points. While the very same people turn around and greenlight funding for companies like Palantir without blinking.
It's typical political bullshit - rage on the surface, business as usual underneath.
yeah. there is plenty of valid issues with A.i. use in art, etc. but, the people making the most stink and noise, have no idea wtf they are talking about.
one argument I make is pointing out the collapse of the ladder. Saw it in comic book industry.
Inking. Inking used to be its own art form, and had its own job. But, late 2000's photoshop could alter levels and darken pencils, cleaning up the pencils without proper inking. companies of course decided do save 10--200$/page and stop hiring inkers.
now, everyone at the time said, "no big deal, the great inkers will still get work. if you are bad, too bad." And sure that was true.. for about 2 years.
then, the great inkers also started getting replaced. or retired. And, there was no longer anyone to replace them. As all the beginner, or medium level inkers lost their jobs, left the industry, or just in general no longer had the avenue to practice and get better on the job.
Same can be said with hiring foreign pencillers on the cheap. Its nearly impossible to FIND good American pencillers these days, because the jobs dried up, now there are none left. no one training to be the next great comic book artist.
This actually leads into another interesting aspect. The specific label of A.i.. Digital inking wasn't called A.i. Photoshop filters in general. Clouds, blurs, etc. fractals, smoke.
Shaders, lighting, etc. All this computer rendering, of lighting, water, and smoke and shit. no one calls that A.i. Emergent gameplay, etc. npc behaviours, which even gets called a.i. is good.. yet..
Argument 2. A.I. art is not actually original. its just stealing from existing art and blending it.
This is true. but amusingly, what do they think actual artists are doing? both abstractly, and more directly. in an abstract sense, the human brain, when creating art is pulling from everything they've ever seen or thought to create their art. it is expressly referential. you don't exist in a vacuum. when you draw a tree, you bring forth your thoughts, and feelings on trees that you have experienced. This is in reality, pretty much exactly what a.i. is doing when you ask it to draw a tree as well. taking static, and "imagining" that static is a tree. pulling from its database. the a.i.'s database is just the internet. while your database is your entire life.
In a direct sense. concept artists steal and paint over peoples work all the time. grab a picture of a dog, paint over it to create a werewolf. shit like that.
Bannerlord warsails. people were discussing if the load screens were A.I. because of oddities in it. No. what it WAS, was a screenshot of the game the artists took. then painted over. so oddities, like scaffolding clipping through the sails were intact, becuase, thats what happens in game.
