I think if its like the guy who uses AI to generate rough iterations and then photobashing it into real art, its fine
I suppose it boils down more to "Is this someone complaining about AI, or is this someone sharing actual paleoart that has some AI involvement". The deciding factor IMO, should be the human factor. AI is a tool at the end of the day and CAN be used in ways that is beneficial so I dont think it should be fully banned.
But 90% of the posts involving AI are just people laughing at terrible AI dinosaurs and not actually Paleontology related
Yeah, I think I'd rather have a megathread of paleo-AI to keep an eye out for, as opposed to a constant dribble of "Oh no, I found another one in [insert shop here]" that...I mean in the end, what productive discussion is there to be had? Yeah, that Stegosaur has a therapod skull and no-one even bothered to proof-read to notice the misspelled "tail". Yeah, it's frustrating. What can we do about it? Nothing.
As a one-off or infrequent mod-post/megathread, there might be a good discussion to be had about where the creative line is, why ignorance and AI is a dangerous combination, and whether there actually is anything we can do to combat the current promulgation of AI-fuelled misinformation.
As a general class of posts, it feels very low effort outrage bait - and frankly boring after a while. And all the more so if we're keeping the rule of Paleoart on the weekends only. I worry that we'd end up with more crap AI "art" than real art where people put their heart into trying to bring paleo animals to life again.
At the very least, I think the poster needs to not just post a photo/screen cap, but actually make a post talking about the specific inaccuracies of the AI example they've found, and why they decided it was important enough to be discussed.
I think critiquing ai paleo images is a good thing because there are many talented artists who are at risk of being replaced by ai or having their work stolen to feed it, plus they spread misinformation. Ai art is bad and all, but this isn't a sub about ai so I don't think it really matters if irrelevant posts are removed
I would create a megathread. I am staunchly against generative AI being used liberally by the general public due to a verity if reasons but I don't feel like discussing it on every corner of the internet 24/7. I come here to talk about dinosaurs.
I get everyone is anti-AI and the campaign against but if the posts are focused on inaccurace information or depictions how is that any different than critiques on outdated books or paleoart is my question
I think it's a type of post that shoud never be banned. We need a constant reminder of how bad AI is, especally for this kind of stuff. It's easy to scroll past them if they are bothersome, anyway.
It's not like such posts cause harm, in fact they ultimately do good for the fortunate bystander that learns on how superficial and wrong AI images are..
Thank you for posting on r/paleontology! Please remember to remain respectful and stay on-topic. Consider reading our rules to orient yourself towards the community
Critique about plagiarism should not be banned. Though from what I feel, neither plagiarism nor their critics seems common, so I guess the rest of the usual AI critics should be probably removed if they add nothing to transparency policies.
I generated a Gorgonopsid that looked decent, but I felt like I couldn't ask for an accuracy check due to the rules of this sub . I think I must able to because people farming karma or real money with "AI slop'"don't care accuracy , but for those of us who actually want to be accurate, there has to be a workaround
Upvote this comment to say yes, it’s a valuable discussion to have and should be allowed
I think if its like the guy who uses AI to generate rough iterations and then photobashing it into real art, its fine
I suppose it boils down more to "Is this someone complaining about AI, or is this someone sharing actual paleoart that has some AI involvement". The deciding factor IMO, should be the human factor. AI is a tool at the end of the day and CAN be used in ways that is beneficial so I dont think it should be fully banned.
But 90% of the posts involving AI are just people laughing at terrible AI dinosaurs and not actually Paleontology related
How much is some human involvement? I don't think it's something to be encouraged given how inaccurate AI models tend to be.
We’re specifically talking about this kind, sorry if I wasn’t clear enough
I mean ig yeah ai does suck
What do you mean? Banning the topic entirely? Or banning posts that just show an AI image and say "look how bad this is"? Or what?
I suppose just the critique in general.
maybe a megathread?
Yeah, I think I'd rather have a megathread of paleo-AI to keep an eye out for, as opposed to a constant dribble of "Oh no, I found another one in [insert shop here]" that...I mean in the end, what productive discussion is there to be had? Yeah, that Stegosaur has a therapod skull and no-one even bothered to proof-read to notice the misspelled "tail". Yeah, it's frustrating. What can we do about it? Nothing.
As a one-off or infrequent mod-post/megathread, there might be a good discussion to be had about where the creative line is, why ignorance and AI is a dangerous combination, and whether there actually is anything we can do to combat the current promulgation of AI-fuelled misinformation.
As a general class of posts, it feels very low effort outrage bait - and frankly boring after a while. And all the more so if we're keeping the rule of Paleoart on the weekends only. I worry that we'd end up with more crap AI "art" than real art where people put their heart into trying to bring paleo animals to life again.
At the very least, I think the poster needs to not just post a photo/screen cap, but actually make a post talking about the specific inaccuracies of the AI example they've found, and why they decided it was important enough to be discussed.
That’s actually a pretty good idea
I think critiquing ai paleo images is a good thing because there are many talented artists who are at risk of being replaced by ai or having their work stolen to feed it, plus they spread misinformation. Ai art is bad and all, but this isn't a sub about ai so I don't think it really matters if irrelevant posts are removed
I would create a megathread. I am staunchly against generative AI being used liberally by the general public due to a verity if reasons but I don't feel like discussing it on every corner of the internet 24/7. I come here to talk about dinosaurs.
This.
I agree that AI Paleo Art is especially terrible and I’ve seen worse somehow like AI Prehistoric animal facts
I get everyone is anti-AI and the campaign against but if the posts are focused on inaccurace information or depictions how is that any different than critiques on outdated books or paleoart is my question
Fr
I think it's a type of post that shoud never be banned. We need a constant reminder of how bad AI is, especally for this kind of stuff. It's easy to scroll past them if they are bothersome, anyway.
It's not like such posts cause harm, in fact they ultimately do good for the fortunate bystander that learns on how superficial and wrong AI images are..
Thank you for posting on r/paleontology! Please remember to remain respectful and stay on-topic. Consider reading our rules to orient yourself towards the community
Join our Discord server: https://discord.gg/aPnsAjJZAP
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
Critique about plagiarism should not be banned. Though from what I feel, neither plagiarism nor their critics seems common, so I guess the rest of the usual AI critics should be probably removed if they add nothing to transparency policies.
[deleted]
[removed]
Nice names and pfps everyone
Likewise and thank you
U welcome:3r
I generated a Gorgonopsid that looked decent, but I felt like I couldn't ask for an accuracy check due to the rules of this sub . I think I must able to because people farming karma or real money with "AI slop'"don't care accuracy , but for those of us who actually want to be accurate, there has to be a workaround
Hmm idk man:3