As a pro, I have to say I heavily dislike when seeing comments or post like this, I just feels very condescending, like saying “hey, I took your art that looked like shit in my opinion and made it way better, no need to thank me :)”
I just don’t see the reason why to do it other then just being condescending…
This is an automated reminder from the Mod team. If your post contains images which reveal the personal information of private figures, be sure to censor that information and repost. Private info includes names, recognizable profile pictures, social media usernames and URLs. Failure to do this will result in your post being removed by the Mod team and possible further action.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
The guy who posted this earlier today didn't like it either. Neither did the guy before that.
I'm all for not doing this but I'm skeptical it's all that common when I keep seeing the same examples posted over and over and over again.
They always do that. Once they found any sort of 'proof' that ai artists are wrong, they will spam it everywhere.
https://preview.redd.it/ke7x6yvoma6g1.jpeg?width=593&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d7148c2828dd292c294874a9be6e355768750733
To be honest this just proves to me that people dont really search for any proof, just overpost the most reposted mention as a mindless horde of social media zombies.
At least most, the same goes for pro AI, even though the groups are so oversiplified so that they both cant be wrong.
Full pro AI and full anti AI are the least common stances in at least somewhat educated (not just phylosophers and theoretics) people and are the worst takes you can create ethically and logically.
Reminds me of “let’s kill ai artists” memegate. Both groups are insufferable
A few dipshits in both groups are insufferable
Except that one actually gets posted a lot. There was an ai picture of Miku that went viral a while back, and that image got posted in the replies like 15+times.
That very real thing that definitely happened
Thats some projection
It's very common lol. I had it done to my music twice (where the songs were then uploaded to Spotify under an identical name to steal streams) all for leaving a pretty mundane "please label as AI so people can avoid the slop" comment. I've never bothered to post it here cause I don't really care enough about the whole "I'm a victim" culture war going on in this sub.
That's deeply asocial behavior. Jokes on those dudes anyway cause I make all my music money from live shows.
And if it's a super uncommon occurrence, why is ya girl defending the practice lower down in this thread?
Obviously they shouldn't copy your music.
Obviously they shouldn't use your name to steal traffic.
They overreacted and are way out of line.
I am 100% not on their side and think they are in the wrong.
That said lets be real.
Asking someone to label AI so that others are aware is fine.
Asking someone to label AI so "people can avoid the slop" is not mundane at all, in fact it's very insulting and rude.
There's no need to treat people that way.
It's free to be kind.
Shockingly, I'm not the one in charge of anyone but me. So... I dunno? I don't think one has much to do with the other, anyway. I could defend things that only happened once, if I wanted.
It appears to be a short copypasta used by various people to ragebait, not all the same exact example, but referring to one another.
I don’t remember where I picked this image up from, but I didn’t know this was talked about already as I’m not on this sub/this account a lot nowadays.
This happens all the time on Twitter.
It's been an ongoing issue since December 2022 to be exact as it began during that 🚫Ai🚫 protest that started after it came to light that the Ai companies started feeding people's art into Ai without their permission. They especially targeted artists that spoke out against Ai in any manner, way, shape or form including a simple "please do not put my art through Ai, I do not consent to Ai" (which is the case for this artist who isn't vocal at all about it except for that statement in their bio). They get harassed with this shit all the time, I've even seen people make entire Ai models of people.
Voice Actor for Futaba of Persona 5, Erica Lindbeck, got harassed off the Internet this way too from people harassing using Ai models of her and her recently deceased boyfriend/ Voice Actor for Dr.Maruki of Persona 5 (his model was also one of the most popular ones during those early months of Ai) after she expressed not liking people making Ai of her and the concerns regarding issues Ai creates for them.
It's crazy how they always take interesting art with an unconventional style, make it look completely generic and forgettable, and then say, "look, I made it better!" Like it's clear the dude just doesn't like or understand art, but wants to be a dick.
I.dont understand why so many pros flex their lack of taste like it's a virtue. The software couldn't even get the expressions right.
There is nothing remotely unconventional about either image. Like not one detail. Nothing.
Gosh, why do AI Bros want to drag everyone down to their level?
"mY aRt IsN't UgLy, AnD YoUrS iSn'T pReTtY tO bEgIn WiTh!!!"
I didn't describe any "want" one way or the other.
I am just stating a plain fact in front of our faces that doesn't depend on any sort of desires. It IS not unconventional. Whether that's a good or bad thing or desired or not is a completely separate topic.
I also didn't say it was ugly... (tf)? I said it was conventional. Usually conventions become conventions to begin with because people generally DON'T find that convention ugly.
> interesting art with an unconventional style
Lmao this is the most generic anime shit there is.
The AI one at least fixes the phoned in manga-style facial expressions that don't fit the rest of the image in the original, and applies some proper color grading.
No. Just no xD the AI version is generic anime style. Like every ai generation.
The color grading and faces of the original art werent bad in any way. You can clearly see the boy is supposed to be struggling with the act. And the girl is disgusted. In the AI version that just isn't there xD.
You just don't like anything that doesn't have a piss filter.
>NUH-UH! + Ad hominem
>No actual argument
Concession accepted.
Your concession has been accepted.
AI art is literally for people with no taste, people who think art serves a "purpose" beyond the inherent human expression of it
You just outed yourself as someone who has zero interest or knowledge about AI art but has a desire to talk shit about it.
Nah I'm someone who has the capacity to express myself with a computer to do all the heavy lifting lmao
This is just shitty behavior no matter what side you are on.
I agree one hundred percent.
Not taking a side here, but genuinely, what's shitty about it? Somebody's feelings got hurt?
You are telling someone their work is bad and you make It look “better” most likely without their consent to do so.
I (not actually me) am allowed to critize someone's art.
I believe I am also allowed to make an edit of said art and present it to the artist, as long as I'm not selling it or sharing it as mine.
Using AI or, say, Photoshop to make said edit shouldn't matter in my opinion.
I agree that it's tone-deaf. But in any way "bad", or wrong? I don't think so.
You're not even giving constructive criticism and helping out the artists. You're literally just being a dick and your AI edit is useless because they can't learn from it.
It's rude af to edit someone's art without asking them, and then throw it at them saying theirs sucks and your edited version is better.
With consent? Then yeah, telling them the edits you did and why you like the edited version (not saying that theirs sucks in the process) is fine.
And that's ignoring the whole, "I stole your art and put it into the 'steal your art/artstyle machine.'"
That's unsolicited advice, which is generally considered a "dick move".
"it's not wrong to be an unlikeable asshole"
Yeah I guess it's not bud, just don't expect anyone to actually like you 😂
Being inconsiderate is not the same thing as having bad intentions, as OP implied.
Again, I ask you to consider the possibility that the person who did the AI edit is a child, or someone naive.
Edit: if you hate this, go and fight the AI companies, not AI users.
Fighting the users is a losing battle anyway.
Bad intentions is not a prerequisite for shitty behavior.
There is a difference between someone coming off as shitty, and someone being intentionally shitty.
The second one should be shamed, but the first one should be educated.
But both should be called out.
Sure, let's agree on that.
It’s pretty clearly shitty to anyone with social skills
Yes. It is something done specifically to hurt the other person's feelings. The offense wasn't an accident or an unfortunate byproduct of the act, it was the act's deliberate goal.
I don't see in the OP any evidence that it was done intentionally to hurt anybody.
To make this argument shorter, imagine that a child did this. Or someone with a low IQ. I don't want to assume malice here.
Edit: I've realized I might have worded this poorly.
What I meant was, imagine that the person who did the AI edit is a child.
Telling someone you took their art and made it better because you thought it was shitty, is asshole behavior.
I disagree. I think it's subjective.
I think that when you put your art online - you should be ready for anything, including reactions like this one.
Just like I am prepared to receive downvotes when posting here.
I don’t think these are mutually exclusive claims.
Let’s say you and I have planned to hang out. At say a comedy club to see to see a show for which you have the tickets. Now, you’ve known me for a while so you know I’m chronically late. And sure enough, as expected, I’m 30 minutes late and since you have the tickets and are kind enough to wait for me, you miss the first 30 minutes of a one hour set.
Does having expected me to be late make it any less rude that I was late and caused you to miss half of the show?
I agree with you.
And I do think that the person who's done the AI edit in the OP screenshot is being rude.
But I do not see any malice.
Hope you never have kids.
"Okay sweetie, I liked your drawing. I made it better, and now mine is going on the fridge door, and yours is going in the trash where it belongs."
Funny that you wrote this, as I actually imagined the opposite situation:
I have a nephew who is 9 years old. I could see me sharing an art piece that I've made with them, and them reacting with "I don't like it, but I put it into ChatGPT and it made it better".
I wouldn't get angry at my nephew in this situation, I would thank them for expressing their feelings on the matter, and would try to think why they didn't enjoy it.
I'd turn it into a lesson about respecting other people's work and how criticism doesn't need to try and one-up what it criticises.
If you really wanted to shoehorn AI usage into this, you could both try finding out why they didn't like it first, then trying to see if you can improve it together. Just going ahead and redoing someone's artwork misses out on so much, like in the recreation in this post. As the original artist, only you know why you chose to do things the way you did.
Looking back at the images in this post, do you notice how key details that tell a story are missing in the AI version? The mice are good/evil, the boy has a bible in his satchel, his fingers are frostbitten.
Without the artists input someone recreating art is bound to miss these details. Consulting the artist, asking about their work, and then trying to reiterate would have better results, and maybe even a better response. Just doing the bare minimum and proclaiming that you surpassed the artist sounds more like someone who gets high off their own farts.
Thanks for the thoughtful reply.
What I disagree with is the assumption that this is an attempt at one-upping.
I agree that as a feedback this is hardly useful.
Literally how is it not? They put their art through AI and then sent it to them saying that the AI version is better. Don't be naive
Your "Hope you never have kids" is very telling.
When you think about it, this sort of message can be very hurtful to a person.
I've not done anything here except trying to share my genuine thoughts and feelings, and trying to have a civil debate on the matter.
Hypocrisy much?
I'm just a parent with a deep disdain for horrible parenting. If your genuine thoughts and feelings are that you'd consider doing this to a child as helping them, you simply aren't fit to be a parent even if you wish so yourself. Sometimes people need a stern reminder that what they think is okay and "no biggie" is actually deeply harmful and bordering on abusive.
Sorry, but you misunderstood my original comment, or I worded it badly.
I wasn't talking about doing it to a child. I was talking about a hypothetical, where a child did this to an artist, in their naivety. Hope this is clear.
All good then - got confused about subject and object.
When I'm in a being intentionally obtuse competition and you're my opponent
I am not being intentionally obtuse.
If you think I am obtuse - feel free to change my mind.
Just by looking at the OP picture, I do not see any evidence of this being a malicious act.
Generally, people don't like being insulted. Telling someone unprompted that you have made what they put effort into better is insulting. This is especially the case here because the person who did it put the image through an ai generator, something that artists don't usually want people to do with the art they create. How would you feel if you put a lot of effort into something and someone came up to you and told you that they can do it way better than you?
> How would you feel if you put a lot of effort into something and someone came up to you and told you that they can do it way better than you?
I would tell them to show me what they got, and then criticise it on its merit.
If they are a child or brain damaged, for sake of argument, it is still "shitty behavior", and you would scold the child and teach them not to do that again, etc.
Yes, but I was replying here to someone who said that this was done SPECIFICALLY to hurt the other person's feelings.
Both. If it was a child, it was still done to hurt the other person's feelings. The child just hasn't been taught not to do that yet and to not be cruel, so they decide to be cruel more often.
Any child old enough to use Stable Diffusion, and type out fully grammatical comments etc, is YEARS older than needed to fully understand this is cruel. Like not even remotely close. They just haven't been disciplined to behave previously.
Children can be assholes
Children shouldn't be on the internet
Good job you answered your own question immediately. So why type it out and hit send still, lol?
Try living without hurting anyone's feelings, and then get back to me.
That's exactly what normal civil kind people do constantly. If you want feedback from people who have been doing that for awhile already, go talk to any of 95% of humans on the street.
My reality is a bit different from what you're describing. People TRY not to hurt other people's feelings, and constantly failing at it.
Things get even more complicated when dealing with narcissists, for example (not equating it with the situation in the OP, just giving you an example).
IF what happened in the OP screenshot was hurtful to the artist - they have my sympathy.
However, practically speaking, if you are putting your art online in the year 2025 - you better be prepared for something like this.
Most people try. The person making the original post shown in the OP, however, was not trying.
The prototypical narcissist is trying to hurt other people's feelings.
There is not really ANY category of person old enough and fluent and competent enough to have written that out with that grammar, hanging out independently on forums, and knowing how to use img2img software, who also doesn't 100% know this is very cruel.
2 year olds can't have done the img2img. Severely autistic people (average ones would still know thit is cruel instantly, you have to be like extreme few % of autistic) couldn't communicate that clearly.
There is 0% chance this is not intentional.
Well yeah, this person is deliberately being an asshole.
Saying “I made it better” and just changing the medium is a jerk move, regardless of whether or not AI is used.
As an anti, i fully agree
pro-leaning.
I genuinely do not understand the motive behind this kinda stuff. Is it just a clueless goodwill, or a ragebaiting?
And then we wonder why both sides hate eachother
It's obvious intentional ragebait. The internet is full of trolls
Twitter ragebait. Next
I mean considering that the og drawing is about theft i would be shocked if they didn't do that to ragebait
Well them doing it I see no problem with but the comment made is low-key assholey.
So yeah, there we go, there is tech for this. Anyone can do that. Well I can see the point of usage but it isnt impressive. The impressive stuff is the original drawing. Anyone can use that as input for a genAI output. So what? They think that is better? Ok?
I agree its shitty behavior. I wouldn't take it too seriously though. OP your drawing is amazing.
Well both artworks look really nice. But to say that AI version look definitevely better is a thick fat bait to farm views it seems. Because no it is not. The first art is done by professional level artist. And i am a pro who worked with ai art since it existed and took paid commissions.
it's satire/disingenuous. Try not to pay attention to it.
The internet is full of trolls. All I can do is denounce them, and that's all I expect from my opposition as well
As an actual pro-AI person I don't give a fuck, keep false flagging while you have a group of people to false flag about. You don't even care about preserving us long enough to have your fill, you have no discipline.
Please learn what a false flag is. Reddit users and their obsessions with buzzwords they don't understand.....
A political or military act orchestrated in such a way that it appears to have been carried out by a party that is not in fact responsible.
What I'm seeing here is antis pretending ragebait, or something they just straight up fabricated, is fully supported and aligned with by AI artists.
This is exacerbated by sockpuppets like OP "Voicing unpopular opinion" in "neutral subreddits", presenting, faliciously, as dissenters, which would entail overwhelming support of that from pro-AI spaces.
I know my abcs, please and thank you.
Its very obviously ragebait. You aren't supposed to like it, you're supposed to get angry and harrass ai artists because of its existence.
AI prompters* remember, you're not artists ❤️
☝🏻🤓
I think we can all agree that someone building on someone else's work should not be allowed. Just stop all human culture! /s
I love stuff like this because it challenges everyone's preconception of art ownership and the motivations behind posting art online.
When someone makes both sides clutch their pearls without actually having done anything prohibited or illegal, you know they're doing something right.
To anyone "fixing" artwork by passing it through AI: keep it up, king. Make those conservative-brained, terminally online Artists™ have conniptions.
Thank you. Big performative energy in here.
Mfs be like:
Like jfc get over yourselves and touch some grass.
So what you're saying is that something is only wrong if somd government says so?
Seriously, taking someone's drawing, putting it into an ai that removes all uniqueness, expression and puts it in the most generic ai art style, then having the audacity to say you somehow made it better is a dick move. The government should not have to make a law that says so before it suddenly becomes wrong.
From your close-minded perspective it is wrong because people on Reddit say so.
From a different one, it is valid critique. By using AI to make it even more generic, they highlight how derivative it was in the first place, while simultaneously poking at the author's ego and assumption of private ownership. People are allowed to criticize art any way they want and it's not "wrong".
"The audacity!" you sound like a cartoon. Touch grass.
As an a.i. neutralist, this is fucked up.
I feel like this behavior will stop when the luddite side stops with the death threats
Whatever makes you feel better about this post I guess?
That kinda sounds like victim blaming ngl. Also luddites? Like the people that don’t use technology. Is that like an insult against people that don’t like ai art?
Luddite is the 'insult' pros use against antis.
Personally, I always think the person that uses it is pathetic.
I figured it was something like that. Personally anytime someone uses a “slur” (I know it ain’t you know what I mean) against their opponent I kinda always move away from their side of the table.
No, it's a historical term referring to a movement that destroyed machines because they felt their jobs were threatened by them.
I think you're confusing luddites with the Amish.
I know it’s a historical term it’s just I didn’t know they were using it as a “slur” against people that don’t like ai
It wasn't just "machine bad, took job, smash machine!" Luddites were opposed to the concentration of capitol and ownership over the means of production into the hands of a calloused elite few who used this monopoly to brutalize their employees. And while progress is essential to humanity its hard to argue that point when the 1st generation of industrial barons were infamous for stuffing children into coal mines and doing little to compensate those who had their limbs ripped off by machinery. It was more a fear of greed and exploitation than it was of technology specifically.
Lol if you get your feelings hurt because someone fed your picture to AI then I'm not really sure "Victim" is the appropriate term for you here. What crime was committed?
Im gonna go eat some noodles but I disagree
This shit was happening long before that, like it was even a common occurrence during the first big Anti-Ai protest where Artists were doing the whole 🚫AI🚫 thing on social media and ESPECIALLY on ArtStation December 2022 as it came to light that these Ai companies had begun training their Ai using artists works and portfolios without their permission.
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2022/12/artstation-artists-stage-mass-protest-against-ai-generated-artwork/
https://www.vice.com/en/article/voice-actors-doxed-with-ai-voices-on-twitter/
Artist that speak out against Ai in any way even if it's just the little "Do not use my Art with Ai / I don't consent to my art being use with Ai" in their bio (which btw is the case for this artist) frequently gets targeted with stuff like this or worse, whole ass Ai models made off them and it's been an ongoing thing since 2022. A very high profile incident was even the voice actor of Futaba in Persona 5, Erica Lindbeck who expressed discomfort with people making Ai of her voice. She was joined by many other members of the voice acting community in discussing the issues it creates for them but for the crime of voicing her concerns and not wanting people making Ai models of her, she was harassed by Ai users and even had those Ai models of her and her recently deceased boyfriend (Billy Kamets, VA of Dr.Maruki in Persona 5 Royal) used against her, causing her to leave her socials, Twitter and Instagram.
https://ftw.usatoday.com/story/tech/gaming/2023/07/10/persona-5-voice-actor-erica-lindbeck-ai-harassment/81029669007/
https://x.com/RiakiFGC/status/1678868725645058052?s=20
r*ddit.com / r / Persona5 / comments / 14uhvwf / ai_isnt_art_and_no_one_should_have_their_voice /
After an entire year and a half of harassment of Artists, disregard for the issues people were facing due to Ai and even Ai users that began making their own Ai models of specific artist and targeting artists that opposed Ai with it, that's when the "k*ll Ai" became a meme in mid 2024 (though originated as a joke response in a Reddit thread after someone asked the Persona Reddit how they believed the Artist character Yusuke Kitigawa of Persona 5, whose notable for not just speaking philosophically about Art but also what it means to be an artist and fighting against the exploitation + abuse of creatives & the creatively bankrupt stealing the works of other artists for their own profit, how they think he would react to Ai). Even then, it was generally understood to not be serious and was part of a trend of other crude reaction memes of a similar nature from the same time frame to express over-the-top disapproval of someone or something in crude fashion like "let's k* him", "I think we're going to have to k* this guy", LTG Lightning or hand pointing a gun .
https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/we-need-to-kill-ai-artist
You can criticize the meme or the wider Internet for making lights of death threats and I would actually agree with you there but to claim that it was serious, an anti specific issue and not an issue with the wider Internet in general or that it was anywhere near the start of where it all started to justify actions by the Ai community (when if anything, the meme became as widespread as it did in response to how the Ai Community had become infamous on the wider Internet for how incredibly disrespectful & dismissive to artists and others they've been) is just outright revisionism.
Why do pro-AI people have such a fucking victim complex it's so weird
[removed]
In an effort to discourage brigading, we do not allow linking to other subreddits or users. We kindly ask that you screenshot the content that you wish to share, while being sure to censor private information, and then repost.
Private information includes names, recognizable profile pictures, social media usernames, other subreddits, and URLs. Failure to do this will result in your post being removed by the Mod team and possible further action.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
You're incredibly naive if you think only anti-AI people throw death threats around. For all you know they might be pro-AI people pretending to be anti-AI so that they can reinforce this rhetoric.
Ask any artist, current or past, or any social media influencer, any musician, political figure - hell, ask 50% of the world today if they ever received death threats in their life, and they'll most likely say yes. There's fucked up people on the Internet, and throwing those into only your opposing "side" is laughably shallow. Dehumanising opponents is something fascists do. Be better than a fascist.
Depends if the person in question who they did that to was being rude to AI artists or pro-AI people.
The artist’s account is all just art and the title of the post in question is just the title of the art, nothing about ai. So probably not
Alright fair enough, then the person who did that was just being a dick without provocation.
You are rude to people all day on this sub lol. Come on.
I am only rude to people who are rude to me.
Aw hell nah, you again.
Anyways, imagine you did something with your time, passion and effort, someone comes, pick this and says: "I remade it, it looks better, I like how it is now".
It's dismissing your time, your effort, and your intention, if you made something to have a meaning and someone pick this and say "I fixed it"... Even if it's an AI image, would you care?
The true question is: do you really love art? AI generating is freedom for you, I know, but you treat this as disposable, or as a treasure?
It's useless, logic doesn't work with you.
But tell me, sincerely.
If the artist was being a dick to someone else and the person fought back like this, then yeah, well deserved.
If the artist didn't do anything hostile towards anyone and was just uploading art, then yeah, the person remaking it is a dick.
It's important to learn nuance, not everything is black and white.
I'm passionate about my AI art, that has no relevance to the topic we're discussing.
It has to me, because every form of arts needs a feeling, the main one being passion, and the basis being: drive, intention, and the meaning.
Second thoughts apart, fair argument...
I hope we can talk more about it futurely, or tomorrow... Good night.
do you do nothing else all day?
Go to bed, you have to get up early for school.
https://preview.redd.it/e67go3sugb6g1.png?width=337&format=png&auto=webp&s=badcb86ee963caf65557bf58f7533b8e7f265cb9
Witty, gal, you know just because this person commented under a post on the teenagers sub it doesn't mean they're a teenager, right?
Ain't that a sub infamous for the amount of older people there?
Sure, it doesn't mean they're a teenager.
They could also be a creepy ass adult lurking around a teenager sub.
You aren't making a good case here, do you have something to hide?
I was just pointing out that just having a comment on the teenagers sub doesnt warrant you automatically being a teenager because of the reasons both you and i pointed out.
I am not trying to make any case, i just thought you didnt know something, which tbf I now realize was probably stupid on my part.
Or an adult who's there to give advices
If being an adult and going onto a teenager subreddit is creepy, then i cannot even imagine how creepy it is to be an adult parent of teenage kids and having them live in your house and eat your food😱
Adults don't belong in teenager subreddits. Adults being in teenager subreddits are not the parents of all the teenagers there. Don't justify creepy behavior, it's making your stance on this questionable.
You mean like how adult teachers in school are not the parents of the students there? Or adults and teenagers generally being in the same public spaces? Or adults playing the same online games as teenagers?
Defending adults being in teen subs is certainly a weird choice.
"i think youre young so youre wrong" cool got it
Zip it, I think I hear your mom calling.
Ngl witty, nobody wants to be mean to you, but honestly, you're doing it to yourself with comments like this. How are you insulting someone for having a mother?
Were you so triggered by me that you had to respond to me 3 times in a row?
And you responded to my response...3 times in a row
I dont intend to be mean or disrespectful to you witty, but going onto someone's profile to find something to insult them about while your own profile is private and inaccessible to that person is a dick move
Excuse me, did you miss the part where they randomly sent me an unwarranted insult as a reply to me stating my case on this matter?
No, however, insulting someone for something completely unrelated to the subject matter is a dick move regardless. Especially when they cant do the same to you.
Well personally it makes a perfect example of my original statement about this post. If you will not respect me, I will not respect you. I will go for low blows, and it will be your fault.
Well, if someone were to insult you based on the fact that you're trans, how would you feel if they said this as a response?
I don't go around insulting individuals for fun like antis do so I will never have that problem. If someone randomly insulted me for being trans they would be instantly blocked and reported for hate.
Aren't you the person who say they don't want people bringing unrelated things to the conversation ? Isn't this hypocrite from you ?
How does being rude to a general group of people justify this
You're.. asking how being rude to a general group of people can cause someone to be rude back?
Nah, you don't get to justify treating people like trash just because you've been treated poorly.
Stealing is wrong. Period.
It's literally not stealing though?
Did you lose the plot of the debate? The AI didn't copy it 1:1, it made significant enough changes to it, plus the guy that posted the "fix" never claimed ownership of it.
People certainly have a right to fight back if they were treated poorly, people don't have an obligation to be "morally better" if someone provoked them.
i personally dont think it made “significant changes” to the original art. it just kinda changed the style while leaving all of the details the same
It looks like pretty significant changes to me, but I don't think any of us are copyright lawyers so.. 🤷♀️
It's still copying someone else without their consent, and illegal or not it's wrong.
By the way, you know what's also wrong on a much more severe scale? Insulting, harassing, banning, gatekeeping, stalking, invalidating, and sending death threats to people.
I won't argue that?
As someone who was gatekept right out of the pro-ai exclusive circle, I agree gatekeeping is really bad. And so are death threats and stalking and all those other things.
And so is ignoring people's consent and privacy concerns.
Just because one thing is bad doesn't mean something else can't be bad too.
You are completely missing the point I am trying to make.
Someone else responded saying that the person who posted the original artwork is an art only account and made no jabs at pro-AI people. I said okay, in that case the person who used image2image on the picture was being a dick, I literally agreed.
That being said, if the person had been making hostile comments or pictures about pro-AI people, then you cannot expect someone to defend themselves.
Humans are emotional creatures, if you insult someone, expect to be insulted back.
All also fair... We may just have to agree to disagree on some of this. But I definitely do agree that humans are emotional creatures, and people have the right to defend themselves.
I wish you no ill will, Witty.
Thank you. I don’t wish you any harm either.
red herring
Explain how.
you always try to talk about how every anti sent you death threats or something even though it was not the topic
I mentioned it because these are all things the anti-AI movement does. You'll respond bad behavior is on both sides, I'll argue that the anti-AI side has significantly worse behavior, which leads me to the point behind mentioning this in the first place.
If the person was culpable of bad behavior towards AI artists or pro-AI, someone fighting back in self defense isn't as "taboo" as everyone here is making it out to be.
Is all it takes someone proclaiming to hate AI for you to lump them into the actual anti-AI people? Because newsflash, it's far easier to do bot accounts that send death threats to everyone replying on a thread using AI than conventionally.
Circlejerk all the way down, even down to friendly fire so you guys can play the victim more effectively.
Like I thought trash
It's trash to defend yourself? Curious.
For a person always complaining and bitching about being harassed. You don't mind doing the same. That's not defending yourself. At that point you're being a dick.
Who was I harassing in specific?
I forgot you're not a straight forward person. You rather dance around words. This post is about AI users "fixing" artists work and your reply was if the artists was being rude. Just a trash take but I really shouldn't be surprised
Well. yeah? If someone is being rude to you, you have no obligation to be courteous to them. Welcome to the real world, champ.
Thanks I'll remember that next time your on here crying about the mean ole anti AI folk's. You can stop talking now.
This is actually a pretty good example for me to demonstrate how I have no obligation to be nice to someone being rude.
You are.. dismissed!
Seeing that your original post is just getting disliked and the fact a group of people disliked you enough to get you banned. I think I understand. Like I said you can stop talking now 😮💨
Because you don't get to dictate what others do and don't get to do with your art after you've shared it and that point needs to be made to anyone that hasn't registered it yet or thinks they can control others.
https://preview.redd.it/csj9annkra6g1.jpeg?width=500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d315f20af411cd71d56097e2bc24131e6f64fe96
This dude’s account is 10 months old posting only AI related rage bait, he’s not being sincere :)
At this point and age, it isn't downright illegal, or able to be pursued with a proper lawsuit (or at least not worth time, money, and effort.)
But it is widely acknowledged as what classifies as "dick move" by majority of any community.
So no. Dont do it.
This has literally been a rule of the Internet for the longest time, way before Ai. You don't get to dictate what others do and don't do with the art you put online. If you don't want someone to view it, save it, edit it, repost it or use it some form or magnet then you shouldn't post it. This was true before Ai and it's still true with Ai.
It still is a dick move.
As much as I hope this is a one-sided thing, it is a double-edged sword. It is possible for others to distribute information that you do not want shared online, whether or not you upload it. Consent is very flimsy under an anonymous label, and regardless of how much you try to keep under wraps by not sharing things, we still have to share things we like on the Internet, as is the current social norm.
There is, as you say, a risk in others abusing content you post regardless of whether you like it or not, and this is more than just AI. Corporations get your personal data and habits through you signing up, and them tracking your activity through cookies, automatically searching up advertisements for you to display on your browser. This isn't against their usage, considering all the privacy agreements you signed by clicking to "Agree with all of the above" is there. You trust them as they are a large corporation, not shady, and they are too big to care about your information. But there are others who prey on this vulnerability, being able to steal data from you by pretending. You get tricked, going into a phishing website, and one wrong move. Someone has access to your credit card number you used to pay for Amazon delivery.
This is the risk everyone takes when using the Internet. People, groups, corporations all take effort to not cross the lines and establish regulations in this digital space. There are some that could be considered public nuisance, but either not illegal or lawsuit-worthy, as I said above.
No one is stopping another from being an asshole on the Internet, but it is still a dick move. Of course there are those who relish in it, and artists know the risks of doing so by posting it online. But they can call it out, equally so, so they are aware that whoever used their art in an unauthorized way is an asshole.
An analogy would be getting a pencil from a classmate. You can take a pencil while they are distracted, because you need that pencil or whatever. It is openly sitting on their desk. It is barely something to take note of, as the whole box of dozen of it is like. What? 5 dollars? But it is rude to just take it. It is considered polite to ask first and say please.
And as much as anyone can take artist or writer's content online, they can also equally call out for unfair usage, and the easiest one to claim is plagiarism. Which, while for personal use is not illegal and commercial use illegal, still a dick move.
"If you dont want to be robbed then dont have things in your house"
Uneducated cope, as always.
The things in your house are your personal property.
Posting art online is the equivalent of moving your furniture out on the street to show it off, then wondering why it's gone overnight.
When you're robbed you don't still have the thing that you had before, lol.
The guy is being a rude dick, obviously (it's low tier rage bait), but nothing to do with "theft". Even if copyright violation, still a completely different thing than robbery
I really disagree with the guy saying the ai art is so much better. There's a visceral quality to the facial expressions that is completely lost in the ai version. Like the woman looks way more irritated in the first version. Also the ai version changes the lighting to be warm and inviting which from what I can tell wasn't the point in the first image. It's a cold, sad scene. The lighting reflects that. The line work being jagged is intentional but ai and by extension the ai guy who did this "improvement" doesn't understand.
You don't need to be anti to agree this is either idiotic beyond imagination or mean.
“Noooo AI doesnt steal it’s original I AM ORIGINAL!!!”
“Hehe i put your drawing in my slop machine”
"YALL puts a very bad image on AI bros so it's FAKE and uncommon because i say so" ass comments
Least shameless AI "artist", hilarious that pro-AI people are suddenly sick of seeing this post cause they know it makes them look bad 😂
Please think beyond "my side good guys, they are bad guys!" Because people can like ai but think this is disgusting. I say this as someone who considers themselves mostly against ai.