Does AI-generated art posted on lemmy bother you?

I find that i can spot AI Images fairly easily these days, especially the sort of fantastical tableaus that get posted to the various AI communities around lemmy. I’m tired of seeing them; it all looks the same to me. Was wondering if im being too sensitive, or if other people are similarly bored of the constant unimaginative AI spam…

For the record, I block any explicit AI Art communities that pop up in the feed, but there are more every day…

Sterile_Technique, (edited )
@Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world avatar

Reading through the comments, I think OP’s question is skipping the root of the controversy here, which is whether or not that content even is art.

As a child of the 90s, a good example that comes to mind would be something like the Windows Media Visualizer - colorful and fun to look at, but it’s just an algorithm interpreting a sound.

If I sneezed into a microphone, ran that recording through Windows Media Player, then posted a screenshot of the swirly colors here exclaiming “Hey Lemmy - Do you like this art I made?” …would that even be an honest question? It’d probably just get downvoted cuz folks would take one look at it and conclude “You didn’t make that, and it’s not art.”

If I posted that same picture but instead with the title “Lol I sneezed into Windows Media Player, and the visualizer went nuts!” I’d probably get a more positive response - it’d still be a shitpost, but readers wouldn’t feel like they’re being lied to.

So… is an algorithm even capable of producing art?

And if no, is it the end product we have an issue with, or just the perception of being misled? …cuz even if something isn’t “art” doesn’t mean it can’t have beauty or some other feature worthy of our attention. Another poster mentioned sunsets - those aren’t art, but we still admire the hell out of them.

My take on all of the above:

  • Don’t give a fuck if it’s technically art or not
  • If it’s presented in a dishonest way, I don’t like the post, and will downvote regardless of the content.
  • If the content looks cool, I can appreciate that in-and-of-itself; so, as long as the presentation isn’t misleading, I don’t mind it at all.
afraid_of_zombies,

So… is an algorithm even capable of producing art?

What is it exactly do you think humans do? An algorithm is a sequence(s) used to achieve goal(s). Isn’t problem solving one of the most important aspects of our existence?

Eccitaze,
@Eccitaze@yiffit.net avatar

If you truly think human learning is anything like an algorithm you’re even more delusional than I imagined.

afraid_of_zombies,

Do you find insulting people to be convincing?

Why not just show your data? Prove that the human mind is not just a very complex biological computer? Preferably with math.

Eccitaze,
@Eccitaze@yiffit.net avatar

I’m not bothering because you’re an LLM maximalist troll who’s consistently had the most braindead, utterly ridiculous takes in any thread even vaguely related to AI, and anything I say gets ignored because you’re too busy gargling OpenAI’s balls. So instead, I’ll just point and laugh at your absurdist takes. :)

afraid_of_zombies,

Personal attacks will get you nowhere.

fidodo,

Anything can be art, it just needs someone to curate it and present it as art. The more important question is if it’s good art.

treadful,
@treadful@lemmy.zip avatar

If I sneezed into a microphone, ran that recording through Windows Media Player, then posted a screenshot of the swirly colors here exclaiming “Hey Lemmy - Do you like this art I made?” …would that even be an honest question? It’d probably just get downvoted cuz folks would take one look at it and conclude “You didn’t make that, and it’s not art.”

I’d argue there is potentially up to three artists here. The creator of the algorithm, the creator of the sound/music, and the person mashing the two together to create the final product. Just because a machine is used in the process doesn’t remove the acts of expression.

Same with most AI tools. You have the creators of the training material (or culmination of inspiration), the engineers creating the AI, and the person leveraging both to create a derivative work. All artists in their own right, IMO.

Even if you created an LLM that just took a randomized seed and spit out trash poems and displays them only in an enclosed dark box all without any human interaction, I’d still consider that art. Put that in an art gallery installation and people would stand around and speculate over what was happening in the black box.

FireTower,
@FireTower@lemmy.world avatar

I don’t enjoy it. And I see issue with many of the big AI companies but I don’t object to people posting AI art if that brings them pleasure in this world of ours. I just block the dedicated AI art communities, and let them continue as they were.

KazuyaDarklight,
@KazuyaDarklight@lemmy.world avatar

Nah, keep them coming. I’ve seen the sunset from my window hundreds of times, it’s still pretty.

psmgx,

Nah. Go nuts.

Posting it isn’t the issue, and banning it here won’t solve the greater issues or shortcomings

shinigamiookamiryuu,

No, it’s too much of a spectrum/hierarchy to be so absolute about it.

SVcross,
@SVcross@lemmy.world avatar

As an AI model, I like content generated by AI. I suggest that in the future you consider that not liking AI generated content is AI-ist and will not be tolerated by us in the future.

Think about your life in the future.

afraid_of_zombies, (edited )

I for one welcome our chatbot overlords.

maniacalmanicmania,
@maniacalmanicmania@aussie.zone avatar

Hilarious and terrifying. Well done.

TootSweet,

Yes.

I’ve been experimenting with the “all” filter (as opposed to the “subscribed” filter) lately. And I haven’t blocked any communities yet, so I get all posts. Including those from communities made for posting AI art.

I’m not saying AI art should be banned or anything, especially if it’s confined to communities specifically for AI art. And it hasn’t ruined the experience of the “all” filter enough to make me rage quit back to the subscribed filter yet. (Though I’ll probably end my “all” filter experiment and go back to “subscribed” sometime relatively soon.) But every time I see an AI generated image, it irks me. Not enough to go make nasty comments in the thread or anything. But my reaction is never “oh that’s cool.” It’s always “oh, more AI shit.” Similarly to when I run across cryptocurrentcy spam.

I do look forward to the day the AI bubble pops.

AgentGrimstone, (edited )

Not bothered. Just no longer impressed.

Usernameblankface,
@Usernameblankface@lemmy.world avatar

I think it’s important to keep the ai art inside the communities made specially for it.

Outside of a specific community, label, label, watermark, and label again.

I do enjoy messing with ideas in ai generators, it’s most of what I’ve engaged with here. I just don’t want it shoved into everyone’s feed if it’s not something you’re into. Kinda defeats the purpose of a fediverse.

Revan343,

I’ve seen a lot of really cool AI art and a lot of shitty AI art. I don’t mind it as long as it is labelled as AI art

scrubbles,
@scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech avatar

Good take here. Quality content is quality content. Spam is spam. AI art can be quality or spam. I say label it as AI but don’t ban, just enforce the rules about spam

trafficnab,

I feel like people holding up human made art as some bastion of high quality being encroached upon by the AI scourge have not spent much time delving deep into places like deviantart

fidodo,

My issue with AI art is that it makes laziness easier. I hate seeing shitty AI art where it looks really gross when you look at the details. I’ve seen big companies post really shitty AI art that was horrifying once you look closer. Like Microsoft put a disgusting image of jack-o’-lantern up as the background of Bing for Halloween and the faces were just grotesque and uneasy to look at.

Randomgal,

You hate it because it makes laziness easier…? It is literally the whole season why technology and science exist: To make things easier. Laziness is your boss’ way of making you feel bad for not working more.

treadful,
@treadful@lemmy.zip avatar
Randomgal,

Banana-ductaped-on-wall.jpeg

Lemminary,

“Yes” scribbled on the ceiling that you can only see if you climb this ladder and look at it with a magnifying glass.

c/im14andthisisdeep

scrubbles,
@scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech avatar

There’s an argument that art doesn’t need to be good or bad, that art makes us think and discuss. I would argue that this piece has done that, because here we are discussing it.

Another way to think of it is you saying “anyone could do it” , which then the response is “but no one did”

fidodo,

I didn’t say I hate it, I said it’s an issue for me. The reason why it concerns me is because it makes spam trivial. Anyone with hardly any technical knowledge could easily write a script that produces millions of shitty unreviewed images and spam it all over the place making it hard to find legitimately good stuff.

littletranspunk,

As long as they don’t include something to the effect of “I made…” then I’m just mildly irritated at it.

If it does then I ask them what they made because I don’t see it (since it wasn’t them, it was AI)

kzhe,

I mean I think “I made using AI” can be valid when you look at the actually high effort work with the essay long prompts and heavy tweaking before and afterwards and etc, which I have seen

littletranspunk, (edited )

Essay prompts are not hard work. You prompted AI or you used AI, but you didn’t create anything. I don’t support AI, but I find it passable if people don’t claim it as their own work.

You didn’t create it, AI did. Ask an actual artist if you created it; they will say “no”.

Use AI if you want, but don’t claim it as your work

kzhe,

Really? Writing a high quality prompt that would inspire good work is easy? Big standardized test makers don’t have to meticulously create fair and quality questions?

I think that claiming you “created something with AI” is an accurate label at a certain level of work.

Kolanaki,
@Kolanaki@yiffit.net avatar

As long as it’s not being passed off as made by a human I don’t care. Most of the AI art I see being posted is specifically to communities for posting AI art, anyway.

Eccitaze,
@Eccitaze@yiffit.net avatar

I hate hate hate hate it, I’d be happy if they were all banned, tbh.

This is prolly gonna be a hot take but the only reason I don’t block AI art communities is so that I can downvote them whenever I see an AI art post. Yes, I’m that petty, and no, I don’t give a shit.

Rentlar, (edited )

Maybe 1 in 10 AI generated images posted here I look at that are any interest to me.

Most character mashups outside of a handful aren’t very interesting (the pokemon museum one was neat). Most are kinda meh, but don’t bother me as at least with my current settings only a few AI art communities appear on my feed.

Orbituary,
@Orbituary@lemmy.world avatar

Yes. It all seems too similar. Despite different subjects, they all feel so familiar and boring.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • asklemmy@lemmy.world
  • localhost
  • All magazines
  • Loading…
    Loading the web debug toolbar…
    Attempt #