Discussion in 'Comics/Art' started by One Too Many, Jan 15, 2022.
that is a lot of piglets!
Tetsuo Hara's thoughts on AI art
So he thinks having a soul is thinking about suffering?
To met that's a pretty crappy worldview.
He's got a point that AI has no capacity for suffering. And suffering is a thing that people draw inspiration from when they create art. AI also has no capacity for pleasure. It doesn't feel anything at all.
I hate this.
As cynical as what he said might sound, it's more or less one of the things to drive a person to draw. One doesn't even need to really be in pain. They could just draw out of boredom or even for the fun of it and have something that, even if it looked basic like a stick figure or a cartoonish hot dog with a flamethrower, has more effort into it than AI generated art. Hell, I don't mind AI generated images. Most I see of it is just good for shitposting and the like as shown by what Congratulations posted but aside from that but it can't replace artist, especially when it needs their works as a reference for someone to have it generate something that hopefully ends up looking coherent.
Yeah, it lacks any sort of soul or emotion to it. Aside from all the jank that's made within AI art, it's one of the things AI art manages to lack compared to even a simple stick drawing made by bored individual. No such state of emotion that spurred one to even draw. One could argue it would have some emotion to it if someone took the outputted image and actually put their own edits and touches to it whether it was on paper with some pencils and brushes or on some art program like paint but even that itself is from the person putting their actual hands on an image and giving their own actual touch and soul to it.
There's something funny about this after knowing how Minecraft had its share of creeps and predators.
Excuse the double post but I'm posting a couple drawings I had some internet AI generator make for me.
A hot dog with an AK-47 that is drawn like a 90's comic book anti-hero.
Made these as the example of these not having some emotion or something similar to spur their creation compared to what a coworker drew for me at work when he was on break and after I gave him a completely random suggestion.
Here's what the coworker drew a few days ago.
Remembering on what one could say in the difference between AI art and non-AI art, I can say that the drawing a coworker of mine made has more effort to it, something drawn not even by suffering but by simply boredom to pass the time. Not to mention, it's more coherent to the prompt than what the AI generator gave.
That first one has a whole bunch of wat in front of that door.
Like you open the door and all that wood crap is in the way...
In SF, emotionless machine intelligence can be vastly more intelligent than humans (like "V'ger" in the first Star Trek movie). But IRL it seems unfeeling AI always makes stupid mistakes.
IRL with AI, it's as a buddy and former fruit farmer told me and I'm paraphrasing this since this was something he told me months ago: AI isn't this intelligent machine as people would think from sci-fi movies. It's really an idiot that goes through its programming. It won't make the image one wants since it can't do any abstract thinking, it'll just be literal. Of course the whole thing could be refined and tweaked that we get images that have less jank and voices that sound more like the actual voice actor and those will no doubt lead to all sorts of ethical problems.
As a side note on AI with some thread derailment: finding out recently that there was some AI VA drama because a voice actor wanted a parody taken down because it used an AI that was trained on her voice really made me think of my own stance on AI. Far as it all goes beyond people shouting "consent" and "parody" over an anime girl singing "Welcome to the Internet", voice AI has other problems like scammers using deepfakes to fool victims into thinking a family member is in trouble. If anything, the thing has to be given some regulation and checked under scrutiny since even with all the jank, those could be ironed out. I don't believe it'll replace artist and actors but this system will no doubt be abused by corporations, and nevermind the fact we had scummy companies or groups make deepfake porn which in of itself is already scummy as all hell, as was shown with one streamer who managed to be a creep in having deepfake AI pics of some ladies who were both streamers and friends of his. AI, with art and voice acting, honestly makes me wish it was just for the likes of shitposting but alas, there's gonna be dark and scummy things associated with it.
Do you know who the VA is or where they are from?
Looking back at the name, it was Erica Lindbeck. She was the voice actor for a character in Persona 5. To tl;dr the drama and controversy, someone used her voice to make this video. For context, it's just AI covers of a song. This is the song in question:
I would of posted the AI cover itself but I'd rather just put up the original since I don't know if posting the cover would really be respectful or not.
She reached out to the guy that made the video and requested it to be taken down after her followers reported it (don't know if she told her fans about it or not, I can't even care for that because she does reach out to the creator) and the guy respected her wishes. Some parts of the internet caught wind of it and reuploaded it. What made it go to being shit was people harassing her. Don't know if telling your fans to report the video counts as harassment but regardless, harassing her is a shit move. This on top of it being a year after a fellow voice actor she was engaged to passed away from colon cancer and she ended up nuking her Twitter account. The whole thing from what I read sounded like a shit show for Twitter as usual but the whole ethical aspect made me think, not on consent vs parody but more on just how AI voices can be abused since even with all the jank in AI voices, I can still see how companies would use that while screwing over the voice actor. Not to mention, there's worse things than just someone taking a voice of a character to have them sing a rap song such as Ballin' (AKA that meme song used for a gay black man with a shapely ass getting a few thirsty guys to follow). Skyrim voices actors don't like the idea of AI used on their voices for NSFW mods that are pretty much just porn mods from what I read.
Some AI checkpoints I downloaded on a whim really suck at armor.
Visually they may look nice but they do suck in copying an image because it's all based off this IRL armor.
Tested a furry checkpoint for shits n giggles and this is what it gave me for a furry at a cafe with a coffee or a laptop.
I will admit from all the AI images I seen for characters that are cartoonish or animeish, the furry one's manage to feel less off clones than the ones I seen of anime characters.
I think that's because anime characters are more humanoid than "anthro" characters are, so the brain has less of an "uncanny valley" reaction to AI mistakes with the latter.
Spoiler: AI was a mistake
I unironically prefer the bored doodle over those awful AI waifu shit that's spammed everywhere. Those things and the harassment of Erica Lindbeck have made me hate this trend almost as much as NFTs.
[crudely drawn JPEG of a monkey that's somehow worth money]
So NFT was a passing fad and not a new way?
[that "and nothing of value was lost" clip]
Remember to have a good, healthy breakfast
Separate names with a comma.