Perhaps possible to enforce now, but they're fighting a losing battle. AI art will ultimately be indistinguishable from human art except by being consistently better; they're relying on the good faith of contributors. And anything that relies on the good faith of 100% of humans is something doomed to failure.
Online art communities begin banning AI-generated images
51–60 of 356 posts
Re: Online art communities begin banning AI-generated images
#52It's interesting to think about it, what differentiate art from a human or a machine. It can't be the content itself, because now machine output is close to a human output (modulo the small details).
So what make those communities attracted to art made by humans, rather than art made by machines? It must be the "act of community" itself, which cannot be made by a machine (it is useless to be "in community" with a conscious-less machine).
So this would mean that the "art content" for humans is not only the pictorial content of the image, but also the "transmission of a message", and in particular, the quality of the initiator and the receiver of the message. In this case, humans would (and apparently seem to) differentiate in quality art that has been created by a conscious being and for a conscious being, to art that has been created by a machine.
Re: Online art communities begin banning AI-generated images
#53> Left unchecked, it’s not hard to imagine AI art crowding out illustrations that took days or weeks for someone to make. This reminds me of what someone from the 1800's would say: "If left unchecked, it is not hard to imagine photography crowding out paintings that took days or weeks for someone to make." Or several thousand years ago when the pottery wheel was invented. Or when humans learned to cast metals instead…
> There are probably a lot of people who did not consider themselves artists, but with creative use of prompts and img-to-img can actually create stunning works
That doesn't make anyone an artist just like filling in a coloring book doesn't. You're following rigid guidelines and given a very small amount of creative choice. I get it, it's a very powerful feeling watching a computer approximate a prompt to great effect but it's not artistry.
Re: Online art communities begin banning AI-generated images
#54I have a degree in Studio Arts in addition to being a software developer (and recently I've started making a lot of creative work with AI). Back when I was in school, there was already plenty of debate about 'what is "Art"'? It's always been hotly contested. Most of my teachers felt that 'technique' was not Art. Others were more purists – life painters, etc – and felt that, no, technique is art. Duchamp poked the art…
This is the kind of comment about art that is measured, constructive, non-absolutist, and too rare on HN in posts about art (and urban dictionary has an entry for 'reverse monet' cos I wondered, but I'd skip that one if I were you).
Ha! Oh dear. Here's the SFW link to what I was referencing:
https://twitter.com/matthen2/status/1566424523125276672?s=20...
(And thanks :)
Re: Online art communities begin banning AI-generated images
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the future we'll hire blade runners to find and destroy AI art
Someone needs to make an AI art detector and name it Voight-Kampff. Ironically, it would be a great application for machine learning.
Wholly appropriate since Blade Runner 2049 had Replicants hunting other Replicants.
Re: Online art communities begin banning AI-generated images
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
They can just focus on obvious cases: people that upload new images at an astounding rate, people who forget to remove the AI watermarks, and people who simply admit to using AI. No need to turn it into a witch hunt where you accuse everyone of using AI.
It will 100% turn into a constant witch hunt - I can absolutely promise it. Want an easy reference? See First Person Shooter games. Turns out that once the computer can mostly do the job, you will see: 1. Constant use of the computer for that job 2. Constant accusations of using the computer in places that restrict it. See basically every online FPS community that exists. And that's with incredibly invasive software…
One way to take down someone you don't like will be to accuse them of using AI. It's an accusation that's impossible to defend against; you could require people to provide a video showing them creating the art, but that adds enough friction to be the death of a community and down the line will itself be something that could be generated.
Re: Online art communities begin banning AI-generated images
#57They should also ban people that have seen more art than others as they may be inadvertently creating derivative artwork from their more thoroughly trained real neural network in their brain. Purposely being facetious, but seriously, we will likely see more and more of these type of rules being applied to competitions or groups. It will be harder and harder to define the rules. At some point, it becomes moot. Did I d…
Newgrounds: "not have the Art Portal flooded with computer-generated art"
DeviantArt: "complaining that their feeds are getting flooded"
Artstation: "the front pages are flooded with unmodified AI generated slop"
They're really worried about the volume that AI art scales. So they don't really have to chase down every image and decide if it's AI or not. They just need to stop users from throwing huge amounts of them, which is easy to detect.
Re: Online art communities begin banning AI-generated images
#58They should also ban creating digital art, as digital art takes less effort than paper.
I don't think that's really fair... I can see the argument for removing AI generated stuff in part because it doesn't require technical artistic skill (whereas digital art still does, in your ability to observe, draw with perspective, etc.)
So if I skillfully combine multiple AI generated images it's stops being art? What's the difference between someone only using that vs. someone taking parts form random images found in Google image search? The latter very common among digital artists.
Re: Online art communities begin banning AI-generated images
#59Art takes effort. Training models and feeding them information takes effort. AI is not magic. Art is just getting another toolset.
They aren't banning AI art because because it doesn't take effort. They're banning it because once that work has been done, you can create a huge number of images which creates problems for the community.
Re: Online art communities begin banning AI-generated images
#60It's going to be interesting to see how this is going to get enforced in the likely future in which AI art becomes in every way indistinguishable from human art.
They're just tilting at windmills. It's already difficult enough to catch cheaters in chess, where there are, at most, a few dozen candidate moves in any position. This is a space with infinite candidate moves.
Best case scenario is that they catch a few people who have no idea how to create art otherwise. But, short of an exam-like proctoring system where art can only be created under complete supervision, I doubt there's anyone in the whole world who can reliably distinguish a creation that is 90% AI / 10% human from 100% human.