I don't like to call myself an artist because that sounds pretentious, but I do post my artwork on twitter and have done so for years. However, I don't hate "AI", at least not for the same reasons the rest of normalfags do, I simply don't like the enshittification of the internet in general, twitter being the current example. It is retarded that artists think people being able to "steal" their art is something new, but having a shiny new button on every image so you can shitpost on the go is even more retarded, it makes slop generation even more accessible, it's like giving a gun to a monkey.>who caresI don't, and (you) probably don't either, but others do. I know /g/ thinks it's funny because it makes artists mad (and it is), but it's also hypocritical of anons to think this way when a lot of us dislike spam/shitposting/shilling here, and have to use filters to hide it. Hell, at least once a week you get a thread talking about how "4chin is shit now", "[people I don't like] ruined the board", "mods should rangeb& [people I don't like]", and so on. And yet when others complain about similar issues somewhere else on the internet, you call them retarded.>just stop using twitter thenI don't hate AI and this shit doesn't affect me, and I don't care what others do with my artwork either, but I think others should have the right to dislike it for whatever personal reasons they might have. But instead all you do is call them luddites and telling them>"No, you can't hate slop because... because you just can't okay?"I just hope the nip artists move to somewhere else where I don't have to deal with this bullshit.
>>107666409Threadly reminder that """AI""" can't do basic reasoning.
>>107666409>all you do is call them ludditesThe posters who invoke luddites are complete imbeciles because modern society is well on its way to fully vindicate them.
>>107666409>It is retarded that artists think people being able to "steal" their art is something newThe way that people use art for AI is different than how art has been "stolen" in the past. Right now this is mostly a hypothetical argument because there is still a ton that AI can't do artistically, and it really still struggles with depicting specific situations and types of character interactions and stuff. But suppose there was a tool you could use where you could just click a button and instantly generate an infinite amount of pics perfectly in an existing artist's style. That's different than anything that existed in the past, because:>1. In the past, aping someone's style took dedication and effort, and in 99.999% of cases, someone who puts that much effort into art is eventually going to stop "stealing" do their own thing and develop their own style>2. The amount of effort required to "steal" art in the past meant that people were naturally rate limited with regards to the quantity of derivative productions they could shit out (AI can generate 1000 pictures before you have time to make a single sketch, so it risks drowing out real artists due to sheer quantity)>3. If you blatantly traced or copied someone's style in the past, peoplpe would almost always call you out for it and say "you're obviously just trying to be an exact copy [artist] lmao you suck and you're unoriginal"
>>107666481Anyone trying to draw an analogy between corporations making an industry out of scraping the entire internet and trying to replace human creativity, and some guy trying to copy some other guy, is a sub-GPT corporate spambot who can't even fake semantics. Their "thinking" is on the level of pattern-matching linguistic forms.>Jane copies Bob>AI copies everyone>X copies Y>therefore sameThe few of them who are biological should be sterilized by the state.
