REMINDER! Glaze. A protection tool against data scraping for ML/AI generator is available for FREE. It is now on Beta 2.0. You can download it here.https://glaze.cs.uchicago.edu/download.html
>>6567613SD founder reaction after glaze is up online. kek.
I've been thinking if they would add this in art website from the get it go, how hard it would be for DA, Artstation or Pixiv to add the stuff as soon as you upload something? Or even to all the pictures in the website already uploaded there. And how this would affect the entire Ai art scene since they need internet to copy and paste the pictures they want to copy it? Would complete destroy the stuff or just from pictures being posted from now on? Either way, I'm still somewhat skeptical about how well this works, but at least is something and maybe it will get better in time. A flimsy light in the darkness, but I will take it.
>>6567613Daily reminder that people who call for the expansion of copyright law, no matter the purpose and/or cause deserve a death worthy of that of the worst people on planet earth.
>>6567620the fact that the founder of SD the most unethical AI generator is trying to cover his ass and these reactions from AI users. Shows that it's doing something.
>>6567624Why exactly? I seen you people make this argument but you never elaborate. The fact AI images can't be copyrighted is a good thing or else you end up with the same or even worst cases than youtube. Some guy can copyright entire databases of pictures and claim that if you post any pose or similar work online he should receive compensation. Can you imagine if some nigger out there copyrights 1000000 pixiv looking pictures and the entire site goes down because of that? Why exactly that would be a bad thing?
>>6567613>data poisoningKEK
>>6567629That is amusing. What this tool basically says is "no, you can't use my art for this, thank you" and nothing else. People have the right to chose if their can be used that way since is clear that the "victims" in this case won't respect their wishes.If that actually ends the way I exemplified and complete ruins their database while coding and writing gets fucked in the process I really do think this will a complete turn of the tables. That I really don't like it personally, I don't want no one get this fucked because this terrible tech and entropy transvestide as progress, is just worth noticing I guess.
>>6567613Is there any version for iPad / mobile use? I don’t have a pc.
>>6567629>chatgpt is something nefarious for us writersThis for real? So its not ok when AI hurts writers and coders but its fine if it hurts artists?
>>6567629>Writer lambasts AI writing>Doesn't understand how it's similar to AI artI swear, some people's stupidity and selfishness really does boggle the mind.People like that idiot are making it so I'm nearly cheering on AI taking other industries, just as a "just-deserts"situation. I'm not yet, but I feel it welling up.
>>6567636wait, so glaze will fuck up datasets? based. I wasn't planning on using it, but ...
>>6567613What's stopping someone from just taking a screenshot of the art? Does the cloak work on that as well?
>>6567629The entitlement of these people.
kek https://twitter.com/Squeez_AI/status/1636173694656495618 artcels BTFO
>>6567633Not that anon, but you've misunderstood his post-He's against the expansion of copyright; so he's not PRO-copyright, he's ANTI-copyright. He's probably, more-so, talking about expanding copyright to stop the abuse of art and artists but putting them into these data sets.Can't say I totally agree with him. What's the point of copyright, if not to protect artists (of any medium)? And artists make a compelling argument that they're being hurt by these AIs.I think you can only really make this argument if you're against the existence of copyright all-together, because then at least you're consistent.
>>6567681There are surely ways to bypass Glaze, but this ain't it. This is just posing some generic anime broad in the same position. Also looks like shit.
>>6567681Are you so technologically inept that you couldn't take a few screenshots?Secondly, that was (i believe) img2img, not using it for the dataset; which is the entire point of the glaze. I'm sure something else will come along to fuck with img2img as well at some point, but you're laughing because it doesn't work for a use case it wasn't intended for (which the copied artist even states).
>>6567624and dirty thieves should have their hands cut off as in the old days.
>>6567681I think you are misunderstand the objective of this. The idea of Glaze for now is to stop image crawlers from stealing the picture from datasets, in this case is just a image2image and input from the user, that is so close to the original that is clear that is just plagiarism that also helps a lot.is not only a beta feature and probably will get better in the future it could help with cases of entire databases getting stolen like what happened with gelbooru. So yeah, for now you probably can use for similar poses and compositions but if every picture is using something similar or better you probably won't be able to prompt anymore or be partially complete crippled.Can I say; I dare even to say; tick tock, aiart fags, tick tock.
destroying the free datasets would just make this the exclusive domain of big corporations who can supply their own training data; outcome for artists is the same
>>6567705Think about what are you saying again.
>>6567613BasedFuck pajeets
>>6567705I've heard this argument before, particularly when it comes to disney, but I honestly just don't believe it.BILLIONS of images were used to make the current AIs, and those images were of vastly different things and using vastly different styles to give the AI range.Now take disney, they may incorporate ALL their movie posters, all their comics, all their production art, and every frame of animation they have in the their own AI... but it still wouldn't have the diversity needed to make a decent AI, outside of it drawing mickey mouse and friend; severely hampering its usefulness.
>>6567613>"Just install this spyware to protect you from a threat that totally wasn't made up by "us""And they just won't stop taking advantage of artists.On the other hand, artists really are fucking retarded and the whole industry is based on taking advantage of them.Remember, if you side with anyone on this, it's going to bite you in the ass.
>>6567636>data poisoningI'm erect.
>>6567717Did you actually made this picture instead of ai generating? What a hypocrite.
>>6567717>NOOO DON'T HELP BIG CORPOS BY ATTACKING OTHER BIG CORPOS STOP STOP!!!Quit being such a corporate cock sucking shill. Stable Diffusion and all the rest were funded by Billionaires, do you really think they're the 'little guy' here?>Remember, if you side with anyone on this, it's going to bite you in the ass.Oh, so do nothing? Just roll over and accept it like a little bitch?Brain dead.
>>6567613> Techbros come to the aid of artists to oppose other techbros.
>>6567713Dale 2 used a 400 mil iirc. My guess is Disney's catalog is enough to train their own models. Especially if they only have to learn their style and characters. They can also license a few hundred million images themselves no problem
Isn't there a massive window of opportunity here? A social media startup could implement this feature automatically on every image & video upload and advertise that to artists. If it catches on, that would make emad seethe wouldn't it? Datasets would pretty much be hard capped at whatever version it was on. Of course this technology is still very new, but it's already improving and it will get better.
>>6567682I'd like to reduce copyright from how shit it is at current (DMCA easily abuse-able and the retardly long copyright duration, etc.). My main issue though with other artists acting like people who want to generate art won't find another way like just pirating the AI databases and generating AI art locally, away from centralized services are deluding themselves and expanding copyright law through legal precedent as they are trying to do now won't change that. Maybe it will, maybe I will be proven wrong but I'm really not optimistic when it comes to anything in terms of making copyright more of a bloated mess than it already is.
>>6567713i think you severely underestimate the portfolio of shit a company like disney has access to. but we don't really know so no point arguing about that. there's also the option of just using existing untainted data and just not telling anyone. that's possible with proprietary systems.either way it's unlikely that trying to sabotage the scraping effort is going to hamper development. in the end it's better that these tools are free and accessible to anyone rather than being controlled by corporations.>>6567725the alternative to SD is the chatGPT approach. unfortunately the technology just going away is not an option.
>>6567734Dale 2 is shit though
>>6567740It's ok. Also there are ways to make it more sample efficient is my guess
>>6567737Did you actually wrote that instead of AI generating? What a hypocrite.
I'm certain regardless of how strongly the law is upheld, it'll be so easy to replicate anything copywritten, it just wont matter. Stable diffusion needed 24 GBs of ram a few months ago, now it needs 4 and you're able to generate images on your phone. GANs, instead of diffusion, are also making a comeback. They're much faster. You're able to create images in milliseconds. And lastly, there will be countries that do not care/ see it as a competitive advantage. It's not that hard to scrape images and create models. Any middle sized company can scrape and create a state of the art model
>>6567613>ChicagoIt’ll take days before friendly niggers paid a grand visit to their offices
>>6567636Elon cloaking every image uploaded on twitter going forward would be pretty funny. Imagine the seething
Artwork looks worse if you use Glaze on it. If you zoom closely there's these weird blobs all over.
>>6567752As opposed to muds by telling them SD's office is making pictures of the prophet Mohammed?
>>6567754It works like a grain filter if you use it as such. Every layering a grain filter on top works fine.
>>6567737>i think you severely underestimate the portfolioPerhaps, but I just really don't see their own custom AI being all that useful. The AI is (and humans too for that matter) useful because it can pull from a broad range of "influences" that wouldn't be Disney appropriate, but a tinge off will make all the difference.If Disney had a Disney AI, I think it would be too bland and stagnant to be of any use to them.
>>6567753I want full retroactive clocking. Probably now is impossible since it does take a good amount of computational power, but like the nice anon here exemplified >>6567750 this sort of tech gets better and faster by the minute. If you read the thread on /g/ about the topic right now is not that great, is just a thin thread of hope for us, bu sure is something, and if it get easy enough to cloak images in " in milliseconds" it's not out of the question to the entire thing be dismantled and scrapped, even img2img.The important thing right now is too keep the expectations low so that won't be no disappointing, but sure is promising either way.Heck, I even would go back to DA if they promise to protect my and other people shit.
>>6567754I guess it's fine if you use it to advertise your work online. Can't use it on commissions since it looks like shit
>>6567754I actually like the look since is lowkey like oil paint. And also legitimize your work as being "real" since no one is protecting their AI generated images. Cloaking will be this symbol of status, like saying "this thing here is worth enough to protect because I'm made myself with effort and is not stolen".
>>6567761Any example artwork that you said work fine? I want to see it for myself.
>>6567636Oh shit! I found a way to clean poison off of it!
>>6567768Why couldn't people with ai art use it to make it more believable?
>>6567770What does this mean?
>>6567768Not to mention, it should protect against actual theft as well. Who's going to steal and print your image on a shirt or whatever else when it's got all those artifacts on it.
>>6567772Would you really put the effort in to it? Just so people can go in some of those sites to check if is really AI made. At some point there is "using AI as a tool" and others it stop being that and just becoming this pathetically desperate attempt at larping you are an artist fr fr.You could do it I guess, but there is such a thing as pride, anon.
>>6567624And that's why the people who made image generators should be scorned for making it an issue in the first place.
>>6567629>ChatGPT is bad for us writers, but AI art is good!I swear these """people"""" are the epitome of "my thing good and important, your thing valueless"
>>6567774>original artwork received glaze>glaze artwork can fuck up data>screenshot or screencap glaze artwork>all poison in data gets wiped off completely>screenshot is the antidote of glaze artwork, making this dumbass protection tool complete worthless.
>>6567780Everybody think they're special, and unique, and irreplaceable, just like /g/ did.
>>6567781I believe they even say on their website that screenshots don't change anything, it's still a glazed image. It has to do with the colours/pixels of the artwork, and not some special code in the image or something - that's why it leaves perceptible artifacts on the image.
>>6567782Nah, bro. I say and I will keep saying. /g/ had absolutely nothing to do with this, and they where actually on our side since the start. The shills that invaded that board and are using like a cockroach nest./g/fags, code monkeys and "computer scientists" all deserve to be protected the same way as us. This entire tech is the problem and is completely fucking people over. Turning on ourselves will lead nowhere.
>>6567777People would put in the effort if they tried to sell something. But I do grant you that 99.5% of images generated are just throwaway shit.
>>6567781Yeah, I don't think screenshotting the image destroys the adverserial image meme. Adverserial machine learning in computer vision has been a thing for a long time. Even the authors will admit that there will be ways to fix this exploit they're doing to confuse the training process. But, i truly believe stable diffusion will respect the opt outs and people adding do not train to their models. Malicious people won't care about it and find a way around glaze
>>6567754I don't care, I don't do art for the attention. I just need art directors to see my art, they're not going to give a damn if there's some filter over it.
>>6567795>But, i truly believe stable diffusion will respect the opt outs and people adding do not train to their models.I'm not so sure, firstly that emad guy seems like a massive cunt.Secondly, they've done some skeevy things around that, like putting a due date to opt, and seemingly implying you can't opt out later etc.Maybe the pressure from the glaze, and the lawsuits, and artists, etc have made them change their tune.
>>6567618didn't release? what?
>>6567768You should know the reason why people like art is because the final product is nice looking to them, not because of some arbitrary 'worth' that the artists thinks matters to the person viewing it. That is why AI art is popular, the labor that went into a product means nothing to a person when they see the final product and only the final product. No normal person who buys a laptop for work has ever cared about how that laptop was conceptual developed and then how it's motherboard was manufactured, they care that it works and they can do shit on it.>>6567779The reason Napster died wasn't scorn, it was lawsuits and then better ways of pirating came out soon after with support for every file format like EDonkey, Limewire and BitTorrent. Scorn has no effect on what people create, they'll release it anonymously if they have to.
>>6567802Well that date was probably because they started training a new model. So anything past that date would still be included. I've heard one of the devs say that once you've trained it enough on the concepts with enough images, you can essentially let the end user pick a bunch of images during inference (prompting) and feed them in to replicate their style. I do wonder how much it can improve on being more sample efficient
>>6567808You actually wrote that yourself? Don't you know that chatHPV is popular because people can use it write long texts really easily? That's why is so popular, bro.
>>6567812>Well that date was probably because they started training a new model.Oh I got the reason, but the way it was put sounded SUPER skeevy. It's just constant bad PR from their end.>I've heard one of the devs say that once you've trained it enough on the concepts with enough imagesI'm personally doubtful. You see those videos or posts here of AI bros jerking off to the newest model, but the differences between them really don't seem to be all that much from my end.I think we've hit that development peak, and advancements are going to come to something of a standstill.Though hey, I may be wrong.
>>6567819I don't care, AI is gay but you fuckers keep acting like expansion of law and making your own art worse to own the coomers is a good thing.
>>6567808If AI art was so heckin' valid, why are the uploaders so afraid to tag it AI? Oh that's right, nobody actually wants to see that crap.
>>6567827DID ACTUALLY WROTE THAT YOURSELF AGAIN? LMAO, LOOK AT THIS DUDE, TONS OF TERAFLOPS OF THE HIGHEST TECH IN THE WORLD AND HE STILL WRITING HIS OWN REPLIES AND FUCKING LOSING THE ARGUMENT! You people, I swear to god, I normally don't goblin out this much but you ask for it, I swear.
>>6567808>Lol the absolute seething of this leeching pajeet realizing he couldn't leech anymore
>>6567831>>6567834Cope and mald. Expansion of copyright law is a retarded idea no matter the purpose or cause. I want 75-52 years of copyright no more, no less and I want my drawn, digital, trad art under that otherwise Creative Commons. See ya fags
>>6567839Fuck off Chandran
>>6567839that's why nobody likes communists always try to take advantage of the hard work of others without doing anything at all
>>6567613Glaze is collecting that shit to release years later. Hahahahahahaha
>>6567636>data poisoningIf only
>>6567808>AI is good and real and vali-ACK
>>6567717>Disney They'll do it regardless of ethics if they ever felt like it. Applies for all big corporations out there.
i dislike ainiggers as much as anyone, but if people's default response to a paragraph of text is now>lol an AI wrote thatwe're just heading toward a future where brain damaged 140 letter twatterspeak is considered to be "human"but this is the future humanity chose so whatever
>>6567892nice samefagging AInigger
>>6567629techbros...
>>6567892ai nigger speak
>>6567892I get that ure worried about people's communication skills going down the drain with the rise of AI language models. But we also need to see the benefits of this technology, like helping with language translation and improving accessibility. Ultimately, it's up to us humans to use technology wisely and not let it take over our skills
so what job is safe from AI?
>>6567912Something manual like electricians I guess. Robots are still very hard to build compared to something you can run and interact with through your computer
>>6567912Nobody knows... Impossible to predict imo
>>6567912Yeah, I don't think computer science or engineering or art are going to disappear any time soon, after all realistic portrait painting didn't disappear when the camera was invented either. Cameras became a useful tool for the painter instead. I think a similar thing will happen with these LLMs after the hype dies down, they'll just be seen as a useful tool for the software developer/engineer/what have you. You still need to know programing to know when it's fucking up code and how to connect things. Similarly you need to know art to create good images with these generators. And purely handmade art will also still have a market. But probably much smaller
>>6567912ai development obviously, industries are going to shit but people seem to still have enough sense to not let it maintain and develop itselfanything that's reliant on physical things malfunctioning. but wait until we get self-repairing pipes
>>6567862I think it actually does somewhat? On their site it says that if your work has already been put into the dataset, by having this glazed images come in afterwards it sorta fucks everything up regarding your tags.So it works in a somewhat retroactive way.However, if you drew an old picture of mountains, and THAT'S the tag someone uses, the retroactive-ness doesn't work, the image is still in the system.
>>6567892>I-I hate ____ as much as anyone else b-but whatabout both sides! Both sides!!>>6567916I work in factories automation, aka with literal industrial robot. Yep, testing and commissioning those robots are HELL of a fucking pain in the ass job because you have no idea how different factories operate/manage their production lines. You have to go there in person, troubleshoot and figure out how the wiring, conveyors, cartoning/canning/case pack sealers/power supplies. Sometimes you have no idea why the E-stop button was permanently shorted, sometimes you have no idea how the HMI ended up showing the wrong I/O inputs. Making the robots is easy-ish, they're mostly standard design with about 15 years of service life. Installing those robots and making sure they work? No robots are going to be able to install another robot. Or even repairing another robot. Or dismantling another robot. Because every projects are different.
>>6567912janitors and trashman
>>6567795>if you do some extra uncompensated work for us sifting through our database then maybe this model won't steal ur shitIt should be opt out by default you thieving niggers
It's too late. They already got more data than they can handle. Also most artists arent aware or wont care about this software anyway.
>>6567944We're talking about it? Artists are observably concerned with AI, so I just think you're flat-out wrong here.
>>6567933>E-stop button was permanently shortedHOLY SHIT!
>>6567951They are but i bet that many of them wont bother with this software even though its just few clicks for many reasons, one being its too late.
It's over... there's no point fighting back anymore...
>>6567944Me when I lie
I can’t believe burger flippers won
>>6567955Just your typical old production line bullshit with cheapskate fucks.
>>6567961>>6567957>>6567944Why does it feel like the same anon is posting the sad boy "give up" shit. Stop it.
It's a good first step but not nearly enough. As other anon said, there is already enough data available. Only the US government can do something about it. If they do it other contries follow suit since they are its colonies.>but muh russia, china and coDying states and they were already ripping off assets 1:1 without giving a fuck.
>>6567613It’s not illegal to use [GLAZE]. [GLAZE] is just a tool. It [protects artwork] the same way humans do. If you don’t like [GLAZE], then you’re a Luddite. We have to develop [GLAZE] quick before China does. The [art protecting] genie is out of the bottle. You can’t stop progress.
>>6567972He's worse than jannies.
>>6567753Isn't he pro-AI?
>>6568035Glaze is AI technology too... AI/ML tech is not bad when it's done properly and ethically. I hope companies make use of Glaze and push them to develop it further.
>>6567629>>6567780That last guy is either a troll or has absolutely no self awareness.
>>6568038Well, I don't think he's pro-artist either since he was such a massive cunt about not wanting to credit people.
>>6567972There's really only like 2-3 pajeets clogging the shitter. Occasionally you can spot them on /d/ and /v/ too but got fucked the same way pajeets get fucked on /ic/
>>656761399% of faggots in existence aren't worth "copying" with an AI. And the 1% of artists that are worth a damn are already part of countless models.Kys retard
>>6567624make AI impossible to copyright, simple as
>>6568051>cope
so does this actually work or is it artist copium?
>>6567827>"I swear I only care about your rights!"
>>6567613It is somewhat ironic that artists are being bamboozled into applying deep learning style transfer on their own artworks, using a model that's been trained on artworks including those still in copyright (Norman Bluhm, from the Glaze paper), under the euphemism of "cloaking"I wonder if this will have any meaningful impact on anything other than the paper author's career and notoreity. Either way, an interesting case study.
>>6567613imagine a browser pluggin telling you if an ilage is AI, putting a big stamp on it.
>>6567933nice wall of text fagtron, did chatgpt help you out with that?
>>6568098We're probably some good time away from that - there is that one service that tells you if an image is AI, but it's currently notoriously inaccurate, or more like; over zealous in calling things AI.
>>6567787Sure thing, man. From /g/ by the way
>>6568110What's wrong about being a manual laborer? lol
>>6568110>W-why are you hampering progress?! >N-no! It must be because of the artists/banks! Lmao. I see the similarities between cryptofags and pajeets.
>>6567613Something about this feels weird, almost on a metaphysical level. I support the right for any artists to not have their work used for training, but I think this will backfire with spiteful prompteurs who will use every fibre of their being to target artists who employ this as a challenge, like a form of streisand effect
>>6568145Feeling an overlap with muh hustle culture grifters who believe every second of your time need to be optimized and monetized.>>6568148And when this gets called out, proompters will tip the public opinion a little more against them.Somehow they are doing an incredible job of appearing even more insufferable than the worst bpd artfags the Internet had to offer, in a matter of months.
>>6567912Programming. All the code in the world is shit, bugged and AI will never be able to fully understand the mess that even the best programmers can't understand, and they wrote it. It is like the whole code world is an extreme form of the hand situation with AI art. Copilot is actually just a complementary tool to speed up work, but programmers are not going anywhere so soon. At maximum, they would become reviewers slaves of AI-generated code.
>>6568211>At maximum, they would become reviewers slaves of AI-generated code.Exactly, and artists are also completely safe. AI will never be able to fully understand soul and the mess that is hands. Creating soulful art is like if the AI could do front end programming, which will never happen. AI art is actually just a complementary tool to speed up work, but artists are not going anywhere so soon. At maximum, they would become hand redrawing slaves of AI-generated images.
>>6567735it would take a lot of computing power, my computer can glaze an image in 20 mins at lowest quality, combine that with some autist like pic related uploading 100 pics per day and you're paying for a lot of computing power to little benefit
>>6567682If they didn't want copyright, they wouldn't have profit from their AI shit.Also AI fags hate each other for same shit.
Post some more examples of glazed up images. Saw some examples earlier that didn't look too good....
>>6568303the tech will get better don't worry ;)
>>6568309What a dogshit disgrace. Some more solace for anyone is that no actual art group is going to accept these insufferable blowhards nor is any reputable company going to want to deal with pathetic inbred and inept prima donnas like that human shaped thing.
>>6568016Kek, I'm going to save that copy pasta and use it /g/.>>6568152>Somehow they are doing an incredible job of appearing even more insufferable than the worst bpd artfags the Internet had to offer, in a matter of months.They act almost exactly like troons. I even see anons on /g/ geting sick of them now.
>>6568340>They act almost exactly like troons.what do you call a group of troons? a dev team
>>6567629the first tweet is legit one of the most hypocritical things I've ever read
>>6567613This doesn't work
>>6568051Even if you're right, there will be popular artists in the future and new styles and trends evolving (especially to differentiate from AI).Imagine if even a significant portion use Glaze (considering it works), the datasets would be a fucked up time capsule 5-10 years from now. Which is fine if you just want to generate big tiddie victorian anime girls in corsets for 2 decades.
>>6568359yeah it's just a glorified filter
>>6568359Proofs?
>>6568365https://warosu.org/ic/thread/S6563165#p6564888https://warosu.org/ic/thread/S6563165#p6565379If you don't believe, be my guest and do the test on your computer too, everything is free besides your time
>>6568363It will be defeated by then anon... Even they will tell you that. The only way to really protect yourself is to only do physical art
>>6568366okay maybe it doesn't work on loras and image2image. but does it work on the initial training of the model?
>>6568370I don't know half of what you're talking, I only glazed the images for someone with SD to test it
>>6568372ok i see. the issue is that gazing was never a robust solution as it tries to make an image visually appealing to humans while also making it "unreadable" to computer vision. in the short term it might be fine if you only intend to showcase your work online for clients
Looks like shit
The people that made the opt out site also did a write up on their analysis https://spawning.substack.com/p/we-tested-glaze-art-cloaking>Effectiveness: This article proposes that Glaze can be bypassed in its current form. If one is to argue that glazing is a form of opt-out request, its effectiveness is perhaps equivalent to making an opt-out claim. >Time commitment: It takes 20 minutes on a beefy macbook m2 processor to Glaze an image, much longer on less powerful devices. Opt-outs are less time intensive. >Repeat commitment: Opting out is a one-time commitment per image link removed. With Glaze, every new deglazing method that appears will force the researchers to adapt for it, and artists will have to repeat the process.
>>6568401>Join us we are the only protectionYeah nah.
>>6568384This is how it looks? Wasn't it supposed to be almost invisible? I don't post images on the web either way, apart from strictly work related things that I have to post, so whatever, I'll just continue like this and fuck it, I had some popular images on Twitter but getting thousands of likes felt hollow anyway.
>>6568401All this could be solved if training was deemed copyright infringement.
>>6568384yeah it looks especially bad on clean styles. Maybe a strategy could be "sign up to my Patreon for unglazed images." That way it can avoid scraping, and AItards who want to rip it for models could at least pay for it.
>>6568438>it can avoid scrapingBecause no one is posting patreon art to the public for free
>>6568421This is what it looks like on the highest setting
>>6568384>>6568444uh, glazebros?
>>6568444Is this dalle from 2018
>>6568444Pure soul.
>>6568444I should verify it myself but I'm too lazy to right now, but from what you posted even the lowest settings are unusable, might aswell not post anything then.
>>6568444glazecore
>>6568444actually looks better, im digging this
>>6568462I really like how the face looks so fucked up. There is some meaning behind this, the world were art lots it's true identity and true artists are the distorted marginalized group. Pure cyberpunk novel trash we are living.
>>6568444It's cool, I'll just tell people to squint when the look at my images.>>6568384It looks fine. I swear some people only want things to be perfectly clear and clean. It's why lo-fi recordings can never really take off.
>>6568467genuinely gettin inspired rn
>>6568401Yeah, tried to find Spawning's original tweet. They (or some developer related to them) bypassed Ortiz's image but then received blowback so deleted the tweet.But it's a good thing there's effort and commercial interest behind this. There will likely be paid alternatives that will work better, and if not enough to defeat the beast it will at least make the AItards 'jobs' harder.
>>6568401This is fucking grim, the absolute state of the future of art online.
>>6568469>It's why lo-fi recordings can never really take off.wot? lo-fi music was on almost every YT video for years.anyway, glaze looks too artificial to be lo-fi. maybe on the lower settings it can look more like noise. if they could make a version that looks like dust & scratches from old film that would be really based.
If the AIchads start winning the argument, does the thread get pruned? How does this work?
>>6568444Hahahahahahaha
>>6568496what argument?
>>6568496>argument>"winning"You faggots get ridiculed from start to finish in every garbage shill thread you make here
>>6567805The initial release was technically by RunwayML
Has anyone successfully reproduced their results though? When I tried it it didn't seem to do shit.
>>6568496>If the AIchads start winning the argumentThere's no argument here, except whether Glaze does the job or not. If not, Glaze and other developers can learn to adapt to make other tools.
>>6568041About that I'm not sure. He also hint that you can find the artist through Google Search. He is known for utilizing hate as marketing strategy and the artist did get a massive followers afterStill a psychopath with brainchip and shit.
>>6567613had to be chicago
Good they're making these tools, but I wonder how urgent it is considering the rose is off the bloom with AI art.Most of it is boring shit. Regardless of what it CAN do most use it for the same redundant anime waifus, uncanny valley and 'surreal' MJ art shit. The culture around it just reveals the difference between an artist and a consumer.
>>6567629Gee man, the double standards are just hilarious. Didn't realize so many people were so resentful of artists. Maybe they should pick up a pencil like the rest of us and actually work, but that would be gatekeeping I guess.
>>6567613How will this stop me from making money off ai art when ai already is working on my computer?
not looking good artists...
>>6568558Yeah so much artist envy has been revealed. Maybe the envy is because artists find some meaning in life, something besides consumerism and chasing paper.AI gave these people a taste, but it'll never be enough because these tools are limited and superficial. They're still rooted in consumerism, not creation.
>>6568566ok luddite, keep posting from your anti consumer all natural handmade no slavery involved phone/pc
i guess only time will tell how this plays out
>>6568570suck a dick u big gigafaggot
>>6568583u 12yo?
>>6568574I'm gonna say this wont go on for long. Not a fa/g/ here, just my personal opinion. However, I wouldn't be surprised if something came along sometime down the line that did actually watermark others art.
>>6568586That's the hope i guess
>>6568110Jesus christ these /g/ fags are as cringey as some of the people on this board. "unshackled creativity"? Nigger please, I've seen those SD threads and they're literally full of the shit they're complaining about here. Nothing but coom, let's face it, we all like seeing ass and tits, some are just willing to put in the work to draw it, others not so much.
>>6568586I mean, the tech cleary exists, it just needs to be improved. And there is a huge market for it, if I was a /g/fag I would be working on anti-AI tactics instead of AI and delivering a solution for a problem most people want while the small minority abuses it.If this works for images it also would work for writing. I can think in a few alternatives but I'm not sure how possible they would be.
>>6568570>ok ludditedidn't say anything about tech, but hey, I'll take the label. social media and smartphones have been a clusterfuck for society, and I use both so little that people in my life think I'm a complete weirdo.
>>6568612ur on 4chan on an ai thread of all things, go to wetcanvas fag
>>6568597>mankind's unshackled creativity just leads to an overwhelming avalanche of pleb-tier slop for coomingI mean, it does make sense when you think about it.
>>6568624yeah, i don't know what people are expecting from something becoming easy to do it's not like the average person is taking amazing photographs they are at most taking selfies, family and friends photos while the few professionals are taking the artistic/documentary photos
>>6568621my first post must have really hurt your pussy.
>>6568630which one
this retard has more than one pussy lmao
>>6568641dont u
it's a start at least. It will only get better with time, and i hope more people join and fund the project. There has to be a billionaire willing to fund this...
>>6568345Correlation does not mean causation and all but what is up with the overlap of troons, autism and coding? They also have a tendency to read shit that isn't there if the Rowling thing is of any indication.
>create a problem>sells you a solutionwhy are code troons like this? this wouldnt be a proble in the first place if these troons would stop dilating for a microsecond and realized no one asked for AI to begin with.
>>6568670most programmers are coomer incels and being coombrain incel is the number one cause for trooning out. It's why Rowling specifically hates MtF and not FtM, the latter mostly transitioned thanks to being molested.
>>6568671>no one asked for AI to begin with Why? Maybe not for ai art. But i would love it if nobody had to do all the repetitive shit work.
>>6568704I'd love everyone getting pushed into blue-collar work too.
>>6568728>reject modernity
>>6568728Blue collar work is unironically more satisfying. If only it were paid better
>>6568671It did find an audience in rich faggots looking to earn some extra shekels by automating workforce, and subhuman redditors with inflated egos using it to avoid confronting their lack of skill.Do not expect either to suddenly start creating anything of value now that this tech is here. Tech made by grifters, for loser.
>>6567780You just know that they hsve to be the same person who thought the riots were justified until they become a victim.
>>6567737I might just be retarded but honestly I would not mind just the few big corporations having access to those slop machines.It's either Disney or the entirety of the internet + Disney. Either I just need to ignore/block anything with the Disney logo or art sites get spammed from all sides and turn to complete shit, I might be missing something but one of those outcomes seems significantly easier to deal with.
>>6568991Yeah I agree, that argument never hit with me either. Disney could be a containment unit for this shit. 99% of what it produces feels like AI anyway.
>>6568991Concentrating power in the hands of a few big corporations will limit competition, innovation, and consumer choice even more. Allowing everyone to use it is far better.
Well, that didn't take long.
>>6569006>will limit competition, innovation, and consumer choice even more.lmao are we even talking about art anymore
>>6569008Link?
>>6569008Yeah it's been bypassed 1000 times already, even shortly after its release. /g/ nerds thirsty to prompt their waifus will find a way. The question is will the normie using fucking Midjourney be able to prompt an artist using Glaze. If not it will have largely done its job.
>>6567613Glazed, defused and redeemed :)))
>>6569014Disney movies, book covers, coon images are all a commodity and for consooming and they have been. Art that is meant to communicate human emotion etc. Will never be replaced by a machine of course. But there is a difference
>>6569020>Upscale it to 200%, then downscale it to 50%. You're back at the original resolution with no perceptible difference but your upscaling algorithm of choice just wiped out all the garbage artifacting patterns Glaze uses as a watermark.
>>6569008This helps artists in the discussion of AI ethics btw, can't hide behind leftist talking points about the democratization of art anymore. Prompting retards cannibalize themselves, you love to see it
>>6567629lazy ass little bitch
>>6569006If you're not the owner of an equally large corporation, you've never had the chance to compete and never will. Anything you can do with an AI, Disney can do a million times faster and a million times better thanks to the giant teams of professionals and advanced equipment it can afford (and also with the help of a likely superior AI). Hell, even if both yours and its output end up somehow equal, Disney still has millions to spend on advertisements and an army of lobotomized fans that will gobble up anything they make.I simply cannot see how spamming the internet with slop and screwing over small teams, studios and creators for a slim chance of putting a scratch on an immovable monolith like Disney as smart or appealing in any way.I fucking hate Disney as much as the next guy, but I'm getting tired of the retarded "you don't want Disney to benefit from this" arguments when discussing solutions and situations that are nothing but beneficial or at least favorable to me as a creator and/or consumer.Literally nothing about Disney's status as a Monopoly is gonna change either way.
>>6569057Just because big companies have more resources and reach doesn't mean smaller teams and creators should be excluded from using AI art. Allowing only big companies will only reinforce monopolies and hinder competition. AI art can level the playing field and lead to more creativity and innovation if used as a tool. Addressing monopolies is important for the health of the industry overall. So, let's not dismiss smaller teams and creators and instead embrace the potential benefits of AI art for everyone, amigo
>>6569075Any benefit or advantage a person might get from this is nullified when freely available to everyone else, and that's without even getting into the drawbacks of everyone else being allowed to freely leech off you.There's simply no leveling the playing field, if you think there is then I'd recommend going out into the real world sometime.It's either slop coming from a few companies or slop coming from everyone (including those companies), one option appears to be significantly more manageable.I'm yet to hear of an actual and realistic drawback of only an easily ignorable handful having access to AI besides a vague "less competition and innovation". I'd like hear of how it could be used to realistically compete with giants and innovate that isn't just cutting cost and pumping out stuff faster, something your competition will do too.
>>6568494You're thinking of the genre, the recording technique/limitation is stuff like recording directly cassette, or live recordings. Low budget, low production stuff.I'm not sure why Low-fi (the genre) took the moniker it did, since usually it's quite polished, the creators are also usually producers.>>6569008>>6569042>Doesn't actually post linkWow, guess I've gotta believe this unverified claim. Besides, glazing is still in its beta-phase wasn't it? Hardly surprising people can't find easy work arounds right now, if they do work that is. It's just a good thing that the protections are being developed, and as another anon noted, it also sort of shows how shameless these AI bros are - how much more abundantly obvious do artists have to make it that they don't want their work put into the AI mincemeat machine than using this thing, only for some assholes to develop and use techniques like this to go against the artist's wishes.
>>6567629>>6567651>>6567780>>6567782>muh progressI know a techbro who thinks coal miners should "deal with it" and unironically said "learn to code". Should give you a hint on what these people are like.
>>6569134It was mostly journalist leftoids that said that truck drivers and coal miners that said that they should just learn to code. The same people that are now against ai art funnily enough
>>6569130Here's the link buds. Have fun training https://github.com/lllyasviel/AdverseCleaner
>>6569153>https://github.com/lllyasviel/AdverseCleanerAnybody dumb enough to glaze probably doesn't. make work worth training on.
>>6568384I hate this, it wont work on with my art
Wtf bros i thought this was supposed to be some super advanced sci fi tech that would defeat the ai and that's not even viable to the human eye
I am glad that no one but coomers give a shit about AI because of how awful it looks. And even most of the normal coomers are getting bored of AI shit or at least wont pay for it.
>>6569075>AI art can level the playing field and lead to more creativity and innovation if used as a tool.>leveling the playing field with multimedia juggernaut DisneyLO FUCKING LLM FUCKING AOThis is the most delusional thing I ever heard.
Is there any industry survey of artists or economic data that show the impact of ai art? Has it had any effect on the market at all?
>>6569279I haven't seen it affect any big name artist but I have seen it affect the smaller artists. I've seen it piss off art directors more than anything else.
>>6569284Piss off art directors? Why? Because they are pressured to use more ai?
>>6569075>level the playing field>t. retard that thinks ai is magic and bestows you creativity instantlyRetards like you make good arguments for eugenics, if fuckers like you all died off then I'm pretty sure we'd be fucking six tittied space babes by now.
>>6569287https://twitter.com/hexeract01/status/1603026812644335617
Imagine being this anti-progress that you side with the government. You deserve all the hate you get drawlets.
>>6568991you're mistaken if you think others are not going to want to use it. the outcome that disney uses image generators and everyone else just carries on ia not realistic. the real options are freedom & openness vs. paid blackbox systems like chatGPT with no user control, guardrails against wrongthink, data collection etc.
>>6569338Yeah deepfake stuff seems like the government and politicians won't tolerate. Don't think they care about art though
>>6569354The best way to fight this AI shit is by making it look as dangerous as possible to the government.
funny to see artists still defending this product after they admitted to illegally using GPL code, yet continue to distribute the binaries like nothing happened.goes to show there's no principles behind the copyright angle, it's all just grasping at straws because they feel threatened by the technology.
>>6569376Yeah. If it magically didn't use copyrighted images but still posed a threat to displace artists they would still want a way to try to destroy it no less. The copyright thing is just a convenient thing to latch on to
>>6569376>funny to see artists still defending this product after they admitted to illegally using GPL codealso funny to see AIshills hypocritically use this to defend mass scraping of copyrighted material, as if there was any equivalence.>just grasping at strawspot, meet motherfucking kettle
>>6569338>anti-progressAI isn't progressing art in any way but firmly grounding it in a consumerist view, that's not progress. besides, not all progress is good, see the state of the west.
>>6569385>>6569385stop using AI then.
>>6569402yeah there is no real equivalance because using GPL code in your proprietary app is unambiguously illegal and in breach of the license, while scraping is legal and probably something you agreed to when using to services, and everyone knew it was happening for the last 10 years yet it somehow only became a problem now.
>>6567613This shit got invalidated recently by a 13-line long Python script that needs to run 3 secs with no GPU to unnoise the image.
>>6569431give it a bit of time. the concept is worth dogging deeper into.
>>6569429>while scraping is legal as soon as one piece of data isn't free to use it isn'tand they have collected more than one.
>>6569279>>6569287There was a scifi magazine that had to close down submissions because too many people were submitting chatgpt crap and they're annoyed by it. And then there's that one incident with a film festival who used AI to make a poster and tried to smear an ad agency's name because they didn't want to do work for cheap and the director of the festival threw a baby ass bitch fit which backfired on him.
>>6569338>implying government wouldn't love to use AI to silence dissidentsLa li lu le lo.
