You must log in or register to comment.
Humans: “I just can’t understand why sentient AI would go rouge, probably something just went wrong with it’s programming”
Also humans:
I think the hypothetical threat of rogue AIs get’s too much attention compared to AIs that are obedient but evil by design.
Submissive and breedable ai
Wow, AI is a coward
If this was an email conversation where someone had commissioned David the Gnome with a pound cake, and then once they saw the result asked for more cake, people would think it’s hilarious.
Has technology reached it’s zenith?
You may not like it but this is what peak performance looks like.
deleted by creator
An insult to life itself
The big booty Ghibli styled gnome or not making it’s butt even bigger?
Mostly the former, but maybe a bit of the latter
Doing the Lord’s work
This is why Miyazaki is so against AI. Man can’t handle the junk in the trunk.
“I’m sorry Dave. I’m afraid I can’t do that.”
I’ve scrolled through here like four times today, and still the gnomes ass is no larger. WTH is wrong with AI these days?
If you made it any bigger, it would turn into Plasma.
Maybe an unpopular opinion here, but I feel like posting AI-generated ghibli-style pictures is hugely disrespectful to Miyazaki and all the values he stand for. Miyazaki said once he feels “AI Art” is an “insult to life itself” - and I have to agree, since it strips all the human element art is supposed to represent
If a miserable old man wants to hatekeep an entire art style then he’s someone that I can safely and happily disrespect.
Rich people like him do not have feelings that matter, he’s wealthy enough to solve real problems but instead he protects his personal legacy and wealth.
Defend capitalism and try to increase the power of the wealthy if you like but I’ll always be on the side of people being free to express themselves regardless of the feelings of a rich old man.
Where do you draw the line, exactly? AI-generated art doesn’t discriminate based on how wealthy the individual whose art it is copying is. Most artists aren’t wealthy. Their work is being stolen just as readily as Miyazaki’s. The fact that Miyazaki’s not using his wealth to help others is completely irrelevant to the conversation.
You know that thing our collective parents do when they want to win an argument so they just start attacking you for random things you did 6 years ago? That’s exactly what this person is doing.
The person above you, I mean.
We can simultaneously agree that what’s happening is bad and disrespectful, and still find it funny :3
Sounds to me like Miyazaki needs to lighten up.
Sounds to me that you need to become a bit more human and empathic.
But daddy elon told me empathy was bad
Just put the shitpost in the bag
I kinda came here to say this. It really doesnt feel right doing that to Miyazaki after all the passion he put into the world. This is a slap to the face no matter the context. It is against his every wish.
That quote is taken totally out of context
It’s been a bit since I saw the original behind the scenes vid or whatever it was, what was the context?
https://youtu.be/ngZ0K3lWKRc is the original context. I’d say it fits what I said perfectly
Not to be controversial, but genocide is bad
Not to be obvious, but bears shit in woods
Bears, beets, battlestar galactica
That one IS a controversial opinion unfortunately.
Ok… but is the picture art??? I don’t think anyone would try to argue it is. Miyazaki was specifically talking about how no algorithm can produce art, and I agree.
What makes this screenshot funny is the human element, the performance! It’s all ridiculous.
Glorified Matrix Algebra: [Presents an image of a caked-up gnome]
Internet goblin: “Make it’s butt even bigger.”
Glorified Matrix Algebra: “Sorry, that’s a bridge too far for me.”
Is the original image art? Who’s to say.
But turn that image into a meme and it does become art. And that’s wonderful.
Is digital art itself bad, because its not the human doing all of it?
Is it ableist to not define AI art as art, when handicapped people can’t perform the same actions?
Does it not create an abundance of art, and thus expands the entire field making it evolve well beyond its current state?
Gate keeping art is silly regardless, you can’t stop it. Just be happy you could make people pay for it while you could, like coal shovelers and blacksmiths things change.
Is digital art itself bad, because its not the human doing all of it?
It is bad primarily because it plagiarizes historical art in order to undermine the professional trade for future artists.
It forecloses art as a career, thereby depriving future generations of evolution in style and professional craft.
Gate keeping art is silly regardless
The gate being constructed fences off professional artists from the revenue their work produced. And in doing so, it defunds the schools and studios where professionals pass their craft from master to apprentice.
It forecloses art as a career, thereby depriving future generations of evolution in style and professional craft.
I hate AI art too, but I don’t think it’s so bad as that. It’s terrible because it uses obscene energy and steals art. But that doesn’t mean anyone actually likes AI art (except people who make it and wish other people would like it).
If you tell me your “art” is AI, then I instantly lose interest (with very rare exceptions that generally use older types of AI, like MGMT’s “When You Die” music video"). Momentarily disregarding economic considerations, AI “art” is to real art as over-processed food is to whole-food, made-with-love meals. Will some people eat it, for whatever reason? Sure. But are Twinkies competing with fine dining? No. I’m interested in art for the relatable human element. If that’s emulated, then you can only hold my interest until that fact is revealed. AI artists can only be disinteresting or deceitful, there’s no third option.
But that doesn’t mean anyone actually likes AI art
Anyone in the business of churning out media slop at high rates and low quality loves it.
Low budget advertisers, propagandists, and click bait influencers are its primary user base.
Is it ableist to not define AI art as art, when handicapped people can’t perform the same actions?
Please reconsider this like of argument in the future, it just comes across as cynical using the disabled for arguments sake. There are plenty of blind/deaf/handicapped/motor impaired/etc people making art of various forms. Deaf musicians. Blind painters. Non-verbal writers.
What makes art, “art” is the human creativity of original thought and intrinsic meaning, even if it is derivative. A jazz beat sampled on a rap track is art because it has social/familial meaning - beat makers often unwittingly share their childhood memories listening to their parent’s music at home. A painter may be influenced by their surreal visions, or the war and horrors they witnessed.
Art has soul in it. Ai has no soul.
The end. ^^
- he said that about any ai art though and he is right.
- he didn’t say it was an insult to him
- This is a ai generated gnomes butt on a shitpost community, not art
This is making fun of the fad. Calm down jeez
Literally 1984
Please put NSFW tag on this…
