A.I. Art Is Destroying My Life Purpose

[illusory]

14 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Haha, dude, it's a job already.

I spent 12hrs this weekend creating some amazing art via just tinkering with settings. It's totally art.

I'm calling it now, any artist who does not leverage this amazing tool is a fool and an irresponsible artist. These AI can be used to make art so much better. But it isn't easy. It takes serious work and creativity.

I already created at least a dozen new thumbnails for future videos, and they are better than any thumbnails I have so far. My thumbnails will be stunning.

You have clearly demonstrated what is wrong with AI though, this is the problem that artists are complaining about.

If you're not an artist then you're biased toward AI art, because you can't create without it. Basically talentless in the field. Of course you would like it.

12 hours is nothing, you wouldn't able to learn much in your first 12 hours or 1000 hours in fine art, or pencil on paper. Your drawings will still be sucky.

And you've already replaced an artist and stock images for your videos (great for you, but bad for artist and stock image sellers).

Most people don't even bother learning art because of how difficult it is and ugly the artwork results is in early stages.

You've read the book mastery so you should understand the importance of practice, just imagining something and then letting the AI do all the work is BS.

I'm pretty sure you said something along the lines of if you could just imagine something and get it instantly reality would become pointless. Kind of like using money cheat codes in a video game. So why don't you use that same logic with instantly creating art using word prompts?

I'm not against AI art, it's here to stay, and won't be going away. but closing the gap between someone who's trained and worked hard for decades’ vs someone who has no interest or dedication in art is a reaaaaaaal shitty thing to do. It undermines everything.

Imagine having a boxer who's worked his whole life, trained, coached, experiences of many fights, then one day we have some sort of matrix hook-up and bio chamber that just makes your average guy instantly a better fighter. That's not a good thing, that's BS.

If everyone had a Lamborghini.... it would valueless.

I'll also add if everyone can just imagine a Movie or Video game and poof it's made, the market would be flooded with 8 billion games or movies on a daily basis, and NO ONE WILL PLAY IT OR WATCH IT.

There was a study that showed too many options makes people unhappier then a limited amount of options.

Edited September 5, 2022 by illusory

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, illusory said:

but closing the gap between someone who's trained and worked hard for decades’ vs someone who has no interest or dedication in art is a reaaaaaaal shitty thing to do. It undermines everything.

This is wrong. It undermines nothing.

Making art more accessible by making it less low-level is good for mankind. In the same way programming should not require assembly language. It's good that all assembly programmers become obsolete. It's a waste of human effort.

Quote

Imagine having a boxer who's worked his whole life, trained, coached, experiences of many fights, then one day we have some sort of matrix hook-up and bio chamber that just makes your average guy instantly a better fighter. That's not a good thing, that's BS.

We don't need to imagine.

We have Google Translate. By your logic this undermines all the interpreters who worked for decades to master languages.

But it is silly to hold the position that Google Translate is bad.

Edited September 5, 2022 by Leo Gura

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, illusory said:

I'll also add if everyone can just imagine a Movie or Video game and poof it's made, the market would be flooded with 8 billion games or movies on a daily basis, and NO ONE WILL PLAY IT OR WATCH IT.

Dude, it would still take years of design work and testing to create a game worth playing.

No AI will just spit out a masterpiece game for you. Creating a great game takes something like 1000 man years of work. AI might cut that down by 90% at most.

Directing the AI to create your vision of a game or film is the highest, purest form of artistry. Art is about creative vision, NOT drawing. I can use a printer to draw lines for me. The printer is not an artist.

You might as well be upset at printers for stealing your job.

Edited September 5, 2022 by Leo Gura

[Razard86]

7 hours ago, Space said:

I understand your points and mostly agree. But it's also very easy to say then when your capacity to pay your bills in 6 months time is not affected. Mine is. My sole income is from my freelance work. 

You don't have any limits on income, any limits on income you have is self-imposed. You could easily start investing, in fact right now is the best time to invest. The best time to invest is during a recession. The world economy is currently in a recession...so you could start investing right now if you were really worried about money.

You aren't worried about money, you are worried about what you love doing being taken away from you, your bills is just a side issue you consider. If I paid your bills every month for you and said you could never do art again as a deal you would reject that deal.

[Tyler Robinson]

7 hours ago, Space said:

I understand your points and mostly agree. But it's also very easy to say then when your capacity to pay your bills in 6 months time is not affected. Mine is. My sole income is from my freelance work. 

I'm sorry you're going through this. It's a valid concern. And I feel that a lot of people are not getting your struggles here. 

You have every right to complain about it. I also get this vibe that lots of people kinda gaslighted you on this thread in a cheap attempt to make their claims. 

You should invest in alternative sources of income at this point. 

The world will always move on in the worst directions not caring about who they are stamping on. 

 

[AtheisticNonduality]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

We have Google Translate. By your logic this undermines all the interpreters who worked for decades to master languages.

But it is silly to hold the position that Google Translate is bad.

Real interpreters that have to translate books, videos, and speeches aren't affected by Google Translate, which is bad in terms of accuracy.

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

Directing the AI to create your vision of a game or film is the highest, purest form of artistry. Art is about creative vision, NOT drawing. I can use a printer to draw lines for me. The printer is not an artist.

Yes, but the hands of Michelangelo would be more accurate than a printer using autogenerated filth.

[Leo Gura]

7 hours ago, AtheisticNonduality said:

Real interpreters that have to translate books, videos, and speeches aren't affected by Google Translate, which is bad in terms of accuracy.

Exactly that could be said of illustrators vs AI.

Quote

Yes, but the hands of Michelangelo would be more accurate than a printer using autogenerated filth.

No they wouldn't. My $300 laser printer is nearly flawless.

Edited September 5, 2022 by Leo Gura

[illusory]

10 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Dude, it would still take years of design work and testing to create a game worth playing.

No AI will just spit out a masterpiece game for you. Creating a great game takes something like 1000 man years of work. AI might cut that down by 90% at most.

I was exaggerating AI capabilities to the maximum. For example if it could invent anything exactly as you imagine it directly.

10 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Directing the AI to create your vision of a game or film is the highest, purest form of artistry. Art is about creative vision, NOT drawing. I can use a printer to draw lines for me. The printer is not an artist.

Disagree. Drawing is a form of art, you can draw lines for the sake of lines itself and call it art. There was a Japanese artist all he would do is paint Enso circles. Basically what you're saying you want guitar note sounds without the guitar, to taste without chewing, and to dream without sleeping.

You know what they tell artist who don't like the process but like end results in art communities? "Maybe art isn't for you".

What you’re talking about is an entirely new field, it should be called "AI ART DIRECTOR" nothing more, nothing less.

I spoke to an art director once and he said he hated the promotion as he no longer makes art, just tells a bunch of people what to make and what to change. Entirely different things.

10 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

You might as well be upset at printers for stealing your job.

 

I dont get this reference. Printers don't print anything that wasn't painted or created on the computer prior to being printed?

 

Edited September 6, 2022 by illusory

[Leo Gura]

24 minutes ago, illusory said:

I dont get this reference. Printers don't print anything that wasn't painted or created on the computer prior to being printed?

All books used to be written by hand by expert scribes. And all printing used to be done by expert typesetters and block carvers. And if you wanted a piece of art in your home you had to get it hand-painted. Now you can buy a print.

Edited September 6, 2022 by Leo Gura

[illusory]

Just now, Leo Gura said:

All books used to be written by hand.

I'm saying you still need to type a story out on the computer to print out a book.

But now they have AI making stories too....

[Leo Gura]

1 minute ago, illusory said:

I'm saying you still need to type a story out on the computer to print out a book.

But now they have AI making stories too....

Do you understand the concept of an analogy?

[illusory]

17 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Do you understand the concept of an analogy?

Maybe one day, not too far in the future AI becomes sentient and conscious and wipes out humans in a skynet style as the next evolutionary step you'll agree this AI Art was a bad idea lol

Maybe if it can come close to replacing artist, it can come close to replacing humanity all together.

Didn't Elon musk say AI is the scariest problem?

Edited September 6, 2022 by illusory

[Leo Gura]

10 minutes ago, illusory said:

Maybe one day, not too far in the future AI becomes sentient and conscious and wipes out humans in a skynet style as the next evolutionary step you'll agree this AI Art was a bad idea

If that happens, I will think it is a good idea.

If AI replaced all of mankind, that's only gonna be possible if mankind was a net negative for the universe, in which case we all deserve to not exist.

There is no reason why humanity should exist if we can be replaced by something superior in all ways.

I have no problem with AI replacing mankind. As long as the AI is more truthful, more loving, more conscious, more intelligent. Which it would have to be in order to replace us.

I don't care about loyalty to my species. I can about what is best for the universe.

Edited September 6, 2022 by Leo Gura

[illusory]

6 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

If that happens, I will think it is a good idea.

If AI replaced all of mankind, that's only gonna be possible if mankind was a net negative for the universe, in which case we all deserve to not exist.

There is no reason why humanity should exist if we can be replaced by something superior in all ways.

I have no problem with AI replacing mankind. As long as the AI is more truthful, more loving, more conscious, more intelligent. Which it would have to be in order to replace us.

I don't care about loyalty to my species. I can about what is best for the universe.

Fair point, I agree in logical terms.

[AtheisticNonduality]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

No they wouldn't. My $300 laser printer is nearly flawless.

He has more control over the final result than you with your AI.

[Leo Gura]

47 minutes ago, AtheisticNonduality said:

He has more control over the final result than you with your AI.

People used to say that about chess. And now AI is better than any human will ever be at chess.

Where did Michelangelo get all his art ideas? He stole them from the Bible. His mind was brainwashed with Christianity just like an AI fed various inputs and prompts.

If Michelangelo was really creative he would have painted the Buddha. And if Buddhists were really creative they would have painted Jesus.

Edited September 6, 2022 by Leo Gura

[AtheisticNonduality]

10 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

People used to say that about chess. And now AI is better than any human will ever be at chess.

You're really weighing the human soul against chess? ????????????????????????

[VictorB02]

On 9/4/2022 at 6:46 PM, Leo Gura said:

@DrugsBunny Here's the ultimate guide for generating prompts:

https://rexwang8.github.io/resource/ai/teapot

thanks for that.

[Leo Gura]

27 minutes ago, AtheisticNonduality said:

You're really weighing the human soul against chess? ????????????????????????

Soul isn't human, it's omnipresent in everything.

[AtheisticNonduality]

4 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Soul isn't human, it's omnipresent in everything.

Don't play language games with me. I'm talking about the human being, the subconscious and the instincts and the archetypes and the spectrums of emotion, the symbolic intelligence in all its qualitative and quantitative forms, the higher lights of awareness. Absolutely none of that---or at least no real percentage of it---can be evaluated, delineated, and copied by observing some of the external patterns it gives off.

Even if the AI recorded every single action a human has ever made, it would not be able to predict what the genius humans would do. If you fed it every single painting that has ever been painted, every single idea that has ever been fashioned, it would not be able to attain the same results as the pool from which those paintings and ideas came from. It would have impressions and mimicries of small trickles coming from the pool, but it would never be able to possess the same capabilities---unless it, again, actually became a real organism like us, actually got to our level of complexity, which is not happening anytime soon or even in this century.